(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Annual report for the year ..."

^ 



r 



87th Congress, 2d Session 



Uuion Calendar No. 1069J 

House Report No. 2559 



COMMITTEE ON 
UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 



,i^,-.-,- .r -: __.:'y^*-j^. 



AJs NUAL REPORT 
FOR THE YEAR I??! 




November 5, 1962. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed 



Prepared and released by the Committee on Un-American Activities 
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 



21-204 



U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
WASHINGTON : 1962 



COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 
United States House of Representatives 

FRANCIS E. WALTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman 
MORGAN M. MOULDER, Missouri GOkLsOV h. SCHERER, Ohio 

CLYDE DOYLE, California AUGUST E. JOHANSEN, Michigan 

EDWIN E. WILLIS, Louisiana DONALD C. BRUCE, Indiana 

WILLIAM M. TUCK, Virginia HENRY C. SCHADEBERQ, Wisconsin 

Francis J. McNamaea, Director 
Frank S. Tavennee, Jr., General Counsel 
Alfred M. Nittle, Counsel 

II 



Union Calendar No. 1069 

87th Congress ) HOUSE OF REPEESENTATIVES ( Document 
M Session j ] No. 2559 



COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES ANNUAL 
REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 



November 5, 1962. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
State of the Union and ordered to be printed 



Mr. Walter, from the Committee on Un-American Activities, sub- 
mitted the following 

REPORT 

[Pursuant to H. Res. 8, 87th Cong., 1st sess.] 



Ill 



Public Law 601, 79th Congress 

The legislation under which the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities operates is Public Law 601, 79th Congress [1946]; 60 Stat. 
812, which provides: 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States 
of America in Congress assembled, * * * 

PART 2— RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Rule X 

SEC. 121. STANDING COMMITTEES 

******* 

17. Committee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine Members. 

Rule XI 

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 

******* 

(q)(l) Committee on Un-American Activities. 

(A) Un-American activities. 

(2)_ The Committee on Un-American Activities, as a whole or by subcommit- 
tee, is authorized to make from time to time investigations of (i) the extent, 
character, and objects of un-American propaganda activities in the United States, 
(ii) the diflfusion within the United States of subversive and un-American propa- 
ganda that is instigated from foreign countries or of a domestic origin and attacks 
the principle of the form of government as guaranteed by our Constitution, and 
(iii) all other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress in any necessary 
remedial legislation. 

The Committee on Un-American Activities shall report to the House (or to the 
Clerk of the House if the House is not in session) the results of any such investi- 
gation, together with such recommendations as it deems advisable. 

For the purpose of any such investigation, the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or any subcommittee thereof, is authorized to sit and act at such 
times and places within the United States, whether or not the House is sitting, 
has recessed, or has adjourned, to hold such hearings, to require the attendance 
of such witnesses and the production of such books, papers, and documents, and 
to take such testimony, as it deems necessary. Subpenas may be issued under 
the signature of the chairman of the committee or any subcommittee, or by any 
member designated by any such chairman, and may be served by any person 
designated by any such chairman or member. 



Rule XII 

LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT BY STANDING COMMITTEES 

Sec. 136. To assist the Congress in appraising the administration of the laws 
and in developing such amendments or related legislation as it may deem neces- 
sary, each standing committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
shaJl exercise continuous watchfulness of the execution by the administrative 
agencies concerned of any laws, the subject matter of which is within the jurisdic- 
tion of such committee; and, for that purpose, shall study all pertinent reports 
and data submitted to the Congress by the agencies in the executive branch of 
the Government. 

VI 



RULES ADOPTED BY THE 87TH CONGRESS 

House Resolution 8, January 3, 1961 
******* 

Rule X 

STANDING COMMITTEES 

1. There shall be elected by the House, at the commencement of each Congress, 
******* 

(r) Committee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine Members. 
******* 

Rule XI 

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 
******* 

18. Committee on Un-American Activities. 

(a) Un-American activities. 

(b) The Committee on Un-American Activities, as a whole or by subcommittee, 
is authorized to make from time to time investigations of (1) the extent, char- 
acter, and objects of un-American propaganda activities in the United States, 
(2) the diffusion within the United States of subversive and un-American prop- 
aganda that is instigated from foreign countries or of a domestic origin and 
attacks the principle of the form of government as guaranteed by our Constitu- 
tion, and (3) all other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress in 
any necessary remedial legislation. 

The Committee on Un-American Activities shall report to the House (or to the 
Clerk of the House if the House is not in session) the results of any such investi- 
gation, together with such recommendations as it deems advisable. 

For the purpose of any such investigation, the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or any subcommittee thereof, is authorized to sit and act at such times 
and places within the United States, whether or not the House is sitting, has 
recessed, or has adjourned, to hold such hearings, to require the attendance 
of such witnesses and the production of such books, papers, and documents, and 
to take such testimony, as it deems necessary. Subpenas may be issued under 
the signature of the chairman of the committee or any subcommittee, or by any 
member designated by any such chairman, and may be served by any person 
designated by any such chairman or member. 

»•♦•••• 

27. To assist the House in appraising the administration of the laws and in 
developing such amendments or related legislation as it may deem necessary, 
each standing committee of the House shall exercise continuous watchfulness 
of the execution by the administrative agencies concerned of any laws, the subject 
matter of which is within the jurisdiction of such committee; and, for that purpose, 
shall study all pertinent reports and data submitted to the House by the agencjes 
in the executive branch of the Government. 

vn 



FOREWORD 



As world Communist power grows, creeping ever closer to these 
United States, it becomes more and more imperative that the Ameri- 
can people know the truth about communism. The truth alone will 
not keep us free, but it will make clear to us what weapons we must 
develop — in the military, spiritual, economic, political, and diplomatic 
fields — to put an end forever to the very real thi-eat communism poses 
to this Nation and to free men throughout the world. Armed with 
this knowledge, we will have no one but om*selves to blame if, as free 
men, we fail to develop those weapons and, more important, to use 
them unhesitatingly wherever and whenever it becomes necessary. 

Too often in the past we have been slow in taking the steps de- 
manded by our national interest and justified by our fundamental 
right of self-preservation. We have done this not because of a lack 
of knowledge of communism or of weapons with which to combat 
it, but because of an unrealistic approach to the necessity for utilizing 
them. This same faihng has proved fatal in the past to more than 
one civihzation thi'eatened by the forces of barbarism. Softened by 
prosperity, luxmy, and ease, they failed to arouse themselves until 
it was too late. This we must not forget — and dare not repeat. 

This report of the Committee on Un-American Activities does no 
more than touch briefly on a few aspects of the overall operations of 
just one unit of the many regiments in the army of world communism. 
Despite this limitation — one imposed by the natm^e and restricted 
functions of the committee — the report will, I hope, contribute to the 
awakening of the too complacent to the reality that the danger is 
here, as well as abroad, and that we dare not ignore the home front 
in om- war for sm'vival. 

Francis E. Walter, Chairman. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

CHAPTER 1 
THE INTERNAL COMMUNIST MENACE 

Should Congress and the American citizen be concerned about the 
U.S. Communist Party as a threat to the security of the United States? 

A variety of sources are telUng them they should not, that Com- 
munist Party membership is lower today than it has been at any time 
during the past 30 years, that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and 
congressional committees (or the FBI alone) can readily deal with 
whatever problem it presents, and that John and Mary Doe should, 
therefore, ignore all talk about any internal Communist danger; 
they have absolutely no cause for concern and should leave the job 
of fighting communism completely in the hands of the Government. 

Such advice is false and therefore dangerous. The purpose of this 
chapter is to demonstrate why this is so, to prove conclusively that 
there is a very real internal Communist menace, that it is serious 
enough to warrant the concern of Congress, and that concerted action 
on the part of organizations and individual American citizens in 
support of sound legislative proposals and other measures designed 
to lessen the danger it presents is called for. 

Claims that there is no internal Communist danger are usually 
based on statements — made by both top-ranking Communists and 
also by Government officials in positions to know the truth — that 
there are now only about 10,000 Communist Party members in the 
United States. 

This figure on party membership would be an accurate gauge of 
Communist strength in the United States if all Communists were 
members of the Communist Party, ij there were no Communist fronts, 
no Communist-dominated unions, no Communist-infiltrated organiza- 
tions, and no non-Communist organizations and individuals cooperat- 
ing with the Communist Party and its fronts. It would be an accurate 
gauge of the internal Communist danger ij the Communist Party 
received no help from abroad, if it was not reaching hundreds of thou- 
sands of Americans with its propaganda, and if there were not groups 
in this country composed of fanatical extremists who, though not 
Communists, constantly agitate for the adoption of policies and actions 
which the Communists also demand because Moscow deems them 
vital to the final victory of the world Communist movement. 

Because none of the above conditions holds, however, the bare 
figure of 10,000 Communist Party members has little relevance to the 
question of the strength of the Communist movement in this country 
and the degree of danger it presents. To the contrary, this figure 
tends to be misleading rather than informative. 



2 annual report for the year 1961 

Keadership op Communist Propaganda Publications 

The Communists have repeatedly demonstrated their behef that, 
when the time is ripe, the sword is much mightier than the pen. At 
the same time, however, they daily demonstrate their belief that the 
pen is a tremendously powerful weapon, second to none in preparing 
the groundwork for use of the sword. 

Statistics on the number of Communist propaganda and agitational 
organs published in the United States, the quantity in which they are 
distributed, and their probable readership are sufficient to demonstrate 
how intensely active the Communist Party is, the tremendous impor- 
tance it attaches to propaganda efforts, and how meaningless the 
10,000 figure is as a true indicator of its strength. 

Postal regulations require that publications using second-class mail- 
ing privileges file annual statements of ownership, management, and 
circulation with the Post Office Department. Statements filed by 
various Communist and Communist-front publications with the Post 
Office Department, in compliance with Section 132.61 of the Postal 
Manual, gave the follo^ving average paid circulation picture for the 
reporting year ending October 1, 1961, for the below-listed publica- 
tions, all of which have been cited as Communist or pro-Communist: 

ENGLISH LANGUAGE PUBLICATIONS 



Title 


Frequency 


Where Published 


Circula- 
tion 


The Worker 


Twice weekly 

Weekly 

Monthly 

Monthly 

Weekly 

Monthly 

Monthly (except 
July & August) 


New York City. 
San Francisco... 
New York City. 
New York City. 
New York City. 
New York City. 
New York City. 


16, 239 


People's World 

Political Affairs 

Mainstream. _ .._ 


7,696 

1,045 

806 


National Guardian 

New World Review. __ 
Jewish Currents ^ 


29, 072 
6,100 
3,262 




64, 220 



« cited under Its former title. "Jewish Life." 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 



FOREIGN LANGUAGE PUBLICATIONS 



Vilnis (Lithuanian) 


Daily 


Chicago 


18, 260 


Morning Freiheit 


«/ —— — — — — — — — — 

Daily 


New York City. 


7,896 


(Yiddish). 


-»-' W-^^^ •.• — •^..v... 




Russky Golos 


Daily 


New York City_ 


5,263 


(Russian) , 








Glos Ludowy (Polish) _ 


Weekly 


Detroit 


3, 183 


Glas Naroda 


Twice weekly 


New York City. 


2,359 


(Slovene) . 








The Ukrainian News.. 


Weekly 


New York City. 


2,185 


Ludove Noviny 


Weekly 


Chicago 


1,775 


(Slovak). 








Nok Vilaga 


Monthly 


New York City. 


1,720 


(Hungarian) . 








Nova Doha (Czech) _ _ 


Weekly 


Chicago 


1,523 


Narodna Volya 


Weekly 


Detroit 


1,029 


(Macedonian- 


. . ww*j_*^ _. — __.__ 






Bulgarian) . 








Vistnik (Carpatho- 


Monthly 


McKees Rock, 


1,691 


Russian) . 




Pa. 






46, 884 


UNION PUBLICATIONS 


The Dispatcher 


Bi-weekly 


San Francisco... 


41,381 


(International 








Longshoremen's 








and Warehouse- 








men's Union). 




^ 




UE News (United 


Bi-weekly 


New York City. 


57, 490 


Electrical, Radio 








and Machine 








Workers of 








America) . 








Mine-Mill Union 


Monthly 


Denver.. __ 


38, 000 


(Mine, Mill and 


•/ 






Smelter Workers 








Union). 








New York Teacher 


Weekly.., 


New York City. 


8,900 


News (Teachers 








Union). 








AC A News (American 


Montlily 


New York City. 


6,403 


Communications 








Association). 










152, 174 



4 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

These figures add up to a total average paid circulation per issue of 
over 263,000 for some 23 U.S. Communist and pro-Communist publi- 
cations. 

The total readership of these publications, of com-se, would be much 
higher. By the most conservative method of estimating readership, 
it would be at least double the circulation figure. 

The readership total, however, is no more an accurate guide to 
Communist strength in the United States than is the figure of 10,000 
party members. 

A certain percentage of the circulation of all these publications is 
accounted for by security agencies, libraries, and anti-Communist 
organizations and individuals. In the cases of some of the publications 
listed, this would amount to no more than a few copies. In the cases 
of The Worker, People's World, and National Guardian, it would be a 
ETiuch greater number. Moreover, the above-listed union publica- 
tions are sent to all members of the respective unions, including the 
many non -Communists within their ranks. 

In addition, there is unquestionably considerable duplication of 
readership by Communists in the total, at least as far as certain of the 
above-listed publications are concerned. 

In the natural course of events, too, a considerable quantity of the 
publications distributed free in an effort to develop sympathetic 
readership do not achieve the desired effect. 

Even if 25 percent, a quarter of the total, is deducted to allow for 
these factors, however, the remainder is still impressively large. 
^ It must also be kept in mind that a considerable number of oflScially 
cited party and party-hne pubhcations are not included in the pre- 
ceding listing because they do not utihze second-class mailing privi- 
leges or are exempt from filing statements with the Post Office De- 
partment. Not included in the tabulation are, for example, Science 
and Society, the party's quarterly on Marxist-Leninist philosophy 
and doctrine; Freedomways, its new Negro quarterly;^ New Horizons 
for Youth, its student and youth newspaper;' and Economic Notes, 
published by the "direct auxiliary of the Communist Party," the 
Labor Research Association. 

Also not included in the tabulation — for the same reasons — are 
publications such as the following which are the official organs of 
cited Communist-front groups: 

The Social Questions Bulletin, official organ of the Methodist 
Federation for Social Action ; 

Law in Transition (quarterly) and The Guild Lawyer (monthly), 
both publications of the National Lawyers Guild; 

Facts Jor Farmers, published by Farm Research, Inc.; 

Bights, official organ of the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee; 

Abolition, publication of the New York Council to Abohsh the 
House Un-American Activities Committee and Youth to Abohsh 
HUAC. 

The Communist Party is always creating new Communist fronts — 
so many, in fact, that this committee and other official agencies could 
not possibly investigate and formally cite all of them. For this 
reason, no listing of officially cited organizations and pubhcations 
has ever been complete. Today, as in the past, there are a consid- 

« Mentified as publication of the Communist Party by Director J. Bdgar Hoover in FBI Annual Report 
for the fiscal year 1961. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 5 

erable number of organizations which are under Communist control 
and which are very obviously promoting Communist objectives, 
although they have not been officially cited as Communist fronts. 
For obvious reasons, the pubhcations of these groups — though they 
unquestionably fall into the category of Communist literature — 
have not been considered in this tabulation. 

Publications of Communist splinter groups, too, have not been 
considered thus far. Although they have separated themselves from 
the main Communist Party and disagree with it on some tactical 
points, these groups and their publications must be considered in any 
estimate of Communist strength in the United States. Like the 
main Communist Party, they are completely dedicated to the princi- 
ples of Marxism -Leninism and, as will be demonstrated later in this 
chapter, the main Communist Party, through united-front tactics, 
has succeeded in winning the support and cooperation of these smaller 
Communist organizations in promoting Soviet objectives in the 
United States. (See section beginning on p. 40.) 

One of these groups, the Sociahst Workers (Trotskyist Communist) 
Party has been cited as Communist and subversive by the Attorney 
General of the United States. Its official newspaper, The Militant, 
reported an average paid circulation of almost 5,000 for the 12 months 
preceding October 1961. The Young Socialist Alhance, a Trotskyist 
youth group, has an official organ, The Young Socialist, also with a 
claimed circulation of 5,000. 

The Marxist-Leninist Vanguard, Workers World, and Turning Point 
are some of the other publications which avowedly represent additional 
Communist splinter groups in this country. 

Though the total circulation of the publications of all these splinter 
groups is not great, the fact remains that even a small number of 
persons who operate on Marxist-Leninist conspiratorial principles are 
a very real danger. There may be only some thousands of people 
who read and agree with the official publication of the Socialist 
Workers Party (which is more openly violent and subversive than 
the main Communist Party) yet, allied with the orthodox Commu- 
nists of this country and their fellow travelers, they obviously intensify 
the very real internal danger posed by the latter. 

Finally, a considerable number of magazines designed primarily for 
readersliip in academic circles — and with definite Marxist and pro- 
Communist orientation — have sprung up within the last year or so. 

No exact figures on Commmiist strength can be deduced from the 
combined readership of all these Communist and pro-Communist 
publications. One fact, however, does stand out beyond contradic- 
tion when their probable readership figures are totaled. It is that 
the Communist movement in the United States must have a following 
far greater than 10,000 people — and much greater than most Americans 
reahze. 

Circulation Increases 

Moreover, there are indications that, at the present time, the dis- 
tribution and readership of the type of Communist literature under 
consideration is increasing rather than decreasing. 

Circulation of the official Communist Party newspaper. The Worker, 
has risen steadily since 1957. A drive was begun in 1961 to increase 
its subscribers to 20,000. Paid circulation of the party's West Coast 
newspaper, the People's World, increased by almost 1,000 in 1961. 



6 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

The Teachers Union, with headquarters in New York City, which 
has been expelled from both the AFL and the CIO as Communist- 
dominated, claimed an average circulation of only 8,900 for its official 
pubhcation, the New York Teacher News, during the 12 months pre- 
ceding October 1, 1961. At the end of the year, however, it boasted 
that its circulation had increased to over 12,000. Subscribers to its 
publication, it said, included not only teachers, but PTA and civic 
leaders, legislators, and school officials. 

Jewish Currents claimed, in mid-1961, that it had obtained almost 
600 new subscribers in the year 1960. 

For the past year, the National Guardian, with a paid circulation 
of over 29,000, has been conducting a stepped-up circulation drive, 
aimed particularly at students. It claims that 135 students on 55 
different college and university campuses have agreed to promote 
its sale and distribution among their fellow students. It further claims 
that, through these student representatives, the National Guardian 
was introduced, during 1961, to 1,000 students and teachers who had 
never seen it before and that response from its new readers has been 
overwhelmingly favorable. It also asserts that a number of its new 
subscribers are professors who request extra copies of the paper to 
distribute to "receptive, but needy students." The National Guardian 
has prepared an intensified promotional drive among college students 
for the year 1962. 

Dissemination of Other Partt-Line Literature 

Communist and pro-Communist periodicals are but a small part of 
the weapons in the U.S. Communist Party's propaganda arsenal. In 
addition to them, the party prepares and distributes, each year, 
millions of handbills, pamphlets, reprints of magazine articles and 
speeches, and similar items which carry its line to non-Communist 
American citizens. Its front organizations play a key role in the 
distribution of this propaganda, although they are not the only 
vehicles used for its dissemination. 

The effectiveness of such literature is an imponderable. No one can 
gauge with preciseness just how many people (and dollars) it brings 
into Communist fronts; how many converts it makes to the party's 
and Moscow's position on disarmament, banning nuclear weapons 
tests, Cuba, and dozens of other issues of national and international 
importance which affect national security. 

Two things can be said with certainty, however: 

1. The party must find that such literature pays dividends or it 
would not waste its and its members' and fellow travelers' valuable 
time and money producing and distributing it. 

2. The great quantity of this literature regularly distributed in this 
country is an indication that the party has financial and manpower 
resources much greater than that of a mere 10,000 persons. 

Foreign Communist Propaganda in the United States 

Communist propaganda publications published by the Communist 
Party and its fronts within the United States do not, by any means, 
account for all the Communist literature distributed and read in this 
country. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 7 

On September 11, 1961, the chairman of this committee pointed out 
that in 1960 the U.S. Bureau of Customs had processed over 14 million 
packages of Communist propaganda mail entering this country from 
abroad and that these packages contained in excess of 21 million items 
such as newspapers, magazines, books, posters, and pictures. This 
was an increase of 137 percent over the jesxr 1959. He also pointed 
out that in the two months of Februar}^ and March 1961, over 162,000 
packages of magazines and 11,000 packages of newspapers were 
addressed to the United States from Communist Cuba alone. 

These figures include only second-class mail. No one knows how 
much propaganda of this type enters this country each year in first- 
class mail. The quantitj^, however, is undoubtedly great. 

Moreover, there are a number of publishing firms in this country 
which serve as official literature-distributing agencies for the Soviet 
Union. Included among them are the Four Continent Book Corpo- 
ration, Imported Publications and Products, Crosscurrents Press, Inc., 
International Arts and Sciences Press, and World Books, all located in 
New York City. These firms print, sell, and distribute many thou- 
sands of copies of Soviet propaganda documents annually. 

The Party Line in Non-Communist Publications 

No consideration of the extent to which Communist propaganda is 
disseminated among the American people can be complete without 
consideration of its distribution through media which are considered 
completely respectable, non-Communist, and even anti-Communist. 
Unfortunately, from a statistical viewpoint, it is impossible to gauge, 
even approximately, the extent to which this goes on. But the fact 
that it does go on is known to all persons who have studied the prob- 
lem and have experience in the field. 

On December 31, 1961, Allen W. Dulles, who had recently resigned 
as director of the Central Intelligence Agency, appeared on the "Meet 
the Press" radio-TV program. In the course of his appearance, he 
was asked about a recently published book which claimed to tell the 
"inside story" of the CIA. One of the reporters on the program cited 
certain alleged facts about CIA activity contained in this book and 
then asked Mr. Dulles if he had any comment to make on this material. 

Mr. DuUes replied that he would call the book the "upside-down 
story" rather than the "inside story" of the CIA. The book, he 
said, contained "a great number of inaccuracies and a good deal of 
material which has been pulled from far-leftist sources, which I think 
should not have been in the book." 

The reporter then asked Mr. Dulles: 

Would you say perhaps they have fallen for some Com- 
munist propaganpa? Would you go that far? 

Mr. Dulles replied: 

The Communists have tried to sell their propaganda, and 
unfortunately they have succeeded in many cases. They 
have placed their propaganda- — first it comes out in their 
own publications and radio and other ways, then it is picked 
up by leftist journals and then it gets more and more 
respectability until you find people quoting Communist 

21-204 — 63 2 



8 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

propaganda, sometimes maybe without knowing what they 
are doing. 

On June 18, 1961, an assistant director of the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation addressed the Virginia Press Association on the subject 
of "The Fourth Estate Versus The Fifth Column." In the course of 
his address, he indicated very clearly that there is Communist infil- 
tration of the press in this country and also pointed out its dangers: 

* * * the communists * * * seldom miss an opportunity 
to exploit our free press. 

They are definitely interested in infiltrating the newspaper 
field, in placing members or sympathizers in strategic posi- 
tions. This is one of the Party's prize objectives * * *, 

* * * Hence, it should be no surprise that some misguided 
newspapermen have leaped like sucker fish from the main 
stream of life to follow the dangling lure of communism. * * * 
By successfully infiltrating noncommunist publications, com- 
munists gain far wider dissemination of their views than is 
possible through their own press, since their thinly veiled 
propaganda is camouflaged by the fact that it appears in a 
respectable publication. Moreover, the appearance of com- 
munist views in noncommunist publications goes far toward 
substantiating the spurious claim of the Communist Party, 
USA, that it is a liberal and progressive political party. 
This aura of legitimacy helps to condition noncommunists to 
the more ready acceptance of communist views on a wide 
variety of issues. 

The opportunity to slant material along procommunist 
lines is frequently considered to be the only motivation for 
communist infiltration attempts, but another reason — equally 
important — is that successful infiltration also provides the 
opportunity to attack noncommunist forces and to suppress 
facts which reflect unfavorably on communism. 

He also stated: 

Unfortunately, in some few instances, there have been 
newspapermen and other writers who not only fail to protect 
their country but who prostitute themselves by selling their 
talents to those obviously desirous of using them to support 
communist causes. 

Who or What Is a Communist? 

The consistent underrating of the strength of the U.S. Communist 
movement and the danger it presents, which has characterized so many 
statements made on the subject in recent years, is due, in large part, 
to the misconception that Communist strength is composed completely 
of, and based wholly on, the number of persons formally enrolled 
in the Communist Party. This, as clearly indicated by the preceding 
section on the number of American citizens who are readers of the 
hard-core Communist press, is anything but true. 

The answer to the question, "Who or what is a Communist?" is 
extremely difficult, yet vital to any realistic appraisal of Communist 
strength within this country and the danger it presents. And the 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 9 

answer to this question, iinfortiinatel}^, is not the same as the answer 
to the question, "Who or what is a Communist Party member?" 

A Communist Party member, obviously, is any person formally or 
technically enrolled as a member of the so-called Communist Party. 
In estimating the Communist danger, however, the question of the 
number of Communist Party members, in this technical sense, has 
become almost meaningless. The answer to it is misleading rather 
than informative. The reasons for this are as follows: 

Repeatedly, in recent years, the committee has received sworn 
testimony from those who have broken with the Communist Party 
and from persons who have served as underground operatives for the 
FBI that many persons have technically resigned from the Com- 
munist Party with the understanding that they would remain Com- 
munists and continue to do the work of the party and of Moscow. 
Obviously, such persons, though technically outside the party, are 
part of the Communist movement or apparatus in this country and 
must be counted in any estimate of Communist strength. 

The technique of the basically false resignation from the Communist 
Party was first adopted, on a significant scale, in the late 1940's 
following the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act which required the 
signing of a non-Communist affidavit by trade union officials. The 
obvious intent of the party in having its members who were trade 
union officers turn in technical resignations was to make it possible 
for them to retain their union offices, use them to manipulate the 
unions in the service of the Kremlin, and thus frustrate the intent of 
the Taft-Hartley Act while avoiding a technical violation of it which 
would make prosecution possible. 

This is illustrated by the following excerpt from testimony given 
before the committee in May 1959, during an investigation of the 
Communist infiltration of the meatpacking industry in Chicago. 
The witness was Carl Nelson, who had been a party member from 
1934 to 1949 and who was subsequently active in various Communist 
fronts until 1955, v/hen he broke completely with communism. On 
the basis of previous testimony and evidence on this point gathered 
by the committee. Nelson was asked the following question: 

Committee Counsel. During the period in 1948 of the pas- 
sage * * * of amendments to the National Labor Relations Act, 
requiring certain officials to sign non-Communist affidavits, to 
your certain knowledge, did certain people resign from the formal 
entity known as the Communist Party and maintain themselves 
in the Communist operation? 

Mr. Nelson. They did. 

Committee Counsel. Did they do that so that they could take 
a non-Communist affidavit in order to avoid the impact of the 
then existing law? 

Mr. Nelson. That is right.^ 

Another witness in the same hearings was a man named John R. 
Hackney, who had been a member of the Communist Party from 1942 

' See "Communist Infiltration of Vital Industries and Current Communist Techniques in the Chicago, 
111., Area" May 5, 6, and 7, 1959. Hearings before the Committee on Un-American Activities. 



10 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

to 1948. In response to a question concerning these technical resig- 
nations from the party, he answered, in part, as follows: 

Mr. Hackney. * * * as far as experience I have had 
with members of the Communist Party resigning for tech- 
nical reasons, I can cite you one particular case that comes 
in my mind and that was in the 1948 convention [of the 
United Packinghouse Workers of America] here in the city 
of Chicago. 

There was a caucus meeting held of top party officials and 
for the purpose of deciding who was to resign from the 
party because of the refusal to sign the Taft-Hartley oath 
and in one particular case there was Meyer Stern, the district 
dii'ector of District 6 in New York, whom I knew to be a 
member of the party, and to my surprise I learned that he had 
resigned from the party the night before the election of 
officers took place and that he was now eligible to run for 
office and be reelected a district director of District 6 because 
he was now not a member of the party and free to sign a non- 
Communist affidavit. 

Committee Counsel. Did he maintain himself for all 
intents and purposes as an active member of the conspiracy? 

Mr. Hackney. Yes. (See footnote p. 9.) 

In the course of these hearings, eight witnesses who were key officials 
and employees of the United Packinghouse Workers of America — and 
who had been identified as members of the Communist Party— were 
called to the stand and asked if they were presently members of the 
party. 

All stated, under oath, that they were not. 

AU eight were then asked if they had turned in technical resignations 
to the party so that they could deny membership while continuing to 
do the work of the conspiracy. 

All eight invoked the fifth amendment rather than answer this 
question. 

Subversive Activities Control Board member, Francis A. Cherry, 
in his December 26, 1961, recommended decision in the case of the 
Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers Union (charged by the Attorney 
General with being a Communist-infiltrated organization as defined 
in the Internal Security Act) found that Raymond Dennis, a member 
of the union's International Executive Board from 1950 to 1960, was 
one of six members of the board who "were members of or affiliated 
with the Communist Party." (Decision, p. 30.) 

The following paragraph in his recommended decision referring to 
Dennis illustrates the extent to which the specious resignation 
technique has been used by Communist trade union officials: 

Gardner [a Government witness, then a Communist 
Pai'ty member] accepted the position [as international repre- 
sentative of the union] and worked out of District 3 office of 
Mine-Mill in Cleveland, Ohio. A few months after he 
went to work, Gardner noticed in the files of that office a 
letter of Raymond Dennis' resignation from the Communist 
Party. This was in December of 1951 or January of 1952. 
Gardner asked Dennis if he thought it was wise to let a letter 
of that sort remain in the files of the Union. Dennis replied 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 11 

tliat he could see nothing wrong with it because this letter 
was one that was sent out by all trade union oificials who were 
members oj the Communist Party at the time they signed a 
non-Communist affidavit under the Taft-Hartley Act, and 
was merely a protection that they had against any possible 
prosecution for membership at the time of signing, (p. 16, 
par. 51(c)) [Emphasis added.] 

The following quotations from Mr. Cherry's recommended decision 
referring to Maurice Travis, secretary-treasurer of the union from 
1948 to 1955, provide additional evidence on this technique: 

In the latter part of 1949, Travis made a speech before 
Mine-Mill Local 392 in which he said he resigned from the 
Communist Party with reluctance and that he would still 
continue to believe in the principles and the practices of the 
Communist Party. 

Petitioner's witness Kirby spoke with Travis at the 1949 
Mine-Mill convention after Travis had signed the non- 
Communist Taft-Hartley affidavit. Travis offered Kirby a 
place on the Mine-Mill Executive Board if Kirby would cease 
his opposition to the positions for which Travis had been 
working. Kirby asked Travis how he could sign the Taft- 
Hartley affidavit and Travis replied that all it meant was 
that at the moment oj signing he was not a Party member. 

In 1953, petitioner's witness Henderson heard a Mine- 
Mill member teU Travis he could not support hini for 
secretary-treasurer of the Union because of his political 
beliefs, and heard Travis reply that: "I haven't changed 
my political beliefs any." (p. 24, pars. 57 (c),(d),(e)) [Em- 
phasis added.] 

It is probable that manj^ hundreds of Communists in the trade 
union movement have resorted to this device of the technical, but 
specious, resignation from the party. Its effectiveness can be gauged 
from the fact that only 10 Communist trade union officers have been 
successfully prosecuted for filing false non-Communist affidavits under 
the Taft-Hartley Act. 

A variation of the false severance of Communist Party ties device 
in the non-union field was revealed in the testimony of Mrs. Moiselle 
Chnger, a former FBI undercover operative in the Communist Party, 
in an appearance before the committee in Los Angeles on October 20, 
1959. Mrs. dinger stated that when she dropped out of the party 
in 1956 because of ill health, she was asked to continue working for it, 
though not a formal member of it. The following exchange between 
the committee counsel and Mrs. Clinger then took place: 

Committee Counsel. Well, it appears then that although you 
were severing your connection as a member of the Communist 
Party, they were asking you to continue in your activity in the 
Communist Party? 

Mrs. Clinger. That is correct. I mean, that I would at least 
support them financially and, possibly later when I felt better, 
to do other things. 

Committee Counsel. You were expected to be affiliated with 
the Communist Party although not actually a member in the 
legal sense? 



12 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Mrs. Clinger. That is correct.^ 

It can readily be seen from the facts cited and testimony quoted 
that the question of the so-called "former" or "ex"-Communist is 
an important one in assessing the extent of the internal Communist 
menace. The following item concerning some so-called "ex"-Com- 
munists points up this truth : 

In "Communist Target — Youth," his report on the San Francisco 
riots of May 1960, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover described some of 
the developments which took place within the ranks of the Communist 
Party after the riots. The following is one of them: 

Mickey Lima [a member of the National Committee of the 
Communist Party and chairman of its Northern California 
District] expressed his pleasure at the number of former party 
members the affair had brought back into the fold. He said 
that individual supporters the party had not seen or heard of in 
years seemed to "emerge from the woodwork" in response to the 
party's campaign. 

Additional testimony and factual evidence along the same lines 
could be cited at this point, but would be superfluous. It is clear 
that the mere fact that a person has "resigned" from the Communist 
Pai'ty or has dropped out of it and ceased attending its meetings is 
not proof at all that that person is not a Communist and not still 
actively working for the party. 

How Many — and How Dangerous — Are the "Ex"-Communists? 

There is no question about the loyalty of some ex-Communists. 
Persons such as Louis Budenz, the late Whittaker Chambers, Elizabeth 
Bentley, and John Lautner have proved by their actions that their 
break with the Communist Party and the Communist movement has 
been complete and unquestioned. These people and others have dem- 
onstrated, by the assistance they have given to Federal security 
agencies and congressional investigating committees, by their writings, 
their support for anti-Communist organizations and causes, and by 
numerous other deeds, their loyalty to the United States and their 
sincere desire to see the end of the conspiracy of which they were 
once a part. 

But the previously cited testimony indicates that there is serious 
question about the loyalty of many so-called "former" Communists, 
even though they are no longer formally a part of the Communist 
Party itself. These people are still doing the work of the Kremlin 
and assisting the party in whatever way they can. 

How many former Communists are there? 

Report on the American Communist,^ a book published in 1952, 
estimated that during the prior 30 years some 700,000 American 
men and women had left the Communist Party after being members 
of it for varying periods of time. 

In his hook American Commissar, published in 1961, Sandor Voros 
estimates that there are approximately one million former Com- 
munists in this country. Voros, a member of the Communist Party 

> See "Western Section of the Southern California District of the Communist Party"— Part 1, October 20, 
1959, Hearings before Committee on Un-American Activities. 
» Morris L. Ernst and David Loth. Henry Holt and Company, Inc. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 13 

for 11 years, was campaign manager for Earl Browder when the 
Communist F&rtj leader was running for President of the United 
States in 1936. 

Mrs. Marion Miller, an FBI undercover operative in the Communist 
Party from 1952 until 1955, estimated, while testifying before this 
committee in the fall of 1959, that there are a half-million former 
Communists in the United States. 

Exact figures are impossible to arrive at in attempting to answer 
this question. It would seem, however, that the figure of 750,000 
would be a reasonable estimate of the number of former Communists 
in this country. 

Where does the loyalty of these people lie today? 

Again, a precise answer to this question is impossible. A relative 
handful of this total has given conclusive evidence of their loyalty to 
the United States by their actions and writings since leaving the party. 

Nothing is known definitely about the remainder although it is prob- 
able that most of them are today completely loyal Americans who are 
fu-mly opposed to the Communist movement. At the same time, it is 
also apparent that a question remains about the ultimate loyalty of 
many thousands of persons in this country who are not today actual 
members of the Communist Party. 

Mrs. Miller, in her testunony before the committee, made the 
following statement on this subject: 

I have found from my experience that at least, and this is 
a conservative number, at least fifty percent * * * [of the 
ex-Communists in the United States], if it came to a show- 
down whether their loyalties lie with the Soviet Union or 
with the United States in case of emergency, still are sym- 
pathetic with what they call the "Father of Scientific Social- 
ism," that is Russia. * * * 

I would like to explain, it is not easy to stay in the Com- 
munist Party, because to be a good, loyal, dedicated Com- 
munist, it takes all of your time, your money, and energy, 
and Communists can be selfish, too. Many of them say, I 
can be a good Communist and not to go meetings, just like a 
good lot of people can say I can be a good Christian and not 
go to church on Sunday. They follow out the party hne. 
They subscribe to the Communist pubhcations. They give 
their donations. They attend these front organizations, and 
these other groups, and when they are within their own legit- 
imate organizations they are promoting communism. 

This is the point. You see, so * * * many people who 
dropped out are stiU promoting communism * * *} 

Although it is impossible to judge accurately just how many former 
Communists in this country are still loyal to the Communist cause and 
how many are completely devoted to the United States, it appears 
reasonable to estimate that there is a sizable minority of them, some 
tens of thousands of people, at least, who must be counted on the 
Communist side. 

For this reason, it is certainly apparent — again — that the strength 
and danger of the internal Communist apparatus is far greater than 
the figure of 10,000 technically enrolled party members would indicate. 

1 See " Western Section of the Southern California District of the Communist Party"— Part 2, October 
21, 1959, Hearings before Committee on Un-American Activities. 



14 annual report for the year 1961 

The Industrial Phase of the Internal Communist Threat 

communications industry 

One of the committee's hearings in 1961 is sufficient to prove how 
real and dangerous the internal Communist menace is. On October 
26 and 27 and November 29, 1961, the committee took pubHc testi- 
mony on the subject of Communist penetration of radio communica- 
tions facihties.* These hearings, like hearings held in August 1960 on 
the same subject,^ were designed to develop information pertinent to 
communications security bUls which had been mtroduced in the 
Congress. 

In the course of these hearings, high-ranking officials of the Federal 
Communications Commission, the Department of Defense, and com- 
mercial broadcasting corporations testified that, in time of emergency, 
Communist subversives with access to transmitting facilities could 
sabotage vital communications equipment, betray the positions of 
this country's ships at sea, and commit espionage by copying messages 
and making them available to Soviet agents. Such action could 
result in the brealdng of our codes so that we would have no secrets 
from our enemy — a development that would be disastrous in time of 
emergency. They also testified that it is possible for Communists 
with access to transmitting equipment to sabotage the whole 
CONELRAD defense warning S3^stem on which the lives of millions of 
Americans will depend in the event of enemy attack. 

How could one Communist do this? 

CONELRAD, which means CONtrol of ELectromagnetic RADia- 
tion, was developed by the FCC at the request of military and civil 
defense officials to serve a double purpose — to deny radiation from any 
transmitter which would provide a homing signal to attacking enemy 
planes or air-breathing missiles and, at the same time, to provide a 
means of Government communication to the people under attack 
conditions. 

In the event of enemy attack, on signal from the North American 
Air Defense Command, some 1,300 stations in the United States which 
participate in the CONELRAD setup will either go off the air or shift 
to frequencies of 640 or 1240. The latter will reduce their power and 
not identify then* locations. 

Just one Communist, by not switching to these channels or by 
staying on the air and identifying his transmitter, could provide the 
homing signal that would enable the enemy to zero in on preselected 
targets in this country. 

A Communist with access to transmitting equipment could do other 
things as weU. He could broadcast statements that would sabotage 
civil defense measures or create panic. 

Is there any danger that this could happen in the event the United 
States should be attacked? 

One witness subpenaed to testify in these committee hearings was 
identified by two other witnesses in the heai-ings as a person they had 
known as a member of the Communist Party. A third witness had 
similarly identified him in executive testuuony before the committee 
in August 1960. 

1 See "Communist Penetration of Radio Facilitios (CONELRAD— Communications)"— Part 2, October 
26, 27, and November 29, 1961. Hearings before Committee on Un-American Activities. 

' See "Communist Penetration of Radio FacUities (CONELRAD— Communications)"— Part 1, August 
23, 24, 1960. Hearings before Committee on Un-American Activities. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 15 

This man denied that he was a member of the Communist Party 
on October 26, 1961, the day he testified before the committee. He 
invoked the fifth amendment, however, when asked if he had attended 
Commmiist Party meetings ; had recruited others into the Communist 
Party; and if he had resigned from the party just prior to receiving 
his subpena to testify. 

At the time he appeared before the committee, this man was em- 
ployed as a television engineer by the American Broadcasting Company 
in New York City. He was also licensed by the FCC to operate an 
amateur radio station in his home. 

Another witness who testified under oath in the hearings had been 
identified as a member of the Communist Party by two witnesses in 
testimony before the committee. This man had been screened off 
U.S. vessels as a security risk during World War II. He, too, denied 
that he was a member of the Communist Party on the day he testified, 
but invoked the fifth amendment when questioned about past party 
membership and whether he had, in the previous month, resigned 
from the party. 

At the time of his appearance before the committee, this man was 
employed as an operating engineer by the National Broadcasting 
Company in New York City. 

Another witness subpenaed to testify before the committee in these 
hearings denied current membership in the Communist Party, but 
invoked the fifth amendment in refusing to answer all questions 
asked him concerning previous membership. At the time of his 
testimony, he was employed as chiej engineer of the Tuschman Broad- 
easting Company in Cleveland, Ohio. 

Still another witness, who was identified as a member of the Com- 
munist Party by three other witnesses who testified during the hear- 
ings, denied current party membership, but invoked the fifth amend- 
ment in refusing to state whether he had ever been a member of the 
Communist Party and had resigned from it. This man, at the time of 
his testimony, was employed as a radio technician by Station WBNX, 
New York City. 

Each one of these men held a position that might have enabled him 
to sabotage the CONELRAD defense warning system in the event 
of enemy attack. This fact alone indicates how dangerous to the 
security of the United States even a small Communist Party can be. 

The conduct of another witness before the committee was even more 
revealing of the nature and extent of the internal Communist menace. 
This man had been identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by five witnesses who testified before the committee. In his appear- 
ance on October 26, 1961, he invoked the fifth amendment when 
asked if he was presently a member of the Communist Party. 

This man, William Bender, is currently secretary-treasurer of the 
American Communications Association, a union which claims 8,000 
members. This union is recognized as the bargaining agent for 
employees of Western Union in New York City, RCA Communica- 
tions in the United States and Puerto Rico, the French Cable Com- 
pany, Western Union Cables, TeleRegister Corporation, and several 
radio stations. Its members service highly sensitive communications 
lines of the U.S. Government — lines which carry messages of the 
Department of Defense and other agencies. 



16 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Bender is not the only official of the American Communications 
Association who has been identified as a member of the Communist 
Party. Joseph Selly, president of the union, and Charles Silberman, 
editor of the union's publications, have also been identified as party 
members — as was the late Joseph Kehoe who preceded Bender as the 
union's secretary-treasurer. The American Communications Associa- 
tion was expelled by the CIO as Communist-dominated in 1950. 

Despite this fact and despite the fact that the union has been cited 
as Communist-controlled by this committee, by anti-Communist labor 
leaders, and by nimierous newspapers and magazines in this country, 
the 8,000 or so members of the union, year after year, have been 
reelectino; their same old Communist leaders, reading the pro-Com- 
munist line peddled in the union's publications, and adopting 
Moscow-serving resolutions at their conventions. 

Most members of this union, of course, are not Communist Party 
members. But can it be argued effectively that the thousands of 
members of this union employed in the sensitive broadcasting and 
communications industry are in no way a danger to the security of 
this country? 

The undeniable fact is that they accept Communist leadership today 
and have done so for years. The big question is: Will they continue 
to accept it at a time of crisis and danger to this country? 

The possibility of union action contrary to the interests of the 
United States in the communications field is just one aspect of the 
internal menace of communism. There are others in this same field. 

The Federal Communications Commission can deny an operator's 
license to a person known as a Communist or a pro-Communist when 
his initial application is made. It can deny such a person's application 
for renewal of a license, but it has no authority to take a license away 
from such a person once it has been issued and, therefore, may have to 
wait almost 5 years before acting against a Communist licensed to 
operate communications facilities. 

Moreover, there are many unlicensed transmitters in this country, 
and there is no law requiring their registration with the FCC. In 
addition, transmitters which can operate worldwide can be built by 
almost anyone of average intelligence from kit form. All the parts 
needed for the construction of such transmitters can be purchased 
from radio and electronic supply houses. 

It is clear from these facts that even a small number of individual 
Communists can present a serious threat to national security in the 
communications field. 

The FCC also faces a problem in the licensing of stations of all 
types. Communists have secured ownership of stations in the past, 
and strict vigilance is required to see that they do not today succeed 
in seizing control of such powerful propaganda instruments which can 
be turned into deadly weapons of sabotage under certain conditions. 

Is the Communist Party alert to the opportunities for subversion 
open to it in the communications field? 

One of the witnesses in the committee hearmgs on this subject was 
Michael Mignon, a communications expert and representative of the 
anti-Communist Communications Workers of America (AFL-CIO). 
Mignon was once a member of the Communist Party, during which 
time he was also a member of the American Communications Associ- 
ation. Testifying before the committee in July 1957, he made the 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 17 

following statement about the importance the Communist Party has 
always placed on infiltration of our communications industry: 

To the best of my recollection, sir, it was always pointed 
out to me that the importance of obtaining control of the 
communications industry in times of stress or in revolution- 
ary times was a primary factor, and therefore the efforts of 
the Communist Party in subsidizing the union [American 
Communications Association] and offering whatever assist- 
ance they could in building the union in the communications 
industry was primarily the main objective.^ 

ANOTHER TRADE UNION THREAT 

The International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union 
(ILWU), like the ACA, was expelled from the CIO in 1950 as Com- 
munist-dominated. This union is headed by Harry Bridges, who has 
often been identified as a member of the Communist Party. 

Bridges, through his leadership of this union which claims 56,000 
members, controls shipping on the West Coast from Alaska to Mexico, 
He also has power to undermine the welfare and security of our 50th 
State — Hawaii. He has organized not only the longshoremen there, 
but w^orkers on sugar and pineapple plantations. In the past, he has 
demonstrated his power to cripple the economy of Hawaii by calling 
strikes which have completely tied up all shipping between the islands 
and the mainland. 

The fact that it is a policy of Communists, when possible, to call 
strikes for no other reason than to further Soviet objectives, indicates 
that Bridges' power over West Coast-Hawaii shipping poses a con- 
tinuing threat to the security of the United States. 

In an appearance before the Committee on Un-American Activities 
in early 1959, Bridges testified that in the event of a war between the 
Communist and Nationalist Chinese, he would do everything he could 
to prevent the shipment of any assistance from this country to the 
Chinese Nationalists.^ 

Just a short while after his appearance before the committee, 
Harry Bridges went to Japan where he played a leading role in the 
first All-Pacific and Asian Dockworkers Trade Union Conference. 
This was a gathering attended by some 75 delegates representing 
Communist-run unions in Australia, India, Japan, Indonesia, Cam- 
bodia, Canada, and the U.S.S.R. Its apparent purpose was to unite, 
under Communist control and in the service of the Kremlin, all the 
dockworkers' unions of the Asian-Pacific area— so that when the time 
came, these unions could coordinate strikes, sabotage, and similar 
activities to assist the Kremlin in undermining the defense of the free 
world. Bridges led a four-man delegation from his union to this 
conference. 

Despite these actions and the fact that his statement before this 
committee about the role he would play in the event of a war in China 
was denounced by many newspapers as verging on treason, Harry 
Bridges and the Communists with whom he has surrounded himself 
in the leadership of the ILWU are as firmly in control of the union 
as ever before. 

' See "Investigation of Communist Penetration of Communications Facilities" — Part 1, July 17, 18, 
19, August 2 and 9, 1957. Hearings before Committee on Un-American Activities. 

» See "Passport Security"— Part 1 (Testimony of Harry R. Bridges), April 21, 1959. Hearings before 
Committee on Un-American Activities. 



18 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

THE ELECTRONICS, MANUFACTURING, AND POWER FIELDS 

Another union expelled from the CIO as Communist-dommated in 
1949 was the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of 
America (UE). This union today claims 160,000 members. An 
indication of the continuing Communist power in this union is found 
in the fact that, in October 1961, the Communist Party selected one 
of UE's officers, James Lustig, to become business manager of The 
Worker when Louis Weinstock resigned that position. 

The UE is recognized as the bargaining agent for workers in many 
major electrical manufacturing plants in this country, plants which 
are turning out instruments and parts for planes of all types, sub- 
marines, warships, missiles and other defense weapons. 

¥7hen the committee held hearings in Pittsburgh in Mai'ch 1959. 
A. Tyler Port, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower, testified 
that five prime contractors for the Department of Defense in the 
Pittsburgh area alone were turning out defense materiel in plants in 
which the UE was the bargaining agent for the workers. Mr. Port 
pointed out the danger to our national security which exists in the 
fact that workers in the power industry, as well as in manufacturing, 
are represented by the UE. He said: 

The potential for bringing defense production to a halt by 
sabotage of power facilities is enormous and the repercussions 
would be, I think, disastrous because if the power itself is 
cut off, defense plants cannot produce, and we would thus 
be denying ourselves the weapons which are so essential to 
our national defense effort.^ 

THE BASIC MINING INDUSTRY 

The Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers Union today claims 100,000 
members. Like the ILWU, ACA, and UE, it was expelled from the 
CIO because it was Communist-dominated. Its members are orga- 
nized in seven districts, representing locals in 30 states. The strategic 
role this union plays in our basic and defense industries, particularly 
in time of war, is made apparent by the following quotation from the 
December 1961 recommended decision of Subversive Activities Control 
Board (SACB) member Francis A. Cherry in the case of Robert F. 
Kenned V, Attornev General of the United States vs. International 
Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers (Docket No. 116-56) i^ 

The jurisdiction of Mine-Mill under its constitution ex- 
tends to all mining operations except coal, plus the processing 
of ore, chemical and reduction plants, casting and allied 
industries. In practice, however, the Union's chief concen- 
trations are in nonferrous metals, particularly copper, lead 
and zinc, and its effective jurisdiction is over mining, miUing, 
smelting and refining these ores. (p. 10, par. 37) 

> See "Current Strategy and Tactics of Communists in the United States (Greater Pittsburgh Area- 
Part 1)," March 10, 1959. Hearings before Committee on Un-American Acltvitles. 

• On July 28, 1955, Attorney General Herbert BrowneU, Jr., petitioned the SACB to hold hearings on 
Mine-Mill for the purpose of determining if it was a Communist-infiltrated organization as defined in the 
Internal Security Act of 1950. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 19 

Mr. Cherry, in his decision, also found: 

It is quite clear from the evidence that many important 
functionaries of [Mine-Mill] are and have been members of 
the Communist Party, and that other important function- 
aries are persons who are and have been amenable to the 
Communist Party. This situation prevails with respect to 
the International Executive Board to the extent that the 
Executive Board is and for many years has been dominated and 
controlled by the Communist Party members on the Board. 
A substantial number of the staff members who assist the 
Executive Board are and have been members of the Com- 
munist Party, (pp. 92, 93, par. 222) [Emphasis added.] ^ 

The Communist Party, in other words, still runs the largest union 
of nonferrous metal workers in the United States. 

THE ARMED FORCES' — AND YOUR — FOOD 

When the CIO cleansed its ranks of Communist-dominated unions 
in 1949-1950, the United Packinghouse Workers of America barely 
escaped expulsion. In 1959, this committee held hearings on con- 
tinuing Communist penetration of the Packinghouse Workers Union. 

As mentioned earlier in this report, eight high-ranking officials and 
key employees of the union were among those identified by witnesses 
in these hearings as persons they had loiown as members of the 
Communist Party. When called to the witness stand, the eight 
denied that they were then Communist Party members. But every 
one of them proceeded to invoke the fifth amendment when asked if 
they had been members of the party and had turned in a technical 
resignation so that they could sign a non-Communist affidavit or 
deny membership under oath in any hearing, while actually remaining 
dedicated Communists and continuing to do the party's work. 

Two former Communist Party members who were employed in the 
meatpacking industry and had broken with the conspiracy testified 
in these hearings. In response to questions, they explained, on the 
basis of their experience as Communists, why the party was trving to 
infiltrate and seize control of the unions in this field. One ol them, 
Carl Nelson, explained it in these words: 

Well, if this country was ever to go to war, an army has to 
travel on its stomach, and they would be in an excellent posi- 
tion to cut ofi^ food for the Armed Forces.^ 

The other witness, John R, Hackney, said: 

Because the party felt that the meat industry was essential 
to the national economy and it was important that they 
build the party within the meat industry in the event that 
we had war with other nations, that we could control the 
meat industry and its various outlets.^ 



1 Additional findings of Mr. Cherry concerning the Mine, MUl and Smelter Workers Union wiU be 
found on pp. 23-27. 

• See "Communist Infiltration of Vital Industries and Current Communist Techniques in the Chicago, 
ni., Area," May 6, 6, and 7, 1959. Hearings before Committee on Un-American Activities. 



20 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Wtien Hackney, who was still employed in the meatpacking industry 
at the time, was asked to give his estimate of the Commmiist Party's 
strength in this field, he replied: 

From my most current information and my experience in 
my activity in the party I would say that the party is 
stronger now in the meat industry than it ever has been. 
(See footnote 2, p. 19) 

Communist Party membership was probably somewhat lower in 
1959 than it is today. On the basis of formally enrolled members, 
the party was weaker than it had been in many years. Yet this man — 
who had been a party member in the past, nad worked in the meat- 
packing industry as such, and was still employed in it — estimated that 
party strength was then stronger in the field "than it ever has been." 

COLONIZERS 

The internal Communist threat in the field of labor is not limited 
to the fact that some half-dozen unions in this country representing 
workers in basic industries are dominated or heavily infiltrated by 
party members. For years, the Commimist Party has been sending 
so-called "colonizers" into strategic plants where workers are not 
organized in unions under its control. It is the function of these 
colonizers, who are usually highly educated young men and women 
(who conceal their education from their employers and fellow workers), 
to create Communist cells in these plants and, if possible, work them- 
selves into positions of leadership in non-Communist unions. During 
recent years, the committee has uncovered Communist Party col- 
onizers in the textile, steel, and other industries. 

What is the ultimate aim of these colonizers and of the Communist 
Party members who hold positions of leadership in the unions previ- 
ouslv mentioned in this chapter? 

Tnis question is answered by a document introduced into the com- 
mittee's records when it held hearings in Buffalo in 1957. This 
document had been given to an FBI undercover operative in the 
Communist Party by a man who was a Communist Party organizer 
in the Bethlehem Steel Company plant in Lackawanna. It was an 
official directive issued to all Communist Party clubs in the area. 
A single mimeographed sheet, it was entitled "STEEL CONCEN- 
TRATION." Immediately under the title, in capital letters, was 
the following: 

EVERY CLUB SHOULD DISCUSS THIS IN THEIR NEXT MEETING 
 AND IF THEY WANT A SPEAKER CALL THE OFFICE OR BETTY. 

The first paragraph under this notation read as follows: 

Three Basic industries. Steel, Railroad and mining. 
These are basic to the national economy, that is if any one or 
all three are shut down by strike our economy is paralyzed. 
It is necessary for a Marxist Revolutionary Party to be 
rooted in these industries. 

Even if no consideration is given to the dangers posed by Communist 
infiltration in certain unions classified as non-Communist and to the 
question of cells organized in various plants by Communist colonizers, 
the harsh truth is that today, though the Communist Party has only 



ANlSrUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 21 

some 10,000 formally enrolled members, some 324,000 workers in 
industries vital to any U.S. defense and war effort are members of 
unions which have been found to be under Communist leadership. 

HOW MUCH A MENACE? 

Is there any danger that all these workers or a significant number 
of them in one or several of these unions would, in time of emergency, 
take action inimical to the United States? Are they doing so today 
in the cold war, taking the side of Moscow rather than that of the 
United States? 

It must first be emphasized that the great majority of these workers 
are not Communists. Sentimentally, at least, they are anti-Com- 
munists. A good number of them are actually "captive" members 
of these Communist unions. Because these unions are recognized as 
the bargaining ao:ents for employees in various plants, they must join 
these unions if they want to work at their trades in these localities. 
For all practical piu*poses, they have no other choice. 

Despite this fact, the record of past events indicates that non- 
Communist workers of this type do not always appreciate the degree 
to which certain actions on their part can endanger the security of 
this country. They can and have been tricked by their Communist 
leaders into doing serious damage to the security of the United States. 

THE STALIN-HITLER PACT PERIOD 

During the Stalin-Hitler pact of 1939-41, the line of Moscow and, 
therefore, of the U.S. Communist Party was that everything possible 
must be done to sabotage defense preparations and production in this 
country. The aim here was to prevent the United States from giving 
effective military aid to free nations which were then fighting Hitler 
and also to delay our defense production so that this country would be 
unprepared, or madequately prepared, to take part in the war against 
the Axis Powers as long as Stalin was Hitler's buddy. 

A wave of sabotage strikes hit U.S. defense industries during this 
period. These strikes, for weeks and months, tied up the Allis- 
Chalmers plant in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; the International Harvester 
plant in Chicago, Illinois; the Aluminum Company of America 
plants in Cleveland, Ohio; the North American Aviation Company 
plant in Inglewood, California (a strike which was so serious that it 
compelled the President to order the Army to take over the plant) ; 
and the Vultee Aircraft and Harvill plants in Los Angeles. Addi- 
tional strikes were called by the Transport Workers Union m NewYork 
City, by the International Woodworkers of America, and by the Mine, 
Mill and Smelter Workers Union. 

The Special Committee on Un-American Activities investigated each 
one of these strikes — and found that each one had been engineered b}'- a 
Communist union official. 

Most of the members of these unions were not Communists. 
Basically, they were loyal Americans who did not want to hurt their 
country. But the fact is that, at a time of great danger to this 
Nation, they did incalculable harm to its defense efforts. Their 
strikes were Communist-staged and, although most of the men who 
took part in them were not Communists, the strikes served the interests 
of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. 



22 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Could the same thing happen today? Or have the American people 
become so alert to the natm'e and dangers of communism that they 
would not let themselves be used by Communist agents as they did 
20 years ago? 

Just 10 years ago, at the time of the Korean war, anti-communism 
reached its peak in the United States. The fathers and sons of the 
American people were fighting Communist armies on the battlefields 
of Korea. They were being tortured, wounded, and kiUed there by 
the thousands. The Communist Party in this country sided with 
the enemy. It was only natural that anti-Communist feeling was 
intense. Through the revelations of Louis Budenz, Elizabeth Bent- 
ley, and Whittaker Chambers before this committee, the Smith Act 
trial of the Communist Party's top leaders, the Hiss case, and other 
developments, the American people had learned much about commu- 
nism that they had not known at the time of the Hitler-Stalin pact. 

In the summer of 1951, at the height of the Korean war, the Mine, 
MiU and Smelter Workers Union, which had been labeled as Commu- 
nist-dominated not only by this committee but by the CIO itself, 
called the first strike in the history of this Nation against the "big four" 
of the copper industry — Kennecott, Anaconda, Phelps-Dodge, and the 
American Smelting and Refining Company, 

The strike affected 100,000 workers and shut down 95 percent of 
U.S. copper production at a time when copper was in shortest supply 
of all strategic materials vital to the Korean war and our general 
defense production. There had been a serious copper shortage before 
the strike. The strike aggravated the situation so much that Presi- 
dent Truman invoked the national emergency provisions of the Taft- 
Hartley law to end the strike on the ground that it was exposing the 
United States to gi'ave danger. 

Manufacturers of Armed Forces materiel were forced to close down 
their plants, and iron and steel production was cut by the shutdown 
of manufacturers' copper casting departments. The Director of De- 
fense Mobilization had to take 30,000 tons of copper from our stock- 
pile of critical materials to keep the industry going. The Director of 
the Mint appealed to the people of this country to get their nickels 
and pennies into cumulation in order to relieve the shortage. 

When the Mine, MiU and Smelter Workers called this strike, the 
Daily Worker, official organ of the Communist Party, praised it and 
held it up as a model for all other unions! 

There can be no question about the fact that this strilve, staged 
by Communist union leaders, served the interests of the Soviet Union, 
Red China, and the entire Communist bloc and that it posed a serious 
threat to the United States. Yet, it was basically loyal, non-Com- 
munist American trade unionists who made this sabotage action 
possible and took part in it. 

WHAT ABOUT THE PRESENT? 

Could the same thing happen today? Could the identified Com- 
munist leaders of the ILWU, ACA, UE, and Mine-Mill foment 
similar sabotage stril^es at a time of national emergency? Another 
important point: Are they today using the several hundred thousand 
workers under their control to promote the aims and interests of the 
Soviet Union in the cold war while, at the samf time, undermining this 
Nation in its fight for survival? 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 23 

In 1955, the Attorney General of the United States petitioned the 
Subversive Activities Control Board to hold hearings for the purpose 
of determining whether the Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers Union 
was a Communist-infiltrated organization as defined in the Internal 
Security Act of 1950. 

On December 26, 1961, SACB member Francis A. Cherry made 
his recommended decision on the case, after holding hearings at which 
the union was given the opportunity to defend itself against the 
charge. A total of 9725 pages of testimony was taken in 110 days 
of hearings. The Department of Justice presented 19 witnesses and 
82 exhibits in building its case against Mine-Mill. The union pre- 
sented 125 witnesses and 167 exhibits in its defense. It was repre- 
sented by counsel of its own choosing, who were permitted to cross- 
examine and do everything in their power to refute or undermine 
the testimony of the Government witnesses. 

As a result of these heai'ings. Board member Cherry recommended 
to the fuU Board that it find Mine-Mill a Communist-infiltrated 
organization within the meaning of the Internal Security Act. Num- 
erous statements in his 96)2-page recommended decision spotlight the 
danger posed to the United States today by the Mine-Mill and the 
other unions previously discussed in this chapter. 

First of all, the following quotations from his decision make it 
unmistakably clear that the Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers Union 
is controlled by Communists who have used the union to promote 
the interests of the U.S. Communist Party and the Soviet Union: 

As indicated in the findings supra, [Mine-Mill] has con- 
sistently taken positions in opposition to the foreign policies 
of the United States and in opposition to the domestic laws 
and progi'ams of the Federal Government in the field of 
Communism. As will appear, petitioner presented evidence 
that the policies and programs of [Mine-Mill] and the views 
advanced by the leaders of [Mine-MiU] in these areas have had 
a consistent similarity with and have been substantially 
identical to the positions taken and advanced by the Com- 
munist Party of the United States, (p. 77, par. 173) 

The record is replete with instances, of which the findings 
heretofore made in this section are illustrative, where the 
Communist leadership of [Mine-Mill] has aligned Mine-MiU 
with the Communist camp of the world and has taken and 
advanced positions in their official capacities which have been 
identical with the positions of the Communist Party of the 
United States, (p. 81, par. 186) 

There is no instance in the record where [Mine-Mill] has 
taken a position which varied from a position or program of 
the Communist Party, (p. 83, par. 197) 

The Communist leaders of Mine-Mill have also succeeded, Mr. 
Cherry found, in eliminating or smothering the anti-Communist 
opposition within the ranks of the union: 

As will appear, Communism remained an issue in Mine- 
Mill after the Union had been expelled from the C.I.O., and 
the efforts of the anti-Communists were consistently 
defeated, (p. 62, par. 124) 

21-204—63 3 



24 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

In the history of [Mine-Mill] the issue of Communism has 
brought about the loss of considerable members, the ex- 
pulsion of the Union from the C.I.O., the dismissal from 
the Union of anti-Communist staff members, and secessions 
by a number of local unions. * * * Various persons who held 
functionary positions in [Mine-Mill] have been discharged 
after taking anti-Communist positions. Persons who were 
members of the Communist Party and were expelled from the 
Party were thereafter discharged from the Union, (p. 
95, par. 230) 

Moreover, the Communist leaders of [Mine-Mill] have 
successfully prevented the passage of any regulations which 
would bar Communists from holding positions of leadership 
and trust (see supra). And, various of [Mine-Mill's] own 
witnesses testified that they had no objection to Communists 
holding office in the Union, (p, 92, par. 220) 

More than this, they have also used their position in the union to 
oppose and undermine governmental anti-Communist activities: 

As the findings made below will illustrate, the policies and 
the position taken and advanced by [Mine-Mill] and by the 
Communist Party have been identical in opposing and 
urging elimination of the domestic laws of the United 
States designed to hamper and expose the Communist move- 
ment, (p. 81, par. 188) 

The majority of the leadership of the International has 
consistently pursued and advanced policies and programs in 
opposition to the Government of the United States in its 
foreign policies and in the domestic laws and programs 
designed to combat the Communist movement in the 
United States. The positions taken and advanced by 
[Mine-Mill] have never deviated from the positions taken 
and advanced by the Communist Party of the United States, 
(pp. 95, 96, par. 231) 

HATE THE U.S. LOVE THE U.S.S.R. 

It is also apparent from Mr. Cherry's recommended decision that 
the leaders of this union have done everything they could to undermine 
the loyalty of the union's members to the United States and to 
promote, in its place, sympathy for the Soviet Union and the world 
Communist movement: 

The positions of Mine-Mill and of the Communist Party 
regarding the foreign affairs and relations of the United States 
have consistently been against the United States — it has 
always been tbe United States at fault, never the Soviet 
Union. The latter, in fact, has been consistently praised. 
Persistent efforts have been made, and with apparent success 
as the findings supra indicate, by the Comm^unist leaders of 
Mine-Mill to convince the membership of the Union that 
Wall Street and the United States Government are their 
enemies, (p. 81, par. 187) 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 26 

A reading of the record is convincing that a major program 
of [Mine-Mill] throughout the many years covered by the 
evidence has been one of stirring up and advocating hate for 
and distrust in the Government of the United States and 
advocating action to change the foreign policy and the do- 
mestic policy in the field of Communism. On the other hand, 
whenever the Soviet Union has been referred to in conven- 
tion resolutions or in statements by the leadership of [Mine- 
Mill] there has been a complete absence of criticism and 
usually praise, (p. 84, par. 198) 

It is a pohcy of the Communist Party that its members in 
labor unions educate the workers that the Government of 
the United States is their enemy (supra). The Communist 
leaders of [Mine-Mill] have consistently done this (supra). 
(p. 85, par. 202) 

What instrumentalities have the Communist leaders of this union 
used to achieve their above-described diabolical ends? 

First of all, there is the union newspaper, Mine-Mill Unions which 
is published biweekly: 

Every paid-up member of a local affiliated with the Inter- 
national Union receives a copy of the newspaper put out 
by the International, (p. 89, par. 212(f)) 

The Union newspaper has been an important link between 
the Mine-Mill leadership and the rank and file members, and 
so considered by the Union officials. Over the years there 
has been strong criticism of the Union paper by the anti- 
Communist people in Mine-Mill (infra) and the paper has 
often advanced positions similar to the positions taken by the 
Communist Party, including positions on the foreign affairs 
of the United States (infra), (p. 35, par. 69) 

Union conventions, held every year, have also been used for this 
purpose : 

Resolutions opposing the foreign policies of the United 
States and opposing the domestic policies of the Govern- 
ment in the field of Communism or subversion, such as those 
set forth above and also set forth in the findings on earlier 
conventions, have been consistent occurrences at the Mine- 
Mill conventions. Similarly, the reports and declarations of 
certain of the International officers have consistently, at the 
various conventions, been quite critical of the Government 
of the United States, especially the foreign policies and the 
domestic programs in the field of Communism, (p. 64, 
par. 135) 

Moreover, the Communist Party members have gained and 
maintain the full faith, confidence and support of the ma- 
jority of the convention delegates to the extent that the 
conventions have consistently taken actions and adopted 
policies and programs favored by these officials, and the con- 
ventions have consistently rejected matters not favored by 
these officials. In a nutshell, the record established that the 
majority of the convention delegates have accepted without 



26 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

question or outward concern — "take their word for it" as 
one of [Mine-Mill's] witnesses testified — the views expressed 
and the policies advanced by those on the governing board 
who are Communist Party members and those who are 
amenable to the Communist Party, (p. 93, par. 224) 

The most frightening finding in Mr. Cherry's recommended deci- 
sion — from the viewpoint of this country's security, the danger of 
Communist-led sabotage strikes in times of emergency, and con- 
tinuing aid to the Soviet Union in cold war activities — -had to do with 
the extent to which the Communist leaders of the Mine, Mill and 
Smelter Workers Union have succeeded in hoodwinking and winning 
the loyalty and devotion of the members of the union, despite their 
continuing record of activity bordering on the treasonous : 

Most if not all of the more than 100 rank and file members 
who testified for [Mine-Mill] showed from their testimony 
that the officers of [Mine-Mill], who were shown on this 
record to be members of the Communist Party or working 
with the Party, have gained the support and coniidence of the 
witnesses, none of whom were themselves Party members, 
(p. 45, par. 98) 

The importance of the fact that the Communist officers of 
[Mine-Mill] have gained the coniidence and support of the 
majority of the Union memhership was given added significance 
by the extent to which this confidence goes, as evidenced by 
the findings now to be made. (p. 46, par. 99(a)) 

A substantial number of the leadershii^ of [Mine-Mill] have 
been members of the Communist Party (supra). The Com- 
munist Party member-leaders of [Mine-Mill] have advanced 
positions to the membership * * * and the membership 
itself has taken and carried out policies and positions which 
have been consistently identical with the policies and posi- 
tions of the Communist Party (supra). The Communist 
leaders of [Mine-MiU] have gained the coniidence and support 
of the majority of the Union memhership (supra), (p. 85, 
par. 201) 

The Communist orientation of the Union and the blind faith 
with which the majority of the members follow and support the 
Communists holding leadership positions, constitute [Mine- 
MlU] an organization through which the Communist Party 
can work with respect to a sizable section of the working class, 
(p. 97, par. 236) [Emphasis added in these quotations.] 

After listening to the many thousands of words of testimony in the 
case and after reading, reviewing, and analyzing the facts produced 
in the hearing, Mr. Cherry was forced to the conclusion: 

The Union [Mine-Mill] is being and for many years has 
been used to a significant extent to further and promote the 
objectives of the Communist Party, particularly with respect 
to the Party objectives as to the trade union movement, 
(p. 96, par. 234) 

The aid and support flowing to the Communist Party 
from [Mine-Mill] and its controlling leadership has been 
real, substantial and significant. Through [Mine-Mill], 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 27 

the Communist Party has acquired and continues to have 
a dependable foothold in the labor movement in the United 
States, (p. 96, par. 236) 

There is no reason to believe that conditions in the other unions 
previously discussed in this chapter differ in any substantial degree 
from those Mr. Cherry found in Mine-Mill. On the contrary, there 
is abundant evidence that they are equally bad. 

An analysis of the records of these unions over the years since their 
expulsion from the CIO as Communist dominated reveals that: 

Year after year, Harry Bridges of the ILWU and the Communist 
leaders of the ACA and UE have also been re-elected to the positions 
from which they dominate the activities of these unions; 

Year after year, they make vicious anti-U.S. and pro-Communist, 
Soviet-serving public statements; 

Year after year, they succeed in crushing such anti-Communist 
opposition as rises to oppose them; 

Year after year, the newspapers of these unions continue to peddle 
the Communist line on numerous issues ; 

Year after year, the delegates to the conventions of these unions 
adopt one resolution after another attacking and undermining the 
internal and foreign policies of the United States and promoting the 
position of the Communist Party, the Soviet Union, and the world 
Communist bloc. 

There is no indication today — any more than there was at the time 
of the Korean war— that the gi'eat majority of the 324,000 members 
of these unions is prepared to rebel against such utilization of its 
organizations in promoting the aims of the Communist Party and the 
Kremlin. 

It is not known just how many Communist Party members there 
are in these miions. Between 50 and 60 top officials, officers, and 
employees of the Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers Union were identi- 
fied as members of the Communist Party in the SACB proceedings, 
although the Government made no effort to uncover all the Coni- 
mmiists in the miion. The one fact that stands out clearly, however, 
is that whether there are 60, 120, 300, or 500 party members in Mine- 
Mill, their real strength, in many respects, is that of 100,000 Com- 
munists — because they have repeatedly and continuously succeeded 
in throwing the jull iveight of the union behind Communist positions 
and against the policies of the United States. 

Combined, the leaders of these four unions which have been found 
to be Communist dominated— the MMSW, ILWU, UE, and ACA— 
have succeeded, year after year, in usmg the power, prestige, and 
influence of some 324,000 American working men to promote the 
interests of the Soviet Union while, at the same time, subverting the 
interests of their own country. 

Moreover, two of these unions, the ILWU and MMSW, recently 
succeeded in breakiiig the ban on collaboration with Commimist-led 
unions which had existed within the labor movement in this country 
since 1950, when the CIO cleansed its ranks of those unions which 
were Red-ruled. 

The Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers Union recently signed a 
mutual assistance pact with the powerful 1,600,000-member Teamsters 
Union, led by James Hoffa. Harry Bridges' ILWU has obtained an 
agreement from the Teamsters for joint formation of a Pacific Coast 



28 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Warehouse Council. A tie-up between the Teamsters and two of the 
largest Communist-dominated unions in the country does anything 
but strengthen this Nation's industrial security. 

OTHER COMMUNISTS IN INDUSTRY 

In any reasoned attempt to point up the internal Communist 
menace, questions must be asked, even though complete or conclusive 
answers to them cannot be given. It would be erroneous to conclude 
this section without pointing out that the danger of communism in the 
organized labor movement is not limited to those unions already 
mentioned in this chapter— the ILWU, MMSW, ACA, and UE. 
These are only four of tne 11 unions expelled by the CIO in 1949-50 
on the grounds they were Communist dominated. What, it must be 
asked, about all the Communists in the seven other unions the CIO 
found to be under Communist domination? Where are they today? 

The Communists who were officials and rank-and-file members of 
two of these unions are already accounted for because (1) the United 
Farm Equipment and Metal Workers Union joined the Communist- 
run UE in late 1949 and (2) the International Fishermen and Allied 
Workers Union merged with Harry Bridges' ILWU shortly before the 
expulsion of these two unions was formally announced by the CIO 
on August 29, 1950. 

The Communists in the other five unions, however, are today 
largely unaccounted for. 

Two of these unions, the United Office and Professional Workers 
of America (UOPWA) and the Food, Tobacco, Agricultural and AUied 
Workers Union of America (FTA), joined the independent Distributive, 
Processing and Office Workers of America (DPOWA) in 1950. 

The DPOWA had been formed earlier that year by a merger of eight 
locals of the CIO's United Retail, Wholesale and Department Store 
Employees of America, which had seceded from the parent union in 
1948 to avoid expulsion (because their leaders would not sign Taft- 
Hartley Act non-Communist affidavits). In 1954, the DPOWA 
merged with the CIO's Retail, Wholesale and Department Store 
Union. It now makes up that union's District 65. 

And where are all the Communist officials and rank-and-file mem- 
bers of the old UOPWA, FTA, and DPOWA who saw to it that, for 
a period of many years, these unions faithfully adhered to the policies 
of Moscow and the Communist Party? What evidence is there that 
these Communists have been eliminated from aU positions of influence 
in the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union? 

Early in 1955, the 45,000-member International Fur and Leather 
Workers Union, which 5 years before had been expelled from the CIO 
as Communist-dominated, merged with the AFL's Amalgamated Meat 
Cutters and Butcher Workmen. The Meat Cutters and Butcher 
Workmen took in the Fur-Leather Union over the strong objection 
of AFL President George Meanj^- and the AFL Executive Council, 
which warned that the Meat Cutters would be expelled from the AFL 
if it did not get rid of the Fur and Leather Workers. Later, in 
October 1955, the AFL Executive Council dropped its objection to 
the merger on the belief that a "good start" had been made toward 
eliminating the Communists in the union. This belief was based on 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 29 

the fact that 29 top officers and a larger number of lower ranking 
officials of the Fur and Leather Workers had been removed, or forced 
to resign, from their positions, or had been barred from running for 
office again. 

Today, however, Abe Feinglass, formerly an ofiicial of the Fur and 
Leather Workers, is now a vice president of the Amalgamated Meat 
Cutters and Butcher Workmen and the director of its Fur Department. 

Feinglass has been identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by witnesses who have testified before this committee. In April 1954, 
less than a year before the Fur and Leather Workers merged with the 
Meat Cutters, Feinglass invoked the fifth amendment when asked by 
this committee if he was a member of the Communist Party. 

The United Public Workers of America, composed of employees in 
the Federal Government and State, county, and municipal govern- 
ments, was disbanded in February 1953. Its members and officials 
presumably have joined other unions. The old Local 555 of this union 
continues to function as the New York Teachers Union (independent). 

Finally, the Marine Cooks and Stewards Union became defunct 
foUowing an NLRB representation election in 1954. Many of its 
members went over to the strongly anti-Communist Seafarers Inter- 
national Union, 

The committee does not claim to know just how many Communist 
Party members there were in the seven above-named unions in 
1949-50. It believes it reasonable to assume that at least a few 
thousand Communist agents were required to keep these unions 
hueing to the Red line in the face of nationwide criticism and the 
threat of expulsion from the CIO and the disgrace that would go with 
it. Fiu-thermore, though it cannot itself provide the answers, the 
committee deems it reasonable to propound the following questions: 

How many of these people are still members of the Communist 
Party? 

How many of them are doing the work of Moscow and the Com- 
munist Party in the non-Communist unions of which they are now 
members — or wherever else they may be? 

In view of these unanswered — and unanswerable — questions and the 
facts presented in this section, it is ridiculous, on its face, to say that 
the internal Communist menace has dwindled to the point where it 
is practically nonexistent or that it can be gauged by the fact that the 
Communist Party has only about 10,000 technical members. 

The members of the unions discussed in this chapter and Communist 
Party colonizers and infiltrators in other unions in our basic defense 
industries have continuing access to vital communications, production, 
power, and transportation equipment and facilities. The opportuni- 
ties for acts of sabotage by these individuals are great. FBI Director 
J. Edgar Hoover, in testifying on the question of appropriations for 
the Federal Bureau of Investigation for the year 1958, stated: 

In time of crisis, the concealed Communist puppets in the 
steel, coal, or rubber industries; or in the automobile, air- 
plane, atomic, and similar defense plants can be oj far greater 
value to the Communist conspiracy than whole divisions of 
armed soldiers. [Emphasis added. J 



30 annual report for the year 1961 

Internal Cold War 

The internal Communist menace is by no means limited to the 
danger presented b}^ Communist control of trade unions and infiltra- 
tion of the basic industries of this country. Although that danger is 
very real, it is far from the whole of the Communist menace. 

Most authorities agree that the Soviet Union v/ould prefer to 
conquer this country without war, if it is at all possible. This could 
be done, as it has been done in other nations, by activities that might 
be summed up in the phrase "political and policy sabotage." This 
encompasses the promotion of foreign policy positions and actions 
which have the ultimate effect of aiding Soviet aggression and its 
conquest of additional territories and peoples. It encompasses the 
promotion of activities which have the effect of undercutting or de- 
stroying firm policy positions or actions that would put a stop to 
Soviet conquest or would help liberate territory already seized by the 
Kremlin. It means the spreading of confusion, misleading of the 
American people on vital policy matters, sabotaging their faith in 
their country, undermining their will to resist, dividing them internally, 
and promoting sympathy for Communist regimes. 

Is the Communist Party capable of successful operations in these 
fields? 

UNITED FRONT OPERATIONS 

In the introduction to its recently published and latest edition of 
the "Guide to Subversive Organizations and Publications," the com- 
mittee makes the following statement concerning the current Com- 
munist Party strategy and line: 

Communist strategists revive the united front tactics of 1935; 
Communist cooperation is offered to socialists and capital- 
ists * * *; substituted for Hitler as the "main enemy" of 
the united front, however, are the "monopoly capitalists" 
allegedly ruling the United States and pursuing bellicose 
and imperialistic policies. The Communist "peace" propa- 
ganda slogan, "outlaw nuclear weapons," is expanded to 
"total disarmament," while the Soviet Union in practice 
steadfastly resists implementation of the slogans by rejecting 
all free-nation proposals for an effective system of armament 
inspection and control. 

Defined as briefly and simply as possible, a "united-front" opera- 
tion is one in which Communists succeed in getting non-Communists 
to cooperate with them in some activity. It may be accomplished from 
"above" — that is, by a more or less open approach of Communists to 
non-Communist organizations and indi-\dduals — or from "below," by 
the infiltration of non-Communist groups by Communists who exert 
their influence within these organizations to bring about their coopera- 
tion with the Communist Party. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 31 

In another section of the introduction, the committee says: 

In contrast to the overtly hostile attitude adopted by Com- 
munists in the post- World War II period, a switch in party 
line decreed by Soviet Communist leaders caUs for Com- 
munists to extend their hands in "friendship" and "co- 
operation" with non-Commmiists — whether as nations, or- 
ganizations or individuals. 

THE ORDERS COME DOWN 

The major issue on which the Communists' revived united-front 
tactics are based is that of "peace." The statement adopted by 81 
Communist parties in Moscow in December 1960 — a document which 
outlines Communist strategy for world conquest in the period im- 
mediately ahead — declared: 

The broadest possible united front of peace supporters, 
fighters against the imperiaUst policy of aggression and war 
inspii-ed by U.S. imperialism, is essential * * *. 

* * 4: * * 

To fight for peace today means to * * * ai'ouse the 
righteous indignation of the peoples against those who are 
heading for war, organize the peace forces stiU better, con- 
tinuously intensify mass actions for peace * * * Today, as 
never before, it is important to fight perseveringly in all 
countries to make the peace movement thrive and extend 
to towns and villages, factories and offices. 

The peace movement is the broadest movement of our 
time, involving people of diverse political and religious 
creeds, of diverse classes of society, who are all united by 
the noble m-ge to prevent new wars and to secure endm-ing 
peace. 

On January 6 of this year, following the Moscow meeting, Khru- 
shchev made a major speech in which he speUed out the strategy and 
tactics to be used by Communists in all parts of the world. He said, 
in part: 

Every day bigger sections of the population should be 
drawn into the struggle for peace, and the passivity which 
unfortunately still prevails among some sections in the 
bourgeois countries overcome. * * * The banner of peace 
enables us to rally the masses around us. By holding aloft 
this banner we wiU be even more successful. 

[and] 

Lenin pointed to the need of establishing contacts with 
those circles of the bourgeoisie which gravitate towards 
pacifism, "be it even of the palest hue." {Collected Works, 
Russ. Ed., Vol. 33, p. 236.) In the struggle for peace, he 
said, we should not overlook also the saner representatives 
of the bourgeoisie. 

The soundness of these words is confirmed by current 
events * * * _ 



32 AJ^NVAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

THE U.S. PARTY BOSS SPEAKS 

On January 20, 1961, Gus Hall, leader of the U. S. Communist 
Party, gave a report_ before a meeting of the party's National 
Committee in New York City. The purpose of this report was 
to interpret and summarize for American Communists the statement 
of the 81 Communist parties adopted in Moscow and also Khru- 
shchev's speech of January 6. Hall's report was deemed of such im- 
portance that it was printed in the party's magazine, Political Affairs, 
and also in special pamphlet form. In the section of his report 
entitled ''The Peace Movement," Hall stated: 

Peace activities take place in the most varied quarters and 
include a great variety of actions — mass marches, demon- 
strations, peace walks, picket lines, postcard campaigns, 
letters to Congressmen and senators, delegations, meetings, 
and many others. 

In the same section. Hall mentioned with approval certain organ- 
izations which are "specifically devoted to peace," including the 
Quaker Committees for Peace, Women's International League for 
Peace and Freedom, the pacifist Fellowship of Reconcihation, the 
Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy, and "committees for peace and 
friendship with Cuba." 

He complained, however, that U.S. peace movements — 

have not yet reached the volume, scope, and militancy which 
the situation imperatively demands. 

It is necessary to widen the struggle for peace, to raise its 
level, to involve far greater numbers to make it an issue in 
every community, every people's organization, every labor 
union, every church, every house, every street, every point 
of gathering of our people. * * * 

It is imperative to bring everyone — men, women, youth 
and yes, even children — into the struggle. * * * 

It is essential to givejull support to the existing peace bodies, 
to their movements and the struggles they initiate, to building 
and strengthening their organizations. It is particularly im- 
portant at this time to get the widest unity and community 
of effort around such actions as the coming Easter March 

* * *. [Emphasis added. 1 

* * * /if is also necessary to recognize the need for addi- 
tional peace organizations * * *. [Emphasis in original.] 
***** 

We Communists seek to be the most active fighters for peace. 

* * * peace is the best way, the best condition for advanc- 
ing socialism in our country. 

***** 

Above all Communists will intensify their work for peace, 
and their efforts to build up peace organizations. * * * 

We regard peace as the paramount issue in American 
political life. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 33 

Later in his report, Hall made the following statement: 

The problem is not one of sending people [i.e., party 
members] into organizations. Many are already there. 
The central question for us is to help our members, our clubs, 
our leaders, to carry on political activities where they 
are * * *. 

Here is where we must work out the application of our 

f)olicy. Here is where the vanguard role meets the test of 
ife. Here is where the policies of the united front meet the 
test of reality. [Emphasis added.] 

Hall's report, as important as it was in spelling out just which 
groups and what kind of groups the Communists were to support and 
infiltrate, was not the fu'st such tactical directive issued by the U.S. 
Communist Party. The April, May, and June 1960 issues of the 
Communist magazine, Neiu World Review, published a series of articles 
under the title "Peace Groups in the U.S." 

The purpose of these articles was made clear in the opening para- 
graphs of the first article in the series : 

No amount of conspiratorial silence can wipe out the 
forces for disarmament and peace; but it can leave them 
isolated from each other and ignorant of the efforts theh- 
fellows are making. Lack of information on peace activities 
can also serve to immobilize large sections of the population 
who long to do something specific to help end the threat of 
war, but do not know of the programs and activities of or- 
ganizations working for disarmament and Isating peace. 

It is our purpose to bring to our readers' [i.e., Communists' 
and fellow travelers'] attention the main groups in our country 
working toward these ends, beginning in this issue, with a de- 
scription of the main non-sectarian national organizations. 
[Emphasis added.] 

Khrushchev's speech of January 6, 1961, and Hall's report to the 
National Committee of January 20, just quoted, make clear the signifi- 
cance of these two paragraphs. The purpose of this series of articles 
was to spell out for party members just what American organizations 
had aims, and were engaged in the type of peace activity, that war- 
ranted Communist support and offered a challenge to the Communist 
infiltrators. 

The National Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy (SANE) was the 
very first group mentioned in the series and was also given more space 
than any other. Excerpts from the section on SANE follow: 

SANE ofiFers a wide choice of channels for expression * * * 
SANE provides an elastic organization and comprehensive 
program through which ordinary people can be effective. 

Referring to the local committees of SANE, the article stated: 

Their membership policy is flexible and they generally 
welcome additions to their forces, whether for one particular 
campaign or on a long-term basis. * * * Commitrtees 
in the Greater New York area are lending major efforts at 



34 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 



present toward a big SANE rally scheduled for Madison 
Square Garden on May 19 * * *. 

There is also a National Student Council for a Sane 
Nuclear Policy and a "Hollj^wood for SANE" Commit- 
tee * * *. 

As facts to be cited indicate, the Communists, in the case of SANE's 
New York City chapter, succeeded in effectively carrying out the 
party's directives on peace activity contained in these articles and in 
Gus Hall's speech. 

The next organization discussed was the Women's International 
League for Peace and Freedom. The article noted that this organi- 
zation did not exclude men from membership and has, since its found- 
ing, advocated "abandonment of the war sj^stem." The article said 
that today the WILPF "stand is for complete and universal disanna- 
ment * * * with a ban on nuclear weapons tests * * *." 

The following excerpt from the Eleventh (1961) Keport of the Cali- 
fornia Senate Fact-Fmding Subcommittee on Un-American Activities 
provides at least a partial answer to the question of whether Com- 
munist infiltration and/or united-front techniques have been applied 
with any success to the WILPF: 

Any organization of a liberal character that is interested in 
achieving results that are in coincidental conformity with the 
Communist line is a natural target for infiltration. So it has 
been with the Women's International League for Peace and 
Freedom * * *, The objectives of the Women's Interna- 
tional League for Peace and Freedom thus being in conform- 
ity with the international Party hne, some infiltration was 
inevitable. On a national scale it has not been sufficiently 
acute to warrant characterizing the organization as a Com- 
munist front or Communist dominated. In California, and 
some other localities, however, the invasion has been far more 
serious. Chapters of the movement were situated in Oak- 
land, Berkeley, San Francisco, Hollywood,^ and Los Angeles. 
All have been active at one time or another, in cooperating with 
knovm Communist-front organizations. [Emphasis added.] 

A national organization of scientists and a number of smaller local 
organizations which were disseminating nuclear and radiation infor- 
mation were also singled out for specific mention in the first New World 
Review article. 

The second article in the series plugged the SANE M adison Square 
Garden rally and then went on to mention a half-dozen or so church 
and church-affiliated organizations which had undertaken peace 
programs of various kinds. After mentioning several church publica- 
tions by name, the article made this statement: 

A number of pacifist groups participate in Hiroshima 
Memorial demonstrations, walks for peace, vigils and at- 
tempts at nonviolent entry into gerni warfare centers, 
missile bases, and other military installations. 

It then named certain pacifist organizations which had taken part 
in such activities. The article closed with favorable mention of the 
activities of several cited Communist-front organizations— the 
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship (and its Chicago 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 35 

branch) and the American-Russian Institutes of San Francisco and 
Los Angeles. 

The third and final article in this series, dealing with "Peace Trends 
in U.S. Labor," was — from the Communist viewpoint — a pessimistic 
one. The article saw little hope of Communist-serving movements 
in the American labor movement. On the contrary, it stated: 

The most serious deterrent to the achievement of a broader 
and more vigorous peace movement in this country is, of 
course, the AFL-CIO cold-war approach to international 
affairs. 

It then went on to roundly denounce the April 1960 AFL-CIO 
Conference on World Affairs and AFL-CIO President George Meany, 
whose firm anti-Soviet policies have made him one of the chief villains 
of the Communist press. Looking for hopeful signs, the article could 
point to no more than a few speeches or statements made by a handful 
of influential U.S. labor leaders favoring a soft approach to the Soviet 
Union and the activities of some Communist-dominated unions. 

With the exception of the two organizations named above which, as 
stated, have been cited as Communist fronts, none of the many 
liberal, pacifist, and church organizations named in this series of 
articles is Communist or pro-Communist. Yet, the message for party 
members in these three articles — as in HaU's report and other recent 
party directives — made it clear that these groups had been singled 
out by the Communist Party for infiltration and "united-front" 
activity. These groups had adopted positions (disarmament, the 
banning of nuclear weapons testing, pacifism) and were engaged in 
activities which, if the Communists played their cards carefully, could 
be used by them to assist in the achievement of Moscow's goal. 
Communists would have to turn out in numbers to make the demon- 
strations, meetings, marches, etc., of these groups as large and impres- 
sive as possible. They would have to insinuate themselves into the 
groups and their activities and use their positions to disseminate 
Communist-serving propaganda in the name of peace, disarmament, 
and the banning of nuclear weapons. 

Have the Communists been successful in carrying out the orders 
given them in these articles, in the 81-party statement, and by 
Kiirushchev and Gus Hah? 

For the past 2 years or so, the Communist press has been packed 
with accounts of varied peace activities — marches, vigils, parades, 
symposiums, fairs, meetings, etc. The manner in which these affairs 
have proliferated in this and other free world nations, following Soviet 
and Communist demands for "mass actions for peace," has been httle 
short of amazing. 

Almost equally amazing has been the frequency with which it has 
developed that the sponsoi-s of these activities have been the very 
same non-Communist organizations named in the New World Review 
articles and in Gus HaU's speech. 

INFILTRATION OF SANE 

The Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy (SANE) is not a Com- 
munist front. It is not controlled by the Communist Party. Its 
leaders are not Communists, although a number of its national 



36 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

sponsors have extensive records of Communist-front activity. SANE's 
aims, however — total disarmament, the abohtion of nuclear weapons 
and their testing, and opposition to any civil defense program — 
coincide with the major propaganda demands which the Soviet Union 
and the Communist Party are making to camouflage their true aim 
of taking over the world. This being so, it was inevitable that 
Communists, following their present tactics of infiltrating non-Com- 
munist groups, and particularly those with such objectives, should 
move in on the SANE organization. 

The largest and most successful SANE operation in the years of its 
existence was a rally held in Madison Square Garden, New York 
City, on May 19, 1960. The purpose of the rally was to mass pubhc 
sentiment around SANE's aim of pressuring the U.S. Government to 
cease development of nuclear weapons. 

The Communists, like the leaders of SANE, know that Government 
policy and actions may be influenced to a considerable extent by large 
demonstrations and by propaganda and agitation campaigns w^hicb 
ostensibly represent the will of the citizens of this country. The 
Communists therefore had a very real interest in making the Madison 
Square Garden rally a success, as well as in building up SANE and 
making its influence as strong as possible. 

Some 17,000 persons packed Madison Square Garden for this 
SANE raUy. 

On May 25, 1960, Senator Thomas Dodd made a statement on the 
Senate floor which revealed how large a role the Communists had 
played, not only in the Madison Square Garden demonstration, but in 
other SANE activities as well: 

Because I esteem the sincerity of the original founders 
of the Committee for the Sane Nuclear Policy and the 
sincerity of the speakers [at the Madison Square Garden 
raUy who] I have named, it was for me an unpleasant duty 
to have to notify them that the unpublicized chiej organizer 
oj the Madison Square Garden rally, Henry Abrarns, was a 
veteran member oj the Communist Party; that there was also 
evidence of serious Communist infiltration at chapter level 
throughout the Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy; that the 
Communist Party and its front organizations had done their 
utmost to promote the meeting; that the Communists pro- 
vided much oj the organizing machinery jor the meeting because 
they planned to use it as a pressure instrument in support 
of Soviet nuclear diplomacy. [Emphasis added.] 

On March 8, 1961, Senator Dodd again spoke on the subject of 
Communist infiltration of SANE. He stated that the Senate Internal 
Security Subcommittee had learned through its hearings that "the 
Communist Party had made the nuclear test ban movement the chief 
target of its infiltration operations in this country * * *." 

In its hearings on the subject, the Senate subcommittee called a 
total of 24 witnesses associated with the Greater New York City 
chapter of SANE. Their testimony has since been made public. 
Of these 24 witnesses, one denied ever being a member of the Com- 
munist Party and another denied present membership. The other 
22 refused to answer questions concerning Communist Party mem- 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 37 

bership and activities, invoking, in all cases but one, the fifth 
amendment. Of these 22 persons, seven were chairmen of local SANE 
chapters. The others were members of the organization, "volunteer" 
workers for it, or persons who had paid for advertisements in the 
program of SANE's Madison Square Garden meeting. 

The national leaders of SANE took some corrective action when 
informed of the findings of the Senate Internal Security Subcommit- 
tee. Abrams was gotten rid of. Communists were barred from hold- 
ing office (but not membership) in the organization; and, in November 
1960 in an effort to clean up the problem of Communist infiltration 
of its ranks, the national leadership of the organization ordered the 
Greater New York City chapter to surrender its charter. This action 
in itself was an indication of how heavily the Communist Party had 
infiltrated the largest, and probably the most influential, chapter 
of SANE. 

When Senator Dodd addressed the Senate on May 25, 1960, he 
said that the national leaders of SANE were "a group of nationally 
prominent citizens about whose integrity and good faith there is no 
question." 

Yet, the fact is that these nationally prominent citizens apparently 
did not even realize, until it was brought to their attention by the 
subcommittee, how heavily the ranks of their organization had been 
infiltrated by Communists. 

Today, though barred from holding office in the organization, Com- 
munists are still giving all-out support co SANE and are capitalizing 
on the approach it takes to U.S. nuclear policy by distributing its 
literature at Communist-front meetings. This, of course, helps win 
acceptance of Moscow's line among the non-Communists who are 
duped into attending such gatherings. 

It would appear from the facts cited about the Communist Party's 
infiltration of SANE that the party would constitute a very real 
internal danger even if it conducted such operations on a very limited 
scale. Yet, the penetration of SANE is only a small measure of the 
danger presented to this country by camouflaged Communist influence 
on the thinking of the American people on vital national and inter- 
national policy matters. 

When J. Edgar Hoover testified before the Appropriations Com- 
mittee in March 1961, he stated that the FBI then had approximately 
200 suspected Communist-controlled or Communist-infiltrated groups 
under investigation and that many of these groups were national in 
scope. 

If there are some 200 organizations in this country — many of them 
national in scope — which are controlled lock, stock, and barrel by 
Moscow agents or infiltrated and influenced by them, then there most 
obviously is an internal Communist menace of considerable propor- 
tions — a menace much greater than the figure of 10,000 party members 
would indicate. Through its many fronts and the non-Communist 
groups it has infiltrated, the Communist Party not only spreads its 
and Moscow's propaganda themes, but involves many thousands of 
non-Communists in activities it has not only planned but managed 
from beginning to end. AU these activities, to some degi-ee, weaken 
the United States while, at the same time, they promote the interests 
of the Soviet Union. 



38 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

who's behind the "peace" demonstrations? 

The numerous peace demonstrations that have taken place in this 
country vary in their inspiration. Some are conceived and run by 
the Communist Party and ensnare well-meaning liberals and pacifists 
into taking part in activities designed to serve the Kremlin. Others 
are initiated by non-Communist pacifists, radicals, and liberals whose 
aim is not to help communism, but who find theh movements infil- 
trated by Communists. 

A "Rally for Peace to Stop the Spread of Nuclear Weapons" was 
held in Carnegie Hall, New York City, on May 12, 1961. The major 
feature of this gathering was a report by Dr. Linus Pauling on the 
(Oslo) Conference Against the Spread of Nuclear Weapons. An 
advertisement for this gathering, published in the Nev: York Times 
on May 10, listed about 80 sponsors. A few of them were identified 
Communists, and a great number had long records of affiliations with 
Communist fronts. Yet a sizable proportion were prominent inno- 
cents who had fallen for the Communist "peace" bait. 

This meeting was sponsored by the Conference of Greater New 
York Peace Groups, which also organized the "100 Days for Peace" 
demonstration in New York City, a campaign described as one of 
"intensive action designed to express the American people's desire for 
survival in the nuclear age." 

The true purpose and origin of the Carnegie Hall meeting and the 
"100 Days for Peace" demonstration is indicated by the fact that a 
key official of the Conference of Greater New York Peace Groups 
was none other than Henry Abrams, the "veteran member of the 
Communist Party" who had organized the huge Madison Square 
Garden rally against nuclear weapons testing for SANE. When 
forced out of SANE following his appearance before the Senate 
Internal Security Subcommittee, Abrams had sunply shifted his 
activities to another Communist-serving "peace" operation. 

The following is an example of a non-Communist group organizing 
a peace demonstration which was infiltrated and used by Communists 
to their advantage: 

Some 3,000 "peace lovers" demonstrated outside the U.N. head- 
quarters in New York City on August 6, 1960, in commemoration of 
the 15th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima. Technically, this 
demonstration had been called by SANE. It was sponsored by a 
considerable number of non-Communist individuals from the religious, 
trade union, and pacifist fields. It had the support of the Women's 
International League for Peace and Freedom. It was one of many 
demonstrations that took place in this country and in Canada on that 
day to protest nuclear weapons. 

Art Shields, a correspondent for the Communist newspaper The 
Worker, wrote an account of this demonstration in which, in a kind 
of Freudian slip, he told of how "we" had marched several miles 
through New York City to the U.N. headquarters and how Pete 
Seeger sang at the close of the demonstration : 

And he never had a better audience, I think. Many more 
folks had now come in. Four to five thousand enthusiastic 
people were packed closely together. And they were 
shouting: "We Want Pete! We Want Pete!" until Pete 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 39 

climbed the ladder to the shaky sound truck roof tnat was 
used as a rostrum. 

Pete's songs were a call to keep up the fight for peace. 

Less than a year later, on April 1, 1961, there was an Easter Peace 
Rally at the United Nations headquarters in New York City — also 
sponsored by SANE. As the "March for Peace" rolled through the 
city from its starting point at the George Washington Bridge, 7 miles 
from the U.N. headquarters, it grew in size— 600, 800, 1,000, 1,200, 
and eventually 3,000 persons Avere finally assembled at the head- 
quarters of the United Nations. 

It was the same old show all over again — with the Communists, 
the SANErs, the liberals, the pacificists, and left radicals of various 
types each playing its role. Again, the m.ob yelled for entertain- 
ment. This time it was "We Want Seeger" (a slight variation of the 
"Pete" theme). Again, Pete Seeger got up and sang — this time, a 
song about the dangers of nuclear war called "Roll On." Again, the 
crowd clapped and cheered Pete Seeger, Idng of the party's propaganda 
songsters. 

You could see the chain of command — the 81 Communist parties 
("mass actions for peace"), Khrushchev ("rail}'' the masses around 
us"), Gus Hall ("It is particularly important * * * to get the widest 
unity and community of effort around such actions as the coming 
Easter March"), and Pete Seeger, the Communist puppet on the end 
of the string, obediently turning out for this SANE rall}^ as his masters 
had ordered party members to do. 

Just 2 days before his appearance at this rally, Pete Seeger, who 
has been identified as a member of the Communist Party, was con- 
victed of contempt of Congress for refusing to answer questions 
about party membership and activities asked him by this committee 
in August 1955. Seeger has marched in Commimist Party May 
Day parades, has performed for various units of the Communist 
Party, for its cultural division and, iji 1949, in behalf of the 12 Com- 
mimist Party leaders then being tried under the Smith Act. In his 
contempt trial, the Government informed the court that in the years 
1942 to 1945 alone Seeger had appeared at 24 separate events spon- 
sored by Commmiist-front organizations. He is, without question, 
the best known of all the Communist Party's entertainers. 

The demand for him at the SANE U.N. rallies, described in both 
the Communist and non-Communist press, was obviously the work of 
Communists and fellow travelers in the crowd who, following party 
orders (as he had), had turned out for this SANE peace demonstration. 
"Pete" would hardly be so weU known to others, 

Revealingly, the latter demonstration was covered by five reporters 
who represented the Soviet news agency, Tass; the Soviet Com- 
munist Party newspaper, Pravda; and the U.S. Communist Party 
newspaper. The Worker. It made a good propaganda item for the 
Communist press — both Soviet and U,S. 

Among the individual sponsors of the first of these SANE demon- 
strations were Meyer Stern, director of District 6 of the United Pack- 
inghouse Workers of America, who has been identified as a member of 
the Communist Party by three witnesses before this committee, and 
David Livingston, leader of District 65, Retail, Wholesale and De- 
partment Store Union, Livingston has testified before a congressional 

21-204—63 4 



40 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

committee that "I'm against wiping out communism." Testifying 
before this committee in 1953, Livingston invoked the fifth amendment 
when questioned about present and past membership m the Com- 
munist Party. 

Where are the Communists carrying out their united-front activity? 

Primarily in actions and demonstrations having to do with peace, 
disarmament, the banning of nuclear weapons tests, and related 
matters. But they are also pusliing their united-front tactics in all 
areas of concern to the Communist Party. They are doing this 
wherever they are. 

And where are they? 

In his appearance before the Appropriations Committee in March of 
1961, J. Edgar Hoover said: 

They [the Communists] have infiltrated every conceivable 
sphere of activity; youth groups; radio, television, and 
motion picture industries; church, school, educational, and 
cultural groups; the press; national minority groups, and 
civil and political units. 

COLLABORATION OF SPLINTER GROUPS 

For years there has been in this country a number of Communist 
"splinter" organizations which have broken with the orthodox Com- 
munist Party. The "Trotskyist" Communists, who have been feud- 
ing with the "Stalinist" Communists since the 1920's, compose the 
largest of the splinter organizations. In the past, their relations with 
the Communist Party have been marked by extreme bitterness. 
Khrushchev's speech attacking and denouncing Stalin at the 20th 
Congress of the Soviet Communist Party in 1956, however, has done 
much to heal the breach between these two groups. 

Following the 20th Congress and immediately before the dissolution 
of the Cominform, which took place about 2 months later, the world 
Communist movement, through a Cominform publication, called upon 
the orthodox Communists of the world to work for united action be- 
tween themselves and other Communist groups. Since that time, the 
U.S. Communist Party, following Moscow's orders, has made a dehb- 
erate effort to heal the breach between itself and the Socialist Workers 
(Trotskyist Communist) Party in the United States. 

In recent years, there has been increasing evidence of orthodox 
Communist success in this endeavor. On numerous occasions, repre- 
sentatives of the Socialist Workers Party — who, some years ago, 
would never have anything to do with the orthodox party — have been 
appearing on the same platform with its representatives and taking 
part in actions initiated by the orthodox party and vice versa. 
Other examples could be given, but the following should suffice to 
demonstrate how successful the orthodox Communists have been in 
their "left" united fronting. 

In September 1961, a protest meeting against nuclear weapons was 
held in Los Angeles. Among the speakers at this meeting were John 
T. McTernan, chairman of the Unitarian Fellowship for Social Justice 
who has been identified as a member of the (orthodox) Communist 
Party by several witnesses who have testified before this committee; 
Theodore Edwards, chairman of the Southern California Socialist 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 41 

Workers {Trotskyist) Party; and also Dr. A. J. Leuas, executive secre- 
tary of the Los Angeles Fair Play for Cuba Committee. 

The following is a near perfect example of a "united front of the 
left" operation: 

On December 15, 1961, the Twin Cities Labor Forum of Minneapolis 
arranged a meeting at which the following persons were featured 
speakers: 

Henry Maj^ville, secretary of the Minnesota Committee To Defend 
the Bill of Rights (Mayville invoked the fifth amendment in the fall 
of 1961 when questioned by this committee concerning Communist 
Party membership); a professor at the University of Minnesota; 
the chairman of the Socialist Club of the University of Minnesota; 
Joseph Johnson, local organizer for the Socialist Workers Party; and 
George Tselos, Minnesota chairman of the Young Socialist Alliance, 
the Trotskyist youth organization. 

Trotskyist Communists are as thoroughly dedicated to the creation 
of a Comnmnist world as are the more orthodox Communists. They 
are, if anything, more openly revolutionary than those who are in 
complete accord with Khrushchev and his policies. The fact that, 
as pointed out earlier in this chapter, the Socialist Workers Party 
publication has an average paid circulation of 4,776 copies per issue 
(indicating a readership of many more thousands) indicates that the 
support of this group adds considerably to the strength of the Com- 
munist Party. 

Miscellaneous Items 

the san francisco elections 

In the fall of 1961, elections were held in the city of San Francisco 
for five places on the city's ruling body, the Board of Supervisors. 
Thirty-three candidates entered the race. The top vote-getter won 
100,000 of the total 229,000 votes cast. 

The man who placed fifteenth in the election, garnered 17,268 votes, 
and outclassed 18 of the other candidates was none other than Archie 
Brown, for years a well-known Communist in the area. 

The fact that more than 17,000 citizens of San Francisco chose 
Brown to help run the affairs of their city can hardly be explained 
away as due to voter ignorance of Brown's loyalties. Through local 
newspaper, radio, and television coverage of the Communist-inspired 
San Francisco riots of May 1960 — in which Brown played the top 
leadership role — ^and through similar coverage of his conduct on the 
witness stand during the committee's hearings at that time, Brown's 
dedication to undermining duly constituted authority in the United 
States and serving the Communist Party had been made abundantly 
clear to the people of San Francisco. Moreover, at the time of the 
election, Brown stood publicly accused of being a member of the 
Communist Party by the Department of Justice, having been indicted 
several months earlier for violating the Landrum-Griffin Labor Act 
(by holding office in an ILWU local while being a party member). 

In addition, Brown's record as a Communist leader of many years' 
standing had been well publicized in San Francisco even before the 
INIay 1960 riots. Two years earlier, in 1959, Brown had also entered 
the race for a position on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. 
His Communist record was publicized at that time. In that election, 



42 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Brown won 33,000 votes — 13 percent of the total. The fact that in 
the 1961 elections the votes cast for him were cut to about 7K percent 
of the total is a decided improvement, but there is obviously some- 
thing to be concerned about when even this percentage of voters in a 
major U.S. city will support a notorious Communist candidate in his 
bid to run that city's affau"s. 

In 1946, when the Communist Party had over 75,000 members and 
Archie Brown ran as the party's candidate for Governor of California, 
he received only about 25,000 write-in votes. Relatively speaking, 
the party's vote-getting strength appears to be greater in San Fran- 
cisco today than it was in all CaHfornia 15 years ago. 

On this same subject of voter awareness of the danger inherent in 
Communist penetration of governmental bodies, it is worth recalling 
that, as recently as the 1958 primary elections in California, Holland 
Roberts — then an identified member of the Communist Party — won 
400,000 votes as candidate for the position of State Superintendent 
of Pubhc Instruction, the top-ranking education office in the State. 

A TEACHER VOTE 

There are 40,000 teachers in New York City, 32,390 of whom 
voted, in late 1961, for a union to represent their interests in negotia- 
tions with city officials. Although an anti-Communist union won 
almost two-thirds of the votes cast in this election, and thus the 
election itself, over 2,500 schoolteachers— ohuost 8 percent of those who 
voted — cast their vote for the Teachers Union, which had been ex- 
pelled from the AFL as Communist-dominated as long ago as the 
1930's and from the CIO on the same grounds in 1950 (when it was 
Local 555 of the United Public Workers Union). 

Moreover, in pre-election developments, over 4,000 New York City 
schoolteachers signed a petition that this union (which had been 
denied recognition by city authorities since its expulsion from CIO) 
be granted a place on the representation ballot. 

INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE 

The December 1961 issue of the World Marxist Revieio, a Commu- 
nist organ published in 19 different languages, featm-ed a letter written 
by Henry Winston, a member of the National Committee of the U.S. 
Communist Party. Winston has been a top-ranking Communist for 
many years. He was one of the first-string party leaders indicted 
for violation of the Smith Act in 1948, tried, convicted, and sentenced 
to prison. Winston and three others — Gilbert Green, Robert Thomp- 
son, and Gus Hall, the party's present leader — jumped bail and went 
into hiding following their conviction. When Wmston eventually 
gave himself up in 1956, he was sentenced to an additional 3-year 
term for contempt of court. This year, because he was in ill health 
and had lost his eyesight, Winston's sentence was commuted to time 
served by President Kennedy and he was released from prison on 
June 30, 1961. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 43 

Winston opened his letter to the editor of the World Marxist Review, 
which was pii Wished under the headhne "Heartfelt Thanks," with 
the following words : 

Let me express my gratitude to the World Marxist Review 
and its readers for the splendid efforts made in the struggle 
to secure my release from a United States federal prison. 

The closing paragraphs of his letter read, in part, as follows: 

The worldwide Communist, anti-imperialist and demo- 
cratic movements were in great measure responsible for the 
action taken by the President of the United States in issuing 
an order for the immediate commutation of my sentence to 
time served. 

Through the pages of the World Marxist Review I want to 
take the opportunity to extend my heartfelt thanks to the 
freedom -lo\'ing people of the world who helped make possible 
the restoration of my freedom. I clasp my hand in solidarity 
and friendship with those who participated in these strug- 
gles * * *, 

Winston's claim that the worldwide Communist pressure campaign 
for his release was what had actually brought it about, probably is not 
true. His letter, nevertheless, serves to illustrate a point which can- 
not be forgotten in considering the nature and extent of the internal 
Communist threat — the fact that the U.S. Communist Party is not 
an independent, domestic organization, standing alone and unassisted, 
but the U.S. branch of a worldwide Communist m.ovement which 
unquestionabh'' has great strength. The U.S. party receives assist- 
ance on various matters, not only from the headquarters of this 
movement in Moscow, but from its branches in other nations of the 
world. This is another reason why the extent of the mternal Com- 
munist menace cannot be judged merely by the membership figures 
of the U.S. party, whatever that may be at any given time. 

The case of Pete Seeger, the folk singer, offers another example of 
the type of assistance the U.S. Communist Party receives from abroad. 
Seeger, as mentioned before, has been identified as a member of the 
Communist Party and today, as for many years past, is an inveterate 
promoter of party fronts and the party line. 

After Seeger's conviction for contempt of Congress on March 29, 
1961, an organization called the "Friends of Pete Seeger" was set up. 
The purpose of this organization is to collect funds to enable Seeger 
to appeal his conviction — if necessary, to the U.S. Supreme Court — 
and also to create agitation in his behalf. A special bulletin released 
by this organization in October 1961 contained the following item: 

Tremendous Support for Pete Comes in From All Over the World 

Hundreds and hundreds of letters and messages have been 
sent to Pete and to the Friends of Pete Seeger, from all over 
the world, and from people of all walks of hfe in support of 
Pete's case. With these letters have come thousands of 
dollars to help pay for the legal costs. This great response 
has come without the efforts of any organization and has 
been a magnificent spontaneous response on the part of so 



44 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

many people who feel a great disservice has been done to 
American democracy by the jail sentence imposed upon 
Pete. The next bulletin will contain excerpts from some 
letters and a report of activities on behalf of Pete. 

Moscow itself has gotten into the act in Seeger's behalf. On 
April 6, 1961, Moscow radio featured a commentary by Nina 
Alekseyeva, which read as follows: 

The news of Pete Seeger's sentence is shocking. To 
think that the folk singer should be sentenced to a year in 
jail for refusing to answer the questions of the Un-American 
Activities Committee! It must remind people of the 
darkest days of McCarthyism when Americans lost their 
basic constitutional rights. In present-day America, too, 
it seems, it's dangerous to combine folk singing with the 
struggle for peace. 

Just a few days ago Pete Seeger was applauded by thou- 
sands at the U.N. Plaza in New York during the meeting 
that brought to a close the Easter Week Peace March. Little 
did the people know they were cheering the folk singer for 
the last time this year. On Tuesday he was gagged by a 
committee that has no right to exist as long as America has a 
constitution — a committee that has usurped executive and 
judicial power in the country and has become an agency of 
repression * * *. 

The international Communist agitation in behalf of Pete Seeger 
probably will not affect the ultimate disposition of his case, but it 
wiU unquestionably provide him with funds that he would never 
have if the U.S. Communist Party were not part and parcel of the 
international world Communist movement with its headquarters in 
the Kremlin. 

Kealizing that its strength depends, in considerable part, on the 
strength of Communist parties abroad, the U.S. party aids other 
national parties to the best of its ability. An example: 

The March 27, 1960, issue of the Communist Party newspaper. The 
Worker, and the March 28, 1960, issue of the National Guardian pub- 
lished identical letters written by Janet Jagan, wife of admitted Com- 
munist Cheddi Jagan, now Prime Minister of British Guiana. These 
letters appealed to readers of The Worker and the National Guardian 
to send books on a variety of subjects — economics, politics, etc. — as 
contributions to the hbrary of the Jagans' People's Progressive Party 
in British Guiana. 

When Cheddi Jagan later visited this country and spoke at a gather- 
ing of Communists and fellow travelers, he thanked them for sending 
books in response to his wife's plea. 

The committee has no idea of just how much in the way of Com- 
munist and party-line books, pamphlets, and other materials on 
economics, government, politics, and related subjects American 
Communists and fellow travelers sent to the People's Progressive 
Party library in response to Mrs. Jagan's request. There can be no 
question, however, about the fact that this literature, whatever its 
quantity, helped build and strengthen the prestige of the Jagans and 
their party and thus their influence in the affairs of British Guiana — 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 45 

an influence which culminated in Cheddi Jagan's taking control of the 
country in August 1961, when Great Britain granted virtual inde- 
pendence to its former colony. 

Inasmuch as the Comnmnists themselves appreciate the fact that 
the various national Communist parties draw stren2;th from the others 
and from the world Communist movement, it would be foolhardy for 
non-Communists to refuse to take cognizance of this fact. As U.S. 
party leader Gus Hall said in his speech of January 20, 1961: 

Each component part both contributes and draws strength 
from the alliance [of the Communist parties and nations of 
the world]. 

ESPIONAGE 

There is no need here for a detailed or lengthy treatment of tliis 
aspect of the internal Communist threat. Brief mention of a few 
facts is sufficient to illustrate how serious a danger even a small 
Communist Party poses to the security of the Nation in this field: 

1. Traditionally, the Communist Party and its fronts have served 
as agencies for the recruitment of persons who are willing to betray 
their country by working for Soviet intelligence; 

2. Soviet intelligence operations in the United States are on the 
increase according to J. Edgar Hoover and other top security officials; 

3. It takes just a handful of native Communists — as the Rosenberg 
case proved — to do tremendous damage to the Nation through 
espionage activity. 

Summary 

If it is true that Commmiist strength in the United States and the 
danger it presents to this country can be accurately gauged by the 
simple fact that the party has only 10,000 members, then the conclu- 
sion must be drawn that these 10,000 are supermen and superwomen, 
both physically and mentally; that they are, in truth, "10 feet tall" — 
and there is no other group of men and women in the country which 
can compare, even remotely, with members of the Communist Party 
who have established a fabulous record for so small a group : 

Their official publications have a readership that is more than 
double their membership; 

They control the content of over 30 different publications which 
promote their ideology and line and which have a combined circula- 
tion of about 350,000; 

They dominate unions in the basic industries of the United States 
and, through this control, powerfully influence the lives and welfare 
of some 325,000 American workers — and also the national security; 

They actually control or have infiltrated something in the neigh- 
borhood of 200 other groups in this country, some of them national 
in scope; 

Though members of a disloj'al, criminal conspiracy directed from 
abroad and thus detested by most Americans, they still succeed in 
spreading their poisonous line and ideology among the American 
people b}^ infiltration of radio and TV, moving pictures, churches, 
schools, political parties, and numerous other instrumentalities. 

The truth, of course, is that it would be a virtual impossibility 
for 10,000 people to carry on the activities and exercise the influence 



46 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

now exercised by the Communist movement in the United States. 
The party can do what it is doing only because there are many 
thousands of people in this countiw who, though not technically mem- 
bers of it, are, consciously and knowingly, members of what might be 
called the Communist movement or apparatus. 

These people, of course, are not 10 feet tall, nor are they supermen 
and superwomen. More informed and accurate reporting on the 
extent and nature of their forces would reduce them to normal size 
and make clearer just what can and should be done to destroy the 
threat they pose. 

Those who minimize the internal Communist threat, claiming that 
it is so small it presents no danger at all and nothing needs to be 
done about it, endanger the life of the Nation just as much as a person 
endangers his own life when he ignores and does nothing about a 
cancer because its cells comprise only a tiny fraction of the millions 
of healthy cells in his body. Smugness and folly of this type are 
conducive to funerals, not long life — and Ivhrushchev has openly 
proclaimed his desire to burj^ freedom. 

WHAT IF THE COMMUNISTS WERE NAZIS! 

Certain individuals, publications, and groups in this country which 
cannot and never have been able to see any internal danger in com- 
munism have, for many j^ears, been expressing great fear of nazism 
and fascism. 

They have done this despite the fact that nazism is today generally 
discredited throughout the world, that there is no international Nazi 
movement, nor any powerful Nazi party in any nation. Nazism in 
this country is represented by a small organization with an insignifi- 
cant number of members who are generally considered crackpots, are 
shunned, and continually ridiculed, denounced, and exposed. 

During recent months, certain segments of the press — which have 
never done anything in the way of exposing the Communist Party or 
its fronts — have been packed with articles and exposes concerning 
both responsible and irresponsible anti-Communist groups in this 
country. These articles have often characterized, by implications or 
outright statements, all of these groups as constituting a very real 
danger to democracy, freedom, and our form of government. It is 
often hmted darkly — though no evidence is produced to substantiate 
the charge — that all of these groups are Fascist or neo-Fascist in 
their orientation. 

At the same time, the same newspapers and magazines are teUing 
the American people, over and over again, that the Communist Party 
presents no danger at all to this country. 

But suppose Hitler were alive today! Suppose that he was the 
boss of an international Nazi machine comparable in size to the world 
Communist movement — a Nazi movement which had some 40 million 
members organized in secret, conspkatorial units in 87 nations of the 
world, which controlled one-fom'th of the earth's surface, one-third 
of its population and 17 nations! 

Suppose that the American Nazi Party had the number of members, 
fellow travelers, collaborators, fronts, publications, cooperating non- 
Nazi groups that the U.S. Communist Party has today — and that 
Nazi propaganda publications emanating from the major centers of 
the movement abroad were pouring into the United States at the rate 



AN]VTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 47 

of many millions of packages annually, and a half-dozen or more 
publishing firms in the United States were turning out books extolling 
nazism day after day! 

Would these same voices then be telling the Congress and the 
American people that there was no need to worry about the U.S. 
Nazi Party? 

The answer is obvious. Their publications would be filled, day 
after day, with denunciations and exposures of the American Nazi 
Party and all its fronts, collaborators, and fellow travelers. The air- 
waves would featiu-e numerous similar items by commentators who 
can today see no danger in internal communism. There would be 
demands that this committee's appropriations be increased tremen- 
dously, its staff enlarged, and its activities greatly expanded — and 
that every State in the Union set up a committee to fight the Nazi 
menace within its boundaries. 

The anti-Communists of today who are denounced as "right-wing 
extremists" would be made to look like ineffective "babes in the 
woods" in the art of propagandizing and agitating against those 
they believed to be a real danger to the Nation. Anti-nazism would 
be the biggest thing in the country. 



CHAPTER II 

HEARINGS CONDUCTED FOR LEGISLATIVE PURPOSES 

THE FUND FOR SOCIAL ANALYSIS 

(Hearings on H.R. 4700, To Amend Section 11 of the Subversive Activities 
Control Act of 1950, as Amended) 

Purpose of the Hearings 

A Communist propaganda offensive, in many guises and directed to 
the American people, is being waged from both within and without this 
country. Hearings held by this committee in the past have disclosed 
the tremendous volume of Communist propaganda printed in the 
Soviet Union, its satellite countries and Red China for dissemination 
in the United States. In an effort to alert the public to the large 
quantities of propaganda mail entering this country from abroad, the 
chairman, on March 21, 1961, introduced H.R. 5751, a propaganda 
control bill identical to ^xie which had passed the House in the 86th 
Congress but did not reach a vote in the Senate. 

Within the United States, scores of Communist-front organiza- 
tions engaged in propaganda activities have enjoyed tax-exempt 
status. Preliminary investigation by the committee disclosed that, 
over a period of less than 5 years, one such group had solicited more 
than a quarter of a million dollars. This tax-free money was used 
almost exclusively for dissemination of propaganda in defense of the 
Communist Party and its members and in furthering Communist 
Party objectives. 

Several attempts have been made to restrict this tax-free flow of 
Communist propaganda by denial of tax exemption to organizations 
from which it emanates. In 1947, the Commissioner of Internal 
Revenue began denying tax exemption to those organizations found 
to be subversive by the Attorney General. A provision in the Internal 
Security Act of 1950 denies tax exemption on contributions to, and 
income of, those Communist action and/or front organizations 
registered or ordered to register with the Subversive Activities Control 
Board (SACB) or determined by the Board to be Commimist infil- 
trated. 

It is apparent that mere denial of tax exemption has not brought, 
and will never of itself bring, about the elimination of these organiza- 
tions. Furthermore, past measures intended as restrictions have 
proved ineffectual and demonstrate the need for further remedial 
legislation. This is so primarily because these organizations, through 
their methods of operation, utilize to their advantage present laws and 
the often considerable delay in their administration under our demo- 
cratic system of government. 

The persons in control of these propaganda organizations are usually 
talented in marshaling support for their causes and skilled in evading 

49 



50 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

the reach of law. They form deceptive fronts, which are quickly 
dissolved or deserted once they have been identified as such, and then 
form another front under a new name which works for the same pur- 
pose. The ostensible purposes of these organizations often indicate 
eligibility for tax exemption, but the groups seldom seek it — because 
that would require disclosure of their operations. Their principal in- 
come is not taxable because it is derived from gifts or contributions 
which are excluded from tax computation on their returns. Thus, 
their expenses exceed their taxable income and no tax is due the 
United States. 

The committee has found that many organizations engaged in sub- 
versive propaganda faU to file tax returns or keep records. This de- 
liberate concealment places upon the Internal Revenue Service the 
burden of proving the amount and source of their income. The di- 
rectors of one organization which failed to file a tax return refused to 
make its records available for examination by the Internal Revenue 
Service, and by the time their production was demanded, the group 
had disbanded. Within months, the same group was re-formed as a 
new propaganda front. 

Few of these organizations have perished for lack of income. Some 
were dissolved because they had served their purpose or because 
disclosure of their subversive nature had ended then* acceptability to 
the public. During their existence, however, their substantial 
incomes escaped taxation. 

One provision in present law which works to the advantage of such 
groups is the requirement in the Internal Security Act of 1950 that 
tax exemption be denied only to those organizations registered with 
the Subversive Activities Control Board, ordered to register with it, 
or determined by the Board to be Communist-infiltrated. As was to 
be expected, no Communist organization has voluntarily complied 
with the Act's registration requirement, and through 1961 the SACB 
had ordered only 13 Communist-front groups to register. 

The Supreme Court's delays in passing upon the provisions of the 
Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, the years it has taken 
between hearings before the Board and issuance of final oraers, and 
the continuing expectation of prolonged litigation, used as a tactic of 
obstruction by Communist organizations in Board proceedings, point 
to the necessity of devismg more effective means to deny tax benefits 
to these organizations and their contributors. 

For this reason, on February 21, 1961, the chairman introduced 
H.R. 4700, to amend section 11 of the Subversive Activities Control 
Act of 1950 by removing the tax-exempt status from Communist 
action, front, and infiltrated organizations mimediately upon their 
formation. It provides that, for Federal income tax purposes, the 
income of Communist organizations, including gifts and contributions, 
shall be taxable and subject to no deductions. It further provides 
that donors, when reporting gross income, may not deduct any con- 
tributions of funds or services to Communist organizations. 

Hearings on H.R. 4700 were held May 31, June 7, and August 16, 
1961, to develop information that would help the committee appraise 
the bill, which had been referred to it for study and evaluation. The 
purpose in calling the officers of The Fund for Social Analysis was to 
determine whether it is an organization using tax-exempt contributions 
for the development and dissemination of Communist propaganda or 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 51 

for other Communist objectives and, if so, whether the enactment of 
H.R. 4700 would assist in deterring such Communist operations. An 
additional purpose of the hearings was to ascertain whether or not the 
witnesses, aside from any relationship to The Fund for Social Analysis, 
are engaged in activities in behalf of the Communist Party, USA, or 
the international Communist movement. 

Members of the Fund's Committee on Awards, when served with 
subpenas, sought to obscure the hearings' purpose by initiating a 
campaign to solicit support from the "academic community" for 
their specious claim that the Fund was being subjected to "harassment 
by the HUAC * * * aimed directly at the liberty of thought and 
right to knowledge which are basic for all academic freedom." 

Contrary to this claim, the committee has actually encouraged 
objective study of and teaching about communism in order to in- 
crease understanding of the grave problems it has created in the 
United States and throughout the world. The committee's inquiry 
was directed not at libert}^ of thought, right to knowledge, or academic 
freedom, but at tax-free manufacture and dissemination of propaganda 
and activities in furtherance of Commmiist objectives. These 
objectives are served by many Communist-front organizations which 
have ostensibly laudable purposes and which, like the Fund, may 
seek no tax exemption or "any other form of public assistance." 
Information was sought concerning The Fund for Social Analysis 
because pre-hearing investigation by the committee staff produced 
evidence that the Fmid fell into this category. 

Accordingly, questions were asked concerning the Fund's formation, 
personnel, finances, and awards. The witnesses, in declining to respond 
and disclaiming possession or knowledge of records subpenaed, 
infringed upon the committee's right to obtain information pertinent 
to the legislation under consideration. Their refusal to answer 
practically all questions asked could be properly justified solely for the 
reason, as they asserted, that truthful answers might tend to incrimi- 
nate them. 

During the course of its investigation and hearings, the committee 
obtained the following information about the Fund, its leaders, 
beneficiaries, purpose, and program: 

The Fund's Formation and Officers 

Creation of The Fund for Social Analysis was announced in the 
April 1958 issue of the Communist Party publication Mainstream. In 
a letter to the editor, Mary Jane Keeney, the Fund's corresponding 
secretary, stated that the Fund had — 

just been organized as an informal group of individuals 
interested in aiding research on problems of Marxist theory 
and its application, bringing together people who want to 
encourage such studies and to provide financial assistance 
toward their production. It operates without paid personnel 
or other overhead costs, and distributes all money raised by 
the sponsors through voluntary activities in research grants. 

A certificate filed with a New York bank for the Fund's account, 
executed on November 14, 1958, named Harry Magdoff as president, 
Irving Kaplan as treasurer, and Dr. Annette T.Rubinstein as secretary. 



52 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

Members of its Committee on Awards for the first year, with 
entire responsibility for making grants, were listed in Fund literature 
as follows: "Frank Coe, Irving Kaplan, Harry Magdoff, Stanley 
Moore, Russell Nixon, Annette Rubinstein and J. Raymond Walsh, 
as well as a panel of consultants in special fields who are available on 
call." 

Elected members of the Committee on Awards in 1960 were Bar- 
rows Dunham, Jules (Julius) Emspak, Irving Kaplan, Harry Magdoff, 
Russ Nixon, and Annette T. Rubinstein. 

Backgrounds of Persons Associated With the Fund 

Officers: 

Harry Magdoff, president and Irving Kaplan, treasurer, were 
identified by Elizabeth Bentley, former courier for a Soviet espionage 
ring, as active members of Communist cells in the United States 
Government in the 1930's and 1940's who fm-nished information to 
her for transmission to the head of the espionage ring for which she 
worked. 

Magdoff resigned from his position in the office of the Secretary of 
Commerce in 1946. 

Kaplan left the Treasury Department in 1948 to work for the 
United Nations. He was dismissed by the UN in 1952 after invoking 
the fifth amendment when questioned concerning Communist Party 
membership by a congressional committee investigating U.S. personnel 
employed by the UN. 

Annette T. Rubinstein, Fund secretary, was identified as a Com- 
munist Party member by Dr. Bella Dodd, a former member of the 
Communist Party's National Committee, and also by John G. Huber, 
in testimony before the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investi- 
gations in 1956. 

Awards Committee members: 

Frank Coe was identified by Elizabeth Bentley in the same manner 
as Magdoff and Kaplan. 

Coe was dismissed as secretary of the International Monetary 
Fund in December 1952, a few days after invoking the fifth arnend- 
ment when questioned concerning Communist Party membership by 
a congressional committee investigating Communist infiltration of the 
United States Government. 

Russell Nixon has been identified as a member of the Communist 
Party by four witnesses who have testified before thiscommittee. 

Julius Emspak ("Comrade Juniper") has been identified^ as a 
member of the Communist Party by two witnesses in testimony 
before this committee and by Louis Budenz, former member of the 
Communist Party's National Committee and managing editor of the 
Daily Worker, in testimony before a House Labor Subcommittee. 

Stanley Williams Moore, who has taught philosophy at several 
colleges, has been identified by three witnesses before this committee 
as a member of the Professional Sections of the Communist Party in 
California and Oregon. 

Barrows Dunham, subpenaed to testify before this committee in 
1952, invoked the fifth amendment when questioned about Communist 
Party membership and activities. In a passport appUcation filed in 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 53 

1957, he stated that he had been a member of the Communist Party 
from 1938 to 1944 and the Communist Political Association in 1944-45. 

J. Raymond Walsh, former radio commentator, served on the 
executive committee of the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee 
(ECLC) from 1954 to 1960. [The ECLC is the Communist Party's 
legal defense arm.] Mr. Walsh has an extensive record of afFUiation 
with Communist fronts and causes dating back more than 20 years. 

Thus; of the nine persons who have served as officers and Awards 
Committee members of The Fund for Social Analysis, eight have been 
identified as members of the Communist Party, 

Others: 

Isidore Gibby Needleman, attorney for the Fund, who also served 
as counsel for two of its three directors in their appearance before 
the committee, was identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by John Lautner in an executive hearing of this committee in Wash- 
ington, D.C., on July 7, 1961. Lautner, a party member from 1929 
to 1950 and an official in the New York State Communist Party 
organization for many years, testified that in the mid-1 930's he had 
been introduced to Needleman as a Communist m the offices of 
Amtorg, the official Soviet tradmg corporation in New York City, 
and that he had attended party conferences in New York with 
Needleman. He further testified that in 1948 when he (Lautner) 
was head of the New York State Communist Party Control Commis- 
sion (which had the function of reviewing party disciplmary cases), 
Needleman had asked him to quash expulsion proceedings against a 
woman party member because he felt she was doing good work for 
the party. 

The Fund's Operations 

In a statement issued after the witnesses had been subpenaed for the 
committee's hearings, the Awards Committee announced that, since 
its inception in 1958, the Fund had made six grants totaling $8,500, as 
follows: 

"Martin J. Sklar, graduate student [University of Wisconsin], $2,000 to 
enable him to complete his study of the background and development 
of U.S. imperialist ideology since the time of McKinley. 

"Professor Paul A. Baran [Stanford University], author of Political 
Economy of Growth, $1,500 to facilitate completion of a IVIarxian 
analysis of monopoly capitalism which he is writing jointly with 
Dr. Paul M. Sweezy. 

"Dr. Herbert Aptheker, author of Negro Slave Revolts, Documentary 
History of the American Negro, $1,000 for research expenses in con- 
nection with the documentation of his history of the Civil War 
period, scheduled for pubfication during the Civil War Centennial 
in 1961. 

"Professor William Appelman Williams [University of Wisconsin], 
author of Shaping American Diplomacy 1750-1955, The Tragedy of 
American Diplomacy, $1,500 to assist in the completion of an inter- 
pretive history of the United States from the sixteenth century to the 
present day. 

"Professor Gordon K. Lewis, [University of Puerto Rico], author 
of articles published in a great variety of learned journals including the 



54 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Western Political Quarterly, the Political Quarterly oj London, and the 
Journal oJ Politics, $1,000 to assist in the completion of his book en- 
titled America As A Colonial Power: The Puerto Rican Experience. 

"Dr. Bernice Shoul, instructor of economics [Boston University, 
1959-60], author of articles in such periodicals as the Quarterly 
Journal of Economics, $1,500 to assist in the completion of a series of 
essays on the relation between Marxian and Classical economics." 

Testimony of Witnesses 

MagdofI, Kaplan, Rubinstein, Nixon, Moore, and Dunham were 
subpenaed to appear as witnesses m the hearings. Also subpenaed 
were Isidore Gibby Needleman, counsel for the Fmid, and Herbert 
Aptheker, the recipient of a $1,000 grant from the Fmid. 

Annette T. Rubinstein, the Fund's secretary, testified that at the 
time she was first served with a subpena, and since that time, she had 
had no minutes of Fund meetings or other Fund records in her pos- 
session; that she had no knowledge of their whereabouts, if any 
existed; and that she had destroyed none. She invoked the fifth 
amendment when asked if she had had any records in her possession 
before she was served; if the Fund had maintained records and files 
of minutes, correspondence, etc., before service of subpenas for the 
hearings; and whether, to her knowledge, such records had been 
destroyed. 

Magdoff, the Fund's president, testified in similar manner with 
respect to minutes, copies of letters or memoranda, applications from 
individuals, account books, and other records. 

Irving Kaplan, the Fund's treasurer, produced records of a check- 
ing account for the period November 14, 1958, to April 1, 1961, which 
showed payment of the grants announced, except the one to Paul A. 
Baran. He also produced a savings account book showing deposits 
totahng $10,132 and withdrawals of $5,700, made during the period 
between January 24, 1958, and November 9, 1960. 

Kaplan declined to identify his signature on the certificate filed 
with the bank or on the canceled checks. He testified that he had 
no books of account showing the amount of receipts, their som"ce, or 
disbursements and that he had no copies of tax returns. He asserted 
that the bank records produced comprised all records he possessed on 
April 10, 1961 (when the fu'st subpena was served him) and which he 
had since acquired. With respect to the period prior to service of the 
subpena, he declined to testify, invoking the seH-incrimination clause 
of the fifth amendment. 

Magdoff, Kaplan, and Rubinstein refused to admit their relation- 
ship to the Fund or to disclose its income, operations, or purpose ex- 
cept insofar as the purpose had been stated in a public announcement 
"purporting to be issued by the Fund," as Kaplan put it. They also 
invoked the fifth amendment when asked if they had been members 
of the Communist Party. 

Needleman testified that he charged the Fund no fee for his services 
as attorney and that, although tlie address of the Fund was the same 
as that of his law office in New York City, his office was used by the 
Fund only as a mailing address. Correspondence addressed to the 
Fund was left on a table in his office, he asserted, to be picked up by 



ANNTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 55 

someone from the Fund. He said that he had never seen any Fund 
officers come into his office for mail, but that he had seen Kaplan pick 
up bank statements. He also said that he had never seen any of the 
Fund's records, except for the bank statements which came in the 
mail. On grounds of the first and fifth amendments and the confi- 
dential nature of attorney-client relationship (which he claimed the 
committee was violating), he refused to say who handled moneys of 
the Fund. 

He testified that no state tax returns were prepared by him and that 
the Fund had been advised that it did not have to file a Federal in- 
come tax retm-n. When a representative from the Internal Revenue 
Serv^ice called on him to inquire about the Fund's reports, Needle- 
man said, he informed the representative that he would communicate 
with his chent. He declined to tell the committee to whom he had 
referred the tax matter or who the Fund's officers were, claiming a 
privileged communication. He stated further that he could not re- 
call the name of the tax attorney the Fund had consulted. 

Needleman declined to state whether Lautner's testimony con- 
cerning him was correct, whether he was a member of Section 22 of 
the Communist Party when Sam Brown headed it, or whether he and 
persons directing the Fmid are Communists. He confirmed that in 
1961 he registered with the Department of Justice as agent for the 
Four Continent Book Corporation, described by him as the general 
book distribution agency for the Soviet Union. On the registration 
fonn he also stated he was legal adviser to the Amtorg Trading Cor- 
poration, an official Soviet instrumentality in the United States (cited 
as subversive by the Attorney General and this committee). The 
form required a listing of all organizations of v/hich the applicant had 
been a member, director, officer, or employee during the past 2 years. 
Needleman's answer to these cjuestions on the form was, "I invoke 
the fifth amendment to this question." 

Russell Nixon, Washmgton legislative representative of the Com- 
munist-controlled United Electrical Workers Union and correspondent 
for the National Guardian, invoked the fifth amendment in refusing to 
answer questions concernmg the Fund and Communist Party mem- 
bership. 

Stanley William Moore, a teacher at Barnard College, had pre- 
viously appeared before the committee in 1954, at which time he had 
invoked the fifth amendment in refusing to answer questions concern- 
ing Communist Party membership. In his appearance before the 
committee on May 31, 1961, Moore testified that he was not a member 
of the Communist Party at the time of his prior appearance before 
the committee and that he had not been one since that time. He 
invoked the first and fifth amendments when questioned about mem- 
bership prior to his 1954 testimony and, on the same basis, refused to 
answer questions concerning the Fund and his membership on its 
Awards Committee. 

Barrows Dunham had also been subpenaed to testify before the 
committee on a previous occasion — in February 1952 — in the course 
of an investigation of Communist infiltration in the field of education. 
On that occasion, he invoked the fifth amendment not only in response 
to questions concerning membership in the Communist Party, but 
even when asked preliminary questions about his occupation and edu- 
cation for purposes of identification. In his appearance before the 

21-204—63 5 



56 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

committee on June 7, 1961, he refused, on the grounds of the fifth 
amendment, to respond to any inquiries about the Fund and pubHca- 
tions for which he now does freelance writing. 

Dr. Herbert Aptheker was a member of the National Committee 
of the Communist Party at the time he received a $1,000 grant from 
the Fund and at the time he testified before the committee on May 31, 
1961. Aptheker is the editor of the Communist Party's theoretical 
organ. Political Affairs, and has also served as associate editor of 
Masses and Mainstream (now called Mainstream), the Communist 
Party's cultural monthly. He is also head of the New York School 
for Marxist Studies, the most important Communist Party school in 
the East. 

As a defense witness for members of the Communist Party's 
Politburo who were tried under the Smith Act in 1949 and for other 
party leaders prosecuted under the Smith Act in 1954 and also for 
the party itself in proceedings before the Subversive Activities Control 
Board in 1952, Aptheker testified that he had been an active Com- 
munist Party member since 1939. In the hearing on the Fund for 
Social Analysis, however, he invoked the fifth amendment when 
questioned about Communist Party membership. 

Conclusion 

The 16th National Convention of the Communist Party, USA, held 
in February 1957, instructed the National Committee of the party 
to prepare a written program to "define clearly and unequivocally the 
viewpoint of American Conununists on all fundamental problems of 
the struggle for socialism in the U.S." 

The National Committee delegated the carrying out of this instruc- 
tion to a Draft Program Committee, of which Herbert Aptheker 
(later a recipient of a grant from the Fund) was a member. 

According to James S. Allen, the secretary of the Draft Program 
Committee, in an article in the Communist Political Affairs magazine 
of September 1958, his committee viewed the preparation of a written 
program as a "really major undertaking" which must, he said — 

be the outcome of an expanding wave of serious study and 
discussion at all stages of preparation. The best Marxist- 
Leninist thinking in America should be "mobilized" and 
brought to bear upon the problems of the program. The 
real and "thinking" strength that is resident within the Com- 
munist movement and in circles around it has to be aroused 
to the task. 

The Fund for Social Analysis, according to its own statement of 
policy issued in 1958, aims to "correct" the dwindling level of research 
on "problems opened up by Marxist theory." It follows the selective 
approach of giving preference to applicants who propose: 

"Topics bearing upon current problems * * * over those of purely 
historical interest" and 

"Topics bearing upon the United States * * * over those solely 
concerned with other countries." 

The Fund claims that it does not propose to merely "popularize a 
set of uncritical beliefs" on "problems of Marxist theory and its 
application," but rather that it expects each grant recipient to "be 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 57 

to some extent a critic of the theories he examines or applies" and "to 
decide how far the criticism shall go." 

This statement of Fund policy, as well as some of the studies for 
which it has made grants, clearly indicates that the Fund's purposes 
coincide with the "written program" called for by the Communist 
Party at its 16th National Convention. In view of the refusal of 
Fund witnesses to answer questions concerning the organization's 
objectives, the similarity of the Fund's program to that of the Com- 
munist Party speaks for itself. 

These facts, as well as the Communist and pro-Communist records 
of the Fund's officers and Awards Committee members brought out 
at the hearings, led the committee to conclude that the Fund for 
Social Analysis "was being operated as a Communist propaganda 
organization." ^ 

These hearings also illustrated the ease with which a Communist 
propaganda organization can function under existing laws, without 
disclosing the nature of its operations. The Fund, for instance, 
obviously designed its financial structure so that it would be immune 
from taxation even though it made no request for tax exemption. 
Furthermore, the Fund, by not maintaining even the basic records 
kept by most organizations or else by being prepared to dispose of 
them at a moment's notice, was in a position to conceal much informa- 
tion about its activities when investigated by this committee. 

The hearings clearly established that the Fund for Social Analysis 
and monetary contributions to it would be denied privileged tax 
treatment if H.K. 4700 became law. 

DISSEMINATION OF COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA IN THE UNITED 
STATES (HEARINGS ON H.R. 9120 AND H.R. 5751, TO AMEND THE 
SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL ACT OF 1950) 

On September 13, 1961, the committee held a hearing on proposed 
legislation concerning the use of first-class U.S. mail service for dis- 
semination of unlabeled Communist propaganda emanating from 
foreign countries. Of primary interest to the committee at this hear- 
ing was H.R. 9120, an amendment to H.R. 5751, a bill calling for 
persons who distribute foreign political propaganda through the mail 
in this country to register as foreign agents with the Department of 
Justice, to label foreign political propaganda as such, and to send 
sample copies of foreign propaganda material to the Library of Con- 
gress and to the Justice Department with a statement setting forth 
full information as to the times, places, and extent of importation of 
such material. 

H.R. 9120 had been introduced by the committee chairman on 
September 11, 1961, for the purpose of giving the Postmaster General 
the authority, when reasonably justified, to warn recipients of first- 
class mail coming directly from foreign countries that it might contain 
Communist propaganda. H.R. 9120 was prompted by the Commu- 
nist technique of mailing foreign propaganda, by first-class as well as 
other mail, directly to individual addressees in the United States, 
rather than to resident Communist agents for further distribution. 

' For complete citation, see p, 78 of the committee's "Guide to Subversive Organizations and Publica- 
tions." 



58 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Attorneys from the Post OfSce Department, the Department of 
Justice, and the Customs Bureau of the Treasury Department testi- 
fied in the hearing. The Department of State had been invited to 
send a representative, but was unable to do so and forwarded its 
regrets to the committee chairman. 

All executive branch representatives at the hearing were essentially 
in agreement with the purpose and composition of H.R. 9120. A num- 
ber of minor revisions were suggested, most of which were incorporated 
in a supplemental report to H.R. 5751 filed on September 14, 1961, 
by Mr. Walter. This report recommended that the Postmaster 
General be directed to display notices in post offices throughout the 
Nation warning that Communists are using the mail service of the 
United States to circulate Red propaganda initiated in foreign coun- 
tries. The report also recommended that he be given the authority 
to invite recipients of Communist propaganda to return it to the 
post office without cost to themselves. 

H.R. 5751 was passed by the House on September 18, 1961, by an 
overwhelming majority. 

In October 1961, the Post Office Department notified the committee 
that it was going ahead with the preparation of posters warning about 
the Communist use of the mails for propaganda purposes. At year's 
end, the Post Office Department had definite plans for the distribu- 
tion of these posters to its branches throughout the country in early 
1962. 

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS AND CITIZENS 
COMMITTEE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTIES 

On Jime 5, 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court, in two 5-4 decisions, 
upheld the constitutionality of the registration and disclosure pro- 
visions of the Internal Security Act of 1950 (the McCarran Act) as 
applied to the Communist Party, and also the Smith Act membership 
clause making punishable active and purposive membership in the 
Communist Party. 

Some three months later, on September 23 and 24, 1961, a so-called 
"National Assembly for Democratic Rights" attracted an estimated 
3,000 persons to New York City's St. Nicholas Arena for "an all- 
inclusive gathering * * * of representatives and supporters of every 
plea for reversal or nonapplication of the June 5th decisions of the 
Supreme Court on the Smith and McCarran Acts." 

The preannounced and widely publicized objectives of the National 
Assembly for Democratic Rights were so similar to the official aims of 
the Communist Party — and preliminary investigation revealed the 
names of so many notorious Communists and inveterate supporters 
of Communist fronts among the organizers and sponsors of the As- 
sembly — that the committee felt compelled to hold hearings on this 
gathering. The purpose was to determine whether it was, as evidence 
indicated, a concealed Communist Party operation and, if so, whether 
the subversive techniques utilized by the Communists in arranging 
and controlling this Assembly lent themselves to correction by 
legislation. 

Committee investigation and hearings directed toward these aims, 
held in Washington, D.C., on October 2 and 3, 1961, developed the 
follo^ving information concerning the origin, organization and opera- 
tion of the National Assembly for Democratic Rights. 



anistual report for the year 1961 59 

Communist Party Opposition to Internal Security Act 

The history of Communist Party opposition to the Internal Security 
Act, often referred to as the McCarran Act, pre-dates its enactment 
in 1950. When the act was first proposed in the late 1940's, it was 
known as the Mundt-Nixon BiU. In June, 1948, a National Com- 
mittee To Defeat the Mundt Bill was formed. After investigation, 
this gi'oup was officially cited by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities in 1951 as "a Communist lobby" against anti-subversive 
legislation. The National Committee To Defeat the Mundt Bill was 
dissolved, but was succeeded in December, 1950 — following adoption 
of the Internal Security Act — by the now defunct National Commit- 
tee To Repeal the McCarran Act which was cited as a Communist 
front by the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee in 1956. 

Thi'ough the years, numerous other Communist fronts — notably the 
Civil Rights Congress, the American Committee for Protection of 
Foreign Born, the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee and the 
Citizens Committee To Preserve American Freedoms — have partici- 
pated in the overall Communist Party campaign to nuUify the Internal 
Security Act. 

Significantly, the thu'd point in the Main Political Resolution 
adopted at the 17th National Convention of the Communist Party, 
held in December, 1959, called for the repeal of the Internal Security 
and Smith Acts. 

As was expected, not only the U.S. Communist Party but Com- 
munists the world over reacted violently following the Supreme 
Court's upholding of the constitutionality of the Internal Security 
Act's registration and disclosure provisions on June 5, 1961, and 
launched an intensified propaganda and agitational war against the 
Act. Testimony and evidence introduced in the committee's hear- 
ings revealed that the effort to nullify the act by various pressure 
devices became a large-scale international Communist operation. 

On June 6, 1961, the Moscow radio denounced the Supreme Court 
and pledged solidarity with the Communist Party of the United States 
in the campaign to destroy the Internal Secm'ity Act. Communist 
Party publications in Canada, Great Britain, France, Japan, Bm'ma, 
New Zealand, India, West Germany, Communist China, Czechoslo- 
vakia, Rumania, Denmark, and North Korea echoed Moscow's 
position. 

New Times, an international Communist organ printed in Moscow 
in eight different languages, published an editorial attacking the 
Supreme Court's decision in its issue of June 21, 1961. The decision 
was also attacked in the August 1961 issue of World Marxist Review, 
a magazine published in Communist Czechoslovakia and distributed 
throughout the world in 18 other languages. There is no doubt that 
the worldwide Communist conspiracy was throwing its full propa- 
ganda weight behind the U.S. Communist Party's attempt to nullify 
the Internal Security Act. At year's end — several months after the 
Assembly — the Communist attack on the Internal Security Act was 
still being carried on in foreign countries. 

The June 11, 1961, issue of The Worker quoted Gus Hall, general 
secretary of the Communist Party of the U.S., as saying that voices 
would be heard "in strong protest" against the "McCarran Act" 
and the "Smith Act," Subsequently, the National Committee of 



60 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1061 

the Communist Party protested the Supreme Court's decisions in an 
open letter to the American people pubhshed in the Communist 
press; it was also placed in several non-Communist newspapers as an 
advertisement. 

The Worker of June 18 quoted statements made at a press conference 
at which Hall was accompanied by EHzabeth Gurle}^ Flynn, national 
chau-man of the Communist Party of the U.S., and National Secretary 
Benjamin Davis. 

Hall said, "We are announcing a massive educational campaign to 
save the Bill of Rights 



* * *>> 



In her column in the July 9 edition of TJie Worker, Mrs. Flynn told 
the party's members that the campaign against the McCarran Act 
"cannot be postponed for a single day." In the July 23 issue, dis- 
cussing an organizatioL called the Citizens Committee for Constitu- 
tional Liberties which was sponsoring the proposed National Assembly 
for Democratic Rights, she wrote that: 

Special folders will be ready shortly at the committee's 
office, addressed to youth and to the Negro people, also one 
addressed to Labor and to the Jewish people. 

If you live in N.Y., visit the committee's office. 

If you can give some time for volunteer work in mailing 
jobs, please go there and do so. 

Now is the time to be bus}^ We can breathe easier, better, 
later, after we win. 

In her column in The Worker of September 10, 1961, Mrs. Flynn 
urged attendance at the National Assembly for Democratic Rights, 
and said, "Let us welcome this magnificent effort and do aU in our 
power to make it a huge success." 

Revealingly, the National Assembly for Democratic Rights was 
scheduled to meet on the eve of the reconvening of the Supreme Court, 
at which time the Court was to consider an appeal by the Communist 
Party for a rehearing of its petition against the Internal Security Act. 
Also, on the night before the Assembly was to open, a rally was held 
in New York by the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee, at which 
the audience was urged to attend the Assembly. 

Organizing the Assembly 

An organization called the Citizens Committee for Constitutional 
Liberties was formed immediately after the Supreme Court decisions 
of June 5, 1961. This group was the parent organizing and coordi- 
nating body for the National Assembly for Democratic Rights 
(NADR), its open and official sponsor of record. The two names 
which appeared on the literature of the Citizens Committee for Con- 
stitutional Liberties (CCCL) as officers of the organization were those 
of Miriam Friedlander as executive secretary, and Oakley C. Johnson 
as treasurer. 

Miss Friedlander was then a member of the National Committee 
of the Communist Party. Oaldey Johnson, the CCCL treasurer, has 
a Communist Party record that dates back to 1919, when he served 
on a 7-man National Organizing Committee which issued a call for a 
convention to organize the Communist Party of America. Identified 
as a member of the Commuiiist Party before this committee in 1957, 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 61 

he invoked the fifth amendment when the committee questioned him 
concerning party membership during that same year. 

On June 12, 1961, exactly one week after the Supreme Court 
decisions. Miss Friedlander, as executive secretary of the CCCL, 
leased rooms 1525-1526 at 41 Union Square, New York City, for use 
as the CCCL headquarters. 

On June 30, acting for the CCCL, she signed a lease for the premises 
of the Riviera Terrace, 1686 Broadway, New York City, to be used 
for a mass meeting of the organization on July 27. 

Testifying under subpena in the committee hearings, Miss Fried- 
lander and Mr. Johnson repeatedly invoked the self-incrimination 
clause of the fifth amendment in refusing to answer all questions 
pertaining to their Communist Party membership, their appointment 
as CCCL officers by the Communist Party, the source of monies used 
for the previously mentioned leases, the raising of funds, selection 
of sponsors, and all other matters pertaining to the CCCL and its 
National Assembly for Democratic Rights. 

The key organizer for the NADR, working with Friedlander and 
Johnson, was Joseph Brandt, also a member of the Communist Party. 
The committee hearings revealed that it was Brandt who, in the name 
of the Assembly, signed a lease on July 19, 1961, for Room 703, 118 
East 28 Street, New York City, which became the headquarters of 
the NADR, leased St. Nicholas Arena for the two-day rally (signing 
the lease as the Assembly manager), and placed an advertisement for 
it in the Aew York Tim.es of September 7, 1961. 

Brandt, testifying in the hearings under subpena, invoked the fifth 
amendment on all questions pertaining to his membership and official 
posts in the Communist Party and his role in organizing and partici- 
pating in the Assembly. 

James Tormey, another member of the National Committee of the 
Communist Party, also assisted in organizing the party's counter- 
attack on the Supreme Court decisions. Subpenaed to testify in the 
hearings, Tormey, on self-incrimination grounds, refused to answer 
when asked if the Communist Party had assigned him the responsi- 
bility of establishing and organizing the Citizens Committee for 
Constitutional Liberties and the National Assembly for Democratic 
Rights; if he had directed the establishment of supporting groups in 
cities throughout the United States; and all other questions concerning 
the Communist Party's role in the organization, financing, and control 
of these groups. 

Assembly Speakers 

After Joseph Brandt had made a brief statement as the National 
Assembly for Democratic Rights got underway on September 23, the 
following persons — all identified or professed members of the Com- 
munist Party — addressed the gathering on that and the following d&j: 

Rev. William, Howard Melish, who delivered the invocation. Rev. 
Melish was identified as a member of the Communist Party in testi- 
mony before the Subversive Activities Control Board in the course 
of its hearings on the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship. 
Although Melish denied in these hearings that he had ever been a 
member of the Communist Party, the report and order of the Board, 
Docket No. 104-53, February 7, 1956, found that "the declination of 



62 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

the Examiner to credit Melish's testimony in explanation or denial 
of connection with Party activities was justified." 

John Aht, attorney for the Communist Party in proceedings before 
the Subversive Activities Control Board (SACB) and other cases. 
Abt has been identified in testimony before both this committee and 
the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee as a member of the 
Communist Party and leader of one of the Communist cells operating 
in the U.S. Government in Washington during the 1930's and early 
1940's. He has also invoked the fifth amendment before both this 
committee and the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee when 
questioned about his Communist Party membership and activities. 

Dr. Herbert Aptheker, editor of the Communist Party's monthly 
magazine Political Affairs. Aptheker is a member-at-large of the 
Communist Party's National Committee. Testifying as a defense 
witness for the Communist Party before the SACB, he stated that 
he has been an active Communist Party member since 1939. 

Carl Marzani, former State Department employee. Marzani was 
convicted and served a prison term for concealing the fact that, under 
the name of Tony Wales, he was a member of the Communist Party 
while employed by the U.S. Government. 

Ishmael Flory, leader of the Afro-American Heritage Association. 
Flory has been identified as a member of the Communist Party by 
two witnesses who testified before this committee in 1953. 
: ^ Oakley C. Johnson, whose background has already been given. 
' ^Benjamin J. Davis, Jr., presently the national secretary of the 
Communist Party and a man who has served as one of its top leaders 
for many years. 

(A witness w"ho attended the National Assembly for Democratic 
Rights testified that when Davis rose to speak, he received the biggest 
ovation accorded anyone at the Assembly.) 

Rev. Richard Morjord. Like Rev. Melish, Rev. Morford was identi- 
fied as a member of the Communist Party in SACB hearings on the 
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship. 

Moe Fishman, a leader of the Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln 
Brigade. Fishman was identified as a Communist Party functionary 
in the SACB proceedings against the VALB. 

Richard Criley, who made a report to the Assembly for the Midwest 
region. Criley has been identified as a member of the Communist 
Party by four witnesses who have testified before this committee and 
has invoked the fifth amendment when asked about Communist 
Party affiliations by both this and the Senate Internal Security 
Subcommittee. 

Mrs. Rose Chernin (Kusnitz), executive secretary of the Los Angeles 
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born. Rose Chernin has been 
identified as a member of the Communist Party by four witnesses 
who have testified before this committee. In 1952, she was con- 
victed for violation of the Smith Act. The Supreme Court, however, 
reversed her conviction in 1957. Denaturalization proceedings were 
also instituted against her in 1953, but cuhninated, in 1956, in a 
court decision in her favor. 

A number of those who addressed the National Assembly for 
Democratic Rights, although not publicly identified as members of 
the Communist Party, have invoked the fifth amendment when 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 63 

questioned on party membership by congressional committees. 
Among tliem were: 

John T. McManus, the late publisher and business manager of the 
National Guardian, who invoked the fifth amendment when questioned 
concerning his Communist Party membership by the Senate Internal 
Security Subcommittee in 1956. 

Mr. McManus was subpenaed to produce for this committee's 
hearings on the CCCL and NADR the records of advertisements 
for the National Assembly for Democratic Rights which had appeared 
in the National Guardian. In his appearance before the committee, 
he testified that he did not know who had actually paid for the ads. 
Mr. McManus produced only a letter and some file cards relating to 
their placement. The cards contained no more than penciled 
notations that certain amounts had been paid for the advertisements. 

William H, Hinton, who has invoked the fifth amendment on 
Communist Party membership in two appearances before the Senate 
Internal Security Subcommittee. Hearings before that committee 
revealed that Hinton, while in China during the period of the Korean 
war, had been employed by the Red Chinese Government and had 
worked for the Chinese Communist Army. 

Sam Pevzner, a member of the editorial board of the Communist 
Party publication Jewish Currents. Mr. Pevzner invoked the fifth 
amendment when questioned concerning Comnmnist Party member- 
ship in an appearance before this committee in June 1958. Years 
ago, he was a member of the board of the official publication of the 
Young Communist League. There is also public record of his having 
addressed Communist Party units in the past. Pevzner was one of 
the three speakers featured at the Communist Party's 1961 May Day 
rally in New York City (the other two were James Jackson, editor of 
The Worker and a member of the Communist Party's ruling body, 
the National Board, as well as its National Executive Committee, 
and Louis Weinstock, also a member of the party's National Com- 
mittee). 

Several other persons who occupy key positions in important Com- 
munist Party fronts were also speakers at the Assembly. They 
included: 

Clark H. Foreman, director of the Emergency Civil Liberties Com- 
mittee, which has been cited as a Communist Party front by both 
this committee and the Senate Internal Securit}^ Subcommittee. The 
ECLC is the party's principal defense front, the successor to its now 
defunct Civil Rights Congress. 

Aryay Lenske, executive secretary of the National Lawyers Guild, 
the party's front for attorneys which has been cited as such by the 
Senate Internal Security Subcommittee and was the subject of a 1950 
report by this committee which characterized it as "the foremost 
legal bulwark of the Communist Party" in this country. 

Honorary Chairmen of the Assembly 

Although all did not address the Assembly, it is sig-nificant that of 
its six honorary chairmen, two have been identified as members of 
the Communist Party — the Rev. William Howard Melish (see p. 61) 
and Rockwell Kent. 

Rockwell Kent, a leader of the National Council of American- 
Soviet Friendship, was identified before the Special Committee on 



64 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Un-American Activities in 1939 and the Washington State Joint 
Legislative Fact-Finding Committee in 1948. He invoked the fifth 
amendment before the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investi- 
gations in 1953. 

Another honorary chairman, Rev. Stephen H. Fritchman, invoked 
the fifth amendment when questioned concerning membership in tlie 
Communist Party while testifying before this committee in 1951 and 
1956. 

Assembly Sponsors 

The Communist natm-e of the National Assembly for Democratic 
Rights is apparent not only from the facts already stated in this report 
but, additionally, from the type person who sponsored the enterprise. 

The names of 165 sponsors of the National Assembly for Democratic 
Rights were made public in advertisements placed in the New York 
Times, the National Guardian, in The Worker articles, and in hterature 
of the CCCL and NADR. Of these 165 persons, 32 have been 
identified as Communist Party members. They are: 

Victor Arnautof — Identified by two witnesses at 1957 hearings held 
by this committee ; invoked the fifth amendment before this commit- 
tee on December 12, 1956. 

Richard W. Baum — -Identified by former FBI undercover operative, 
Joseph A. Chatley, in testimony before this committee on October 3, 
1957. 

Elmer A. Benson — Identified before the Subversive Activities Con- 
trol Board in 1954. 

Valeda J. Bryant — Identified before this committee in 1960. 

Edwin Berry Burgum — -Identified in 1941 before the New York City 
Subcommittee of the Joint Legislative Committee To Investigate the 
Public Educational System; invoked the fifth amendment before the 
Senate Internal Security Subcommittee in 1952 and the Senate 
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations in 1953. 

Edwin H. Cerney — Identified before this committee in 1960. 

Isobel M. Cerney — Identified before this committee in 1960. 

Max Dean-^r-ldenii^ed and invoked the fifth amendment be fore this 
committee in 1954. 

Moe Fishman — -Identification previously cited; see p. 62. 

Joseph B. Furst — ^Identified before the Senate Internal Security 
Subcommittee in 1953; invoked the fifth amendment before that same 
subcommittee in 1960. 

Sidney J. Gluck — Identified by Mrs. MUdred Blauvelt before this 
committee on May 3, 1955. 

Shirley Graham (Mrs. W. E. B. DuBois)— Identified before the 
Subversive Activities Control Board in 1954. 

Balph H. Gundlach — Identified before Washington State Joint 
Legislative Fact-Finding Committee on Un-American Activities in 
1948, Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Natural- 
ization in 1949, and this committee in 1954; refused to answer ques- 
tions about party affiliation before Washington State Joint Legislative 
Fact-Finding Com.mittee on Un-American Activities in 1948 and was 
subsequently convicted of contempt. 

William Harrison — Identified before this committee in 1951 and 
again in 1958 and before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee 
in 1953; invoked Massachusetts Declaration of Rights privileges before 



ANINTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 65 

the Special Commission on Communism, Subversive Activities and 
Related Matters Within the Conmionwealth of JSIassachusetts in 1954. 

Oakley C. Johnson— Record previously cited. See pp. 60, 61. 

Rockwell Kent — Identification previously cited. See pp. 63, 64. 

Sol Londe — Identified as party member and invoked fifth amend- 
ment before this committee in 1956. 

John T. McManus — Record previously cited. See p. 63. 

John T. McTernan — Identified as party member by two witnesses 
before this committee in 1952; invoked the fifth amendment before 
this committee in 1956. 

William Howard Melish — Identification previously cited. See 
pp. 61,62. 

Richard Morjord — Identification previously cited. See p. 62. 

Qeorge B. Alurphy, Jr. — Identified as party member and invoked 
the fifth amendment before this committee in 1956. 

Otto Nathan — -In denying Nathan a passport in 1955, the State 
Department said that he had been a member of the Communist Party 
in Germany before coming to this country. In an appearance before 
this committee on June 12, 1956, Nathan invoked the fifth amend- 
ment when asked questions concerning Communist Party member- 
ship. 

Don Rothenherg — Identified by Mary Markward in executive session 
testimony before this committee on June 11, 1951. On June 19, 1957, 
Rothenberg, in an appearance before this committee, invoked the 
fifth amendment when questioned concerning Communist Party 
membership. 

Daniel Rubin — Identified as a national youth dn-ector and national 
committee member of the Communist Party by FBI Director J. Edgar 
Hoover in 1960 and 1961. 

Annette Rubinstein — ^Identified by Bella Dodd before the Senate 
Internal Security Subcommittee on February 2, 1956. Four days 
later, on February 6, Annette Rubinstein invoked the fifth amend- 
ment when asked questions concerning Communist Party member- 
ship by that subcommittee. 

Damd Sarvis — ^Identified by Ernestine Gatewood in testimon}^ be- 
fore the Subversive Activities Control Board. On June 19, 1957, 
Sarvis invoked the fifth amendment when asked about Communist 
Part}' membership in an appearance before this com.mittee. 

Morris U. Schappes — Admitted Communist Party membership in 
an appearance before a New York State legislative committee in 1942. 
Elected member-at-large of the 1957 New York State party conven- 
tion. On April 2, 1953, when questioned concerning Communist 
Party membership by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Inves- 
tigations of the Senate Government Operations Committee, Schappes 
invoked the fifth amendment. 

Hymen Schlesinger — Identified before this committee on February 
22, i950, and before the Subversive Activities Control Board in its 
hearings on the Civil Rights Congress by Matthew Cvetic. Schles- 
inger invoked the fifth amendment on November 28, 1956, when 
questioned b}- this committee concerning Communist Party member- 
ship. 

Louis B. Scott — Identified as a party member by William Ward 
Kimple in executive testimony before this committee on April 18, 
1955. 



66 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Maurice Sugar — Identified before this committee by two witnesses 
in 1939. 

Robert C. Travis — Identified as a party member by two witnesses in 
executive testimony before this committee — Donald O. Spencer and 
Walter W. Rumsey, both of Moline. Ill, on July 30, 1952. 

Jeanefte Turner — Described in the Daily Worker of January 6, 
1938, as being one of the women leaders of the Communist Party, 
invoked the fifth amendment on November 14, 1956, when ques- 
tioned concerning; Communist Party membership by this committee. 

Mary Van K'/^^r^*— Identified as party member before the Senate 
Internal Security Subcommittee in 1951. 

Rev. Eliot White — Reported as having joined the Communist Party 
by the Daily Worker of August 19, 1943, which quoted White as stat- 
ing: "I find communism maintains the teachings of the Bible, which 
I promised my Bishop, when I was ordained to the ministry of the 
Episcopal Church nearly 50 years ago, to follow in my life and 
preaching." 

Five other sponsors have invoked the fifth amendment when sub- 
penaed to testify before congressional committees and questioned 
concerning their membership in the Communist Party. These 
persons are: 

Henry Abrams — Invoked the fifth amendment before the Senate 
Internal Security Subcommittee on May 19, 1960, when questioned 
about Communist Party membership. 

Stephen H. Fritchman — As previously indicated, invoked the fifth 
amendment before this committee in 1951 and 1956. 

Charles A. Hill — Invoked the fifth amendment before this com- 
mittee in 1952 and 1956. 

Hugh Mulzac — Invoked the fifth amendment before this committee 
in 1956 and 1960. 

C. LeBron Simmons — Invoked the fifth amendment on February 27, 
1952, when questioned concerning Communist Party membership in 
an appearance before this committee. 

Many other sponsors of the Assembly, though not identified as 
members of the Communist Party, have extensive records of aflSlia- 
tions with Communist-front organizations. 

Supporting Organizations 

The Citizens Committee for Constitutional Liberties and its Na- 
tional Assembly for Democratic Rights were supported by what 
appeared to be numerous independent local groups scattered across 
the country. The Worker, official Communist Party newspaper, of 
September 17, 1961, listed the following names and addresses of 
supporting organizations: 

Minnesota Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights, 690 14th Avenue, 
N.W., Now Brighton, Minnesota. 

The address proved to be that of Henry Harrison Mayville, who 
was described in The Worker of Au2:ust 27, 1961, as the spokesman 
for the Minnesota group. Testifying before the committee under 
subpena on October 3, 1961, Mayville declined to answer questions 
about the Minnesota group and whether he was a member of the 
Communist Party. 

Committee for 'Constitutional Liberties, 942 Market Street, Room 
401, San Francisco, California. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 67 

Utah Council for Constitutional Liberties, P. O. Box 1112, Salt Lake 
City 10, Utah. 

The committee's investigation disclosed that this organization had 
not functioned in Utah since 1960. The Worker's information in this 
instance was therefore incorrect. 

Wisconsin Committee Jor Constitutional Freedom, P.O. Box 433, 
Milwaulvee, Wisconsin. 

At the committee hearings on October 3, 1961, Malcohn C. Nelson 
testified that Post Office Box 433 in Mihvaukee was his, that he had 
attended a meeting of the Wisconsin Committee for Constitutional 
Freedom, but was not a member of it or of the Communist Party. 
He also said that though he had once permitted the WCCF to use his 
Post Office box for a niaihng, he had not authorized the group to use 
it in conjunction with the National Assembl}'^ for Democratic Rights. 

A street photographer, Mr. Nelson admitted under questioning 
that, about two years ago, he had been enclosing Communist news- 
papers and magazines with pictures mailed to customers. He also 
admitted under questioning that he had visited Cuba in December 
1960. 

Constitutional Liberties Information Center, P.O. Box 388, Holly- 
wood, California. 

Michigan Committee of the National Assembly Jor Democratic Rights, 
1306 Holden Avenue, Detroit 2, Michigan. 

Evidence introduced in the October 3 hearings indicated that the 
premises located at the above address had been leased to Mark I. 
Solomon. The National Guardian of October 2, 1961, stated that 
Solomon had delivered a report at the final plenary session of the 
National Assembly for Democratic Rights. When Solomon appeared 
before the committee on October 3, he invoked the fifth amendment 
in refusing to affirm or deny current Communist Party membership 
and in refusing to testify about his affiliations with the Michigan 
Committee or the National Assembly for Democratic Rights. 

Chicago Committee of the National Assembly for Democratic Eights, 
Mrs. Nellie De Schaaf, secretary, 189 West Madison, Chicago, Illinois. 

Nellie De Schaaf, who in a previous appearance before this com- 
mittee had taken the fifth amendment on inquiries about her member- 
ship in the Communist Party, again did so on October 3. She also 
declined to confirm or deny association with the above-listed Chicago 
Committee or the National Assembly for Democratic Rights. 

Investigation by the committee revealed that 189 West Madison 
Avenue, Chicago, was also the address of the Chicago Youth Com- 
mittee for National Assembly for Democratic Rights, the Chicago 
Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights (See next paragraph), and the 
Midwest Committee for Protection of Foreign Born. The committee 
and the Subversive Activities Control Board have found the Midwest 
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born to be an integral part of a 
parent organization, the American Committee for Protection of 
Foreign Born, both of which have been cited as Communist fronts. 

Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights, Rev. William T. 
Baird, executive director, 189 West Madison, Chicago, Illinois. 

The secretary for this group was Richard Criley, an identified Com- 
munist Party member, who, as previously stated, delivered a report at 
the National Assembly for Democratic Rights. Testifying before the 
committee on October 3, 1961, Criley invoked the fifth amendment in 
response to all pertinent questions. 



G8 ANNTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Ohio Citizens for Constitutional Rights, 14712 Shaw Avenue, East 
Cleveland. 

The chairman of this group was Edna A. Kaufman, a previously- 
identified Communist who appeared before the committee on October 
3, 1961, and, under the protection of the fifth amendment, declined to 
answer questions about the Cleveland group and her participation in 
the National Assembly for Democratic Rights. 

Maryland Committee jor Democratic Rights, 1526 Winford Road, 
Baltimore, Maryland. 

Philadelphia Representative, 249 South Melville Street, Phila- 
delphia, Pennsylvania. 

St Louis Representative, 1434 Chambers Road, St. Louis, Missouri. 

New Communist-Front Technique 

The fact that the National Assembly for Democratic Rights was 
supported by strategically located — but difi'erently named— groups 
in various parts of the country is illustrative of a relatively new 
Communist concealment technique. Ten or twelve years ago a 
major Communist operation of this t^^pe, in one sense at least, would 
have been much more readily identified as such — because, from begin- 
ning to end, it would have been the work of one organization. There 
would have been, for example, a "National Assembly for Peace" 
sponsored by a "National Committee for Peace" and affiliated local 
branches — the "New York Committee for Peace," "Chicago Com- 
mittee for Peace," "San Francisco Committee for Peace," etc. By 
their very names, the groups sponsoring and supporting the Assembly 
would have revealed their affiliation with one another and with their 
parent national Commmiist-front organization. 

The basic Communist motivation in departing from this past prac- 
tice and in adopting the technique of having diferently named local 
groups sponsor a front operation that is national in scope vv^as revealed 
in testimony given to this committee on July 5, 1955. On that day 
Mrs. Anita Bell Schneider, a former FBI undercover operative in the 
Communist Party, told the committee of a meeting at which she, 
Peter Hyun, and other Communist Party members had outlined plans 
for establishing in San Diego a Communist-front operation in the 
"peace" field: 

It was a Commimist Party meeting. We discussed setting 
up the San Diego Peace Forum in detail. Peter Hymi said 
that he had just returned from a national meeting of the 
American Peace Crusade ^ and that it had been decided in 
Chicago to divide the American Peace Crusade up into 
smaller regional sections. In California it would be divided 
into the Northern California Peace Crusade, under, I think, 
William Kerner; the Southern California Peace Crusade 
would be under Peter Hyun and m San Diego it would be 
called the San Diego Peace Forum, 

Peter Hyun explained that he had been taught by Mao 
Tse-tung in China to divide up into small groups. In that 
way, if a small group was attacked it doesn't wipe out the 
parent organization. He said it was like hitting a pillow with 

• Cited as a Communist front by this committee, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee and the 
Subversive Activities Control Board. 



ANlSrUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 69 

your fist : although you crush some of it the rest of it is still 
intact. 

In its report on "Communist Political Subversion," published in 
1957, this committee revealed that the various local affiliates of the 
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born — which had 
previously professed their ties with the parent group — began to 
represent themselves as independent organizations "only after 
enactment of the Internal Security Act which would have required 
them, as affiliates, to register as Communist-front organizations." 

This denial of affihation with a national Communist-front organi- 
zation by local affiliates with the same name was one step taken by the 
Communist Party to make it more difficult for governmental agencies 
to cite its nationwide front operations.^ The current device of using 
differently named local organizations to support _ a nationwide Com- 
munist operation is a further step in the same direction — a step that 
has the advantage of also making it more difiicult for the average 
citizen to identify local branches of nation^vide Communist fronts. 
In addition, identification of a local group as a Communist front will 
not have the effect of similarly identifying the (differently named) 
parent national organization and aU local affifiates (also differently 
named). 

Significance of Communist Attack on Internal Security Act 

The massive, worldwide Communist attack on the Supreme Court 
decision upholding the registration provisions of the Internal Security 
Act is a tribute to the effectiveness of disclosm-e and exposure as 
weapons in the fight against communism. It is also an indication of 
how thoroughly the U.S. Communist Party and the world Communist 
movement are^ committed to the use of concealment and deceit to 
achieve their aims. 

The Internal Security Act is basically a mild anti-Communist law. 
Its registration provisions require no more than that organizations 
fomid to be Communist file certain information (concerning finances, 
officers and/or membership) with the Attorney General and that they 
label their propaganda as the product of Communist organizations. 
The Act does no more than try to strip from U.S. Communist Party 
operations the masks of "peace", "democracy", "Americanism", etc., 
behind which their true intentions are normally hidden. It is an 
attempt to force Communists to be honest and aboveboard. It gives 
Communist groups complete freedom to continue their operations as long 
as they do not try to conceal their true nature. 

But honesty in operation, apparently, is something the Communist 
movement cannot risk. Hence the "Citizens Committee for Consti- 
tutional Liberties", the "National Assembly for Democratic Rights", 
and the worldwide attack on the Internal Security Act. 

Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy touched on one of the key 
reasons for the intense and widespread Communist attack on the 
Internal Security Act decision when he stated on June 10, 1961: 

The Communist Party as it exists in the United States and 
in other countries is not a legitimate political party. It is a 
group whose policies, decisions and movements are directed 

> Despite this denial, the Subversive Activities Control Board found, in 1960, after extensive hearings, 
that the American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born and its supporting groups throughout the 
country were, in eflect, one Communist-front organization. 



70 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

and controlled by a foreign power. This is why the Soviet 
Union and the Communist Party are so inimical to the activi- 
ties of free men everywhere. It is the Trojan Horse assunn'ng 
the form of a so-called political party in democratic countries 
around the world — agrarian reformers in China, guerillas in 
South Viet-Nam or rioters in Japan. 

* * * « * 

After 10 years of litigation, the Supreme Court has held 
that the Communist Party of the United States is directed, 
dominated and controlled by the Soviet Union. 

For this reason this is a momentous decision. The 
control of the Communist Party in the United States is no 
longer a matter of charges and accusations, but a matter 
of judicial finding. The Communist Party of the United 
States has had its day and, in fact, its years in court. 

***** 

The case * * * should be studied by all non-Communist 
governments and groups, such as teachers, students and 
labor organizations around the world. 

Worldwide study of both the SACB proceedings against the Com- 
munist Party and the Supreme Court decision on the case, as recom- 
mended by the Attorney General, would have disastrous efTccts on 
the Communist movement. It is for this reason that Communists 
everywhere are so desirous of nnllifjnng the Internal Security Act 
and all legal proceedings and decisions related to it. 

On the basis of the extensive evidence compiled by the committee's 
investigation and iiearings which clearly demonstrated the predomi- 
nant role the Communist Party played in planning, organizing, and 
conducting both the CCCL and NADR — -and because of the fact 
tiiat the aims of both coincided completely with the aims of the 
Communist Party and the world Communist movement — the com- 
mittee concluded that — 

The National Assembly for Democratic Rights and a co- 
ordinating and organizing group in support thereof, titled 
the "Citizens Committee for Constitutional Liberties," are 
Communist fronts (II. Rept. 1282, Nov. 29, 1961). 

Although the National Assembly for Democratic Rights was sup- 
posedly a one-time activity and the Supreme Court has denied a 
rehearing of the Communist Party's petition against the Internal 
Security Act, the campaign to nullify this antisubversion law con- 
tinues. The Assembly maintains a post office mailing address in 
New York City and stated at year's end that 16 supporting groups, 
including the Citizens Committee for Constitutional Liberties, were 
still active. 

These groups are continuing their efforts to enlist new members 
and supporters in order to strengthen their attacks on antisubversion 
legislation. Non-Communists should be extremely cautious about 
participating in, or lending support to, any groups which oppose the 
Internal Security Act until they have investigated them thoroughly 
and are satisfied that they are not dominated by the Communist 
Party. 



ANlSrUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 71 

COMMUNIST PENETRATION OF RADIO FACILITIES (CONELRAD— 

COMMUNICATIONS)— PART 2 

On October 26 and 27 and November 29, 1961, additional hearings 
pertaining to Communist penetration of radio facilities and the 
CONELRAD system of communications were held in Washington 
D.C. The hearings were held in connection with Section 321 of 
H.R, 6, a bill introduced by the chairman of the Committee on 
Un-American Activities on January 3, 1961. H.R. 6 is commonly 
referred to as the Internal Security Amendments Act of 1961 or the 
Omnibus Bill. 

Section 321 of H.R. 6 provides that any person who wilfully fails 
to answer, refuses to answer, or falsely answers questions relating to 
Communist activities, when summoned to appear before certain Fed- 
eral agencies, shall have any hcense which has been issued to him 
by the Federal Communications Commission revoked by that Com- 
mission. 

In opening the hearings on the bill on October 26, 1961, the chair- 
man of the subcommittee conducting the hearings, the Honorable 
Edwin E. Willis of Louisiana, pointed out that sworn testimony of 
experts in the communications field plainly indicated that Communist 
penetration of communications facilities presented a prime source of 
danger to the security of the United States. Since Mr. Willis' opening 
remarks appear in the printed hearings and define the committee's 
interest in this field of inquiry, this point will not be fully discussed 
herein. 

On the second day of the hearings, October 27, 1961, Mr. Dee W. 
Pincock, assistant general counsel of the Federal Comnmnications 
Commission; Mr. Gerard M. Cahill, assistant general counsel of that 
agency's Legislation Division; and Mr. Frank M. Kratokvil, assistant 
chief of the Field Engineering and Monitoring Bureau of the same 
agency, appeared before the committee. They discussed some of the 
problems confronting the Commission, which is the agency of the 
Federal Government responsible for the issuance of licenses to persons 
who operate radio or television broadcasting equipment. Mr. Pincock, 
spealving for himself and as a long-time Government employee, made 
it clear that there is not at present adequate statutory authority to 
protect our communications systems from subversive elements. He 
stated — 

that if we wish to protect the vital communications estab- 
lishments such as the international telecommunications 
stations and the CONELRAD broadcasting stations, that the 
effective way to achieve that is not so nmch by tightening up 
our own licenses, our own licensee requirements, and plug- 
ging this hole in the sieve, but we have to get to the whole 
problem, * * * We have a big question here so no matter 
what we do to tighten up this phase of it, we still have a very 
big area which we have not as yet found our way to get to. 
This is a matter I think the committee will want to give seri- 
ous consideration to. * * * I am sure a great many agen- 
cies of the Government have given thought to this problem. 
There are interdepartmental committees that work with this 
and struggle with it eveiy day and it boils down to a ques- 
tion, I suppose, of balances as to how much restriction for 

21-204—63 6 



72 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

security purposes are we willing to place on our liberties, 
and this is where the really difficult problem comes. * * * 
In the years I have been worldng with this problem and I 
have been close to it since 1949 or 1948, this has been the frus- 
tration point with me, the feeling that here we go through 
this ritual and we make the effort to tighten up on licensees, 
and yet they are a very, veiy small part of the problem. 

Mr. Pincock also pointed out in his testimony that the language of 
Section 321 of H.R. 6, as it now stands, is applicable only to the 
hcensing of operators who transmit messages and that it does not 
apply to the licensing of stations themselves. 

Mr. Frank M. Kratokvil, assistant chief of the Field Engineering 
and Monitoring Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission, 
pointed out that: 

The building and construction of a transmitter to work 
all the way around the world is no great problem. Almost 
anyone could do it from a kit form and the parts are readily 
obtainable. 

Mr. Kratokvil was asked the following question pertaining to 
clandestine operation of amateur transmitters by subversives: 

In the case of a national emergency would there be any 
great difficulty in our monitoring system locating an unau- 
thorized operator of a station? 

In answer to this question, Mr. Kratokvil replied, in part: 

Not if the volume were reasonable. In other words, in 
any system — I won't mention agencies, I don't want to get 
into an argument — but any agency can be inundated. * * * 
If you said individually — if you had one in the Midwest, one 
in the East, one in the West — anything like that could be 
handled; but if you had obviously fifty or a hundred of them 
all simultaneously operating, then there would be a certain 
lag in getting at them. 

Mr. Kratokvil also testified that there is no definite provision in 
the communications law requiring registration of unlicensed trans- 
mitters, and that in some cases, a law requiring their registration 
would be of definite assistance to the monitoring division of the 
Federal Communications Commission. Both Mr. Kratokvil and 
Mr. Pincock pointed out that there are certain technical devices 
which can be converted mto transmitting equipment and that present 
laws do not enable the Commission to cope fully with this problem. 

The testimony of the Commission representatives during these 
hearings amply demonstrated the need for the study of broader legis- 
lation applying to the communications field in order to insure, insofar 
as possible, the uninterrupted flow of vital messages in times of 
emergency. The hearings demonstrated that there are no effective 
legislative measures preventing the illegal use of radio transmitters 
for subversive purposes in times of emergency. The problem of 
Commmiist inffitration into this field is a pressing one which must 
be met by the broadest possible legislation. 

During the course of the hearings, it was brought out that the 
major consolidated effort of past and present infiltration by Commu- 



AITNTTAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1061 73 

nists in the communications field has been channeled through the 
Communist-controlled American Communications Association, com- 
monly Imown as the ACA. William Bender, the present secretary- 
treasurer of this union, was a witness before the committee on October 
26, 1961. Mr. Bender testified before the committee on a prior 
occasion, October 9, 1957, at which time he denied that he was 
then a member of the Commimist Party. During questioning on 
that 1957 date as to his previous membership in the Communist 
Party, Mr. Bender invoked the fifth amendment as the basis for 
declinhig to answer committee questions. However, on October 26, 
1961, Mr. Bender declined to answer on the basis of the fifth amend- 
ment whether he was, on October 10, 1957, the day after his previous 
appearance before the committee, a member of the Communist 
Party. He also refused to state, on October 26, 1961, whether he 
was on that date a member of the Commmiist Party, again invoking 
the fifth amendment. On the same ground, Mr. Bender also refused, 
on October 26, 1961, to state whether his union had ever made any 
effort to free itself of Communist control after it had been expelled 
from the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) on this ground 
on Jmie 15, 1950. 

Mr. Bender has been identified as havmg been a member of the 
Communist Party by five witnesses who have appeared before this 
committee. All of these persons were themselves former members 
of the Communist Party who had left it in disillusionment. Two 
of these witnesses testified that it was William Bender who had re- 
cruited them into the Communist Party. 

Mr. Bender, during the course of his testimony on October 26, 1961, 
attempted to castigate the committee for questioning him regard- 
ing one Joseph Kehoe, deceased, former secretary-treasurer of 
the American Communications Association and the person whom 
Mr. Bender succeeded in office. The hearing record reveals, however, 
that it was Bender who first mentioned the name of Joseph Kehoe. 

Normally the committee does not ask questions regarding deceased 
persons. In this instance, however, it questioned Mr. Bender re- 
garding Mr. Kehoe because Bender had brought Kehoe 's name 
into the hearing; Kehoe had several times been identified as a Com- 
munist Party member before his death (and had failed to deny the 
identification in an appearance before another committee) ; and the 
committee desired to demonstrate that the secretaryship of the 
American Communications Association had remained in Communist 
hands over a period of many years. 

Mr. Bender also declined to answer, on the basis of the fifth amend- 
ment, whether he had ever attended a Communist Party fraction 
meeting with Joseph Selly, president of the ACA, or with Charles 
Silberman, editor of the union's publication, the ACA News. Both 
Selly and Silberman have been identified as having been Communist 
Party members by witnesses before this committee. Mr. Bender's 
testimony did nothing to refute the charge made in 1950 by the CIO 
that the American Communications Association is a Communist-con- 
trolled union. 

Mr. Bender was called before the committee during the October 
1961 hearings because he had not previously been questioned by 
the committee regarding radio operator's licenses which had been 
issued to him in the past by the Federal Communications Commission. 



74 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Testimony by Mr, Bender and others before this committee estab- 
hshes that the American Communications Association is the bargain- 
ing agent for the employees of Western Union in New York City, the 
RCA Communications in the United States and Puerto Rico, the 
French Cable Co., Western Union Cables, and Teleregister Corp. 
The union also represents several commercial radio stations. 

It is not intended in this report to convey the impression that any 
organization mentioned, other than the union under discussion, the 
American Communications Association, has any connection what- 
soever with the Communist Party. Moreover, no charge or imphca- 
tion of Communist Party membership on the part of persons who 
belong to the American Communications Association is intended, un- 
less a person has been specifically identified as having been a member 
of the Communist Party. 

Another witness who appeared before the committee on October 
26, 1961, was one Ralph llowite, then employed by the American 
Broadcasting Company in New York City as a television engineer. 
Mr. llowite presently holds a license issued by the Federal Commu- 
nications Commission to operate an amateur station at his home in 
Ridge wood. New Jersey. Prior to receiving this license, Mr. llowite 
had held licenses issued by the Commission in his capacity as a 
commercial radio operator. Mr. llowite, during the course of his 
appearance before the committee, dechned to answer the question of 
whether he was a member of the Communist Party in August 1961, 
the month during which he filed his application for renewal of his 
amateur license with the Federal Communications Commission. 

llowite was identified as havmg been a member of the Communist 
Party by a witness who appeared before the committee in executive 
session on August 19, 1960. This witness had also been a member of 
the Communist Party and testified that it was Ilowdte who had re- 
cruited him into the Communist Party. Two witnesses in the 1961 
hearings also identified Ralph llowite as having been known to them 
as a member of the Communist Party. 

Mr. llowite denied current Communist Party membership, but de- 
chned to answer, on the basis of the fifth amendment, whether he had 
resigned from the Communist Party "just prior to the time" he was 
subpenaed to testify before the committee. He also declined to say, 
on the basis of the fifth amendment, whether he had attended Com- 
munist Party meetings with Joseph Selly and other officials of the 
American Communications Association during the time he belonged 
to that union and whether he had ever recruited anyone into the 
Communist Party. 

Another witness who appeared before the committee on October 26, 
1961, was one Marvin Shapiro, who stated that he also uses the name 
of Milton Shapiro upon occasions. Shapiro testified that he is em- 
ployed as a radio technician by radio station WBNX in New York 
City and that he is a member of the American Communications 
Association. Shapiro was identified during the hearings by one 
Loron Wardwell, through a personal confrontation, as having been a 
member of the Communist Party during the period Wardwell was 
also a member of the party. He was also identified as having been 
a member of the Connnunist Party by two other witnesses who 
appeared during the course of the hearings. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 75 

Shapiro denied current membership in the Communist Party but 
refused to answer, on the basis of the fifth amendment, whether he 
had ever been a member of, and had resiajicd from the Communist 
Party. Shapiro also refused to state, on the same ground whether he 
had ever held a radiotelephone hcense which had been issued to him 
by the Federal Communications Commission; whether he had ever 
been denied a license by the FCC because he refused to answer a 
questionnaire pertaining to past and/or present membership in the 
Communist Party; and whether he had attended Communist Party 
fraction meetings with various officials and mem.bers of the American 
Communications Association who have been identified as Communists, 
including William Bender, secretary, and Joseph Selly, president of 
that union. 

Jacob Winocur, 2045 East 24th Street, Brooklyn, New York, 
testified on October 26, 1961, that he is employed as an operating 
engineer by the National Broadcasting Company in New York City. 
Winocur declined to answer, on the basis of the fifth amendment, 
whether he had ever been a member of the American Communications 
Association; whether he had ever been issued a license by the Federal 
Comrnunications Commission; whether he had been screened off 
American shipping vessels during World War II; and whether he had 
ever been a member of the Communist Party. Mr. Winocur has been 
identified as having been a member of the Communist Party by two 
persons whose testimony was made public by the committee. He 
denied current membership in the Communist Party, but declined 
to state whether he had resigned from it and whether he was a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party as recently as September 1961. 

A witness who appeared before the committee on October 27, 1961, 
Kudolph William Jones, testified that he was at the time employed 
as chief engineer of the Tuschman Broadcasting Corp., of Cleveland, 
Ohio. Jones denied current membership in the Communist Party, 
but declined to answer any questions asked him by the committee 
referring to previous membership. 

Jones has been the holder of several professional or commercial 
radio operator licenses issued to him by the Federal Communications 
Commission. His applications for renewal of his licenses have not 
yet been approved because he refused to execute a questionnaire 
directed to him by the Federal Communications Commission at the 
time his licenses were about to expire. This questionnaire pertains to 
past and/or current membership in the Communist Party, or any 
organization which advocates the overthrow of the United States 
Government by force and violence. 

Two other witnesses, Stanley Blumenthal and Stanley M. Hauser, 
who appeared before the committee in 1960 and invoked the fifth 
amendment on questions about membership in the Communist Party, 
were also subjects of pending applications for renewal of their FCC 
commercial operators' licenses. Like Jones, both Blumenthal and 
Hauser, refused to execute the questionnaire directed to them by the 
FCC. Both Jones and Hauser were identified as having been mem- 
bers of the Communist Party by Loron Wardwell, former member of 
the Communist Party and undercover operative for the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation. 

The Federal Communications Commission's ..'statutory and con- 
stitutional authority to ask appHcants for licenses questions concerning 



76 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Communist Party membership was established and reaffirmed in 
two recent cases, Borrow v. Federal Communications Commission, 
285 F. 2d 666, certiorari denied 364 U.S. 892, and Cronan v. Federal 
Communications Commission, 285 F. 2d 288. The Morton Borrow 
case, which resulted in a favorable decision for the FCC and which 
was upheld by the Supreme Court, grants the Commission the right 
to deny the renewal of a license to any operator who refuses to answer 
certain questions relating to Communist Party membership and 
activities when so questioned by the Commission. 

The Borrow decision does not grant power of revocation to the Com- 
mission in those cases where an operator with Communist leanings 
has already secured a license. 

Despite the decision, the Federal Communications Commission, 
under present law, would have to wait almost 5 years in some cases 
before it could take any action against the holder of a license who, 
subsequent to the issuance of the license, was identified as a Com- 
munist. The language of the majority opinion in the Borrow case, 
combined with the testimony of experts in the communications field 
who have appeared before this committee, makes clear the fact that 
additional legislation is needed in the communications security field. 

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY 

During 1961, the National Security Agency continued to be the 
object of an investigation and a series of executive hearings which the 
committee had initiated in 1960, following the defection to the U.S.S.R. 
of NSA mathematicians Bernon F. Mitchell and William H. Martin. 
In the 13 months that followed the defection, the committee's inves- 
tigative staff devoted 2,000 man-hours and covered 15 States — in de- 
veloping information and leads that served as the basis for 16 separate 
executive hearings. The committee staff interviewed scores of former 
NSA emplo3^ees and 34 present and former employees of the Agency 
testified in executive sessions before the committee. 

See Legislative Recommendations Chapter of this report for legisla- 
tion proposed as a result of the investigation into personnel security 
practices at the National Security Agency. 

Background 

The Mitchell-Martin case became a matter of immediate interest to 
the committee on August 1, 1960, when the Department of Defense 
made a public announcement that these two NSA employees had 
failed to return from a supposed vacation trip which they had taken 
together. The committee had already begun a preliminary investi- 
gation when, on August 5, 1960, the Defense Department made a 
follo^vup statement concluding that, as a result of its own investigation 
into why Mitchell and Martin had not returned from leave, "there 
is a likelihood that they have gone behind the Iron Curtain." 

Other events which provided the background for the committee's 
hearings, which began on September 14, 1960, occurred as follows: 

(a) By the end of August, committee investigators had uncovered 
important evidence indicating there was far more involved than just 
the fact that two NSA employees had defected to the U.S.S.R. Ac- 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 77 

cordingly, in a letter to Secretary of Defense Thomas S. Gates, Jr., on 
August 31, 1960, Chairman Walter said: 

It is apparent to me that Executive regulations intended 
to guarantee the loyalty of Government employees, espe- 
cially of sensitive agencies, are not effective and are not 
safeguarding the security of the United States. 

(b) On September 6, 1960, at a press conference in Moscow, the 
Soviet Union presented Mitchell and Martin to the v/orld in the role 
of traitors, willing to accuse the United States of acts about which 
they possessed no knowledge. Mitchell and Martin did possess much 
knowledge, however, about the organization and operation of the 
supersensitive National Security Agency, and it was reasonable to 
presume that their disclosiu-e to the U.S.S.R. of information about 
the NSA adversely affected the security of the United States. 

(c) On September 7, 1960, the Committee on Un-American Activi- 
ties authorized a formal investigation and hearings on the National 
Security Agency for the following legislative purposes: 

1. Strengthening of seciurity laws and regulations by 
amending those parts of H.R. 2232 referred to this Commit- 
tee on January 12, 1959 relating to unauthorized disclosure 
of certain information affecting national defense and Section 
349 of the Immigration and NationaHty Act, providing for 
loss of nationality in certain cases; 

2. Consideration of legislation to amend the Act of August 
26, 1950, relating to the suspension of employment of civilian 
personnel of the United States in the interest of national 
secmity in line with H.R. 1989, introduced by the Chairman 
on January 9, 1959; 

3. Proposed legislation affixing procedures for investiga- 
tive clearance of individuals prior to government employ- 
ment with a view to eliminating employment of subversives 
and secm"ity risks ; 

4. Performance of the duties of legislative oversight. 

(d) Also on September 7, 1960, the Department of Defense denied, 
in the face of reports to the contrary, that the records of either Mitchell 
or Martin indicated homosexuality or other sex abnormality. 

(e) On September 12, 1960, a corrective public statement was made 
in behalf of the Department of Defense to the effect that "one of the 
men, Mitchell, in his emplojTxient interview, stated that in his teens 
he had engaged in certain abnormal sexual practices." 

At the outset of the committee's probe into the National Security 
Agency, the Defense Department, which has jurisdiction over NSA, 
exhibited great reluctance to cooperate. As an example, a committee 
request for the Government employment application forms filled out 
by Mitchell and Martin was denied by the Department, and the 
desired records were produced only after issuance of subpenas duces 
tecum. Furthermore, in an executive session of the committee on 
September 16, 1960, the then General Counsel of the Department of 
Defense attempted to present as his testimony the verbatim text of a 
statement which had been released to the public the day before. 
Under the circumstances, the committee refused to accept the pre- 
pared statement or a summary of it. 



78 AJSri^rUAL report for the year 1961 

In order to understand the significance of the defection of Mitchell 
and Martin, it is sufficient to say that the National Security Agency 
was established approximately 10 years ago by a Presidential directive 
to provide centralized ^coordination and direction for certain very 
highly classified functions of the Government vital to the national 
security. The functions assumed by the NSA were similar to those 
performed by military security agencies during and after World War 
II. In fact, much of the civilian leadership of the NSA has been 
composed of former military personnel who served with the wartime 
military security agencies. Today the military services still con- 
tribute large numbers of personnel to the National Security Agency, 
whose operations are subject to the direction and control of the 
Secretary of Defense. 

The specific functions of the National Securit}^ Agency and the role 
they play in the security of the United States are so highly sensitive 
that they are carefully guarded not only from the public, but from 
other Government agencies as well. Since July 1959, even the Civil 
Service Commission has been prohibited by act of Congress from 
conducting job audits of NSA positions, despite the fact this has been 
a major Commission responsibility for most Federal Government 
positions subsequent to the passage of the Classification Act of 1949. 
Congress granted NSA this authorit}^ to evaluate and classify' its own 
positions solely for the purjDOse of further protecting the secret nature 
of its operations. 

The sensitive nature of the operation of the National Security 
Agency was recognized and respected by the Committee on Un- 
American Activities during its investigation and hearings. The com- 
mittee did not attempt to learn the details of the organizational 
structure or the products of the Agency, feeling it had no need for 
knowledge in these areas. In addition, to reduce even further the 
chance that the security of the Agency's work would be in any way 
compromised, the committee will not make public the testimony 
acquired in executive sessions. 

Facts Developed From the Investigation 

violations of and inconsistent application of security 

procedures 

The mission of the National Security Agency, whether performed 
by it or its predecessor, the Armed Forces Security Agency, is and 
has always been extremely sensitive. Its sensitivity was demon- 
strated by the following testimony of a top Defense Department 
official before a subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee 
on September 15, 1960: 

Appointment of civilians in the Department of Defense is 
subject to investigation, the scope of which depends upon the 
degree of security importance of the position in question. 
Clearance to handle classified information is also the result 
of investigations whose extent is measured by the security 
level of the information handled. Because of the sensitive 
nature of the National Security Agency's activities, and be- 
cause employment in the Agency requires access to very 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 79 

highly classified information, NSA employees must meet the 
strictest of all the security standards in the Department. 

While this position sensitivity has always existed, it was not until 
August 1959 that it was so designated by formal action of the Depart- 
ment of Defense. The absence of this designation prior to 1959 had 
the effect of reducing the value of security directives and confusing 
their application to employees and applicants for employment at 
NSA. It further made it possible for the Agency to frustrate the 
security regulations by instituting security requirements v/hich did 
not meet the standard intended for positions within the Armed Forces 
Security Agency and subsequently NSA. As a result, until the time 
of the committee's investigation, interim access to cryptologic (highest 
seciu-ity classification) information was permitted on the basis of a 
mere national agency check ^ and polj^graph interview. Thi'ough 
this procedure, the Agency was failing to assm^e itself that an employee 
given access to cryptologic information was "of excellent character 
and discretion and of unquestioned loyalty to the United States with- 
out qualification or exception." ^ (Department of Defense Directive, 
"Eligibility Criteria for Cryptographic Clearances," June 5, 1952.) 

While the committee found that NSA was technicallj^ complying 
with Department of Defense security regulations, it found further 
that the Agency, specifically its Office of Securit}^ Services, was not 
complying with the intent of the regulations, namely, guaranteeing 
that employees granted interim clearances posed no threat to the 
security of the United States. 

Not only did the Office of Security Services fail to live up to De- 
partment of Defense intent in granting interim clearances but, begin- 
ning in 1951 or 1952 — NSA officials were unable to provide precise 
testimony as to the date — the Agency began making appointments 
prior to conducting national agency checks or initiating full field 
investigations. Such appointments were not in accordance with 
Department of Defense appointment directives, which provided that 
positions as sensitive as NSA's should not be filled "prior to comple- 
tion with satisfactory results of a full field investigation, which in no 
event will be less than a Background Investigation * * *." 

These same regulations provided for appointment to less sensitive 
positions in the Defense Department without full field investigations, 
but even in these categories the minimum investigation requirement 
was "a national agency check with satisfactory results * * * prior 
to appointment * * *." 

These Defense Department directives provided relief from the pre- 
appointment investigative requirements, referred to above, in cases 
of emergency. However, to avoid abuse, it was further provided that 
emergency appointments would be on a position-by-position basis; 
that in each case there would be a finding that the appointment was 
necessary in the interest of national defense; and that this finding be 
made a part of the records of the department or agency concerned. 
The committee's investigation uncovered the fact that neither the 
Armed Forces Security Agency nor NSA had made an attempt to 
satisfy these requirements of the appointment directives. It further 
found that the Department of Defense had been aware of this fact, 

• A check with several specified agencies, such as the Federal bureau of Investigation, the Civil Service 
Commission, etc., which might be in possession of facts bearing on the trustworthiness and loyalty of an 
individual concerned. 

2 Emphasis in quotations on this page added by committee. 



80 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

NSA officials, in attempting to justify the appointment-before- 
investigation practice that was still being followed at the time the 
committee initiated its inquiry, claimed that this policy had originally 
been adopted because of an urgent need for personnel during the 
Korean war. The committee found, however, that NSA had con- 
tinued the practice after the Korean emergency and until the very 
time the committee, during the course of its investigation, concerned 
itself with this practice. As will be pointed out hereafter under 
"Corrective Action" taken by the Agency, this practice is no longer 
followed. 

The appointment-before-investigation practice resulted in large 
numbers of individuals being placed on the Agency payroll without 
prior investigation. Initially, in accordance with the basic provisions 
of Defense Department regulations, these appointees were not given 
access to cryptologic information and material until they had been 
properly cleared. In order to make use of these appointees after 
they had been placed on the payroll but before they had received 
security clearance, the Agency assigned them to unclassified job- 
related training in the Agency school. This was not a satisfactory 
solution, however, because many completed their training course 
before security investigations on them had been concluded and thus 
still could not be used in the positions for which they had been hired. 

Accordingly, the Agency adopted as routine practice the utilization 
of another emergency provision contained in Defense Department 
security regulations — that which authorizes the granting of an interim 
clearance to a new employee after a satisfactory national agenc}^ check 
has been made, but prior to the completion of a full field investigation. 
Also, the Office of Security Services overlooked the fact that the above 
provision required the Agency to have in its possession the results of 
a pre-appomtment background investigation before granting this 
interim clearance. In effect, therefore, instead of granting such clear- 
ances to individual emergency appointees on the basis of a successful 
national agency check and on a position-by-position basis as author- 
ized by the regulations, the Agency simply decreed a general emer- 
gency and began granting interim security clearances to all emploj^ees 
who had passed national agency checks but who were still awaiting 
the completion of field investigations. 

The departm'es from the spirit and intent of the appointment and 
interim clearance regulations, the latter coming on top of the former, 
had the effect of vitiating their effectiveness as secm^ity measiues even 
while there was technical compliance with them. 

In an attempt to augment its now relaxed security procedures, the 
Agency — at the suggestion of its Office of Security Services — initiated 
the use of the polygraph (popularly known as the "lie detector") inter- 
view as a security-screening device. In the absence of derogatory 
information resulting from the national agency check, interim clear- 
ance was granted or denied by the Office of Security Services according 
to an evaluation of data obtained dm'ing the polygraph interview. 

When the poh^gi-aph was first instituted by the NSA as a means of 
screening new employees and updating security clearances on old 
ones, some of the older employees protested by threatening to resign 
from the Agency rather than submit to the polygraph interview. 
Although leading NSA officials subsequently placed far more im- 
portance and rehance upon the polygraph as a security device than 



ANNTJAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 81 

was justified, they did not make the older employees submit to the 
new procedm^e. However, since the institution of this procedm'e in 
1951, many older employees have submitted to polygi-aph interviews. 

In addition to the old-tune civilian employees who were exempted 
from the polj^graph, the Agency was confronted with reluctance on 
the part of the military services to have the large components of their 
enlisted and officer personnel assigned to NSA submit to the polygraph 
interview. They were, therefore, also exempted, and this exemption 
is still in effect. 

Some former NSA employees interviewed by committee investiga- 
tors related examples of laxity in NSA security practices. One example 
was NSA's hiring of a person who had been denied employment by 
another Government agency because he was strongly suspected of both 
homosexuality and Communist activities. (When this information 
was later uncovered, NSA demanded and received the employee's 
resignation.) 

Former investigators for agencies which conduct background in- 
quiries of NSA employees told of homosexuals and sex deviates within 
the Agency.^ They related how difficult it was to check on some 
NSA personnel because often the only references given by employees 
were personal friends or feUow employees. The most outspoken com- 
plaint against NSA by former investigators, however, was that occa- 
sionally, prior to the committee's investigation, when derogatory 
information was uncovered during background investigations, respon- 
sible officials in the Office of Security Services ignored it. 

nsa's office of security services 

Much of the committee's probe centered on the Office of Security 
Services, because it was discovered that this office handled ail person- 
nel and physical and industrial security matters involving the National 
Security Agency. It was this office that initiated, or caused to be 
initiated, national agency checks and background investigations on 
NSA employees. While most of the field investigations were con- 
ducted for NSA by the investigative branches of the Army, Navy, 
and Air Force, a relatively few of them were conducted by agents of 
the Office of Security Services. The findings of all investigations and 
polygraph interviews were evaluated by NSA's own Office of Security 
Services, and it was this office that granted all security clearances, 
interim and final. 

The committee found in the course of its hearings and investigation 
that, at the time Mitchell and Martin were hired, it was possible that 
the judgment of only one medium-grade (GS-9) evaluator would 
determine whether the results of a particular investigation or poly- 
graph interview were favorable or unfavorable. If nothing appeared 
out of order to this evaluator in the report of investigation or polj^- 
graph interview, he was not required to refer it to anyone else for 
concurrence in his judgment. In some cases, although the hearings 
made it clear that it was not standard practice, this same evaluator 
was assigned to review all phases of the investigative findings pertain- 
ing to an employee, and thus was the only person to pass judgment 
on the subject's acceptability from an overall security standpoint. 

1 This condition, it is believed, has been corrected by NSA's subsequent dismissal of 26 individuals 
because of indications of sexual deviation. 



82 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

The director of the Office of Security Services had delegated excep- 
tional authority to individual evaluators with minimum cross-control. 
Another important factor ascertained by the committee was that 
the Office of Security Services was the only office permitted access to 
information resulting from polygraph interviews of NSA emploj^ees. 
NSA's personnel ofHce was not allowed to review the secm^it}^ files. 
And, of possibly greater significance, the Office of Security Services 
did not furnish Army, Navy, or Air Force investigators with the 
results of poij^graph interviews for investigative direction when they 
were conducting full field investigations of NSA employees. 

THE DEFECTORS 

Bernon F. Mitchell was born on March 11, 1929, at San Francisco, 
California. He was interviewed by an NSA recruiter on February 25, 
1957, while a student at Stanford University. He had gamed field 
experience in cr3'ptology during the course of Navy service from 1951 
to 1954 (during which time he and William Martin became friends) 
and had acquired familiarization and experience with computers. 
Based on Mitchell's academic record, the recruiter's recommendation, 
the personal knowledge of an NSA supervisor as to Mitchell's work 
performance while in the Navy, and the fact that he had been pre- 
viously cleared by the Navy for access to cr3^ptologic information, he 
was offered, and accepted, employment as a mathematician, GS-7, 
reporting for dutj^ on July 8, 1957. 

On July 17, 1957, the Office of Security Services requested the Civil 
Service Commission to conduct a national agency check on Mitchell. 
On July 23, 1957, Mitchell was given a polygraph interview. At that 
time he refused to answer any questions about sexual perversion or 
blackmail. Eleven days later Mitchell submitted to another poly- 
graph interview and admitted that, between the ages of 13 and 19, he 
had participated in sexual experimentations with dogs and chickens. 

The Office of vSecurity Services evaluator who reviewed the data on 
Mitchell — including the results of the pol^'graph interviews, a national 
agency check, and a background investigation conducted b}'' the Navy 
in 1951 — did not refer the case to another evaluator for a supporting 
or dissenting judgment before approving Mitchell for an interim 
security clearance, which was granted on August 7, 1957, 5 days after 
his second polygraph session. On September 4, 1957, Mitchell exe- 
cuted a Security Indoctrination Oath. On the same day he was issued 
a badge permitting access to information through top secret on a 
"need-to-lmow" basis. It was not until September 9, 1957 — 2 months 
after he had been placed on the payroll — that NSA requested a full 
field investigation into his background. The Air Force agency which 
conducted this mvestigation was not given the benefit of any of the 
information revealed during his pol3^graph interviews. 

On January 3, 1958, the Air ForceOffice of Special Investigations 
submitted its report on Mitchell's background investigation to NSA. 
On January 23, 1958, he was given final clearance. 

NSA's director of the Office of Security Services told the committee 
at an executive session that the Agency did not turn over information 
obtained from polygraph interviews to other investigative organiza- 
tions because NSA employees had been promised by NSA that poly- 
graph interviews would be kept confidential. The only exceptions to 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 83 

this policy, the committee was told, would be in cases where interviews 
turned up information about undetected crimes and subversive 
activities. 

William H. Martin was born on May 27, 1931, at Columbus, 
Georgia. He was interviewed by an NSA recruiter on March 8, 
1957, while a student at the University of Washington in Seattle. 
He had become experienced as a cryptologist during a tour of dutj 
in the Navy from 1951 to 1955 and continued the same type of work 
as a civilian for the Army in Japan for nearly a year after receiving 
his discharge from the Navy. As in the case of Mitchell, the recruiter 
detected no reason why Martin would have any difficulty in obtaining 
security clearance to work at NSA. Based on the recruiter's recom- 
mendation, Martin's academic record, and the recommendation of an 
NSA supervisor who had known both Martin and Mitchell in Japan, 
he was hired as a mathematician, GS-7, and reported for duty on 
July 8, 1957, with Mitchell. 

The national agency check on Martin and his polygraph interview 
disclosed no information that the NSA evaluator considered to be a 
bar to interim security clearance. During the background investiga- 
tion on Martin, which included the results of the 1951 Navy investi- 
gation, it was revealed that acquaintances described him as (1) an 
insufferable egotist; (2) a little effeminate; (3) not wholly normal; 
(4) rather irresponsible; and (5) one who might be swayed hj flattery. 
Former supervisors of Martin, both Navy and Army, were almost 
unanimous in expressing the opinion they would not want to have him 
work for them again. Nevertheless, with only one exception, persons 
interviewed recommended him as one who could have access to 
classified information. 

The NSA security evaluator concerned saw nothing sufficiently 
derogatory about the above characterizations of Martin to recommend 
that he be denied a security clearance. The findings of the field 
investigators, of course — ^in accordance with the practice at that time — 
were not turned over to NSA's personnel office or any other office 
having to do with Martin's employment. Martin was granted an 
interim clearance on August 14, 1957. 

On August 28, 1957, more than a month and a half after he had 
been hired, NSA requested the Department of the Navy to conduct 
a full field investigation on Martin. On September 4, 1957, he exe- 
cuted a Security Indoctrination Oath and on the same day he was 
issued a badge permitting access to information classified through top 
secret on a "need-to-know" basis. NSA received the Navy's report 
of investigation on April 22, 1958. On May 12, 1958, Martin was 
gi'anted a final clearance. 

Despite the sensitive nature of the work of the National Security 
Agency and the Office of Security Services' declared program of 
periodically updating seciu-ity investigations on all NSA employees, 
the committee's investigators turned up some startling facts about 
Martin and Mitchell which were unknown to the Agency's secm*ity 
office until after they had defected. Examples follow: 

1. When Martin, as an employee of NSA, was sent to study at the 
University of Illinois in 1959, he had associations with members of 
the Communist Party. 

2, In December 1959, Mitchell and Martin traveled to Cuba with- 
out permission of the Agency and in violation of its directives. 



84 ANlSrUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

3. Martin was sexually abnormal; in fact, a masochist. 

4. Mitchell had posed for nude color slides perched on a velvet- 
covered stool. 

5. Mitchell and Martin were agnostics who were critical of the 
United States and complunentary of the Soviet way of life. This was 
known by several dozen employees of NSA, yet unknown to its Office 
of Security Services. 

6. In May 1960, Mitchell sought the services of a psychiatrist 
whose offices are located near the Nation's Capital in suburban 
Maryland. The psychiatrist testified in executive session before the 
committee in September 1960 to the effect that, on the basis of three 
consultations with Mitchell, he had concluded that Mitchell had 
had hom^osexual problems for many years. 

nsa's former director of personnel 

Among other things, the investigation established that the then 
director of personnel had, over the years, acquired such power that 
some former NSA employees were fearful of supplying the committee 
with information. One example of such fear was provided by an 
employee who had transferred from NSA to another security agency 
and who told a committee investigator: "If I tell you what I know, 

Mr. will see that my security clearance is taken away and I will 

be unable to continue employment in this field." Other former NSA 
employees expressed similar fears, though the committee was not seek- 
ing information of a classified nature, but simply making mquiries 
which dealt with employment practices that affected the security of 
the Agency. 

As the committee's investigation deepened, evidence indicated more 
and more clearly that the then director of personnel was also lacking 
in integrity. It was reliably reported, for example, that he had made 
several false statements in the execution of official Government per- 
sonnel documents at the time his employment with the Agency was 
changed from a military to a civilian status. He had falsely listed 
Harvard as the college from which he obtained his LL.B. degree; he 
had concealed a change in his name; he had listed several different 
dates for his birth; and he had supplied an employment history which 
was not factual. 

This making of false statements on official Government documents, 
when discovered hj NSA, should have been a bar to his continued 
employment as director of personnel in such a sensitive agency. 
However, the committee's investigation did not concern itself with this 
subject. What did particularly concern the committee was reliable 
information that he had later substituted, without authorization, 
corrected documents for the original ones containing the false infor- 
mation. 

When evidence continued to mount in support of the reports about 
the director of personnel's falsification of records and record switch- 
ing, the committee requested permission from the Department of 
Defense to review this highly placed NSA official's personnel file. 
On the day the official's file was being prepared at NSA for delivery 
to the Department of Defense for examination by an investigator for 
this committee, document switching again took place for the purpose 
of concealing the original substitution. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 85 

Continued digging by the committee led to the reconstruction of the 
following facts regarding NSA's director of personnel: 

Subject official made application for civilian employment with the 
Agency on June 15, 1949. At that time he was an Army major, 
already assigned to the Agency as assistant chief of the Operations 
Division. In preparing Form 57 (standard Government emplojmient 
application form), he provided false information to make it conform 
with false information he had supplied the Government earlier and 
which was contained in, his military personnel file. He was accepted 
as a civilian employee by NSA and granted cryptologic clearance on 
the basis of background investigations which had been conducted 
while he was in military service. Unfortunately, those investigations 
had been made during World War II and lacked the thoroughness of 
the usual investigative inquiries carried out by security agencies in 
normal times. 

After President Eisenhower entered the Wliite House, he issued a 
directive for all civilian Government employees occupying sensitive 
positions to be reinvestigated. During the resulting reinvestigation 
of the subject NSA official, it was discovered that he had made the 
false statements on his personnel forms. This discovery was reported 
to NSA, together with other derogatory information about the em- 
ployee. The director of security interrogated the official about the 
discrepancies in his records, but apparently was not alarmed by 
them for he continued to certify the employee in question, not only 
for employment with NSA, but for cryptologic clearance as well. 
Thereafter, the subject official used the director of security as one of 
his references when he filled out security forms for the Agency. 

Following his interrogation by the director of security, the director 
of personnel — who had ready access to his own personnel file — removed 
the original Form 57 containing false information and replaced it with a 
newly prepared form containing accurate information about his back- 
ground. This substituted form remained in the NSA personnel file 
until the time the subject's records were being prepared for delivery to 
the Department of Defense for examination by an investigator for this 
committee. Realizing that it would be discovered that the substituted 
Form 57 had been printed by the Government Printing Office later 
than the form's supposed date of execution (June 15, 1949), the 
director of personnel made another Form 57 substitution. The 
second substitution was an old Form 57 (bearing an earher GPO 
printing date than June 15, 1949), which the subject ofiicial apparently 
obtained from his personal effects and on which he had made erasures 
of some earlier penciled entries and had typed correct information 
about his background. On this form, also, he had typed June 15, 1949, 
as the date of execution. 

The erasures on the document caused the committee staff to become 
suspicious of its authenticity. The suspicion was strengthened by 
the fact that this Form 57 (which the director of personnel had made 
available to the Defense Department for examination by committee 
staff members) contained no entries on that portion of the form re- 
served for remarks by NSA's personnel division and the Civil Service 
Commission. The committee learned that notations had been made 
on this portion of other employees' Forms 57 in NSA files. 

The typewritten entries contained on the Form 57 supphed the 
Defense Department by NSA also appeared to have been made by a 



86 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

later model typewriter than was in existence in 1949. With the 
assistance of the Identification and Detection Division of the Veter- 
ans' Administration, which examined a photo copy of the questionable 
Form 57, it was determined by the committee that the document had 
been prepared by an IBM Electromatic typewriter, bearing elite type, 
spaced 12 letters to the inch. The year of the typewriter's manufac- 
ture could not be determined without maldng an examination of the 
original Form 57 from which the photo copy had been made. Inas- 
much as the original was still in the possession of the Department of 
Defense, Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara was furnished the 
committee's findings and requested to make an independent investi- 
gation. 

Moving with dispatch, the Defense Department called upon its 
investigative services and the Federal Bureau of Investigation before 
arriving at the conclusion that the Form 57 in question could not have 
been the one filed by NSA's director of personnel when he became 
a civilian employee of the Agency in 1949. In fact, the Defense De- 
partment's own probe clearly established that the subject Form 57 
had not been filled out until the time the director of personnel's 
records were requested by the Pentagon for review by this committee. 

In the light of the findings of the committee, the investigating unit 
of the Veterans' Administration, and the Defense Department's in- 
quiry, the following exchange between the committee's general counsel, 
Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., and NSA's director of personnel, which took 
place at an executive hearing in 1961, assumed considerable signifi- 
cance : 

Mr. Tavenner. Information has come to our attention 
that you were permitted to withdraw Form 57 and sup- 
planted this form [the one sent the Defense Department] 
in its place. 

Witness. Absolutely not, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you withdraw 

Witness. No, sir, 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you withdraw a 1957 and supplant it 
by another form? 

Witness. No, su-. 1957? 

Mr. Tavenner. A Form 57. 

Witness. No, sir. 

In view of the contradictions between the testimony quoted above 
and the facts uncovered by both the committee's and Department's 
investigations, this matter was referred to the Department of Justice 
for possible prosecution of the witness for perjury before the com- 
mittee or for any other criminal offense justified by the evidence. 

During its long investigation, the committee discovered evidence of 
misconduct on the part of other National Security Agency officials. 
Inasmuch as the nature of most of the misconduct was outside the 
jurisdictional scope of this committee, the evidence and investigative 
leads pertaining to it were turned over to the Department of Defense. 
Followup inquiries and joint action by the Defense Department and 
the Agency have resulted in the removal from the payroll of several 
officials in NSA's Office of Security Services. 



ANlSrUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 87 

Conclusions 

Officials of the National Security Agency, many of whom were 
associated with the operation when it was the Armed Forces Security 
Agency, operated tliis most sensitive organization over a period of 
many years without proper regard for Department of Defense security 
regulations pertaining to appointment of personnel. 

Even before the defection of Mitchell and Martin, one NSA em- 
ployee and one AFSA employee had been dismissed for security rea- 
sons — the former after being indicted for espionage and the latter 
after being convicted of contempt of a grand jury investigating espio- 
nage. In addition, some AFSA polygraph operators had been exposed 
and dismissed for engaging in unethical conduct. 

Past efforts by the Defense Department to investigate NSA were 
ineffective for the most part because, when matters involving irregu- 
larities at the Agency were brought to the attention of the Department, 
it more often than not appointed as the investigators of the irregu- 
ah'ities the very NSA officials responsible for then- existence. This 
is in sharp contrast with recent investigations conducted by the 
Department after irregularities were called to its attention by the 
committee and the salutary reforms that resulted therefrom. 

The committee found that the basic provisions of the Defense De- 
partment security regulations, as applicable to NSA, were in them- 
selves sound, but they failed to achieve their objectives because (1) 
too much authority to administer them was delegated from the 
Secretary of Defense to the Director of NSA and, in turn, to lesser 
NSA officials, and (2) in its haste to make personnel appointments, 
NSA did so without adequate background investigations. 

Through Department of Defense Directive 5100.23, the Director 
of the National Security Agency or, in his absence or incapacitation, 
the person acting for him was delegated all authority required for the 
administration and operation of the Agency. Under this delegation 
of authority, the Director of NSA was authorized, in case of an emer- 
gency, to appoint a person to a sensitive position for a hmited period, 
even though a full field investigation on that person had not been 
completed. The Director was further authorized to clear personnel 
of NSA for interim access to classified material before full field 
investigations had been completed. 

In all events, when grantmg a temporary appointment to a person 
who had not been fully investigated, the Director of NSA was required 
to submit a WTitten record of such action, citmg the emergency which 
dictated it, to the Department of Defense. Nothing in the regula- 
tions authorized blanket hiring under a general and longstanding 
declaration of emergency without national agency checks and back- 
ground investigations. 

The committee found that the NSA and its predecessor, the Armed 
Forces Security Agency, acted wholly outside the spirit of Defense 
Department security regulations by operating generally and for an 
extended period of time under those provisions which permitted use 
of interim clearances for access to sensitive cryptologic information. 
That the Agency began utilizing these provisions in order to get new 
appointees on the job more quickly to fulfill emergency needs during 
the Korean war was no justification for its stiE being the practice 

21-204 — 63 7 



88 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

nearly a decade later, when Mitchell and Martinj'defected to the 
U.S.S.R. - 

Awareness that the United States is in a death struggle with the 
international conspiracy of communism dictates that extraordinary 
procedures be applied in obtaining data upon which to make a deter- 
mination of an individual's eligibility for access to activities as vital 
as those of the National Security Agency. While the National 
Security Agency did employ an additional investigative step (the 
polygraph) beyond the minimum required by departmental regulation 
for interim clearance, the automatic granting of interim clearances 
was inconsistent with the security objectives of the Agency. 

Furthermore, despite the fact that the Defense Department regu- 
lations delegated authority to the Director of NSA to determine when 
a person was suitable for hire and safe for access to classified material, 
in practice it was actually medium-grade personnel in the Agency's 
Office of Security Services who made these determinations in many 
cases. 

The procedure at NSA at the time Mitchell and Martin were hired, 
as well as when they defected, permitted the Office of Security Services 
to retain exclusively for its own use all investigative reports and 
records of polygraph interviews. The personnel office, which did the 
actual hiring, therefore may well have been deprived of information 
not bearing directly on the appointees' loyalty but which might have 
been important in determining their suitability to perform the duties 
for which they were hired. 

The committee found that the Agency relied on the polygraph pri- 
marily for purposes of adjudication rather than for investigative leads. 
Few persons familiar with the limitations of the polygraph would 
use it for any purpose other than as an aid to investigation. The 
committee does not know of any competent criminal investigative 
agency or department which uses the polygraph alone for making a 
final determination of either innocence or guilt. 

On March 27, 1953, J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the Federal Bureau 
of Investigation, testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee 
as follows about the use of the polygraph as a lie detector : 

The name "lie detector" is a complete misnomer. The 
machine used is not a lie detector. It shows the variations 
of your blood pressure and of your emotions. The person 
who operates the machine is the lie detector by reason of his 
interpretations. The machine technically is known as the 
polygraph. The man operating it must be extremely skilled 
and must be conservative and objective. He must be able 
to properly interpret the recordings made. However, when- 
ever the human element enters into an interpretation of any- 
thing, there is always a variance. I would never accept the 
conclusion of a lie detector as proof of innocence or guilt. 
All that it can be called is a psychological aid. 

For instance, I have in mind defalcations in banks. There 
was a case where one or two defalcations had been reported. 
We never use the lie detector except upon agreement of the 
employees. Two employees immediately admitted they had 
committed this defalcation and 11 others admitted other de- 
falcations which the bank did not know of and which had 
not been reported. That was psychological. 



ANIMAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 89 

I saw the lie detector used in a kidnaping case which I 
handled some years ago in which a young man in his early 
twenties was picked up. He was quite a nervous and hi^h- 
strung individual. The lie detector indicated he was guilty 
of kidnaping and murdering a child. We were not satisfied 
to accept that. We tried it on another suspect. He proved 
to be as innocent as any man could be. Five days later I 
received a full confession from the second suspect whom the 
Ue detector proved to be innocent and he went to the chair 
and paid the penalty. 

That is why I have said I do not have confidence in it as 
specifically proving anything. It is a psychological aid but 
as you and I both know, there are many persons who are 
highly excitable and highly emotional, who get very nervous 
when they have committed no crime. 

NSA's reliance upon polygraphy as ahnost an exact science was so 
contrary to Mr. Hoover's 1953 evaluation that the committee asked 
the FBI Director if his above-quoted views had changed. Mr. Hoover 
advised the committee by letter dated September 22, 1961, as follows: 

The position I took in 1953 regarding the polygraph or 
so-called "lie detector" remains basically and essentially 
unchanged. I feel that the polygraph technique is still not 
sufficiently precise to permit absolute judgments of guilt or 
nonguilt without qualifications. The polygraph is currently 
being used by the FBI as an investigative aid in carefully 
selected cases. The examination results must be considered 
within the context of a complete investigation. The poly- 
graph can be helpful to implement an interrogation and 
provide investigative direction but must not be relied on 
solely or used as a substitute for logical investigation. 

The committee found that NSA not only placed far too much 
importance upon the polygraph as a means of conclusively determining 
an employee's security suitability but too little, if any, importance 
upon the polygraph's real value in providing "investigative direction." 

It is the opinion of this committee that the Agency should furnish 
outside agencies which do field investigations on NSA applicants and 
employees all the raw material possible — ^including an,Y significant 
results from polygraph interviews — that would be helpful in giving 
leads to the subjects' backgrounds. 

It is the opinion of the committee that, without knowledge of 
Bernon Mitchell's polygraph admissions of sex deviation, the Air 
Force investigators who checked on his background for NSA were 
denied leads into an area of considerable significance as far as deter- 
mining his security suitability was concerned. By the same token the 
investigators were deprived of other information that would have 
made possible a more accurate evaluation of statements from persons 
queried about Mitchell's habits and characteristics. Without Mitch- 
ell's polygraph admissions, the effectiveness of the background in- 
vestigation was bound to be reduced considerably. The committee 
does not think it unreasonable, therefore, to conclude that Mitchell's 
appointment to NSA employment and his clearance for cryptologic 
work were a miscarriage of security awareness. 



90 ANISTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

The personnel security procedures which permitted Mitchell to be 
hired by the National Security Agency have been responsible for the 
employment by the same Agency of more than a score of persons who 
were security risks to the United States. Evidence to this effect was 
ridiculed by the Defense Department until the committee's investiga- 
tion brought about admission that, after the committee had initiated 
its series of executive hearings in September 1960, NSA began a review 
of all employees' files which contained any derogatory information. 
As a result of this review, by August 1961, 26 persons on the payroll 
had been fired by NSA for reasons of sex deviation. Just one year 
earlier, based on assurances from NSA, the Defense Department had 
denied that NSA possessed derogatory information of this nature on 
even one of its employees. Yet, of the 26 subsequently released, 
several were persons whose security files had contained damaging facts 
for more than 5 years. 

The committee investigation obtained evidence that, prior to the 
investigation, NSA did not understand the homosexual or sex deviate. 
The du-ective from which security evaluators received their guidance 
was so ambiguous that it failed to establish a clear-cut policy. After 
stating that criteria used by other Government agencies would not be 
used by NSA, it set forth NSA rules on the sex pervert as follows : 

NSA's general rule therefore must be that we will look at all 
of the circumstances in this type of case to determine whether 
the acts are isolated instances, whether there are mitigating 
circumstances, whether the acts constitute a pattern, whether 
the Subject has a genuine perverted compulsion, as well as 
other facts to determine whether there is a likelihood of 
repetition. Where the results of interview indicate that the 
Subject may be a latent pervert, or is confused in his own 
mind as to his sexual desires, the Subject will normally be 
referred to the Office of Personnel for referral to the NSA 
Medical Center if he is an emploj^ee. If the Subject is an 
Apphcant the Office of Security will normally advise the 
Office of Personnel that there is insufficient information upon 
which to make a security determination. 

Another weakness in the National Security Agency's personnel 
security program involved its relationship with the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation. Wisely, the Agency notified the FBI of the names of 
its employees at the time they were hired. Unwisely, however, NSA 
failed to notify the FBI when one of its employees was relocated for 
some special reason in a different part of the country. Thus, when 
NSA sent William Martin to the University of Illinois in 1959 to 
undertake a special academic course, the FBI was not informed. As 
it turned out, Martin had associations with known members of the 
Communist Party while he attended the university. Had the FBI 
been aware that the William Martin associating with Communists 
while he attended the University of Illinois was the WiUiam Martin 
employed by NSA, it could have immediately effected appropriate 
security measures. 

The NSA investigation has made the committee acutely aware of 
how much can be accomplished when there is proper cooperation 
between a committee of Congress and a department of the executive 
branch. The committee experienced considerable contrast in the 



AJSnsrCTAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 91 

degree of cooperation received from the Department of Defense and 
the Agency at various stages of the investigation. 

In 1960, when the investigation began, obstacle after obstacle was 
placed in the path of the committee. Its requests for routine docu- 
ments were denied by the Department of Defense, thus necessitating 
the issuance of a congressional subpena. The Defense Department 
released misleading statements to the press which had the effect of 
discrediting the committee's investigation. Consequenth^, the com- 
mittee had to undertake considerable work which would not have 
been necessary if there had been full cooperation from the very 
beginning. 

Chairman Walter addressed a letter to the Secretary of Defense on 
February 8, 1961, in which he set forth the difficulties encountered by 
the committee dm'ing the administration of the Secretary's predecessor 
with regard to the production of certain records needed in the com- 
mittee's investigation, and requested that the decision of his predeces- 
sor be reviewed. The letter also set forth adequate precedent for the 
furnishing of the desu-ed information. The results v/ere rewarding. 
A plan of cooperation was agreed upon which proved most beneficial 
to the committee's investigation and to the Agency's self-analysis of 
its programs and practices. This plan could well serve as a model for 
proper cooperation between executive agencies and legislative 
committees. 

Corrective Action 

The investigation had produced positive results by August 1961, 
when the Director of the National Security Agency reported to the 
committee that a number of sweeping security changes had taken 
place. A summary of these corrective measures follows: 

1. The mandatory preemployment medical examination has been 
expanded to include psychological tests to assess a job candidate's 
mental and emotional fitness. 

2. Professional psychological and psychiatric advice is now im- 
mediately available for resolution of uncertain cases. 

3. Arrangements are being made with one of the military services 
to give the Agency's psychological tests to candidates for military 
cryptologic schools. 

4. NSA's screening techniques now consist of an examination of the 
applicant's professional qualifications and mental attributes, a 
polygraph screening interview, a national agency check, a medical 
examination, aptitude or achievement tests, and the background 
investigation. 

5. NSA job candidates must pass all screening devices except the 
full field investigation before receiving conditional appointments. 

6. Conditional appointees are not permitted access to sensitive 
information until the full field investigation has been completed. 

In addition, the Director's report to the committee contained the 
following information: 

Delegated authority to grant interim security clearance to 
new employees for access to cryptologic information has been 
terminated. Formerly, the Director of Security was au- 
thorized, on an emergency basis and in line w^ith our former 
conditional appointment practices, to grant an interim 



92 AXNTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

security clearance to new employees who had passed a 
national agency check and a polygraph screening interview. 

Under present procedures, no new employee can he granted 
interim clearance jor access to cryptologic information except 
upon my personal authorization. Security clearance Jor access 
to cryptologic information is now granted only after the evalu- 
ation of the background investigation confirms the suitability 
and eligibility of the employee. 

In order to expedite investigations and utilize an employee's 
talents as soon as possible, we have arranged for the three 
Services, who perform the bulk of our securit}' investigations, 
to provide us with more expeditious handling of selected cases 
to fill critical jobs. We have further requested the Service 
organizations to provide the broadest possible investigative 
coverage. In addition, we can now handle a limited number 



of investigations through our own resom-ces. Agency inves- 



tigations wiU be limited to select groups of candidates 
urgently required to fill critical vacancies. 

^V'e have just completed a review of the security clearance 
record of each employee of the Agency. When the review 
disclosed information which raised any question as to an 
individual's eligibility for continued security clearance, the 
case was placed under the most searching scrutiny. Further 
investigations, medical and psychological examinations, and 
interviews of the emplo^'ees concerned were undertaken as 
required. \iy senior subordinates and I are being kept fully 
apprised of the facts disclosed through this re-evaluation 
process and we are personally participating in the final reso- 
lution of individual cases. 

As a preventive measure, supervisors have been apprised 
of the available psychological counseling services and are 
being actively alerted to greater awareness of any indications 
of undue mental or emotional strain on the part of their 
subordinates. 

We have established a requirement that the Office of 
Security Services and the Office of Personnel Services be 
notified of any unexplained absences of employees within two 
hours of the time the absence without official leave is known. 

We have revised the Agency's security indoctrination to 
provide more comprehensive coverage of personnel and 
physical security programs. A revised security manual has 
been prepared and distributed throughout NSA to provide 
each employee with a ready reference to accurate and current 
information about security policies and practices and a 
guide for security conduct. 

In the area of physical security we have improved our 
controls over custodial and contract personnel. 

Within several months following the above report, NSA's director 
of personnel, the official who had falsified information on his Form 57 
and then attempted to cover up the falsification, was ordered to resign 
by the Defense Department, which he did, effective November 10, 
1961. 



ANISTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 93 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

The National Science Foundation was created by an Act of Congress 
in 1950. Among other things, the Foundation was given authority to 
award fellowships and scholarships to deserving science students and 
also grants to institutions for scientific research projects. The objec- 
tives of the Foundation, as spelled out by Congress, are "to promote 
the progress of science, to advance the national health, prosperity, 
and welfare, to secure the national defense, and for other purposes." 

In view of these reasons for passing the Act, Members of Congress 
were justifiably jolted in March 1961, when the Foundation announced 
a fellowship award to Edward Yellin, a graduate student at the Uni- 
versity of Illinois. In 1958, this same Edward Yellin had been identi- 
fied as a member of the Communist Party by former Federal Bureau of 
Investigation undercover operative Joseph E. LaFleur when the 
Committee on Un-American Activities held hearings in Gary, Indiana, 
on Communist infiltration of basic industry. LaFleur testified that 
Yellin Vv^as one of a number of well-trained, well-educated young 
Communist colonizers sent into the steel industry in an effort to 
rehabilitate the Communist Party in the labor movement. 

When Yellin was called to testify during the Gary hearings, he 
claimed the protection of the first amendment, rather than the fifth, 
and refused to answer questions relating to his employment. Com- 
munist Party membership, and whether he had deliberately concealed 
facts concerning his college education when applying for employment 
with the Carnegie-Illinois Steel Corporation. 

In 1960, Yellin was convicted of contempt of Congress, fined $250, 
and sentenced to one year in prison for his misconduct before the 
committee at the Gary hearings. His conviction was upheld by a 
Federal Court of Appeals on February 16, 1961 (a month before the 
National Science Foundation announced the award of a scholarship 
to him), and Yellin then petitioned the Supreme Court to review his 
case. (A petition for WTit of certiorari, in forma pauperis, was granted 
by the Supreme Court on October 9, 1961, and was still pending at 
year's end.) 

The Gary hearings were not the first occasion on which Yellin had 
been identified as a Communist Party member. He had also been so 
named under oath before the committee in 1954 by former Communist 
Francis X. Crowley. 

After it was reported that a National Science Foundation fellowship 
had been awarded to YeUin, a staff" member of the committee contacted 
the Foundation, which confirmed that the award had been made but 
claimed to be completely in the dark about YeUin's Communist 
background and his conviction for contempt of Congress, as well as 
the fact that he had been suspended for about 10 days by the University 
of Illinois at the time of his contempt trial. The committee then 
decided to review^ the security provisions of the National Science 
Foundation Act and to look into the screening practices emploj^ed 
by the NSF prior to approving applications for scholarships, fellow- 
ships, and grants. Accordingly, an investigation and a series of execu- 
tive hearings (beginning June 6, 1961) were initiated by the committee. 



94 annual report for the year 1961 

Facts Established 

The National Science Foundation awarded a $2,000 fellowship, plus 
an $1,800 family allowance, to Edward Yellin on March 15, 1961. 

The Foundation has made awards to at least three other persons 
who have either been identified as Communist Party members or 
declined to answer questions about party membership before legis- 
lative committees. 

Columbia University received a grant of $4,500 from the Foundation 
in 1956 for a project to be conducted under the direction of Professor 
Harry Grundfest. In 1958, Columbia University received another 
grant of more than $75,000 for a second project to be supervised by 
Grundfest. This is the same Harry Grundfest who continued to 
serve on the boards of directors of two organizations after they had 
been cited as "subversive and Communist" by the Attorney General; 
who numbered among his associates a mem.ber of the infamous 
Canadian Communist spy ring; who invoked the fifth amendment 
when questioned about Communist Party membership by a Senate 
committee investigating subversion in the Army Signal Corps in 1953; 
who pleaded the fifth amendment on similar questions before an 
executive session of the Committee on Un-American Activities on 
October 2, 1961 (in the course of the investigation of the National 
Science Foundation); and who, 2 days later — on October 4, 1961 — 
was the object of an additional grant of $156,000 awarded to Columbia 
University by the Foundation. Grundfest also has a long Communist 
front record. 

When Dr. Alan T. Waterman, director of the National Science 
Foundation, was queried on October 25, 1961, about the grants made 
to Columbia in Grundfest's behalf, he claimed that the Foundation 
had no knowledge of the professor's Communist affiliations or his 
fifth amendment record at the time the grants were made. 

In 1957 the Foundation awarded a 2-year grant of $9,800 to 
Philander-Smith College in Little Rock, Arkansas, for research to be 
conducted by Dr. Lee Lorch. In 1950, the same Lee Lorch had been 
identified as a member of the Communist Party by three witnesses in 
public testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities. 
When Lorch had appeared as a witness before the committee in 
public session in 1954, he denied party membership as of the time he 
testified but refused to answer questions about party membership for 
an earlier period. He was cited for contempt of Congress, but was 
acquitted by a Federal court on » technicality. Dr. Lorch had been 
dismissed as undesirable by at least three colleges before the Founda- 
tion approved the grant for his project at Philander-Smith. 

Dr. Waterman claimed that the NSF had none of the above infor- 
mation about Dr. Lee Lorch at the time the grant was awarded to 
Philander-Smith. 

In 1958, the Foundation awarded a one-year, $7,500 fellowship to 
Martin Berman for postgraduate work at the University of Illinois. 
Berman used 8 months of the fellowship before deciding that he was 
carrying a heavier academic worldoad than he could handle. He 
forfeited the balance of his fellowship. 

Upon learning that Berman had been a recipient of an NSF fellow- 
ship, the committee subpenaed him to testify because information 
previously furnished the committee by a confidential source had 



AISTNTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 95 

linked Berman with the Communist Party. Berman appeared at 
an executive session of the committee on Jul}^ 25, 1961, and pleaded 
the fifth amendment on all questions about Communist Party mem- 
bership and on nearly all other questions asked him. 

Provisions of the National Science Foundation Act 

In the cases of awards to individuals, the National Science Foun- 
dation Act requires candidates to be U.S. citizens and states that 
they must be chosen "solely on the basis of ability." The Act also 
specifies that recipients of fellowships and scholarships, before receiving 
any payment, must take an oath of allegiance to the U.S. and execute 
an affidavit stating that they do not believe in, are not members of, 
and do not support, any organization that believes in or teaches the 
overthrow of the U.S. Government by force or violence or by any 
illegal or unconstitutional method. Thus, Congress made clear its 
intention of having only loyal persons in the program. Both Yellin 
and Berman filed disclaimer affidavits and took oaths of allegiance 
requirements. 

In the cases of grants to institutions, even when such grants are 
earmarked for persons such as Grundfest and Lorch who have long 
records of Communist affiliations, the National Science Foundation 
Act does not require either the disclaimer affida\'it or loyalty oath 
from persons who are going to work on the proposed projects. An 
application from an institution must identify only the chief investiga- 
tor of the project and his principal assistants. The names of other 
persons who will work on the project need not be made loiown to the 
Foundation. (Some project personnel are not selected, in certain in- 
stances, imtil after an application has been approved by the NSF.) 
Persons who work on projects underwritten by Foundation grants to 
institutions need not be U.S. citizens. An assistant on one of the 
Foundation-sponsored projects directed by Grundfest was a scientist 
from Communist Poland. In at least one instance, NSF funds al- 
lotted to the National Academy of Sciences were used to pay the cost 
of transporting a Russian scientist to this country in accordance with 
a U.S.-U.S.S.R. exchange program. 

Loyalty Policy 

The Foundation adopted a policy statement on loyalty to establish 
its position on this subject in regard to persons who work on institu- 
tional projects, since no such position had been expressed in the NSF 
Act. 

Dr. Alan T. Waterman, director of the NSF, testified "that the 
Foundation considers this policy statement a guide for dealing with 
the question of loyalty when it arises among candidates for or 
recipients of individual scholarships and fellowships. The statement 
and its preamble read as follows: 

One of the basic objectives of the National Science Founda- 
tion is the promotion of progress in science. For this reason 
the Foundation is vitally concerned with the relationship 
between the Federal Government and American scientists. 
If this relationship is not healthy, and results in mutual 
distrust, scientific progress is retarded. The Nation is de- 



96 AIOftJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

prived of the fruits of much research and the scientist of a 
source of support needed for his investigations. 

Therefore, in keeping witli fundamental concepts of justice 
and freedom, and in fairness to the scientific community, the 
Foundation early in its career determined that: 

In appraising a proposal submitted by or on behalf of a 
scientist for the support of unclassified research not involving 
considerations of security, the Foundation will be guided as 
to an indiviaual's experience, competence, and integrity by 
the judgment of scientists having a worldng knowledge of 
his qualifications. However, the Foundation does not know- 
ingly give nor continue a grant in support of research for one 
who is —  

1. An avowed Communist or anyone established as being a 
Communist by a judicial proceeding, or by an unappealed 
determination by the Attorney General or the Subversive 
Activities Control Board pursuant to the Subversive Activi- 
ties Control Act of 1950, or anyone who avowedly advocates 
change in the United States Government by other than 
constitutional means, or 

2. An individual who has been convicted of sabotage, 
espionage, sedition, subversive activity under the Smith Act, 
or a similar crime involving the Nation's security. 

Fiu-thermore, if substantial information coming to the 
attention of the Foundation indicates that a potential or 
actual researcher might be guilty of violation of any such law, 
the information will be forwarded to the Department of 
Justice for its consideration. 

When asked by a committee member to explain what was meant by 
the preamble's reference to "mutual distrust" between the Federal 
Government and American scientists, Dr. Waterman said, in part, 
that —  

Therefore, we have to watch out for the poHcies which may 

antagonize them [American scientists] as a group so that they wiU 

not contribute to the research which the country needs. 

Charles B. Ruttenberg, deputy general counsel and congressional 

liaison officer for the National Science Foundation, testified as follows 

about the Foundation's policy statement on loyalty: 

I think personally that there could be a serious legal question if 
challenged, in other words, if someone attacked the Foundation 
on this score [denying or revoking a fellowship because of a ques- 
tion of loyalty] and we do apply these principles to fellowships 
and will. Legally, though, we might be hard put to sustain this 
position if challenged in a court. However, we felt that, in the 
public interest, this should be applicable to the fellowship pro- 
gram. How far beyond this kind of thing we can go is question- 
able in my mind. 
Dr. Bowen C. Dees, assistant director for scientific personnel and 
education for the National Science Foundation, also expressed his 
doubts about the Foundation's right to carry out its own policy on 
loyalty : 

We have been given to understand that the Foundation had no 
legal grounds after it had made an award on the basis solely of 
ability to revoke such an award without being sued as part of the 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 97 

fact that this is the legal requirement that we must choose these 
individuals solely on the basis of ability. 

Witnesses for the Foundation repeatedly emphasized, (1) that the 
National Science Foundation Act insists that candidates for awards 
be selected solely on the basis of ability, (2) that the Act does not 
permit the Foundation to consider a candidate's subversive or criminal 
record unless that record might have some effect upon the individual's 
ability to produce scientifically, (3) that the Act does not require a 
lo3^alty investigation of applicants for awards, (4) that the Foundation 
is neither trained nor equipped to conduct loyalty investigations even 
if they were required, and (5) that when applicants for fellowships 
and scholarships fulfill the disclaimer affida\dt and oath of allegiance 
requirements of the Act, the Foundation can legally demand no further 
evidence of loyalty from them, even if suspicions about some of them 
might exist. Despite these alleged shortcomings in the Act which 
became law more than 10 years ago, the NSF has never asked Congress 
to strengthen it. 

When asked about considerations of the personal integrity of 
applicants for Foundation awards, Dr. Waterman insisted that the 
keen competition for fellowships and gi-ants necessarily hmits the 
awai'ds to only the best scientists and students of science and that a 
good scientist, in his judgment, had to be a person of unquestioned 
integrity. He said that, by its very nature, the field of science is one 
in which the work of one person is always checked by many others. 
Accordingly, if a scientist is found by his colleagues to be lacking in 
scientific integrity (misrepresents his findings, clauns credit for others' 
accomplishments, etc.), Dr. Waterman testified, he will be exposed as 
a poor scientist by his associates. In such a case, contended the 
du-ector of the NSF, the scientist would not be able to get recommenda- 
tions from other scientists and, therefore, would not receive awards 
from the National Science Foundation. 

The committee's hearings revealed that the various forms which 
have to be filled out by applicants for awards from the Foundation 
require little background information, other than that of a scholastic 
nature. They do not require information relating to convictions of 
crime or of past membership in subversive organizations. The latter 
point is not even required in the Act's disclauner affidavit, which per- 
tains only to present membership in such organizations. No character 
references are required. ^ 

Furthermore, most applications for Foundation fellowships are not 
processed by the NSF itself, but are contracted for processing to the 
National Academy of Sciences. The Academy, in turn, appoints 
panels to review the various categories of applications. Normally, 
there is no personal contact between the reviewing panel and an 
apphcant for a Foundation fellowship. The panel bases its judgment 
in each individual case on the information contained in the application 
and accompanying references from foiu- persons who have knowledge 
of the candidate's scientific ability. The persons who furnish the 
references have all been chosen by the applicant. No check is made 
by the Foundation or the National Academy of Sciences' screening 
panels into the loyalty or integrity of the persons who provide the 
applicant's references. 

Dr. Waterman testified that the NSF had awarded some 18,000 
fellowships and 20,000 to 30,000 research grants, yet the Foundation 



98 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

could present no evidence that, prior to the hearings, it had ever 
denied or revoked a fellowship because of a candidate's or recipient's 
disloyalty or suspected disloyalty to the United States. The only 
applications denied which in an}^ way related to the ouestion of 
loyalty were those of candidates who had refused to fulfill the dis- 
clauner and/or oath requirements of the NSF Act. 

When committee members suggested to Foundation witnesses that 
persons of questionable loyalty should be kept from receiving NSF 
awards since the preamble to the NSF Act states that one of its 
pm'poses is "to secure the national defense," the response was that 
most awards were for the support of unclassified basic research, not 
in any way affecting the national defense. 

The National Science Foundation Board arrived at two decisions 
in late June 1961, after its witnesses had appeared before the Com- 
mittee on Un-American Activities at three executive hearings. 

1. On June 21, Dr. Waterman, in compliance with an NSF Board 
deeisioD, sent the following telegram to Edward Yellin: 

We regi-et to advise you that after a full review of all facts 
in your situation, including the possibility that you may not 
be able to pursue your studies without interruption during 
the fellowship tenure,^ the present fellowship award made to 
you on March 15 for the year 1961-62 is revoked. 

On June 29, 1961, the National Science Foundation Board adopted 
a policy statement which, according to testimony by Dr. Waterman 
before the House Committee on Science and Astronautics on July 20, 
1961, said that "conviction of a crime is a factor to be taken into ac- 
count in judging [an] individual's quaUfications for a National Science 
Foundation fellowship." 

Conclusions 

Loopholes in, and questionable administration of, the National 
Science Foundation Act by the National Science Foundation and the 
Foundation's fear of antagonizing members of the science community 
make it possible for persons of questionable lo3^alty to the United 
States to become the beneficiaries of Federal grants of taxpayers' 
money. When awards are made to persons of the caliber of Yellin, 
Lorch, and Grundfest, the Foundation — in the committee's view — 
is disregarding the purposes Congress had in mind when it passed the 
Act in 1950, to wit, "to advance the national health, prosperity, and 
welfare, to secure the national defense * * *." 

The Foundation's claim that recipients of fellowships and grants 
work only on unclassified basic research is not a justification for using 
Federal funds to advance the interests of persons who are either 
members of, or sympathetic to, a foreign-directed conspiracy bent 
on the destruction of this Nation. Such persons clearly should not 
at Government expense be given, or helped to develop, information 
which they might be inchned to use for the benefit of the enemies of 
this country. Moreover, Federal fimds should not be used to educate 
scientists of doubtful loyalty who would be unemployable by the 
Government and therefore couldj^con tribute nothing to the defense of 
the United States. 

* Because Yellin might be serving a prison term for contempt. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 99 

Congress must depend upon administrative agencies to adopt 
supplementary measm'es to carry out the spirit of enacted legislation, 
because — quite obviously — no statute can spell out in every detail 
just how it is to be administered. The National Science Foundation 
has not met its responsibilities in this respect. Prior to this com- 
mittee's hearings, the Foundation was not even concerned about 
whether an applicant for a scholarship had a cruninal record. 

Foundation representatives claimed, during the hearings, that it had 
to keep confidential the references they received for fellowship appli- 
cants, otherwise persons providing the references would not feel free 
to be completely objective in their remarks. The committee can only 
conclude that this confidential relationship did nothing for the objec- 
tivity of the four persons who provided the academic references (no 
character references were required) _ for Yellin. Not one of them 
mentioned Yellin's having been identified as a Communist, his shame- 
ful performance before the Committee on Un-American Activities, his 
contempt conviction, or his temporary suspension by the University 
of Illinois. 

The Foundation has reported that "the prestige of these [predoctoral] 
fellowships is so high that they are much sought after by top quality 
graduate science students." Accordingly, the Foundation says it 
can best attain its objectives "by keeping these fellowships highly 
selective and highly competitive" (National Science Foundation's 
1958 report, p. 51). Despite this claim, approximately one out of every 
three of the 13,000 applications the Foundation receives annually for 
fellowships is approved, even though no inquiry is made about the 
applicants beyond their scholastic achievements. Additional inquiries 
as to character, conduct, etc., would certainly seem appropriate in 
view of the Foundation's interest of obtaining "top quality" students 
from a "highly competitive" field of applicants. 

By Dr. Waterman's definitions, the distinction between a grant 
and a fellowship is as follows: 

(1) A grant goes to an institution when someone at the institution 
has proposed that certain scientific research or experimentation would 
be worthwhile, and the Foundation agrees. In other words, when a 
grant is awarded to an institution, the Foundation's primar^^ interest 
is in the work that is to be done, not the people who are to do it; 

(2) A fellowship is awarded to an individual when the Foundation 
feels that an applicant's scholastic record is such that he should be 
encouraged and helped to study further. The Foundation is not 
concerned with the specific studies the applicant will undertake, 
as long as they are approved by the college or university of the appli- 
cant's choice. In short, in the case of a fellowship, the Foundation 
is concerned with helping the applicant to increase his potential as a 
scientist, but is not concerned precisely with the courses he chooses 
to accomplish this. 

Whenever Federal money is appropriated in the interest, and for 
the benefit, of an individual citizen, particularly for the purpose of 
underwriting higher education, that citizen is indeed a privileged 
person. Traditionally in this country, privileges — whether publicly 
or privately inspired — are based on merit. On this basis, Yellin's 
Communist record and his misbehavior before a committee of Con- 
gress should most certainly have disqualified him from being approved 
for a fellowship from the National Science Foundation. 



100 AJSTNTJAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

Dr. Waterman testified that the Foundation had no background 
information on Yellin beyond his scholastic record. The committee 
cannot help but conclude, therefore — since Yellin did fulfill the loyalty 
oath and disclaimer affidavit requirements of his fellowship applica- 
tion — that the NSF Act and the administration of it both need to be 
tightened considerably to assure that only deserving persons will be 
privileged to obtain awards from the Foundation. This need is par- 
ticularly apparent when it is recalled that NSF witnesses claimed that 
even if they had had Yellin 's Communist record and information 
about his appearance before the committee, they would not have had 
the authority, either under the NSF Act or the Foundation's policy 
statement on loyalty, to refuse or revoke his fellowship. (Note that 
when Yellin 's award was canceled, the reason implied was that his 
pending jail sentence might make him unavailable during the period 
for which the fellowship had been granted. He was not informed 
that the Foundation had decided that he did not deserve the award!) 

Dr. Waterman testified that the NSF policy statement on loyalty 
which he read into the record of the hearings was initially du'ected at 
persons who work on institutional projects sponsored by Foundation 
grants. These persons are not required by the NSF Act to complete 
a loyalty oath or disclaimer affidavit. 

Although Dr. Waterman said the NSF pohcy s tatement was widely 
hailed at the time of its adoption (1956), it still remains unclear to the 
committee whether the statement was drafted to keep persons of ques- 
tionable loyalty out of Foundation programs or whether its real pur- 
pose was to pacify those members of the science community who are 
antagonistic to loyalty inquiries about persons in their field. The 
policy statement seems more designed to emphasize conditions under 
which the Foundation will not disqualify persons of suspected dis- 
loyalty than it does to create conditions under which the Foundation 
will make a positive effort to screen out persons whose loyalty to this 
country is questionable. 

The primary reason for the committee's reluctance to accept the 
statement as a positive policy for the elimination of undesirables 
from Foundation programs is that the conditions under which a 
person would be rejected for or removed from a Foundation pro- 
gram because of suspected disloyalty are so rigid that practically no 
one could be eliminated under them. According to the statement, the 
fact that Yellin had been identified under oath before a congressional 
committee by a former FBI operative in the Communist Party and 
had refused an opportunity to deny the testimony when he himself 
was under oath, were not sufficient reasons to question Yellin's loyalty. 

The Communist and Communist-front records of Professors Lorch 
and Grundfest, respectively, would not have been sufficient reason to 
disqualify them from working on Foundation-sponsored projects, 
according to the NSF policy statement. 

Furthermore, the three NSF witnesses (Dr. Waterman, Dr. Dees, 
and Mr. Ruttenberg) raised doubts about the Foundation's legal right 
to carry out its stated loyalty policy. The committee wonders why, 
if the policy statement had been adopted for the positive purpose of 
keeping disloyal persons out of Foundation programs, all of these wit- 
nesses testified so negatively about it. If it is true that the policy 
was not adopted for the purpose of screening out persons who might 
be disloyal, then it must have been adopted for some other purpose. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 101 

Could that purpose have been to minimize the chance that the Founda- 
tion would have to question or take action against a person whose 
loyalty was in doubt? If that was the purpose, it was no doubt pleas- 
ing to that element of the science community which the Foundation 
is admittedly most reluctant to antagonize by questioning anyone's 
loyalty. 

Regardless of what motivated the pohcj^ statement adopted by the 
Foundation, the committee concludes that it not only is not an effec- 
tive tool for keeping disloyal persons out of the program, but that it 
also actually serves the interests of disloyal persons who want to 
obtain fellowships but who probably would be unable to do so if 
careful checks were made to see if they deserved the privilege. 

Although the committee concedes that it would be impractical for 
loyalty investigations to be made for every person who applies for a 
Foundation fellowsliip, it would seem important that loyal t}^ investi- 
gations be conducted on all applicants who have been approved as 
qualified academically. Such investigations should be made before 
fellowships are awarded. If this procedure were followed, it would 
greatly reduce the chances of the Federal Government's being caught 
in the utterly ridiculous position of financing the activities of a person 
whose ultimate goal is to overthrow this Government by force and 
violence. 

The committee beUeves that loyalty investigations should also be 
made on persons who work on institutional projects which are awarded 
grants by the Foundation. They should also be required to take an 
oath of loyalty to the United States. Under present practice, these 
people do not take such an oath or disclaim membership in subversive 
organizations. As previously pointed out, the Foundation requires 
only the names of the principal persons who work on institutional 
projects. The NSF assumes that if an educational institution allows 
a person to work or study on its premises, he cannot be a loyalty 
risk or undesirable for any other reason. The committee concludes 
that this is not a safe assumption. Certainly the three colleges that 
hired (and subsequently fired) Lee Lorch exercised poor judgment 
when they employed him. 

The vast amount of money that the Federal Government spends 
each year in the field of education, both for individuals and institu- 
tions, is further reason why its educational programs should be 
administered carefully. In 1960, $328 million, or 44 percent of the 
total Federal allocation for basic research, went to educational insti- 
tutions and research centers administered by them. Five Federal 
departments or agencies accounted for 98 percent of the $328 million. 
Excluding obligations for research centers, amounts made available 
by the following agencies for basic research at educational institutions 
in 1960 were: 

National Science Foundation $59, 477, 000 

Department of Health, Education and Welfare 59, 450, 000 

Department of Defense 54, 979, 000 

Atomic Energy Commission 27, 945, 000 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 8, 193, 000 

The National Science Foundation budget for 1961 was $263,250,000, 
of which almost one-half was obligated for grants to universities, capi- 
tal research facilities, and other national programs. About one-third 
was used for individual fellowships, institutional projects, and other 



102 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

program activities under the Division of Scientific Personnel and 
Education. 

It can readily be seen that National Science Foundation grants 
constitute a large part of a vast Federal operation in underwriting 
education and research at educational institutions. It is also appar- 
ent that there could be similar sliortcomings in laws and the adminis- 
tration of them by other Federal departments and agencies in the 
fields of education and research. There is a definite and urgent need 
to establish some uniformity in security standards applicable to the 
administration of fellowships, scholarships, loans, and grants which, at 
present, are being administered differently by different Federal 
authorities. 

In any event, wherever the intent of Congress is not clear in laws 
pertaining to Federally-sponsored education and research programs, 
the administermg agencies should ask Congress to clarify them. 

Recommendations 

Following this committee's disclosure in early June 1961 of the 
National Science Foundation's award to Edward YeUin, hearings on 
the matter were also held by the House Committee on Science and 
Astronautics. On June 21, 1961, following these hearings, the late 
Representative Overton Brooks, then chairman of that committee, 
introduced H.R. 7806, a bill designed to prevent additional NSF 
grants to persons such as Edward Yellin. 

H.R. 7806 v/ould have amended section 10 in the National Science 
Foundation Act to provide that selections for scholarships and fellow- 
ships be made "on the basis of character, ability, and loyalty to the 
United States and its constitutional form of government." It would 
also have amended section 16 to require each applicant for a scholar- 
ship or fellowship to furnish information as to whether he has ever been 
a member of, or supported, any organization cited by the Attorney 
General as subversive and whether he had been arrested, charged, or 
held for any violation of law other than minor traffic violations or a 
violation committed before he was 16 ^'^ears of age. After further 
study, this bill was superseded by a new bill (H.R. 8556) introduced 
by Chairman Brooks on August 8, 1961, and reported favorably by 
the Committee on Science and Astronautics on August 24, 1961 
(H. Rept. No. 1029). The Senate Committee on Labor and Pubfic 
Welfare accepted the provisions of H.R. 8556 in its report of Septem- 
ber 21, 1961 (S. Rept. No. 2117). 

H.R. 8556 prohibits the National Science Foundation from making 
scholarship or fellowship payments unless the awardee has taken an 
oath of allegiance to the Constitution and to the United States and has 
provided a full statement explaining any crimes of which he has been 
convicted or which have been charged against him and are pending. 
Furthermore, it would make it unlawful for any person to apply for a 
Foundation scholarship or fellowship if he is a member of a Communist 
organization and has knowledge that the organization has registered, 
or been ordered to register, in accordance with the Internal Security 
Act of 1950. Finally, the proposed amendment includes the following 
provision : 

Nothing contained in this Act shall prohibit the Foundation from re- 
fusing or revoking a scholarship or fellowship award, in whole or m 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 103 

part, in the case of any applicant or recipient, if the Board is of the 
opinion that such award is not in the best interests of the United 
States. 

Clearly, if H.R. 8556 had been enacted prior to the date of the 
Yellin application, it is highly unlikely the Foundation would have 
made an award to him. 

While the House Committee on Un-American Activities regards the 
solution offered in H.R. 8556 as a step forward, it is recommended that 
the Congress give further study to the problems raised in the com- 
mittee investigation, which involve both grants and scholarship 
awards. There are obvious difficulties in reaching a complete solution 
to these problems through legislative activity. Certainly a great deal 
can be accomplished through a responsible administration of the Act 
by those in the academic world who recommend, as well as by those 
on the official side who award, grants and fellowships. 

STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF 
THE UNITED STATES— PARTS I AND 2 

The functioning of the United States Communist Party since the 
death of Stalin — with particular attention to its relationship with 
the post-Stalin Soviet dictatorship — was explored by the committee 
at pubhc hearings on November 20, 21, and 22, 1961. 

During these hearings, the committee received testimony and 
documentary evidence from its director of research and also inter- 
rogated five individuals who played key roles in recent Communist 
Party developments while serving as party officers or as editors on the 
staff of the party's official newspaper. 

The hearing record graphically recapitulates 

(a) a bitter struggle which erupted within the Communist 
Party leadership in this country following Soviet dictator 
Khrushchev's confirmation in 1956 of Stalin's criminal behavior; 

(b) an ensuing 2-year stalemate as a minority of American 
party leaders subservient to every whisper from Moscow jockeyed 
to unseat a majority of party leaders suddenly imbued with 
visions of some independence of the Soviet Union; 

(c) repeated intervention by Soviet and other foreign Com- 
munists to end the American party conflict in favor of the 
staunchly pro-Soviet faction; 

(d) final victory for the Moscow-backed Communist leaders, 
manifested by a reshuffle of personnel in the party's top ofiices 
in February of 1958. 

A total of 110 documents, based chiefly on confidential or publicly 
distributed Communist writings, was introduced during the hearings. 
The Communists' own words and actions recorded in these documents 
support the conclusion that the Communist Party of the United States 
is as abject an instrument of the Soviet Union under Khrushchev's 
dictatorship as it was in the days of Stalin's brutal tyranny. 

The structure of the Communist apparatus in America, its principles 
of organization, and its operating procedures were also delineated with 
a wealth of detail as a result of the committee's examination of the 
present-day functioning of the Communist Party, USA. 

Charts outlining the various organizational units of the Communist 
Party from the national board — the top rufing cfique — down to 

'21-204 — 63 8 



104 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

clubs operating in local neighborhoods or shops were introduced in 
the hearings by the committee's director of research, Francis J. 
McNamara. These charts also disclosed the identity of the indi- 
viduals whose ofTicial positions place them at the top of the Com- 
munist hierarchy in America. 

Mr. McNamara presented testimony explaining the roles played 
by the different organizational units of the party — the national 
convention, national committee, national executive committee, na- 
tional board, national commissions, as well as the many subordinate 
units operating on the levels of a district, state, city, county, section, 
or club. He pointed out that this paramilitary party structure — 
combined with the Communist principles of monolithic unity and 
democratic centralism — provides the Red leaders with the necessary 
tools for enforcing their will upon party members. He also drew 
attention to a reorganization of the party apparatus, begun in 1959, 
which seeks to streamline and increase the operating efficiency of the 
party by eliminating unnecessary biu-eaucracy between the national 
and local levels of party organization. 

The sharp contrast between the principles of organization of the 
Communist Party and those of non-Communist democratic groupings 
in our society was pointed up by the Communists' own statements 
introduced into the record by Mr. McNamara and by the record of 
party actions in events involving five Communists and former Com- 
munists called as witnesses before the committee. 

The Communist Party of the United States was clearly demon- 
strated to be a paramilitary organization, whose members are required 
to respond with lock-step obedience to directives channeled dowm to 
them through a hierarchy of party officials. Nonelected, self- 
perpetuating party officials enforce obedience with the aid of martial 
disciplinary procedures. The membership does not participate in 
policy decisions, and dissent constitutes heresy in the Communist 
Party. The system of organization is patterned after the select and 
secret party of professional revolutionists developed by Lenin prior to 
the Bolshevik overthrow of the Russian Government in 1917. 

The hearing record shows that American Communists who un- 
successfully sought to operate with some independence of the Soviet 
leadership in recent years had also unsuccessfully attempted to intro- 
duce into the party organization in America certain democratic 
procedures — e.g. election of leaders, the right of dissent, membership 
participation in policy-maldng, etc. But the post-Stalin Soviet 
leadership, in a series of '\\Tathful statements against what was then 
a majority view among the leaders of the Communist Party of the 
United States, condemned proposed changes in the traditional auto- 
cratic or "Leninist" form of party organization in this country just 
as vigorously as it denounced American Communists daring to take 
a critical view of certain post-Stalin Soviet policies. Wlien the party's 
internal conflict was resolved in 1958 by installation of a national 
leadership as subservient to enunciations from Moscow as in Stalin's 
heyday, a strict adherence to Leninist methods of party functioning 
was also promised. Manifestly, the organizational principles of the 
Communist Party of the United States are a key factor in the effective- 
ness with which the party serves as an instrument of Soviet policy 
on American soil. 



annual repoet for the year 1961 105 

Background of Recent Communist Party Developments 

A devastating indictment of the Communist Party, USA, as a 
totalitarian organization subservient to the will of the Soviet dic- 
tatorship was provided by the American Communists themselves in a 
chain reaction set off by Soviet dictator Nikita Khi-ushchev in Febru- 
ary 1956. Khrushchev, then a rising star in the "collective leader- 
ship" which controlled the Soviet Government following Stalin's 
death, delivered a "secret" speech on that date to the 20th Congress 
of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The speech, shortly 
thereafter subject to wide publicity outside the Soviet Union, con- 
demned Stalin as an egotistical, brutal tyrant, guilty of the un- 
justifiable murder of thousands of Soviet citizens. Communist as well 
as non-Communist. 

Such revelations by the new Soviet leader regarding the man who 
had been the supreme and unquestioned authority over the World 
Communist Movement for about 30 years created turmoil within 
many Communist parties around the world. In the United States, 
many members quit the Communist Party and those remaining were 
split into factions advocating such divergent courses of action as: (a) 
blind obeisance to the prevailing dictatorship in the Soviet Union, 
with mechanical apologies for any past mistakes incurred by the 
Communists' similar support of Stalin; (b) independence of the Soviet 
leadership more or less imitative of Tito's "national" communism; or 
(c) continued loyalty to the late Stalin's policies and methods and 
complete enmity toward the new Soviet leadership. 

Within 4 months after Khi-ushchev's famous "de-Stalinization" 
speech, Soviet Communists began an open campaign to reunite world 
Communists under Soviet dominion. The mounting Soviet cam- 
paign, conducted via radio and the printed word, was reinforced 
beginning in November 1957 by a series of Moscow conferences at- 
tended by most of the world's Communist parties. This Soviet 
effort, which is documented in great detail in the committee's recent 
hearings, singled out for attack in the United States those Commun- 
ists who, for a variety of motives, were chary of continued complete 
reliance on Moscow. 

A group of so-called "revisionists," who sought to introduce mem- 
bership responsibility and democratic procedures into the party 
organization in America in order to effectuate an independent or 
"nationaUst" type of Communist movement, received the brunt of 
the Soviet attack by virtue of the fact that they held a majority of 
top party offices. Another faction of abjectly pro-Soviet Communists 
in this country, backed to the hilt by Moscow, was at a distinct 
disadvantage in 1956 with respect to power positions. In addition, 
the editor-in-chief of the party's most important newspaper, the 
Daily Worker, had joined the revisionist cause and kept the spotlight 
of publicity on the actions of dissenting factions in the course of 
pleading for a new type of part}^. As a consequence, every action by 
the pro-Soviet minority to establish undisputed control over the party 
organization served to undermine the cherished Communist propa- 
ganda line that the Communist Party, USA, is an independent 
political organization, operating in the best democratic tradition for 
socialist goals. The long-drawn-out power struggle which finally 
ended in victory for the Moscow-backed faction of American Com- 



106 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

munists in 1958 is documented in the committee's hearings. The 
committee beUeves that anyone who reads the hearing record on the 
complaints of bona-fide Communists seeking to reform the traditional 
party organization and the responding words and actions by the 
Soviet Communists and their American puppets during and after this 
period of party conflict will agree that the Communists themselves 
have irreparably discredited the image of the party they offer to 
non-Communist Americans. 

Communist Testimonials on the True Nature of Their Party 

Typical of those American Communists who took a new and more 
objective look at their own Communist organization after lOu-u- 
shchev's revelations about Stalin was Robert Friedman, then city 
editor of the Daily Worker. Mr, Friedman's writings in the Daily 
Worker, under his own name, and in a secret, internal bulletin of the 
New York State Communist Part}^, under the alias "Robert Mann," 
made charges going to "the very nature of the Communist Party, 
its procedm^es, structure and methods of work." Mr. Friedman was 
called as a witness and interrogated regarding his knowledge of 
certain basic and totalitarian operational procedm-es of the party which 
he had revealed in the New York party bulletin, Party Voice, under 
date of June 1956: 

I joined the movement in my late teens at the height of 
the depression. * * * 

But, although I had had no long experience in other 
organizations, trade union or otherwise, I quickly came to 
recognize a disparity between the methods of work, either 
already existing or fought for by Communists and others in 
organizations and unions and in the party organization 
itself. 

In the unemployed organization to which I belonged, I 
insisted on elections, minutes, motions, decisions, check-up, 
majority rule and parliamentary process. In my club [of the 
Communist Party], I became increasingly conscious of the 
absence of all this * * *. 

We swallowed whole the concept of a tightly disciplined, 
"chain-of-command" type of organization, adopted from 
abroad. 

Robert Friedman told the committee he had not been a member of 
the Communist Party in the past 4 years and was presently anti- 
Communist and opposed to the Communist system. He confirmed 
that the principle of "democratic centralism" — on which the Com- 
munist Party, USA, is admittedly organized — is "just a pretty word 
to cover and cloak the totalitarian Soviet system of government." 
However, Mr. Friedman refused on grounds of possible self-incrimina- 
tion to answer all committee questions involving an acknowledgment 
of his own past participation in the party. 

Witness Leon Nelson was interrogated by the committee regarding 
his proposals before the National Committee of the Communist Party 
in June 1956 for the democratization of the party. Mr. Nelson, who 
was then organizational secretary of the New York State Communist 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 107 

Party, had also urged the party to "cast off to positions of greater 
independence of poHcy and public expression from positions we have 
held in the past in regard to our relationship to the Soviet Union and 
other lands of Socialism." Mr. Nelson's report to the National 
Committee, introduced in evidence at the recent hearings, had further 
objected to the fact that party organizational concepts were taken 
"lock, stock and barrel" from Lenin; that nonelected leaders issued 
policy decisions without consultation with the membership; and that 
even the few democratic procedures provided for in the party con- 
stitution were never actually practiced. 

Documentation produced at the hearings showed Mr. Nelson had 
lost his position with the important New York State party organization 
in June 1957 and that, within another year, other officers of the State 
organization holding similar views had left in the face of the party's 
complete domination by a staunchly pro-Soviet faction. Air. Nelson 
responded to aU committee questions on recent Communist Party 
developments and his own participation therein by involdng the fifth- 
amendment provisions against self-incrimination. 

The hearing record is replete with statements by many other 
Communists suddenly and vocally concerned that the party's constitu- 
tion is largely a propaganda document; that the party is not a "politi- 
cal party as the American people understand it"; but rather a "semi- 
military" or "war-military" organization, ruled despotically with the 
aid of a harsh system of discipline. 

An entire Brooklyn club of the party'^protested in October 1956 
against the practice that "once a policy decision has been made, it 
must never be questioned as a matter of party discipline." The club 
also complained that "Discussion in many areas has taken place in 
an atmosphere of intimidation" and "Differences of opinion have 
often been construed as 'anti-leadership tendencies' and outright 
'deviationism.' " ^ Many individual Communists took a new look at 
past expulsions of party members and found the party leadership 
guilty of making standardized, unjustifiable charges against members 
for the purpose of suppressing dissent. 

Communists on both high and low levels in the party also minced 
no words about the party's relationship with the Soviet Union. One 
leader declared that "whatever Stalin said became our policy." An- 
other member said American Communists had been "living our lives, 
to some extent, vicariously, as Soviet citizens," while yet another 
Communist declared the party in America was "a miniature Soviet 
party in both organizational form and domestic outlook." A fourth 
Communist reminded his fellow comrades: 

The American Communist Party does not approach the 
American people vnth clean hands, as far as the Soviet Union 
is concerned. The American Communist Party repeated, as 
gospel truth, which it sincerely believed, every lie told by 
the Soviet tJnion about its living standards, about Tito, 
about democracy in the Soviet Communist Party, about the 
Moscow trials, about the electoral system, about the Doc- 
tor's Case, the stamping out of Jewish culture. 



1 "Deviationism" In Communist terminology means departing, either to the left orrlpht, from the correct 
party line. Oeneraliy speaking, rlpht deviationists (opportunists) want to go slower and pursue a "softer" 
course than does the party leadership, while left devlationlsts (sectarians) call for bolder and more unyielding 
tactics to fulfill Communist alms. 



108 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

The Communist last quoted also found that, as of 1956, certain 
Communist Party leaders were still showing a "cringing subservience" 
to pronouncements and criticisms from Moscow." 

Soviet Intervention in American Communist Dispute 

"Cringing subservience" to Moscow was an apt description for the 
position taken in the 1956-1958 party controversy by a faction of 
American Communists headed by the late William Z. Foster. Foster 
held the successive posts of national chairman and honorary national 
chairman of the Communist Party, USA, during this period and 
quickly received the endorsement of the Soviet Communist leadership 
in his maneuvers to dethrone a majority of party leaders advocating 
a revision of the party organization and its relationship to the Soviet 
Union. The increasingly persistent Soviet efforts to settle the Amer- 
ican party conflict in favor of the Foster minority is recorded with 
extensive documentation in the course of the committee's interrogation 
of its own director of research, Francis J. McNamara, and A. B. 
Magil, former foreign editor of the Daily Worker, who was personally 
castigated by the Soviet Communists for his position in the party 
dispute. Mr. Magil, however, refused to confirm or deny his role in 
recent Communist Party developments, invoking his privileges under 
the fifth amendment. 

Moscow's first impact on the Communist movement was registered 
as a result of a resolution by the Central Committee of the Soviet 
Communist Party dated June 30, 1956. This resolution, condemnuig 
an Italian Communist criticism of the present Soviet Governnient 
and demanding a resumption of international Communist "solidarity" 
under Soviet leadership, acted as a brake on the independent thinking 
stimulated within the American Communist Party by the shock of 
Khrushchev's revelations a few months earlier. This was the assess- 
ment of Communists themselves, who also recorded an immediate 
abject response to the Soviet Central Committee by such American 
Communist leaders as Chairman Foster and the late Eugene Dennis, 
then general secretary. 

The committee's hearings call attention to a rapid succession of 
other Soviet statements, widely propagated by Soviet press or radio, 
as well as by international Communist journals, in which still recalci- 
trant American Communist officers and ^^^'ite^s came under bitter, 
personal attack. The Soviet Communist statements took issue, for 
example, with Communists in the United States who — 

demanded, instead of democratic centralism, adoption of 
the principle of "democratic leadership," the right of the 
minority to organize factions, to reject and refuse to submit 
to majority decisions, to "fight to become the majority." 

and who — 

campaigned for withdrawing their Parties from the inter- 
national Communist movement and, above all, for severing 
contact with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. 

The Soviet leadership extolled the merits of the traditional Leninist 
form of party organization with its "unity" and "uniform discipline" 
and accused reformists of attempting "to reduce the revolutionary 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 109 

proletarian party to the level of ordinary bourgeois parties." The 
deviating opinions of American Communists such as John Gates and 
witness A. B. Magil were quoted with derision by the Soviet Com- 
munists, who had no hesitation in quoting out of context or name- 
calling in their effort to quell the revolt in the American Communist 
Party. The majority of American leaders and their adherents during 
this period of confhet were "anti-Marxist," "unstable elements," and 
"unhealthy" forces in Soviet diatribes. 

An interesting addition to this Soviet intervention, the committee 
hearings show, was the effort of French Communist leader Jacques 
Duclos to promote a victory for Fosterite forces. The ouster of 
American Communist chief Earl Browder in 1945 had been precipi- 
tated by a condemnation from Duclos, then acting as Stalin's inter- 
mediary. Duclos' most recent service for the Kremlin took the form 
of two sharp messages to the 16th National Convention of the Com- 
munist Party, USA, held m February 1957. Duclos warned Ameri- 
can Communists that changes proposed by reformist elements in- 
volved "dangerous departures" from proper Communist principles of 
party organization exemplified by the Soviet Communist Party. 
Although National Chairman William Z. Foster appealed to other 
party leaders to heed the words of Moscow and Duclos, the party 
convention did nothing to resolve the internal struggle. A "collec- 
tive leadership" body, representative of the main contending factions, 
was installed at the 16th National Convention, in striking similarity to 
the collective leadership then prevailing in the Soviet Union while 
Khrushchev vied with other Soviet Communists for supreme power. 

The power struggle within the Communist Party, USA, continued 
unabated for another year — featured, as the committee hearings 
demonstrate, by intrigues among various factions of American Com- 
munists, each seeking undisputed domination of the party organiza- 
tion, together with a continuing barrage of Soviet interventionist 
declarations. 

In November 1957, Khrushchev, who had finally attained domi- 
nance over the Soviet Government, called representatives of 65 
Communist parties throughout the world to Moscow. Declarations 
signed as a result of this meeting called for, and recognized the neces- 
sity for, unity of the international Communist movement under 
Soviet leadership and condemned Communists who would deviate from 
the Soviet norm. 

The effect on the Communist Party, USA, a majority of whose 
leaders now stood accused of heresy by the international Communist 
movement, is recorded in the committee's hearings. As leaders of 
the main contending factions themselves admitted, the international 
Communist declarations at Moscow played a key role in enabling the 
abjectly pro-Soviet faction of American Communists to reorganize 
and assume undisputed control of the top party bodies in February 
1958. The resolution of the U.S. party power struggle in Moscow's 
favor was further assisted by the intrigues of the pro-Soviet faction 
and by continuing resignations of Communists who despaired of any 
change in the traditional party operation. 

A new National Executive Committee of the CPUSA (eight of the 
nine members of which had long been identified as unwavering sup- 
porters of Soviet Communist leadership) was installed. Almost 
immediately, this new group adopted a public statement aligning the 



110 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

party organization in America with the policies of the world's Com- 
munist parties enunciated at Moscow in November 1957. 

Interrogation of witnesses Homer Chase and Alexander Bittelman 
dealt with recent disciplinary actions by the Communist Party leader- 
ship and demonstrated that the party's present operation is as 
totalitarian and as Soviet-oriented as it was in Stalin's day. 

Recent Communist Disciplinary Cases 

In 1960, Homer B. Chase served as "organizer" (the top official) of 
the New England District of the Communist Party, USA, and held 
membership on the party's National Committee. In October of the 
same year, the National Secretariat — a five-man body then represent- 
ing the pinnacle of leadership in the American party organization — 
circulated a letter among party members within the New England 
District, charging Chase with opposition to party "policy" and 
announcing that action against him would be on the agenda of the 
next meeting of the National Committee. The letter demanded that 
New England Communists repudiate Chase and take steps to estabhsh 
a new district leadership. Further, the National Secretariat warned 
Communists in the New England District that any actions taken in 
support of Mr. Chase violated the party's organizational principles 
of "democratic centralism" and "Party discipline." Other significant 
observations were made in the letter regarding party procedure 
following the termination of the power struggle in 1958: 

During the past few years, our party has successfully 
v/eathered the most severe crisis in its history. It has * * * 
defeated the onslaught of revisionism, as well as the assaults 
of the ultra-left dogmatists from within its ranks. 

In these struggles the 17th National Convention [1959] 
was a major landmark, registering an impressive advance 
toward the unification of the Party. This was expressed in 
Comrade Gus Hall's concluding remarks in these words: 
"Above all — and of crucial importance — emerging from the 
17th Convention is the fact that we have one party, one 
policy and one direction. . . . The policy, line and direc- 
tion set forth at this convention will be the policy, line and 
direction for the whole Party, for every member, including 
national committee members and officers." 

HH * :lli: * * * * 

We are now at a point where the looseness of the past on 
policy questions, growing out of the severe ideological 
struggles through which we have passed, can no longer be 
tolerated. Today the Party must demand that every leading 
comrade, without exception, adhere to and fight for the 
Party's policies * * *. 

A lengthy bill of particulars on Mr. Chase's differences with pre- 
vailing party "policy" included the charge that he was "guilty of 
irresponsible anti-Soviet statements." His opposition to various 
party tactics — such as Communist participation in the 1960 electoral 
campaign— was also cited as an example of what the party leadership 
labeled as "sectarian" or "ultra-left dogmatist" deviations. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 HI 

Mr. Chase was subsequently ousted from leadership of the party's 
New England District. His National Committee membership was 
also revoked at a meeting of that committee in January 1961. When 
Mr. Chase was interrogated by the committee on this documented 
record of party disciplinary action, he refused to discuss his relations 
with the Communist Party on constitutional grounds. Mr. Chase's 
volubility with respect to his personal views, however, was instructive 
in light of the response they had provoked from the Communist Party 
leadership. Mr. Chase testified, for example, that he had "alwaj^s 
regarded Stalin as an outstanding humanist"; that Khrushchev's 
attacks on the late dictator were unjustified and against the interests 
of the working class; and "the outstanding Marxist-Leninist" is the 
Chinese Communist leader, Mao Tse-tung." 

Another disciplinary case acted upon at the January 1961 meeting 
of the Communist Party's National Committee was that of Alexander 
Bittclman, for years the party's leading spokesman on matters of 
Communist theory. Although Mr. Bittelman was also one of the 
founders of the Communist Party, USA, and long an occupant of high 
national office, the present party leadership decided to throw him 
out of the organization he had served for more than 41 years. The 
record of events leading up to the expulsion of Mr. Bittelman from 
the party exposes the falsity of a great many Communist propaganda 
claims regarding the party organization, including the alleged dis- 
avowal of force and violence in achieving its objectives. 

Alexander Bittelman was among those American Communists who, 
to quote his OAvn words, took "a fresh look" at the theory and practice 
of Communists after Kl:irushchev embarked on his de-Stalinization 
campaign in 1956. In October 1957, the Daily Worker — then under 
the editorship of the reformist John Gates — published a series of 12 
articles by j\Ir. Bittelman, in which he discussed the prevailing party 
crisis, re-examined various Communist theoretical and programmatic 
concepts, and offered his proposals for a peculiarly "American road 
to socialism." He suggested, for example, that American Communists 
strive for a new, intermediate goal of a "welfare state," which would 
precede an eventual "peaceful and constitutional transition" to a 
Communist system of government in this Nation. 

William Z. Foster immediately took up the cudgels against Bittel- 
man, accusing him of "revisionism" — the type of deviation from 
"true" Marxism-Leninism which Foster and the Soviet Communists 
were also attributing to the majority leadership of the Communist 
Party, USA, at this time. In 1958, following the takeover of party 
leadership by rigidly Moscow-oriented Communists, Mr. Bittelman's 
views were publicly condemned by fellow members of an important 
cornmittee engaged in preparing a draft program for the party's next 
national convention. In 1959, Mr. Bittelman announced plans to 
publish a book he had written on the subject of his "American road 
to socialism." Although the new party leadership threatened him 
Avith dire consequences, the book was released in September 1960. 
The National Secretariat of the party immediately instructed Mr. 
Bittelman's local party club to terminate his membership; the club 
obeyed in November 1960; and the action was affirmed by the Na- 
tional Committee in January 1961. 

Mr. Bittelman, appearing under subpena in the committee hear- 
ings, refused on constitutional grounds to answer all committee ques- 



112 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

tions dealing with the Communist Party and his own participation 
therein. However, documents introduced in the course of the com- 
mittee's interrogation of the witness included the statement of charges 
by which the party's National Secretariat justified the expulsion of 
Mr. Bittelman. The Secretariat accused him of violation of the 
"Party principles of democratic centralism," "insistent defiance of 
Party discipline," and advocacy of "views in dhect opposition to the 
very principles of the organization which he joined to uphold." In 
addition to illustrating the autocratic nature of the party organiza- 
tion, this disciplinary case demonstrates the fate of a Communist 
theory and program "made in America" and gives the lie to such 
statements in the party constitution that: "The Communist Party 
of the United States is an American working-class political organiza- 
tion" which advocates "a peaceful, democratic road to socialism" and 
seeks the "establishment of socialism by the free and democratic 
choice of a majority of the people." 

What authority did the National Secretariat of the Communist 
Party, USA, rely on to prove that Alexander Bittelman was guilty of 
"departure from Marxism-Leninism," "bourgeois individualism," and 
other heresies? The Secretariat cited from the New Soviet textbook. 
Fundamentals oj Marxism-Leninism, published in 1959 for the stated 
purpose of providing a "scientifically sound, though popular, elucida- 
tion of the Marxist-Leninist teaching" which the Soviet editors re- 
minded were "not a dogma but a guide to action." The National 
Secretariat quoted from the Soviet text to show that Mr. Bittelman 
was guilty of "reformist and revisionist" deviation in foreseeing an 
"evolving" of capitalism into communism, rather than "a clear-cut 
program of decisive struggle against the capitalist monopolise * * * 
for the overthrow of the dictatorship of a handful of monopolist 
aristocracy." 

It should be known that the same Soviet text, which obviously 
represents another Khrushchev effort to replace Stalin as the infallible 
authority in the international Communist movement, also states: 

Of course, it would be wrong to think that power can be 
won by parliamentary means on any election day. Only 
reformists who are convinced that profound social changes 
are decided by a mere vote could believe this. Marxists- 
Leninists do not have so primitive a conception of the coming 
of the working class to power tlirough the parliament. 

and 

Wherever the reactionary bom*geoisie has a strong arm}^ 
and police force at its disposal, the working class will en- 
counter fierce resistance. There can be no doubt that in a 
number of capitalist countries the overthrow of the bourgeois 
dictatorship will inevitably take place through an armed 
class struggle. 

As the committee hearings show, such ominous warnings were also 
made in Khrushchev's speeches downgrading Stalin in 1956 and in 
many subsequent Soviet declarations seeking to restore the disciplined 
unity of American Communists under Soviet leadership. 



CHAPTER III 

INFORMATION AND REPORTS COMPILED TO ASSIST THE 
CONGRESS IN ITS LEGISLATIVE DELIBERATIONS 

RULES OF PROCEDURE 

The committee's Rules of Procedure, first codified and published in 
1953, were revised and reprinted in 1961. 

Early in the year, the chairman appointed a Subcommittee on 
Rules, consisting of Mr. Doyle (chairman), Mr. Tuck, and Mr. 
Johansen. In reviewing and revising the rules, the subcommittee 
not only drew upon the extensive experience of its members, but 
called upon all Members of the House to contribute suggestions on 
procedures for refining the operating procedures of the Committee on 
Un-American Activities. On two occasions, the subcommittee chair- 
man made personal appeals on the floor of the House for his colleagues 
to take advantage of the subcommittee's invitation. 

After the revised rules were printed, a copy was distributed to each 
Member of the House. 

In a statement announcing the publication of the revised rules, 
Mr. Walter said that several Members of the House had responded to 
Mr. Doyle's invitation by submitting suggestions to the subcommittee, 
which had given them careful consideration. He also noted that a 
number of other Congressmen had expressed satisfaction with the 
procedures which the Committee on Un-American Activities had been 
following in the past. In the com'se of his statement, Mr. Walter said : 

We take pride in the committee rules hitherto promulgated 
and now revised, and note that this committee was the first 
to adopt written Rules of Procedure, the substance of which 
were in fact, some years ago, incorporated within Rule XI of 
the House. Of course, it will be understood that no set of 
rules can cover every conceivable situation that might arise 
in the course of the many and varied investigations mider- 
taken by this committee. The rules which we publish today, 
in a sense, form a constitutional framework within which we 
can effectively pursue our work. A disciplined judgment, 
applied within the framework of these rules, will be the safe- 
guard for the rights and mterests of those who may become 
involved in this necessary work. * * * 

SUPPLEMENT TO CUMULATIVE INDEX 

A much needed supplementary cumulative index was printed in 
1961, listing every hearing, report, and consultation published by the 
committee during the period 1955-1960, as well as the 14,312 individ- 
uals, 2,427 organizations, and 892 publications mentioned m them. 
The supplement reveals that dm-ing the 84th, 85th, and 86th Con- 

113 



114 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

gresses, the committee published 99 hearings or parts of hearings and 
67 reports and consultations or parts thereof. 

In addition to the 14,312 persons Hsted in the supplementary 
index, hundreds of aliases attributed to many of these persons are 
included. The 2,427 figure for organizations does not include several 
thousands of their subsidiaries and affiliated groups which are listed 
in the index. There are, for example, 732 separate subdivisions and 
units listed in the index under "Communist Party of the United 
States of America," although only the party itself is included in the 
2,427 figure. 

The mere fact that a name appears in the supplementary index, in 
itself, means nothing — favorable or unfavorable — about the indi- 
vidual, organization, or publication listed. The supplement includes 
the names of such persons as President Kennedy, former President 
Eisenhower — and Stalin and Lenin; such organizations as the American 
Legion, the Democratic and Republican Parties, and the Communist 
Party of Italy; and such publications as The Worker and the Chicago 
Tribune. The only way to determine under what circumstances an 
individual, organization, or publication was mentioned by or before 
the committee would be to consult the original hearing or report in 
which the name appears. 

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE FILM "OPERATION ABOLITION" 

The Annual Report for 1960 described at length the Communist- 
inspired riots and demonstrations against the committee's hearings 
held May 12-14, 1960, in San Francisco, California. On-the-scene 
newsfilms of the riots and hearings were subpenaed by the committee 
from San Francisco television stations KRON and KPIX and used 
by Washington Video Productions, Inc., in the preparation of a doc- 
umentary motion picture entitled "Operation Abolition." 

The film "Operation Abolition" not only served as an official exhibit 
in a committee report to Congress on the need for legislation against 
misconduct by witnesses and spectators whose purpose is to thwart 
or impede proper inquiries by committees of Congress, but also, 
through popular public demand, became perhaps the most widely 
viewed non-Hollywood motion picture of the year. 

During the latter part of 1960 and throughout 1961, as the docu- 
mentary became more and more sought after by the American people, 
there arose a militant minority movement to discredit both the film 
"Operation Abolition" and the committee for having authorized its 
production. In order to wage this campaign eflectively, film dissenters 
had to widen their attack to include such other targets as the Federal 
Bm'eau of Investigation, San Francisco law enforcem.ent agencies, the 
mayor of San Francisco, and a judge of that city — all of whom sup- 
ported the film's main theme that the San Francisco riots were 
Communist-inspired. 

The Communist Party's long-standing opposition to, and hatred for, 
the committee is well known. Therefore, having been caught by 
cameras in the act of inciting violence against it in San Francisco, it 
was neither surprising nor unexpected that the party and those or- 
ganizations and individuals who, knowingly or unwittingly, have been 
manipulated by the Reds in the past began screaming "foul" as millions 
throughout the Nation were viewing the committee film "Operation 
Abofition." 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 115 

It was surprising, however — and also a serious threat to the dis- 
semination of the truth about internal subversion — when many 
irresponsible and uninformed persons and organizations began echoing 
the Communists' flagrantly untruthful attacks on the film. Authors 
of the attacks, in addition to denying that the riots were Communist- 
inspired, charged that "Operation Abolition" contained numerous 
"distortions" and was, as some critics said, a "forgery by film." As 
a result, doubts about the integrity of the committee were raised 
even in some quarters normally undisturbed by such propaganda. 
Members of Congress and the committee received an avalanche of 
mail requesting the truth about the film. 

In order to set the record straight for Members of the House and the 
American people, the committee made an extensive study of all the 
known charges against the film "Operation Abolition." After 
eliminating those of such obvious falsity that no reply to them was 
called for, the committee found that there were 29 claims that might 
seem plausible to reasonable persons if they were not equipped with the 
facts by which to judge them. Finally, the committee made an 
exhaustive analysis of the evidence that would either uphold or refute 
these 29 claims. 

The committee published both the charges and the facts relating 
to them in a two-part report entitled "The Truth About the Film 
'Operation Abolition.' " Part 1, which dealt almost exclusively with 
the most serious of all charges — that the San Francisco riots were not 
Communist-inspired — was published on October 5, 1961. The re- 
maining 28 charges were answered in Part 2, released December 27, 
1961. 

Part 1 

"Communist Target — Youth," an official report by FBI Director 
J. Edgar Hoover, was cited as primary evidence that the San Fran- 
cisco riots were conceived, organized, and fomented by the Communist 
Party. The committee pointed out that Mr. Hoover not only identi- 
fied Communists who played an active role in the riots and demon- 
strations, but also reported the places and dates of party meetings 
where the operation was planned; told of the decisions reached at 
these meetings; and named Communist Party members and officials 
who had taken part in them. 

Furthermore, he reported in detail how Communist Party members 
in the San Francisco area contacted, and won the support of, some 
student groups on college campuses, circulated petitions against the 
hearings, paid for anti-committee advertisements in newspapers and 
on radio, and conducted a massive telephone campaign to assure a 
large turnout for anti-hearing demonstrations. The FBI director — 
who is in a better position to know the truth about Communist 
activities than any other non-Communist in the country^stated that 
this overall operation was in keeping with the main political resolution 
adopted at the Communist Party's 17th National Convention (New 
York City, December 1959), which called upon all Communists to 
"abohsh the witchhunting House Un-American Activities Committee." 

The committee report quoted from a prefatory statement in "Com- 
munist Target — Youth," in which Mr. Hoover fully supported the 



116 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

committee's reason for documenting "Operation Abolition" on film. 
Mr. Hoover said — 

it is vitally important to set the record straight on the extent 
to which Communists were responsible for the disgraceful 
and riotous conditions which prevailed during the HCUA 
hearings. 

Part 1 quoted several other official statements by Mr. Hoover in 
which he consistently and unequivocally maintained that the San 
Francisco riots were the end product of Communist planning and 
direction. 

The first part of "The Truth About the Film 'Operation Abolition' " 
draws upon the conclusions of numerous other public officials and 
organizations, as well as private groups and individuals, to illustrate 
the widespread and responsible support of the film's main theme. A 
summary of the sources and the nature of their support follows: 

The California Senate Fact-Finding Subcommittee on Un-American 
Activities, after "a careful investigation of the San Francisco riots," 
concluded: 

The [Communist Party] plan was first to wage an inten- 
sive and prolonged propaganda campaign to make certain 
that large numbers of non-Communists, already conditioned 
against the Committee, would be present at the hearings, 
and then to provoke a carefully planned series of incidents 
that would turn the spectators into an enraged mob. Key 
Communists were to act openly * * *. Others were to 
operate inconspicuously: nudging, exhorting, prodding and 
otherwise inciting the crowd to violence. 

San Francisco Mayor George Christopher, an eyewitness to the 
demonstrations, said: 

Known Communists, and I repeat this emphatically, known 
Communists were in the lead of this demonstration. The 
students were dupes who joined some of these causers of 
agitation believing it is an innocent and harmless expression 
of civil liberties * * *. 

Municipal Court Judge Albert A. Axelrod, although he dismissed 
charges against more than three score of the rioters on June 1, 1960, 
in the hope that they had learned their lesson and could avoid having 
their futures impaired by records of conviction, nevertheless con- 
cluded — 

they chose the wrong means to accomplish their purpose and 
let themselves become victims of those who profit by creating 
unrest, riots, and the type of conduct which is outlawed by 
the penal code sections I have quoted. 

And, on January 5, 1961, Judge Axelrod wrote to an Illinois State 
senator that "it was and still is my opinion that the riots were inspired 
by members of subversive groups * * *." 

Sheriff Matthew C. Carberiy, who was on duty at the San Francisco 
City Hall during the committee hearings, subsequentl}'' told the editor 
of the Indianapolis News that: 

The people stirring the students up, and bringing them to 
an emotional pitch, were well-known Communists in the San 
Francisco area. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 117 

Senator Strom Thurmond (D.-S.C.) stated on the Senate floor on 
July 31, 1961: 

I was there, and I saw it in person, with my own eyes; and 
after that I stated that I only wished that every American 
could have been in San Francisco and could have seen what I 
saw there. It reminded me of a bunch of howling wolves — 
to see these Communists and Communist-led people, with 
thwarted minds, and misled people — college professors, 
students, and others being led by Communists and being 
sucked into that movement, going along and committing the 
acts they did, in protest against the very fine and patriotic 
work of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. 

A former undercover operative for the FBI testified at the commit- 
tee's San Francisco hearings and said that, while serving in the Com- 
munist Party for the FBI, he had been trained to participate in the 
types of riots and demonstrations then taking place in that city. He 
also correctly predicted that, when exposed, the Communists would 
countercharge that the demonstrations had begun peacefully and that 
it was police brutality which caused the riots. 

After the hearings were concluded, seven clergymen who had been 
eyewitnesses to the agitation inside the hearing room released a state- 
ment in which they said : 

We watched a national committeeman for the Party line up 
a dozen Communists near the railing and throw every sneer, 
invective, abusive language, vile profanity, and fiendish 
charge at the Congressmen they could conceive. 

Part 1 of "The Truth About the Film 'Operation Abolition' " lists 
numerous Communists who were in the hearing room, in the rotunda 
outside the hearing room, and among the demonstrators outside City 
Hall. It lists, as contributing in a prominent way to the riots and 
demonstrations, six organizations which are either controlled or have 
been influenced by the Communist Party. 

In short, there is such complete evidence in Part 1 of the report 
that the San Francisco riots were Communist-inspired that it would 
seem unlikely any reasonable — ^and informed — ^American could believe 
to the contrary. 

Part 2 

The second part of "The Truth About the Film 'Operation Aboli- 
tion' " replies to 28 other charges against the film. The claims and 
the facts relating to them are summarized as follows: 

Claim — San Francisco Municipal Court Judge Albert A. Axelrod, 
at the time he dismissed charges against those arrested for rioting, 
implied that the riots were not Communist-inspired. 

Fact — Judge Axelrod actually implied, at the time of the dismissal, 
that the riots were Communist-inspired and, on December 24, 1960, 
said, "I very definitely agree with the view of FBI Director J. Edgar 
Hoover that the City Hall riot last May 13 was instigated by Commu- 
nist subversives." 

Claim — Matthew Carberry, the sheriff of San Francisco, has 
stated: "There was no act of physical aggression on the part of the 
students." 



118 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Fad — The source of this charge was an article by Paul Jacobs in 
The Reporter magazine of November 24, 1960. On December 6, 1960, 
Sheriff Carberry said that he had been at lunch at the time the riots 
broke out and would not have been in a position to make the statement 
attributed to him by Jacobs. Accordingly, the sheriff stated: "I did 
not make that statement." Jacobs subsequently aclaiowledged in a 
letter to The Reporter that he had misquoted the San Francisco 
sheriff. 

Claim — An investigator for the committee admitted that the film 
contained "distortions." 

Fact — This claim stemmed from a television panel discussion of the 
film "Operation Abolition" on "The Tom Duggan Show" on August 9, 
1960, over Station KCOP-TV, Los Angeles, in which William A. 
Wheeler, committee investigator, was a participant. Burton White, 
representing the Bay Area Student Committee for the Abolition of the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities, charged that "the film 
does have inaccuracies. * * * Does have distortions." Mr. White 
paused after charging inaccuracies, at which time Mr. Wheeler began 
his reply: "And, we have admitted that. Let us go to another 
subject." Mr. White and other anti-committee persons have claimed 
that, at that point, Mr. \Vheeler admitted the film contained distor- 
tions, which he obviously did not. Earlier in the conversation, Mr. 
Wheeler had flatly denied the "distortion" charge by saying, "I 
dispute it wholeheartedly," 

Claim — The committee was in recess during the May 12 demonstra- 
tion. 

Fact — The official transcript of the hearings and the film itself prove 
that the committee was very much in session — and attempting to 
conduct its business — during that demonstration. 

Claim — The film does not show the May 13 demonstrators' attack 
on the barricades outside the hearing room which, the film commen- 
tary claims, justified the police use of fire hoses. This claim implies 
that no such attack was made. 

Fact — There were no television cameramen or news photographers 
on the scene at the time this incident suddenly occurred. However, 
the San Francisco police, the Associated Press, and San Francisco 
newspapers — which had representatives on the scene — all reported 
that the attack occurred. There is no doubt that it did. 

Claim — The student demonstrators were not guilty of violence. 

Fact — In addition to the sources cited in the answer to the previous 
claim, others, including the University of California newspaper, 
reported that violence had occurred. Significantly, the American 
Civil Liberties Union, which has frequently aligned itself with leftist 
causes and individuals, refused to defend those arrested as a result 
of the rioting. 

Claim — The film suppresses scenes of police brutality. 

Fact — Reporters, clergymen, and committee staff members who 
have reviewed the entire original film footage of the riots taken by 
television stations KPIX and KRON agree that no scenes of significant 
police action were deleted from the documentary "Operation Aboli- 
tion." 

Claim — The film distorts the meaning of an article on the front page 
of the May 12, 1960 (opening day of the hearings), Daily Californian, 
the University of California student newspaper. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 119 

Fact — The film narration accui'ately states that the article reported 
a call from the Student Committee for Civil Liberties for students to 
attend the hearings and "laugh out loud in the hearings when things 
get ridiculous." Eyewitnesses reported that copies of this article 
were circulated among the hearing room spectators and that many 
persons followed the SCCL's instructions. 

Claim — The poHce did not warn the demonstrators to disperse 
before turning the fire hoses on them. 

Fact — J. Edgar Hoover and reporters for three major newspapers 
said that, before the hoses were turned on, the sheriff repeatedly 
pleaded with the demonstrators not to cause a disturbance, but that 
all of liis pleas were ignored. 

CZam— The film distorts by implying that only the Communist 
press charged police brutality. 

Fact — The film narration states that the Communist and pro- 
Communist press charge police brutality. The fact that a few other 
newspapers picked up this claim is irrelevant to the purpose of the 
film, which is to portray the Communist role in the San Francisco 
demonstrations and riots. Mr. Hoover reported that the charge of 
pohce brutality was part of the prearranged plan adopted by the 
Communists. The charge was predicted in advance by a former 
Communist Party member and FBI undercover operative. 

Claim — -The film does not explain that the May 12 demonstration 
was for the pm'pose of presenting a petition to Congress. 

Fact — The petition plea was a gimmick seized upon by hard-core 
Communists to foment disorder in the hearing room. Petitions are 
not presented to a subcommittee of Congress. They are normally 
presented to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House. 
Furthermore, no Members of Congress could be expected to accept a 
petition in an atmosphere of coercion. 

Claim — The film distorts by implying that "We Shall Not Be 
Moved," originally a religious spiritual and sung by the demonstra- 
tors, is a Communist song. 

Fact — A Gospel hymn used widely in the South in the latter part 
of the 19th Century was entitled "I Shall Not Be Moved." In the 
early thirties, however, Communist, Socialist, and some labor groups 
changed the initial pronoun to "We" and used it for their own special 
purposes. "We Shall Not Be Moved" has been published in several 
Communist Party song books. 

Claim — The film distorts by saying that Harry Bridges was escorted 
out of the City Hall just before the riots broke out. 

Fact — This is an error in the film which the committee has admitted 
from the time it was first pointed out. Bridges was escorted out of 
City Hall after the riots. A distortion, as distinguished from an 
error, is a deliberate, calculated attempt to mislead or present a false 
account. The committee in no way attempted to do this. The fact 
that Bridges put in an appearance at this Communist-inspired activity 
speaks for itself. 

Claim — By splicing together unrelated fihn sequences, "Operation 
Abolition" creates the false impression that students booed and jeered 
police attempts to restore and maintain order. 

Fact — As previously mentioned, the committee had no film of the 
chaos and rioting in the rotunda outside the hearing room. In order 
to illustrate what occurred there, a film sequence of jeering students 

21-204—63 9 



120 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

taken at a different time in a different place was used. The main 
fact is that Mr. Hoover, Mayor Christopher, the Associated Press, 
and San Francisco newspapers all reported that the demonstrators 
in the rotunda mocked, booed, and jeered authorities who tried to 
preserve order. 

Claim — By splicing together out-of-sequence events which took 
place at different hours and on different days, the film conveys a 
distorted impression that such events were causally related or related 
in time. 

Fact — Again, lack of film footage of all events on each day of the 
hearings made it necessary to use out-of-sequence film in order to 
produce an accurate motion picture documentary of the San Fran- 
cisco riots. A jeering, ill-mannered demonstrator is a jeering, ill- 
mannered demonstrator no matter what day of the week or hour of 
the day he performs. The important fact is that all the film used 
was taken from the overall Communist-inspired, anti-committee opera- 
tion. Even more important is the fact that the committee has ample 
proof that every event portrayed by an out-of-sequence section of 
film did actually occur as illustrated by the substituted film. As a 
matter of fact, although the film makes no such claim, there was a 
causal relationship among all the demonstrations against the com- 
mittee in San Francisco — each event was part of the whole Com- 
munist Party plan to accelerate its efforts to have the committee 
abolished. 

Claim — The film does not show that friendly witnesses were al- 
lowed to read statements before the committee, while uncooperative 
witnesses were denied this right. 

Fa^t — Committee rules require prepared statements to be submitted 
in advance of hearings so that members may determine if they are 
pertinent to the inquiry. No friendly witnesses read statements in 
the San Francisco hearings. As a matter of fact, the only three wit- 
nesses the film shows were all hostUe to the committee, and one of 
them, Douglas Wachter, was permitted to read a prepared statement, 
despite the fact it had not been submitted in advance. 

Claim — The film fails to tell viewers about organizations which 
protested the committee hearings. 

Fact — The film identifies four organizations which protested the 
hearings, so the claim is false. On the other hand, the film does not 
identify a single one of the far more numerous organizations which 
supported the hearings. The naming of organizations supporting or 
opposing the hearings was not relevant to the purposes of the film, 
namely, to portray communism in action and to present to Congress 
evidence of the need for legislation to control the conduct of witnesses 
and spectators at congressional committee hearings. 

Claim — The film faUs to tell about the "white cards" and how they 
were used to keep students from knowing what was going on in the 
hearing room. The film distorts the proportion of friendly and 
hostile spectators in the hearing room on Friday, May 13. 

Fact — For over a dozen years the committee has used the "white 
card" system of issuing hearing passes to civic, veteran, patriotic, 
religious, police, and security groups; and this is the first time such an 
objection has been raised. The system has been in effect for two 
reasons: (1) to give non-Communists an opportunity to attend the 
hearings (Communist practice has been to pack the hearing rooms 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 121 

early to keep non-Communists out), and (2) thereby assure some 
balance in the make-up of the spectators and a reasonable possibility 
of maintaining order in the hearing room. 

The film narrator states that nearly 100 passes had been issued by 
the committee. Thirty passes (each good for the admission of a group 
of people) were issued to students at Stanford University. Further- 
more, after all seats in the hearing room had been filled, police admitted 
an additional 100 to 140 persons (mostly students) who stood along 
the walls and in the aisles. As it turned out, they caused so much 
commotion that the practice of admitting standees had to be discon- 
tinued the following session. The committee's contention that a 
large proportion of the spectator crowd was made up of persons 
hostile to the committee is based on the number of passes issued by 
the committee and the total number of spectators present as estimated 
by the San Francisco police. 

Claim — The film fails to reveal that the students had a justified 
grievance because, a year earlier, the committee had subpenaed about 
100 teachers for hearings, released their names to the press, and then 
caUed off the hearings without giving the teachers a chance to clear 
themselves. 

Fact — This multiple claim is completely false. Proposed committee 
hearings, in which some members of the teaching profession in Cali- 
fornia would be called, were announced on June 5, 1959, for later that 
month. These teachers were subpenaed. Pressing business forced 
delays in those hearings. Eventually, at the suggestion of the Cali- 
fornia Teachers Association, which expressed a desire for the teachers 
in question to be investigated by their local school boards, the hearings 
were canceled. At no time did the committee release the names of 
the subpenaed teachers, except in confidence to the school boards 
concerned, although some were somehow learned and published by 
the press. The committee would be willing to provide a hearing to 
any subpenaed teacher who wished to "clear" himself, but no such 
request has ever been received by the committee. 

Claim — The film edits and falsifies the San Francisco testimony of 
William Mandel. 

Fact — Mandel's testimony was edited to include only that portion 
necessary to make the point which preceded it in the film narration: 
that defiance by witnesses and their attorneys is one of the tactics 
used against the committee by the Communists. No other Mandel 
testimony was required to make the point intended. 

Claim — The film says Vernon Bown is a Communist, although the 
committee's hearings in San Francisco indicated that he is not. 
The film says that Bown was one of the "Louisville Seven" charged 
with sedition in 1954, but does not say he was acquitted. 

Fact — Although Bown was unwillingly expelled from the Com- 
munist Party in 1959, J. Edgar Hoover's report shows that he was 
clearly under the discipline of the party as it prepared its San Francisco 
operation against the committee. Bown took the fifth amendment 
about current party membership before the committee during the 
San Francisco hearings. The film does not say that Bown is a member 
of the Communist Party, but rather that he is a Communist. His 
submission to direction by the party indicates this to be true. Tech- 
nical membership is not the only qualification for being dedicated to 
communism. 



122 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

Bown was not acquitted of the sedition charge made against him 
in Kentucky. His case had to be dropped when the Supreme Court 
invahdated all State sedition laws in the Nelson case. 

Claim — The film "Operation Abolition" is a highly edited propa- 
ganda film. 

Fact — The film did receive customary editing in the interests of 
eliminating repetition and in holding it to a reasonable length. It is 
propaganda in the sense that it is a planned effort to present to 
Congress and the American people factual information about how, in 
one instance, Commimist-directed activity disrupted and impeded 
congressional proceedings. It is not propaganda in the sense nor- 
mally applied to Communist efforts to sell a specious idea or "line" 
by half-truths, falsehoods, and distortions. 

Claim — The film does not give screen credits because its producers 
are reluctant to identify themselves, desiring to avoid responsibility 
for the film's distortions. 

Fact — The film was produced by the committee for the purpose of 
submitting it as an official exhibit to Congress. As such, the com- 
mittee was its authority, not the producer. The committee has 
never concealed the fact the film was produced by Washington Video 
Productions, Inc. 

Claim — The committee "confiscated" or "seized" the films of the 
riots from San Francisco television stations and did not pay for them. 

Fact — Television stations KRON and KPIX were willing to provide 
the committee with their films; the committee issued subpenas to the 
stations to protect them from any unforeseen legal problems. The 
films were returned to the stations as soon as the committee had copies 
made of portions of them. 

Claim — The film was turned over to a commercial firm which is 
selling it for profit. 

Fact — Washington Video Productions, Inc., offered to produce 
the copy of the film the committee planned to submit to Congress at 
no cost to the committee and to produce some extra copies which might 
be sold to reimburse the firm for the production costs. Much greater 
demand for the film than had been anticipated developed, and a profit 
on it was realized. From the profit, however, a new shortened version 
suitable for television presentation was made. Washington Video 
has never charged the normal royalty for showings of the film on 
television stations. 

Claim — The acquittal of Robert Meisenbach, University of Cali- 
fornia student charged with clubbing a policeman during the riots, 
proves that the film "Operation Abolition" is a fraud and vindicates 
all the student rioters. 

Fact — The acquittal (or conviction, if that had been the case) of 
Meisenbach of an assault charge had no bearing on the theme of the 
film "Operation Abolition" — that the San Francisco riots were Com- 
munist-inspired. It in no way removed the fact that he and the other 
student rioters were dupes of the Communists, The only question 
at issue in the Meisenbach trial was whether he had attacked a 
policeman. 

Claim — A "fair" and "objective" 32-page report by the National 
Council of Chm'ches proves that the film completely distorts the facts 
surrounding the 1960 San Fra.ncisco hearings. 



ANNUAL REPORT TOR THE YEAR 1961 123 

Fact — The NCC report is heavily slanted in favor of the opinions 
of persons so biased against the committee that they are incapable 
of making impartial judgments about the San Francisco riots. One 
"authority" quoted in the NCC report attacked the fJm even though 
he had never seen it, had not read J. Edgar Hoover's report on the 
riots, and had not been an eyewitness to the San Francisco hearings. 
In fact, the NCC report all but ignores the fact that rioting occurred 
at the San Francisco hearings. 

Claim — The film implies that all persons who oppose the committee 
are dupes of the Communists. 

Fact — There are five instances in the film narration when the word 
"dupe" or variations of it are used. In each case, it is directed at a 
specific group of people who, by their unwitting actions, have shown 
themselves to be dupes of the Communists. In no instance is it 
implied or stated that all critics of the committee are dupes of the 
Communists. 

"The Truth About the Film 'Operation Abolition'" concludes that 
the film has squarely and fairly met the standards of a documentary, 
as defined by Dr. Kichard D. McCann, assistant professor of cinema 
at the University of California in Los Angeles. Dr. McCann said: 

Documentary film insists not on an actual reproduction 
of the entire event, but on choosing the significant events 
that represent truth. 

Furthermore, the committee report concludes that the film has 
alerted millions of Americans to the serious threat of communism and, 
because of this. Communists and their dupes have gone all out to dis- 
credit and undermine the effectiveness of the film "Operation 
Abolition." 

GUIDE TO SUBVERSIVE ORGANIZATIONS AND PUBLICATIONS 

A new edition of the committee's Guide to Subversive Organizations 
and Publications — the first revision since January 2, 1957 — was 
released on December 1, 1961. 

The Guide is essentially a compilation of organizations, projects, 
and publications which have been declared Communist or Communist- 
front enterprises in official statements of Federal legislative and 
executive authorities and by various State and Territorial investigating 
committees. Approximately 200 organizations and projects and 44 
publications not in the 1957 edition were included in the new Guide, 
which lists a total of 818 organizations and projects and 147 
publications. 

Each organization and publication listed is accompanied by the 
oflBcial wording and the identification of the authority which charac- 
terized it as communistic. Where a Communist organization, or 
publication has been so designated by more than one official public 
body, all sources are listed. 

The committee cautions users of the Guide not to assume that it 
contains a complete listing of all Communist and Communist-front 
activities and publications in existence in the United States. It lists 
only those which have been officially cited as such. Numerous Com- 
munist fronts, extant and defunct, have never been cited by any 
official source. The committee also emphasizes that the mere listing 
of an organization or publication in the Guide aoes not mean that it 



124 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

is necessarily still functioning. The inclusion of an organization or 
publication in the Guide means that, during the course of formal in- 
vestigations by an appropriate and official Federal, State, or Terri- 
torial body, it (the organization or publication) was found to be or 
to have been a Communist or Communist-front enterprise. 

In addition to the listings mentioned above, the Guide contains 
useful information on bow to identify Communist fronts and current 
Communist strategy in relation to non-Communist groups. Inasmuch 
as the Kremlin has reverted to the "united front" tactic, which 
succeeded so well for the Reds in this country during the 1930's, the 
committee believes the revised edition of the Guide is of particular 
importance at this time. 

THE NEW ROLE OF NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE BODIES IN THE 

COMMUNIST CONSPIRACY 

Bullheaded, unwavering adherence to their official doctrines — even 
when they have been proved wrong — is one of the outstanding char- 
acteristics of Communists. Despite this, there has been considerable 
evidence in recent years that the current Communist attitude toward 
parliaments represents a radical departure from the original teachings 
of Marx and Lenin. 

Communist strategy formerly called for the capture of national 
legislative bodies for the sole purpose of destroying them. Now, 
when conditions make it possible, the Red conspii-ators prefer to 
retain parliaments after capturing them and utilize them for outlaw- 
ing opposition parties and other measures which assist in the consoli- 
dation of their power. By not abolishing parliaments (although 
stripping them of their democratic processes and powers). Communist 
propagandists can brazenly claim that their conspiratorial seizure of 
power has been absolutely "democratic" and legal. 

A boastful account of the role this new parliamentary strategy 
played in the subjugation of Czechoslovakia in 1948 was an important 
acquisition by the committee in 1961. The document consisted of 
two chapters from a book, About the Possible Transition to Socialism 
by Means of the Revolutionary Use of Parliament and the Czechoslovak 
Experience, by Jan Kozak, a Communist member of the Czechoslovak 
National Assembly and historian of the Czechoslovak Communist 
Party. Although existence of the Kozak thesis was first brought to 
the attention of the free world in 1957, the Communist apparatus 
successfully kept its contents an Iron Curtain secret until a copy fell 
into the hands of Radio Free Europe 3 years later. 

In addition to telling the inside story of the techniques used by the 
Reds in their takeover of Czechoslovakia, the author suggests that his 
document can well become the blueprint for Communist revolutions 
in many other nations which thus far have remained unyielding to the 
pressure of the international conspiracy. For its value as a warning 
to America and because it gives a fresh insight into the deceitful and 
treacherous tactics Communists employ to attain their objectives, the 
entire Kozak document was reprinted in a committee publication 
under the title of "The New Role of National Legislative Bodies in the 
Communist Conspiracy." 

Except for the post-revolution role of its Parliament, the 1945-48 
diary of Czechoslovakia reads like the pages from any Communist 
primer on|how to overthrow a democratic government. As Kozak 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 125 

tells it, the Communist Party infiltrated Parliament and high Czech 
Government positions to exert pressm-e "from above," stirred up 
peasants' and workers' groups to create pressure "from below" and 
then used the combination of high-low pressure like the jaws of a 
pincer on the opposition in Parliament. Parliament was converted 
into an "active revolutionary assembly" of such stormy proportions 
that its non-Communist members reluctantly knuckled under to the 
demands of the Communist disrupters. When, after nearly 3 years 
of ever increasing Communist subversion and coercion, 12 anti- 
Communist government ministers resigned in protest, their posts 
were filled by Reds and pro-Reds and the takeover in Czechoslovakia 
was complete. Selected factory guards and "mature" workers were 
armed to secure the revolution. 

In keeping with basic Marxist-Leninist doctrine, the overall revo- 
lutionary program — from which the Communist Party of Czecho- 
slovakia never deviated — included, in Kozak's words, the following 
measures: 

the breaking up of the basic members of the old oppressive 
bourgeois state apparatus and assumption of power by the 
national committees, the formation of a new people's se- 
curity system and army, the prohibition of the revival of 
the pohtical parties which had represented the treacherous 
upper bourgeoisie, a systematic purge of the entire pohtical, 
economic and cultural life of the country * * * the transfer 
of all enemy property * * * to the national administra- 
tion of the new people's authorities * * * [and] unequiv- 
ocal alliance with the Soviet Union * * *. 

One vitally important Kozak admission (which should dispel a 
misconception held by many uninformed persons) is that the Com- 
munist movement is not a reform movement. In fact, he describes 
true reformists — those who earnestly attempt to bring about changes 
for the benefit of an entire society — as the worst kind of enemies of 
the Communists. Communists reason that when reformists work 
toward cooperation among all groups of people, they obstruct the 
Red plan for isolation and annihilation of all elements of society which 
refuse to accept absolute Communist domination. Characteristi- 
cally, however, Kozak advocates an initial, insincere Communist 
alliance with reform groups, not only to utilize their assistance in 
building a united front but also to enable Communists to infiltrate, 
capture, and render them ineffective for any reform purposes after 
they have served their usefulness to the conspiracy. 

While Kozak repeatedly boasts that the Communist takeover in 
Czechoslovakia was carried out "legally" and "peacefully," he never- 
theless confesses that it was the initial presence of Soviet armed forces 
that made the revolution possible. 

In an introduction to the reprinted Kozak document, the committee 
points out that the new revolutionary role of parhament has been 
confirmed by the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the 
Soviet Union in Fundamentals oj Marxism-Leninism (a new 876-page 
book of basic Communist doctrine published in Moscow in 1959), in 
a 1960 statement by 81 of the world's Communist parties; and by 
recent statements and actions of the Communist Party of the United 
States. The introduction calls attention to past Communist sue- 



126 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

cesses in penetrating legislative bodies in this country and reviews the 
revolutionary role of parliament in the Red conquest of Guatemala in 
the early fifties. 

The committee emphasizes, however, that the Communists' new 
attitude toward parliaments in no way means that they have dis- 
carded force and violence as necessary revolutionary tools. Korea, 
Tibet, Vietnam, Hungary, Cuba, and Laos are recent proof that the 
Red conspirators still take to arms to win and maintain power. This 
the Communists admit. 

Fundamentals oj Marxism-Leninism says: 

There can be no doubt that in a number of capitaHst coun- 
tries the overthrow of the bourgeois dictatorship will in- 
evitably take place through an armed class struggle. 

The previously mentioned statement by the 81 Communist parties 

says — 

the possibility of nonpeaceful transition to socialism should 
be borne in mind. Leninism teaches, and experience con- 
firms, that the ruling classes never relinqiush power volun- 
tarily. In this case the degree of bitterness and the forms 
of the class struggle will depend ... on the resistance put 
up by the reactionary circles. . . . 

In a major address on January 6, 1961, Soviet dictator Nikita 
Khrushchev said: 

Marxism-Leninism starts from the premise that the forms 
of the transition to sociahsm may be peaceful and non-peace- 
Jul. It is in the interests of the working class, of the masses, 
that the revolution be carried out in a peaceful way. But in 
the event of the ruling classes resisting the revolution with 
violence and refusing to submit . . . the proletariat will be 
obliged to crush their resistance and launch a resolute civil war. 
[Emphasis added.] 

The committee's introduction to the Kozak document concludes 
with a message from Petr Zenkl, Vice Premier of Czechoslovakia and 
a member of its Parliament at the time of the Communist overthrow, 
who says : 

While democratic Czechoslovakia's defeat was composed 
of many factors, one important element facilitating the 
Communist march to power was our wishjul thinking. We 
believed that Communists could be transformed into part- 
ners in the parliamentary sense. The contrary happened. 
While taking part in Czechoslovalda's Parliament, they suc- 
cessfully followed Kozak's commandment: "not to lose sight 
for a single moment of the aim of a complete socialist over- 
throw." 

But now the secret is out — in Kozak's book of revelation. 
Read it and heed it, gentlemen of the Free World, while you 
are free. For those who cannot remember the past are con- 
demned to repeat it. [Emphasis in original.] 



ANTnjAL REPOBT FOB THE TEAR 1961 127 

EXCERPTS FROM SPEECHES BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS 
CONSTITUTING COMMITTEE VIEWS 

During the course of each year, the committee compiles much im- 
portant background information while reviewing the effectiveness of 
existing security laws and formulating recommendations for new 
legislation. Since it is impossible for the committee to publish reports 
on all new information pertinent to the problem of internal security, 
speechmaking is sometimes the only means by which important com- 
mittee findings are made known to the Congress, the executive branch, 
and the American people. 

This section of the Annual Report consists of excerpts from a num- 
ber of 1961 speeches in which committee members disclosed new data 
on Communist strategy and tactics, discussed the Supreme Court's 
decision on the Internal Security Act, and suggested guidelines by 
which individual Americans can help reduce the menace of subver- 
sion. The speech excerpts incorporated in this report have been 
approved and adopted as the expressions of the entire committee. 

A New Communist Manifesto 

Last November [1960], 81 of the world's 87 Red fascist parties met 
in Moscow to plot the final destruction of freedom — to draw up plans 
for bringing the whole world under their totahtarian domination. On 
December 5, 1960, they unanimously adopted a 20,000 word "state- 
ment," as they called it. This statement was then published in Soviet 
Russian journals, in international Communist organs, and also in 
periodicals of various national Communist parties. In the United 
States, it has appeared in the party's monthly journal, Political Affairs, 
and has also been published in pamphlet form by one of the two major 
publishing houses of the Communist Party, New Century Publishei-s 
in New York City. It sells for 25 cents. 

This is probably the most dangerous 25-cent document ever to 
appear in print, for it is, fundamentally, the Communists' master 
plan for taking over the world. It outlines the basic strategy they are 
to use in the years immediately ahead, the tactics they are to put 
into effect in different areas of the world to bring into reality the 
perverted, more than 100-year-old dream of Karl Marx and Frederick 
Engels — a dream that frequently occupied the twisted minds of Lenin 
and Stalin and so obviously preoccupies Khrushchev's mind today. 

As the document itself states, it is binding on every Communist 
party and every Communist in the world. It tells them what they 
are to do and how they are to do it. It also proclaims that all Com- 
munist parties recognize the Soviet Communist Party as their boss 
and that what it does — which is another way of saying what it com- 
mands — is to be followed by them. There are no "ifs," "ands," or 
"buts" about it. 

Even if we did not have a judicial finding in the recent Supreme 
Court decision on the Internal Security Act, that the U.S. Communist 
Party is an agent of the Soviet Union, completely controlled and 
dominated by it, this document — the declaration of the Communists 
themselves — would be proof of the point, if any further proof is needed 
after all these years. 

The document reveals that "peaceful co-existence," as the Com- 
munists preach it to the non-Communist world, is a complete fraud. 



128 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

It states bluntly that "peaceful co-existence is a policy of mobilizing 
the masses and launching vigorous action" against the United States 
and every other anti-Communist nation and that peaceful co-existence 
"implies intensification of the struggle * * * of all the Communist 
Parties" for the triumph of communism. 

Shall Communists use force and violence and internal revolution to 
seize power in their native lands? Yes, says the Kremlin and all the 
other 80 Communist parties, if the decadent bourgeoisie — ^whicb is 
their term for us — do not surrender without a fight. 

Inasmuch as many 25-cent and 5- and 10-cent pamphlets outlining 
basic Communist plans have been published before, it may be 
wondered why it is claimed that this one is the most dangerous ever 
to appear in print. The reason is that, in the past, such pamphlets 
usually outlined Communist dreams or very long-range plans and 
hopes that saw no chance of realization in the very near future. This 
one is different. Today, the Communists, as they say in it, see victory 
as not far off, as something they may grasp before many more years 
have gone by. They claim in this document that the world balance 
of power has already changed — and in their favor. 

Whether we agree with this or not, we must face the fact that their 
power is greater than it has ever been before, that they dominate and 
control more territory and people than at any time in their history, 
and also that they wield greater influence on governments and peoples 
not under their control than at any time in the past. 

The total, unending war between communism and freedom has 
entered its final, crisis stage. Before too long, its outcome wiU be 
decided once and for all, the scales definitely tipped one way or 
another. For this reason, this pamphlet may be Moscow's final 
battle order and thus the most dangerous of any published under its 
auspices. 

Many things of vital importance to world communism are treated 
in the Moscow declaration of December 1960. There are too many, 
in fact, to be considered here. There is one matter in this statement, 
however, that deserves our attention because, to the best of the com- 
mittee's knowledge, it has never before appeared in a major inter- 
national Communist directive. Its appearance in the Moscow state- 
ment is, therefore, of special significance. It reads: 

In our time * * * conditions are particularly favorable 
for * * * vigorously exposing anti-Communism * * * and 
winning the broadest sections of the working masses for 
Communist ideas. * * *itis indispensable to wage a resolute 
struggle against anti-Communism — that poison weapon which 
the bourgeoisie uses to fence off the masses from socialism. 
[Emphasis added.] 

What does this mean to America? It means that anti-Communist 
organizations, which have been prime targets of the Communist 
Party, its fronts, fellow travelers, and dupes in the past, know that 
these attacks wUl continue; that they will be smeared and vilified and 
that unending efforts will be made fco destroy their effectiveness as 
long as they continue vigorously to oppose Red treason. 

-Although smear tactics against those who most strongly oppose the 
movement are well known to students of communism, the fact that the 
Moscow declaration openly called for this strategy is highly significant. 



ANNTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 129 

It means that the world Communist conspiracy now considers itself 
so powerful that it can go about openly and systematically destroying 
all anti-Communists, all those who stand in the way of its program of 
global conquest, all those who are its enemies. 

And because Moscow has made it more than clear, over and oyer 
again in recent years, that the United States is the major obstacle to its 
plans for world domination and, therefore, its No. 1 enemy, it follows 
that anti-Communists in the United States rate as the prime enemies 
not only of the U.S. Communist Party, but of Communists everywhere. 

Specifically, it means that attacks on all anti-Communist govern- 
mental bodies, private organizations, and individuals in this country 
will now be stepped up greatly. The Communist Party will make 
every effort to destroy each and every anti-Communist individual 
and organization, or at least render them powerless to impede in any 
way the Red totalitarian advance. 

Objectives, Strategy, and Tactics of American Communists 

On January 20, 1961, Gus Hall, boss of the U.S. Communist 
Party, made a major speech to the party's National Committee. 
In this speech, he emphasized five issues as the important ones on 
which the party was to concentrate its activities. On May Day, 1961, 
the party caUed on all Americans to demand that our Government 
take certain actions. On the basis of these two recent Communist 
directives, the following are the top issues of the day — because they 
are the Communists' most important, immediate cold-war objectives: 

1. Universal disarmament. 

2. The complete abolition of nuclear weapons testing. 

3. The dismantling of U.S. overseas defense bases. 

4. The dissolution of NATO, SEATO, and other free-world defense 
alhances. 

5. An "end to the cold war." 

6. The adoption of the policy of "peaceful co-existence." 

7. Re-establishment of friendly relations with Cuba, 

8. Recognition of Red China and its admission to the UN. 

9. Demilitarization of Berlin. 

10. The ending of colonialism everywhere. 

After these ten points comes another one of major importance to 
the Communist Party because it always has a place in its platforms 
and directives: 

"Abolish the Un-American Committee." 

These demands are revealing in several ways: 

1. Notice that not one of the top ten objectives of the U.S. Com- 
munist Party has anything to do — at least directly — with what might 
be caUed the positive promotion of communism within the United 
States. Party demands for nationalizing certain industries and 
other internal communizing steps are way down on its priority ladder. 
Every one of these ten demands concerns U.S. foreign poHcy and, 
specifically. United States foreign policy toward the Soviet Union. 
These demands are, in themselves, proof that the U.S. Communist 
Party is nothing but the traitorous tool of a foreign enemy power. 
The demands the U.S. Communists parade as theirs are all made in 
Moscow, 



130 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

2, Notice, too, that the first demand of the Communist Party which 
concerns internal affairs is for the aboHtion of the Committee on Un- 
American Activities. This, too, has nothing to do — directly — with 
communizing the United States, though the gimmick in it is clear. 
The party gives abolition of the committee first priority among all 
domestic issues because it wants free rein to carry out its subversive 
activities. Its aim is to destroy, not to build. 

3. Further, these demands reveal that the U.S. Communist Party 
has no hope of achieving power in this country legitimately. They 
reveal that it is counting on Moscow to conquer this country and 
that it is meanwhile doing everything it can to help the Kremlin in 
this task by promoting the adoption of U.S. policies which will weaken 
this country and, at the same time, build Soviet power. 

Every Communist and fellow traveler in this country is today doing 
everything he can to whip up support among the American people for 
these and other party objectives. 

Communists and the Police 

In the summer of 1960, Gus Hall issued a directive that all members 
and "friends" of the Communist Party "must be first * * * in the 
sitdowns, on the picketlines, in the peace marches and meetings" 
that are taking place in this country and which frequently turn into 
riots. Committee findings in 1961 did nothing to alter its conclusion 
in the Annual Report for 1960 that: 

There is considerable evidence that, in the United States, 
as well as on a world scale, the Communists feel that the 
present tactical situation calls for increased utilization of 
rioting and mob violence. 

This not only means that there will be more riots, but that there 
will be more charges of police brutality. They will be made every 
time and in every place in the United States where the Communists 
stage or participate in a riot. It is standard operating procedure for 
the Communist Party to make this charge whenever the police inter- 
fere with or impede its subversive efforts. It is part of the Reds' 
"Stop thief!" technique — to charge others with brutality when they 
have resorted to it in order to achieve one of their ends. 

One complication is that many of these demonstrations are initiated 
and organized by non-Communists. Withoat a doubt, in the majority 
of the cases the demonstrators are not Communists or pro-Com- 
munists. But the unpleasant truth is that the U.S. Communist 
Party boss has ordered the Communists to infiltrate these groups and 
play key roles in the demonstrations. 

These facts and developments put the pohce generally in a very 
delicate position. They must enforce the law. There can be no 
question about that. Yet, at the same time, they are placed in 
situations where, imless they are most careful, they can open them- 
selves up to Communist-inspired charges of brutality. 

Police forces everywhere must realize that the Commimist Party 
hates them — just as it hates the Committee on Un-American Activi- 
ties — and will do everything it can to discredit them. This is because 
police forces stand for law and order, and the Communists want chaos. 
It is only by breaking down or seizing control of the pohce and other 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 131 

law enforcement institutions that the Communists can pave the way 
for their takeover. 

The Communists know that pohce forces are powerful instruments 
in assisting — or preventing — Communist seizure of power. This is 
why, whenever they obtam sufhcient strength in any comitry and a 
united-front type of government is established, the Communists 
always want one of their men to be given the post of Minister of 
Justice. They know that if they can get control of the pohce, they 
can dispose of their opposition with relative ease and it will just be a 
matter of time before they have the whole nation m then* hands. 

When the Commmiists succeed in doing this, policemen become the 
agents of tyranny. They are no longer the enforcers of law, the pro- 
tectors of free men, but, rather, the oppressors of an enslaved people. 

The Separate Functions of the Committee and the FBI 

Critics often claim that the Committee on Un-American Activities 
duphcates the work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation or that 
the committee isn't necessary because the FBI alone is fully capable 
of protecting this Nation against communism. Neither claim is tiTie 
for the following reasons: 

It is the function of the Congress and its committees to develop 
information on national problems through investigation, research, and 
hearings and to pass appropriate legislation, if it is needed, to cope 
with these problems. It is also its job to plug loopholes in existing 
laws and to oversee the operations of the executive branch. 

Congressional conmiittees, in the course of their hearings, perform 
a valuable and essential side function — that of informing the American 
people, who are the ultimate rulers of this land, about problems and 
the issues involved in them. 

This informing function is accomplished through the committee's 
pubhshed hearings and reports and also, of course, by press, magazine, 
radio, and TV reports on committee proceeduigs. 

For over 20 years the House of Representatives has relied upon the 
Committee on Un-American Activities to perform its vital legislative 
and informing functions in the field of countering Communist sub- 
version. Independent studies made by the Library of Congress reveal 
that in the years 1941 to 1960, the committee made 96 separate and 
distinct legislative recommendations to the Congress. They reveal 
that 35 of these recommendations have been adopted by the Congress 
and are now a part of the laws of this land which are designed to pro- 
tect the Nation from the destructive, subversive forces of communism. 
The studies also show that the executive branch of the Federal Gov- 
ernment has adopted 13 recommendations of the committee which 
covered policy matters rather than legislation. 

As far as its infonning function is concerned, the many thousands 
of published pages of committee hearings, reports, consultations, and 
scholarly works — on numerous facets of communism — have been a 
vital service to the Congress, the executive branch, and to the Ameri- 
can pubhc. 

Once congressional legislation becomes law, it is then the duty of 
the executive branch to enforce it. This is where, in the field of 
Communist activities, the FBI enters the picture as a branch of the 
Department of Justice. The FBI operates under directives of the 



132 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

Attorney General of the United States, our country's chief law 
enforcement officer. The FBI is his investigative arm. 

The FBI's job is to coUect evidence that will make possible the trial 
and conviction of lawbreakers. Over the years, in the field of Com- 
munist subversion, the FBI has done an excellent job of penetrating 
the Communist Party, keeping track of all its activities and the 
identity of its members. Numerous Communist Party leaders have 
been tried and convicted under the Smith Act — on evidence collected 
by the FBI. Others have been tried and convicted under our espio- 
nage laws or, if diplomats, have been exposed and shipped back 
behind the Iron Curtain as 'persona non grata — all on the basis of 
evidence provided by the FBI. 

It must be remembered, however, that most of the extensive infor- 
mation the FBI collects on the operations of the Communist con- 
spiracy in this country, for a number of good reasons, is kept absolutely 
secret. It is rarely ever made public except in the case of a court trial. 

Because the FBI is purely an investigative agency and has neither 
the legislative nor the informing function of a congressional committee, 
it, alone, cannot do a complete job of protecting this country from 
communism. 

Critics of the committee sometimes complain that it has not 
"convicted" any Communists or spies. It is not the committee's job 
to do this. This is the work of the executive branch of the Govern- 
ment — the Department of Justice with the help of the FBI. 

In some cases, in the course of its hearings, the committee has 
produced evidence that was later used in the courts to convict certain 
individuals. But when this happens, it is more or less an incidental 
development, an offshoot of the committee's primary function of hold- 
ing hearings for legislative purposes. 

In sum, the picture of how our Government is set up to meet the 
threat of internal communism is as foUows: 

The Congress, with the Committee on Un-American Activities 
playing a special role, develops information and legislation pertinent 
to the problem. The Department of Justice, with the FBI playing a 
special role, then develops the evidence to prosecute those who have 
broken the law — with the courts judging innocence or guilt. 

How Individual Americans Can Fight Communism 

Many people beheve that they need not worry or do anything about 
the problem of communism because appropriate governmental agencies 
are taking care of it. Others feel that the only threat posed by com- 
munism is in terms of Communist forces in foreign countries, about 
which the individual American can do nothing. Both groups are 
wrong. 

The committee has no quarrel with those who say that the most 
important elements of the struggle in which we are engaged involve 
our foreign pohcy and foreign Communist forces. This is plain for 
all to see. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the Communist 
Party of Red China, and the Communist Party of Cuba have all been 
assigned vital roles by Moscow in the war it is waging to destroy the 
United States. 

But it must never be forgotten that the U.S. Communist Party is 
also a part of Moscow's army; that it is carrying on the same basic 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 133 

attack on the United States ivithin our borders that the foreign Com- 
munist forces are waging against us from without; and that its 
activities are carefully coordinated by the Kremhn with those of all 
its other troops. 

The U.S. Communist conspiracy, then, must be fought, too. To 
ignore its operations and give it free rein could have the most serious 
consequences. The American people must be made to understand 
that this Communist war is total, involving both internal and inter- 
national policy, internal and international Communists , and internal 
and international anti-Oommunists . The attack is both from within 
and without. The counter-attack must he the same. 

While the House Committee on Un-American Activities and the 
Senate Internal Security Subcommittee have found Communists oper- 
ating in nearly every important phase of American life — 'Government, 
the Armed Forces, churches, in the legal and teaching professions, 
etc. — it is impossible for these two small congressional bodies to obtain 
and give the American people of our 50 states the knowledge of local 
Communist activity which they must have if they are to play the role 
they should play as good citizens in combating this conspiracy. The 
most dangerous type of Communist activity is the day-to-day, semi- 
concealed party agitation and propaganda work that is being carried 
out in the cities, towns, and villages across the country ; in schools, in 
trade unions, in the press, in industry, and in clubs and organizations 
of all kinds. This is the fifth-column weapon with which the Com- 
munists have subverted other nations and weakened them for the kill. 
It is the weapon with which they can eventually destroy this Nation — • 
if it is not immobilized. 

Here is how the Red fifth column works. A new nationwide Com- 
munist front is set up. It establishes branches in many cities and 
towns. Its members start passing out propaganda and holding public 
meetings and rallies at which pro-Communist and concealed Com- 
munist speakers are featured. By a concerted campaign of deceptive 
propaganda and agitation, it induces many citizens in many communi- 
ties to accept a position on a vital national question — ^such as that of 
nuclear weapons testing — -which follows exactly the line of the Com- 
munist Party and Moscow. It succeeds in getting many of these 
people to promote this position in letters to Members of Congress, the 
White House, and the Department of State — and to sell their friends 
the idea that the United States should sign an agreement with the 
Soviet Union banning nuclear tests, even though Moscow will not 
permit adequate inspection of its territory. 

Concerted nationwide activity along these lines — if not fought and 
exposed — could have disastrous effects, not only on our country's 
testing policy but, through it, on our very survival. 

An important fact which many people do not realize about the 
Red fifth column and its members is that most of their activities are 
not illegal.^ Therefore, while the Federal Bureau of Investigation 
keeps a watchful eye on the fifth column, it can do nothing more, in 

1 Although the Internal Security Act of 1050, as amended, recognizes the Communist movement as a 
worldwide conspiracy directed by a foreign power for the purpose of establishing Communist totalitarian 
dictatorships In all countries of the world, and although the Act makes it illegal for anyone to perform an 
act which would substantially contribute to the establishment of a totalitarian dictatorship within the 
United States, the Act also speclfleally states that the holding of office or membership in the Communist 
Party in Itself cannot be used as evidence that a person is engaged In an effort to establish a totalitarian 
dictatorship in this country or that he has been associated with an illegal procurement of classified Qovern- 
ment Information for use by a foreign power. 



134 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

most cases, than add to its bulging files the names of persons taking 
part in its activities. 

Party members and their fellow travelers in the United States 
number in the many, many thousands. J. Edgar Hoover testified in 
March 1961, that the FBI then had 200 known or suspected Com- 
munist-controlled and infiltrated groups under investigation. 

What can the Committee on Un-American Activities do? Obvi- 
ously, in the course of a year, it and the Senate Internal Security 
Subcommittee can investigate no more than a very small fraction of 
the activities of these groups and individuals. This means that /or 
the most part, as far as governmental agencies are concerned, the 
Communist Party's dangerous operations are completely unimpeded. 

Accordingly, the Communist conspiracy's fifth-column operation, 
designed to bring about the conquest of America, must be fought on 
the community level by Mr. and Mrs. America. It must be fought 
by businessmen, labor leaders, educators, clergymen, municipal offi- 
cials, the press — people in aU walks of life. 

How can it be fought? Through letters to local newspapers; by 
countermeetings and rallies at which persons well informed on Com- 
munist activities, strategy, and tactics are featured as speakers; by the 
issuance of effective counterpropaganda ; by the exposure of the back- 
grounds of the Communist and pro-Communist agitators who are 
doing the conspiracy's work. But these steps are not easy ones. 

Because it is so difficult to obtain documentary evidence of Com- 
munist Party membership today (there has been no such thing as a 
card-carrying Communist since 1948), those who fight the Communists 
must be better informed on national and international issues than ever 
before. In most cases, the only way the effectiveness of a concealed 
or secret Communist propagandist can be destroyed is by defeating 
his arguments Avith the true facts on the issue at hand. 

There is no one set of rules that will guarantee a successful counter- 
fight against the many-sided strategy of the international conspiracy 
of communism. Perhaps the best single piece of advice that can be 

fiven anyone who wants to be effective against communism is to first 
now America and what she really stands for. 

Americans cannot possibly comprehend what we stand to lose, 
should we ever yield to international communism, unless we first fully 
understand and appreciate what we have, A person who stands for 
nothing is likely to fall for anything. 

Do you want to be an intelligent, effective, anti-Communist? Do 
you want victory for your country in the total war in which it is 
engaged with communism? Then, know your America — and do all 
in your power to see that every other American knows it as well 
as you do. 

The following suggestions would have to be included in any mean- 
ingful individual or group program for combating communism: 

1. GET THE FACTS. Study communism. You can't fight an 
enemy you don't know. This is a fundamental rule of warfare. Learn 
communism's basic doctrines, its strategy, and tactics; its line on 
current national and international affairs; the names of major Com- 
munist fronts and of leading Communists and fellow travelers. 

2. ACT. Knowledge that is not put to use is wasted. No matter 
how much you learn about communism, you will contribute nothing 
to the fight against it unless you have the will to DO, to translate 
your learning into deeds that weaken communism. 



ANmJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 135 

3. GET THE HELP OF OTHERS. Two heads are better than 
one — and ten men are more powerful than two. 

4. ORGANIZE your helpers and PLAN your action. Mere num- 
bers are not enough. Any project you undertake should have at least 
as much planning and organization as the Communists normally put 
into their schemes. And that's plenty, 

5. Be SCRUPULOUS about your evidence and the rules of fair 
play before maldng a charge against any individual or group. You 
have helped communism instead of hurting it when you have to retract. 

6. NEVER BACKTRACK. Stick to your guns. Resolve that 
though you are unjustly attacked and subjected to various pressures, 
you will not retreat. 

7. The TRUTH AND EXPOSURE are your most powerful 
weapons. Use them in letters to newspaper editors and public officials 
— the molders of public opinion and initiators of government action. 

8. Don't forget the POWER OF THE PURSE. You, as a con- 
sumer, have considerable power over radio and television advertisers, 
producers of public entertainment, and many others whose success 
depends on public acceptance of their goods, services, or talents. In 
short, don't let your dollars support those who unwittingly or other- 
wise support the Communist cause. 

No outline of action against communism would be complete with- 
out a word about dedication. Many years ago, Lenin wrote: 

We must train men and women who will devote to the revo- 
lution, not merely their spare evenings, but the whole of their 
lives. 

Communist success in training such men and women is the key 
reason for the tremendous power the conspiracy wields today. Mem- 
bers of the various Commujiist parties of the world comprise only a 
little more than one percent of the world's population — yet they 
completely rule one-third of the people of this globe and have exten- 
sive influence on millions of others. They have, indeed, devoted to 
their cause not merely their spare evenings, but the wliole of their 
lives. 

If we are to defeat the international conspiracy of communism so 
that our way of life may endure, we must devote ourselves to our 
cause as wholly as the Communists have devoted themselves to theirs. 
There is no other way. 

Supreme Court Decision on Communist Party Case 

On Monday, June 5, 1961, the Supreme Court of the United States 
announced its decision in the case of the Communist Party of the United 
States of America, Petitioner v. The Subversive Activities Control Board. 
This decision wes a landmark of importance in law and in relation to 
the congressional effort to curb Communist internal subversion. At 
issue in this case was the constitutionality of certain basic provisions 
of the Internal Security Act of 1950, more particularly the registration 
and disclosure provisions thereof, as apphed to Communist-action 
organizations. 

The Internal Security Act of 1950 was the product of many years 
of intensive hearings and study conducted by the Committee on Un- 
American Activities and its predecessors. Legislation to counter the 

21-204—63 10 



136 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

program of internal subversion presents complex problems, some of 
which are basically solved in the Internal Security Act, as amended. 
These problems, both legal and practical, are of the utmost subtlety. 
As a free society, responding to ethical and constitutional inhibitions, 
we proceed in accordance with the tenor of our institutions. Accord- 
ingly, the Internal Security Act is not a police-state statute. On the 
contrary, it is designed to draw the Communists from the under- 
ground into the light of day, so that our people may better judge and 
evaluate their activities, as Justice Frankfurter said, "against the 
revealed background of their character, nature, and connections." 
The registration and disclosure provisions of this statute, designed to 
promote and preserve the integrity of free speech, therefore serve to 
strengthen democratic processes. 

Under Sections 12 and 13 of the Act, the Subversive Activities 
Control Board was established as a quasi-judicial body for the purpose 
of making certain determinations in relation to the requirements for 
registration of Communist organizations. Having reason to believe 
that the Communist Party of the United States was required to regis- 
ter under Section 7 of the Act, the Attorney General, pursuing pro- 
cedures set up in the Act, filed with the Board on November 22, 1950, 
a petition requiring that party to register as a Communist-action 
organization. After extensive hearings, the Board found that the 
Communist Party of the United States was an organization operating 
in this country under Soviet Union control, for the purpose of estab- 
lishing a Soviet-type dictatorship in the Unitecl States, and was hence 
a Communist-action organization and required to register as such. 

For more than a decade, however, until the Supreme Court decision 
of June 5, 1961, the Communist Party avoided a showdown on regis- 
tering as a Communist-action organization by litigation challenging 
the constitutionality of the registration and disclosure requirements 
of the Internal Security Act. 

The order of the Subversive Activities Control Board requiring the 
Communist Party to register was upheld by a majority of the Supreme 
Court, consisting of Justices Frankfurter, Clark, Harlan, Whittaker, 
and Stewart. Dissenting were the Chief Justice and Justices Black, 
Douglas, and Brennan. The Court's decision confirmed the power 
of Congress to strengthen the national security by the adoption of this 
type of statute which, aimed principally to inform rather than to 
prohibit or punish, is representative of, as well as calculated to assist 
in preserving, a free society. 

For its purpose, the Internal Security Act of 1950 classifies Com- 
munist organizations within the United States as either "Communist- 
action" or "Communist-front." A third category designated as 
"Communist-infiltrated" was created by the Communist Control 
Act of 1954, as an amendment to the Act. A Communist-action 
organization is one which is substantially directed, dominated, or 
controlled by a foreign government or a foreign organization control- 
ling the World Communist Movement, and operates primarily to 
advance its objectives. A Communist-front organization is one which 
is substantially directed, dominated, or controlled by a Communist- 
action organization, a Communist foreign government, or the World 
Communist Movement. A Communist-infiltrated organization is one 
which is substantially directed, dominated, or controlled by an indi- 
vidual or individuals who are, or who within 3 years have been actively 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 137 

engaged in, giving aid or support to a Communist-action organization, 
a Communist foreign government, or the world Communist move- 
ment, and is serving, or within 3 years has served, as a means for 
giving aid or support to any such organization, government, or move- 
ment, or the impairing of the mihtary strength of the United States or 
its industrial capacity to furnish material support required by its 
Armed Forces. 

Under Section 13 (e) and (f) of the Act, certain relevant and material 
evidential guidelines, segregated as to action and front groups, are 
laid down, but which are not exclusive, to assist the Board In reaching 
its determination as to the character of the organization. A just 
apphcation of the detailed rules will leave no reasonable basis for 
error in the designation of the organization. Yet, of course, as one 
might anticipate, the section has been assailed by Communists as 
an adoption of the principle of "guilt by association," a phrase to 
which they have given currency if not meaning and respectability. 
The phrase, taken from the Communist smear vocabulary, is just 
another application of Communist semantics, in conformity with 
propaganda principles expressly laid down by Lenin, designed solely 
to obscure the issue and to foreclose reasoned discussion. The 
above-mentioned section in reality is not limited to any one form of 
proof, but nonetheless guilt by association is, in fact, a most reliable 
form of proof — depending on how close the association may be. 
Familiarly known to the law as "circumstantial evidence," and ac- 
cepted in both criminal and civil proceedings, it is recognized by the 
experts as a form of proof even more reliable, in certain instances, 
than a confession of guilt. The late Justice Jackson, in his concurring 
opinion in American Communications Association v. Douds, 339 U.S. 
382, at 432f, had occa,sion to note: 

However, there has recently entered the dialectic of politics 
a cliche used to condemn application of the conspiracy prin- 
ciple to Communists. "Guilt by association" is an epithet 
frequently used and little explained, except that it is gen- 
erally accompanied by another slogan, "guUt is personal." 
Of course it is; but personal guilt may be incurred by join- 
ing a conspiracy. That act of association makes one respon- 
sible for the acts of others committed in pursuance of the 
association. It is wholly a question of tne sufficiency of 
evidence of association to imply conspiracy. 

Under Section 7 of the Act, each Communist-action organization 
required by a final order of the Board to register as such, shall, within 
the time limited, register with the Attorney General as a Communist- 
action organization. The statement accompanying the registration 
must contain the name of the organization and the address of its 
principal office; the name and last-known address of each individual 
who is, and was at any time during the 12 months preceding the 
filing of such statement an officer of the organization; an accounting 
of all monies received and expended, including the sources from which 
received and the purposes for which expended during the 12 calendar 
months preceding the filing thereof ; the name and last known address 
of each individual who was a member of the organization at any time 
during the preceding 12 months; and a listing of all printing presses 
or machines in the possession or control of the organization, or in 



138 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

which its oflScers and members have an interest. After the organi- 
zation has registered, it must file an annual report containing the 
same information as is required in the registration statement. 

The procedures and requirements of registration for Communist- 
action and Communist-front organizations are identical, except that 
the fronts need not list their non-officer members. Communist- 
infiltrated organizations are not required to register with the Attorney 
General, but are under other sections of the Act, as is the case with 
front and action organization, required to label their publications 
or mail transmitted through the channels of interstate or foreign 
commerce, and to identify themselves in any broadcast by radio or 
television sponsored by them; and no deduction for income tax pm-- 
poses shall be allowed in the case of contributions to or for the use of 
such organizations, nor shall such organizations be entitled to exemp- 
tion from Federal income tax; and they are deprived of certain bene- 
fits under the National Labor Relations Act. 

It is gratifying to note that the congressional findings vv^hich form 
the statement of necessity for the legislation, embodied in the pre- 
amble to the Internal Security Act of 1950, have received judicial 
recognition and sanction, and indeed have not been disputed by any 
of the nine Justices. Upon these findings, which spring from investi- 
gations and study mandated to the Committee on Un-American Acti- 
vities, Justice Frankfurter made the following observations: 

On the basis of its detailed investigations Congress has 
found that there exists a world Communist movement, for- 
eign controlled, whose purpose it is by whatever means 
necessary to establish Communist totalitarian dictatorship 
in the countries throughout the world, and which has a,h-eady 
succeeded in supplanting governments in other countries. 
Congress has found that in furthering these purposes, the 
foreign government controlling the world Communist move- 
ment establishes in various countries action organizations 
which, dominated from abroad, endeavor to bring about the 
overthrow of existing governments, by force if need be, and 
to establisli totalitarian dictatorships subservient to that for- 
eign government. And Congress has found that these action 
organizations employ methods of infiltration and secretive 
and coercive tactics; that by operating in concealment and 
through Communist-front organizations they are able to ob- 
tain the support of persons who would not extend such sup- 
port knowing of their true nature; that a Communist network 
exists in the United States; and that the agents of commu- 
nism have devised methods of sabotage and espionage carried 
out in successful evasion of existing law. The purpose of 
the Subersive Activities Control Act is said to be to prevent 
the world-wide Communist conspiracy from accomplishing 
its purpose in this country. 

It is not for the courts to re-examine the validity of these 
legislative findings and reject them. See Harisiades v. 
Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580, 590. They are the product of 
extensive investigation by Committees of Congress over 
more than a decade and a half. Cf. Nebbia v. New York, 
291 U.S. 502, 516, 530. We certainly cannot dismiss them 
as unfounded or irrational imaginings. See Galvan v. Press, 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 139 

347 U.S. 522, 529; American Communications Assn. v. Douds, 
339 U.S. 382, 388-89. And if we accept them, as wo must, as 
a not unentertainable appraisal by Congress of the threat 
which Communist organizations pose not only to existing 
government in the United States, but to the United States 
as a sovereign, independent nation— if we accept as not 
wholly unsupportable the conclusion that those organizations 
"are not free and independent organizations, but are sections 
of a world-wide Communist organization and are controlled, 
directed, and subject to the discipline of the Communist 
dictatorship of [a] . . . foreign country," § 2(5) — we must 
recognize that the power of Congress to regulate Communist 
organizations of this nature is extensive. 

Unless the dissent of Chief Justice Warren — which rested princi- 
pally upon procedural grounds — is regarded as a suspension of judgment 
on the issue, none of the Justices has taken exception to the specific 
conclusion of the Subversive Activities Control Board which, after 
receiving voluminous evidence, pronounced the Communist Party 
of the United States to be a foreign-dominated organization, controlled 
by the Soviet Union, and operating primarily to advance the objectives 
of the World Communist Movement. Justice Douglas, although 
dissenting on other grounds, accepted the specific findings of the Board 
and said: 

The Subversive Activities Control Board found, and the 
Court of Appeals sustained the finding, that Petitioner, the 
Communist Party of the United States, is "a disciplined or- 
ganization" operating in this Nation "under Soviet Union 
control" to instill "Soviet style dictatorship in the United 
States." Those findings are based, I think, on facts; and I 
would not disturb them. 

Equally striking was the degree of unanimity with which the Court 
disposed of the first-amendment objections to the statute. With 
the lone exception of Justice Black, none of the Justices found the 
Communist Party defense on that basis valid. In view of the con- 
gressional findings and the evidence laid before the Subversive 
Activities Control Board, it would seem that no other conclusion 
could sensibly be reached. Moreover, it would seem obvious that the 
registration and disclosure provisions of the statute, which were 
treated by the Court as separable from other provisions and which 
were alone at issue, eflected no denial of free speech, peaceable as- 
sembly or association by their terms, but required only that the 
speaker be identified. For the majority, Justice Frankfurter mad*^ 
that clear: 

The present statute does not, of course, attach the registra- 
tion requirement to the incident of speech, but to the inci- 
dents of foreign domination and of operation to advance the 
objectives of the world Communist movement — operation 
which, the Board has found here, includes extensive, long- 
continuing organizational, as well as "speech" activity. * * * 
To state that individual liberties may be affected is to 
establish the condition for, not to arrive at the conclusion 
of, constitutional decision. Against the impediments which 



140 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

particular governmental regulation causes to entire freedom 
of individual action, there must be weighed the value to the 
pubhc of the ends which the regulation may achieve. 
******* 

Where the mask of anonymity which an organization's 
members wear serves the double purpose of protecting them 
from popular prejudice and of enabling them to cover over 
a foreign-directed conspiracy, infiltrate into other groups, 
and enlist the support of persons who would not, if the truth 
were revealed, lend their support, * * * it would be a dis- 
tortion of the First Amendment to hold that it prohibits 
Congress from removing the mask. 

For the minority (excepting Justice Black), Justice Douglas said: 

If lobbyists can be required to register, if political parties 
can be required to make disclosure of the sources of their 
funds, if the owners of newspapers and periodicals must 
disclose their aflBliates, so may a group operating under the 
control of a foreign power. 

The Bill of Rights was designed to give fullest play to the 
exchange and dissemination of ideas that touch the politics, 
culture, and other aspects of our life. When an organization 
is used by a foreign power to make advances here, questions 
of security are raised beyond the ken of disputation and 
debate between the people resident here. Espionage, busi- 
ness activities, formation of cells for subversion, as well as 
the exercise of First Amendment rights, are then used to pry 
open our society and make instrusion of a foreign power 
easy. These machinations of a foreign power add additional 
elements to free speech just as marching up and down adds 
something to picketing that goes beyond free speech. 

These are the reasons why, in my view, the bare require- 
ment that the Communist Party register and disclose the 
names of its officers and directors is in line with the most 
exacting adjudications touching First Amendment activities. 

Thus, although the first amendment was a relevant consideration 
the Court did not allow the tail to wag the dog. The first amend- 
ment is but one item in the bundle of constitutional liberties guar- 
anteed to our people. All liberty will perish upon the demise of this 
Government, which gives life to liberty and the first amendment its 
application. As the late Chief Justice Vinson said in Dennis v. 
United States, 341 U.S. 494, at p. 509, a Smith Act prosecution, "if 
a society cannot protect its very structure from armed, internal 
attack, it must follow that no subordinate interest can be protected." 

Red China's Activities in Latin America 

Within the past 2 years, Moscow and Peking have established a 
beachhead 90 miles from the shores of the United States. Their aim, 
in doing so, is the ultimate destruction of this Nation. It is not, 
however, limited to this. They also intend to seize control of every 
nation in Latin America — either before or after conquering the U.S. — 
and turning each one of them into a R^d satellite. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 141 

The Castro regime has given us a foretaste of what this will mean 
to tens of millions of Latin Americans: mass executions before firing 
squads, a brutal war against religion, dictatorial control of the press 
and all media of information, the suppression of liberty in every 
form — all the horrors the peoples of Russia, China, and the satellites 
have suffered at the hands of Communist governments for years. 

What has been Red China's role in the enslavement of the people 
of Cuba? 

It has given Castro a loan of $60 million with the understanding 
that he need not pay it back. It has bought 500,000 tons of his 
slave-labor sugar crop. In February, 1961, Raoul Castro said Red 
China had given the Communist Cuban dictatorship hundreds of 
machine guns and other weapons "for which we have not had to pay 
one cent." 

In the spring of 1961, when Castro asked Red China's help in 
putting down any anti-Communist revolution or invasion, Liu Shao- 
chi and Chou En-lai pledged Red China's complete support. In 
another message, Peking referred to former President Eisenhower and 
President Kennedy as "jackals of the same lair" and stated that 
"whatever happens" Communist China would take "all the necessary 
measures in every field" to see that Castro's Communist grip on the 
Cuban people is never broken. 

Shortly after Castro seized power, diplomats in Cuba reported that 
Peking's worldwide extortion machine had already gone to work on 
the 30,000 Chinese there. The Overseas Chinese Returnees Associa- 
tion in Peking was asking them if they had relatives in Red China 
and what property they owned in Cuba. Peking's letters of inquiry 
bore the correct names, addresses, and even apartment numbers of 
the addressees — an indication of how thoroughly its international 
extortion ring goes about its business. 

Overseas Chinese in this country and other nations have, for 
years, been receiving extortion notes from Red China. Many are in 
the committee's files. The fear created by the Red extortionists 
among Chinese in free nations, however, is nothing compared to what 
it is for those who live under a Communist dictator. 

Red China's freedom-wrecking efforts in the Western Hemisphere 
have not been limited to Cuba. Two training centers for Latin 
Americans have already been established in Peking. One of them is 
teaching guerrilla warfare, an art in which the Chinese Communists 
excel. The other has already sent 200 Communist agents into various 
Latin American countries as students and journalists and under other 
guises. 

Through its Sino-American Cultural and Friendship Association, 
Red China has established binational cultural centers in nine Latin 
American countries. It has stepped up its Latin America broadcasts 
to 21 hours per week, and in April, 1960, added lOK hours in Portu- 
guese. Its New China News Agency has an oflBce in Havana and is 
publishing a slick propaganda magazine for distribution throughout 
Latin America. In 1960, over 1,000 Latin Americans traveled to Red 
China at Peking's expense. 

The purpose of all these activities is obvious. It is to destroy free- 
dom throughout the Western Hemisphere by whatever means are 
possible and impose in its place Red totahtarian regimes. 



CHAPTER IV 

CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS 

In 1961 the committee made no recommendation to the House 
for contempt citation of any of the witnesses who had appeared before 
the committee during that year. 

Cases Pending, 1961 

Twelve persons had previously been cited for contempt of Congress 
for refusal to answer pertinent questions before a subcommittee of this 
committee in Puerto Rico in 1959. They were indicted by the grand 
jury in Puerto Rico on November 30, 1961, and at year's end, were 
awaiting trial. These persons are: 

Jose Enamorado Cuesta Ramon Diaz Cruz 

Juan Saez Corales Frank Ruiz 

Consuelo Burgos De Pagan Juan Emmanuelli Morales 

John Peter Hawes Cesar Andreu Iglesias 

Gertrudis Melendez Perez Pablo M. Garcia Rodriguez 

Cristino Perez Mendez Juan Santos Rivera 

In addition, the following cases of earlier years are pending in 
various Federal district courts, as listed: 

Robert Lehrer, Gary, Indiana 
Victor Malis, Gary, Indiana 
Alfred James Samter, Gary, Indiana 
Harvey O'Connor, Newark, New Jersey 

District Court Cases in 1961 

The cases of George Tyne [also known as Martin (Budd}^) Yarns], 
radio, screen, theater, and television actor, and Elliott Sullivan, also 
an actor, were tried by a judge without a jury in the Southern District 
of New York. The judge directed a verdict of acquittal of both 
defendants on October 28, 1961, because of failure of a necessary 
link in the chain of proof, to wit: the resolution authorizing the sub- 
committee to hold the hearings. 

Circuit Court of Appeals Cases in 1961 

Martin Popper, former secretary of the National Lawyers Guild 
presently engaged in practice of law in the city of New York, was 
convicted in the District Court, District of Columbia, on May 4, 
1961. The conviction was appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals, 
District of Columbia. 

The conviction of Donald C. Wheeldin, a former writer for the 
West Coast newspaper, the Daily People's World, was affirmed by the 
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, on October 17, 1960. Cer- 
tiorari was denied by the Supreme Court on July 19, 1961. 

143 



144 AXNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

The conviction of Sidney Turo;ff, a former member of the State 
Committee of the Communist Party of the State of New York, was 
reversed by the Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, on June 
29, 1961, and was remanded to the district court for a new trial. 

Peter {Pete) Seeger, an entertainer, was convicted in the District 
Court for the Southern District of New York, on March 29, 1961. 
The conviction was appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals, Second 
Circuit. 

Supreme Court Cases in 1961 

Frank Grumman, a former radio operator for RCA Communications, 
Inc., was convicted in the District Court, District of Columbia. This 
conviction was afiirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals, District of 
Columbia, on July 30, 1961. Certiorari was granted by the Supreme 
Court on December 5, 1961. 

The conviction of Bernard Silher, a former service writer for the 
Western Union Telegraph Company, was affirmed by the Circuit 
Court of Appeals, District of Columbia, on July 30, 1961. Certi- 
orari was granted by the Supreme Court on December 5, 1961. 

The Supreme Court of the United States on February 27, 1961, 
affirmed the conviction of Frank Wilkinson and Carl Braden, each 
of whom received a sentence of 12 months. 

No decisions as of this date have been handed down in the cases of 
John T. Gojack, Norton Anthony Russell, and Edward Yellin. 



CHAPTER V 

LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS 

Introduction 

Over the years, this committee, within the area of its assigned 
mandate and on a variety of subjects, has made a large number of 
legislative recommendations which have for their ultimate purpose 
the preservation of our free society and constitutional form of govern- 
ment. These recommendations, from 1941 through 1960, together 
with a statement of action subsequently taken either legislatively or 
administratively, are set forth in the committee publication released 
December 30, 1960, titled "Legislative Recommendations by the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities (A Research Study by 
the Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress)." The 
present chapter is a detailed study limited to action taken on com- 
mittee recommendations by the 87th Congress, 1st session, or by 
executive agencies during the year 1961, including an exposition of 
certain urgent proposals for legislative action in the future. This 
chapter might well be read in connection with the above-mentioned 
1960 publication. 

It will be observed that many of the committee's proposals have 
found suppor-t from numerous Members of both the House and Senate, 
and many bills reflecting the committee's proposals have been offered 
in this and prior sessions of the Congress. This accords with the 
evident purpose of the Congress in the creation of this committee, 
which has a statutory basis in Public Law 601 — the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1946 — as well as in the Rules of the House of 
Representatives. The congressional mandate requires the committee 
to report to the House the results of its investigations, together with 
such recommendations as it deems advisable. Its function is, there- 
fore, to inform the House, and its recommendations are offered to all 
Members. The record of legislative action in the 87th Congress, 1st 
session, will evoke the conclusion that the committee's work has met 
with unusual response. Indeed the effectiveness of the committee's 
efforts may well be measured in part in the light of this response by 
Members, who have introduced many bills incorporating the com- 
mittee's proposals. 

The record further demonstrates that a substantial number of com- 
mittee proposals have met with approval by passage in the House, or 
enactment finally into law. Yet, the efforts of this committee and 
the validity of its proposals are not to be measured finally by the 
number of bills passed by the House or immediately enacted into law. 
Quantity alone exposes neither extent of labor nor depth of insight. 
As was pointed out in the committee's Annual Report for the Year 
1960, the form which legislative proposals should take is often a mat- 
ter for continuing refinement and development, which is particularly 
true in the area of activity with which the committee is concerned. 

145 



146 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

The proposals do serve to inspire a ferment of ideas and to initiate the 
democratic process. Moreover, it is the committee's function to make 
continuing investigations and studies for the information of the 
House. An informed opinion is a necessary ally in the legislative 
process. 

Nor are the efforts of this committee and the validity of its proposals 
to be impugned by the suggestion, even though now raiely heard, that 
frequently bills based upon the proposals of this committee are re- 
ferred to other committees for disposition. The mandate of this 
committee and its proposals are in the area of the national security 
and necessarily involve varied subsidiary subjects of legislation. It 
is not always possible to compartmentalize, or completely to insulate, 
the functions of the several committees of Congress from each other. 
This is generally acknowledged by those who are well versed in 
parliamentary procedure. Nevertheless, it seems clear that in the 
investigation of subversion and un-American activities, this committee 
has been mandated to service the House as a whole, as well as having 
its special charges. It is a committee highly specialized, trained, and 
experienced in the investigative process within the area of its mandate 
and, therefore, an effective instrumentality well equipped to serve the 
parliamentary process in a unique way. The record will demonstrate 
that the committee has made a determined effort to carry creditably 
the burdens imposed upon it by the Congress. 
This Chapter is divided into six parts: 

Part I. Bills enacted into law in 1961; 
Part II. Bills passed by the House in 1961; 
Part III. Detailed summary of all legislative recommendations 
and subsequent action by the 87th Congress or by executive 
agencies in 1961, including bills under study and pending; 
Part IV. BiUs urgently recommended; 

Part V, Appendix to relevant bills introduced in the 87th 
Congress, 1st session; 

Part VI. Index to committee recommendations. 
"Item" numbers hereafter referred to in the above parts correspond 
to the original "Item" number in the aforementioned 1960 publication 
titled "Legislative Recommendations by House Committee on Un- 
American Activities." Also, it is pointed out that those "Items" 
to which reference is made in Parts I and II of this chapter are re- 
peated and detailed in Part III. It is, therefore, not necessary to 
make reference to the 1960 publication to ascertain the history of the 
recommendations or the status of legislation introduced in the 1st 
session of the 87th Congress. 

Finally, the committee wishes to express its appreciation to the 
Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress, which has 
very kindly prepared in large part the excellent analysis of legislative 
action which follows. 

Part L Bills Enacted into Law in 1961 

Four laws were enacted in 1961 which contain provisions in the 
field of the committee's prior recommendations. 

Public Law 87-801, § 5 — Judicial review of final order of deporta- 
tion. (See Item 99, Part III of this chapter, p. 160, for detaUs.) Sec- 
tion 5 of this act provides an exclusive procedure for judicial review 
of orders of deportation which is intended to frustrate tactics of delay 



AKmjAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 147 

indulged in by certain aliens, including subversives and immoral per- 
sons, who have managed unduly to protract their stay in the United 
States by repetitive and frivolous proceedings before administrative 
agencies and courts. 

Public Law 87-301, § 19 — Loss of United States nationality — burden 
of proof . (See Item 115, Part III of this chapter, p. 164, for details.) 
Section 19 of this act establishes evidentiary rules governing the adjudi- 
cation of cases arising pursuant to provisions of law, where it is claimed 
that an act causing the loss of nationality was involuntary. The pro- 
vision is aimed at proceedings affecting loss of citizenship (expatriation) 
and not at revocation of naturalization (denaturalization). While the 
burden of proof of loss of nationality is upon the party alleging such 
loss, there is by the provisions of this law a presumption of voluntari- 
ness in the case of any person who commits an act of expatriation. 
Although it is true that the presumption is rebuttable, yet the bm"den 
of proving the involuntariness of such act is now imposed upon the 
party claiming it, for such evidence would normally lie in his posses- 
sion. Thus the act does not disturb the body of judicial decisions 
which held that expatriation shall not occur through an involuntary 
act; rather, it shifts the burden of proof of such involuntariness to the 
person who would normally have such proof. 

Public Law 87-366 — Registration of domestic organization controlled 
by foreign government. (See Item 128, Part III of this chapter, p. 169, 
for details.) This act amends the Foreign Agents Registration Act 
so as to include mthin the definition of a "foreign principal" domestic 
organizations which are substantially "supervised, directed, controlled, 
or financed by any foreign government or foreign political party." 

The act originally had defined a "foreign principal" to include a 
domestic organization which is "subsidized" by a foreign government 
or foreign political party. This definition left a loophole through 
which agents of a domestic organization could escape the registration 
requirements, even though their organizations, while not "subsidized," 
were in fact controlled or directed by a foreign government or foreign 
political party. 

Public Law 87-369 — Espionage and censorship jurisdiction extended. 
(See Item 98, Part III of this chapter, p. 160, for details.) The act 
extends the application of chapter 37 of the United States Criminal 
Code, which relates to espionage and censorship, to acts committed 
anywhere in the world. Prior legislation limited jurisdiction to cases 
within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, 
on the high seas, and within the United States. Such limitation on 
jurisdiction prevented prosecution of acts of espionage committed 
against the United States in foreign countries, which was, of course, 
an intolerable situation. 

Part II. Bills Passed by House in 1961 

Four bills in the fields of the committee's recommendations were 
passed by the House of Representatives and are now pending in the 
87th Congress. 

H.R. 3247— The Smith Act. (See Item 122, Part III of this chapter, 
ps 166, for details.) This bill provides that the term "organize," as 
used in the Smith Act, shaU include the recruiting of new members, 
the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing 
clubs. 



148 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

It is the belief of our committee that the ambiguity in the present 
definition of the tenn and the interpretation given it by the Supreme 
Court in the Yates case (354 U.S. 298) have had a harmful effect upon 
the Government's efforts to combat Communist conspiratorial activity 
in this country. That decision reversed the conviction of several 
leading Communists on the ground that the Communist Party of the 
United States was "organized" in 1945 and that the then existing 
3-year statute of limitations barred prosecution for any organizational 
act with respect to the Communist Party, such as the establishment 
of new cells, occurring after 1948. If the construction of the term 
"organize" is not modified in the manner proposed by this bill, then 
a significant provision of the Smith Act is nullified. This bill will 
revitalize the Smith Act, which has been an important weapon toward 
the containment and destruction of that odious conspiracy. 

H.R. If.J+69 — Vessel and 'port security. (See Item 126, Part III of 
this chapter, p. 168, for details.) This bill provides that no individual 
who wilfully fails or refuses to answer, or falsely answers certain 
questions relating to subversive activities, when summoned to appear 
before certain agencies, shall be employed on any merchant vessel of 
the United States or within waterfront facihties in the United States. 

As we stated in our report on the bill, because of the very nature of 
their occupation, seamen may be, and in fact have been, used as 
convenient links in a worldwide Communist communication and 
espionage network. If our merchant marine can be paralyzed by 
sabotage and made the available vehicle for espionage, then all the 
billions we are spending for defense still leave us woefully unprepared. 

H.R. 5751 — Dissemination oj Communist Propaganda in the United 
States. (See Item 128-B, Part III of this chapter, p. 170, for details.) 
This bill has been passed by the House and reported favorably by the 
Senate Judiciary Committee. It was likewise briefly debated in the 
Senate as late as September 26, 1961, and is now pending. 

In order to alert the recipients of mail and the general public to the 
fact that large quantities of Communist propaganda are being intro- 
duced into this country from abroad and disseminated in the United 
States by means of the United States mails, the bill requires that the 
Postmaster General shall publicize such fact (1) by appropriate notices 
posted in post offices, and (2) by notifying recipients, whenever he 
deems it appropriate, that the mail may contain such propaganda. 
The return of such mail to local post offices shall be permitted without 
cost to recipient thereof. This bill does not authorize the Postmaster 
General to open, inspect, or censor any mail. 

H.R. 7053 — Admissibility of confessions. (See Item 97, Part III of 
this chapter, p. 159, for details.) This bill applies only to the District 
of Columbia, but includes the principle which the committee has 
propounded in its recommendation for general application. It pro- 
vides that confessions, otherwise admissible, shall not be inadmissible 
solely because of delay in taking an arrested person before an officer 
empowered to commit persons charged with offenses against the laws 
of the United States. 

According to testimony given by the Chief of Police of the District 
of Columbia before the House Committee on the District of Columbia, 
crime in the District has shown a steady increase for the past 4 years, 
and he attributes this, in large measure, to the Mallory decision 
(354 U.S. 499), in which the Supreme Court held that a confession was 



ANNTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 149 

inadmissible because of such delay. The practical effect of this 
decision is to exclude from evidence many voluntary confessions. 
This bill wlU make "voluntariness" the test of admissibility of confes- 
sions. It does not seek the admission of a confession which was not 
made freely and voluntarily. 

Part III. Detailed Summary of All Legislative Recommendations and 
Subsequent Action by the 87th Congress or by Executive Agencies 
in 1961, Including Bills Under Study and Pending 

Outlawing Organizations Under Foreign Control 

Item 5. Committee recommendation — The enactment of legislation 
to outlaw certain political organizations which are shown to be under 
the control of a foreign government (contained in House Report No. 1, 
77th Congress, dated January 3, 1941). 

Action — It should be noted here that in the Communist Control Act 
of 1954 (68 Stat. 775 § 2) Congress declared the Communist Party 
to have a "role as the agency of a hostile foreign power." Thus, a 
bill proposing to outlaw the Communist Party would be implementing 
the committee's recommendation contained in Item 5. 

In the 87th Congress, the following bills propose to outlaw the Com- 
munist Party by prohibiting membership therein with knowledge of 
its objectives: 

H.R. 2302 (Mr. Smith of California), January 9, 1961; referred to 
the House Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and 
under study. 

H.R. 7388 (Mr. Brooks of Louisiana), June 1, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and 
under study. 

H.R. 7545 (Mr. Hagen of California), June 7, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary; now pending and under study. 

H.R. 8O43 (Mr. McDonough), July 10, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and 
under study. 

Refusal of Foreign Countries To Accept Deportees 

Item 6. Committee recommendation — The enactment of legislation 
to prohibit all immigration from foreign countries which refuse to 
accept the return of their nationals found under American law to be 
deportable from this country (contained in House Report No. 1, 
77th Congress, dated January 3, 1941). 

Action — Present law provides that when the Attorney General 
notifies the Secretary of State that any country refuses or unduly 
delays to accept a deportee who is a national, citizen, subject, or 
resident thereof, the Secretary of State shall instruct the consular 
oflBcers in such country to discontinue the issuance of immigrant visas 
to the nationals, citizens, subjects, or residents of such country until 
such country has accepted such alien (Immigration and Nationality 
Act (Walter-McCarran Act) § 243(g); 8 U.S.C. § 1253(g)). _ 

In the 87th Congress, the following bills propose that "no immigrant 
or nonimmigrant visa (other than a diplomatic visa or a visa issued 
to a duly designated representative of a foreign state in any inter- 
national organization) may be issued," and "no immediate and con- 



150 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

tinued transit may be authorized," during the period in which a 
foreign state refuses to accept or delays in the acceptance of any of its 
nationals, citizens, subjects, or residents, under final order of deporta- 
tion from the United States: 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under 
study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

H.R. 388 (Mr. Hiestand), January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on the Judiciary; now pending and under study. 

Independent Commission on Federal Loyalty 

Item 11. Committee recommendation — That Congress create an 
independent commission with authority to investigate and to order 
the discharge of any employee or official of the Federal Government 
whose loyalty to the United States is found to be in doubt (contained 
in House Report No. 274£, 79th Congress, dated January 2, 1947). 

Action— H.R. 972 (Mr. Hiestand), January 3, 1961, The Federal 
Security Act, proposes to estabhsh a Central Security Office to coor- 
dinate the administration of Federal personnel loyalty and security 
programs, and to prescribe administrative procedure for the hearing 
and review of cases arising under such programs. 

The bill was referred to the House Committee on Post Office and 
Civil Service, and is now pending. 

H.R. 6183 (Mr. Gubser), April 11, 1961, proposes that the President 
shall designate one agency of the Federal Government to conduct all 
secm'ity investigations of civil officers and employees of the United 
States, and of persons who apply for employment as such officers and 
employees. 

The bill was referred to the House Committee on Post Office and 
Civil Service, and is now pending. 

Restriction of Tax-Exemption Privileges of Communist 
Educational and Charitable Organizations 

Item 17. Committee recommendation — Legislation should be enacted 
to restrict the benefits of certain tax-exemption privileges now ex- 
tended to a number of Communist fronts posing as educational, 
charitable, and relief organizations (contained in House Report 2742, 
79th Congress, dated January 2, 1947). 

Action — •Present law denies income tax exemptions under § 101 of 
the Internal Revenue Code, to Communist organizations required to 
register under § 7 of the Internal Security Act (Internal Security Act 
of 1950 (64 Stat. 997 § 11 ; 50 U.S.C. § 790)). 

In the 87th Congress: 

H.R. 4700 (Mr. Walter), dated February 21, 1961, proposes to 
amend section 11 of the Internal Security Act (known as the Subversive 
Activities Control Act of 1950) so that its provisions for tax-denial will 
not be dependent upon the registration requirement of the organiza- 
tion involved. The bill would deny certain tax-exemptions to Com- 
munist organizations whether or not they register or are required to 
register. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 151 

The bill was referred to the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities and is now pending and under study. 

H.R. 4862 (Mr. Scherer), dated February 23, 1961, is identical with 
H.R. 1^700, above. It was referred to the House Committee on 
Un-American Activities, and is now pending and under study. 

B..R. 9090 (Mr. Mills), dated September 7, 1961, proposes to amend 
the Internal Revenue Code, by adding a section (§ 291) which would 
deny certain income tax exemptions to Communist-action organiza- 
tions, Communist-front organizations, and Communist-infiltrated or- 
ganizations. The denial is not made to depend upon the registration 
requirement. 

The bUl was referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means, 
and is now pending. 

Employment of Subversives in Defense Plants — Safeguards 

Item 29. Committee recommendation — Adoption of H.R. 3903, 81st 
Congress, providing for safeguards against employment of subversive 
individuals in defense plants (contained in House Report No. 1950, 
81st Congress, dated March 15, 1950). 

Action — Under present law, § 5 of the Internal Security Act oj 1950 
(64 Stat. 992; 50 U.S.C. §784), members of a Communist-action 
organization are forbidden to hold employment in a defense facility. 

In the 87th Congress, the foUowmg bills propose to amend the 
Subversive Activities Control Act (Title I of the Internal Security Act 
oj 1950) so as to authorize the Federal Government to guard strategic 
defense facilities against individuals believed disposed to commit 
subversive acts. Proof of actual Commimist Party membership will 
not be required under these bills. However, the bills do require that 
there be reasonable ground to believe that such individuals may engage 
in subversive acts, and provide for a hearing to allow them to answer 
the charges against them. Where an individual is summarily barred, 
by regulation, from access to a defense facility, he shall be entitled 
to a hearing after proper notification in writing of the charges against 
him. 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under 
study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under 
study. 

H.R. 5Ji2J^ (Mr. Walter), dated March 9, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under 
study. 

H.R. 5It25 (Mr. Scherer), dated March 9, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under 
study. 

S. 1769 (Mr. Butler), dated May 3, 1961; referred to the Senate 
Committee on the Judiciary; now pending. 

Detention of Undeportable Alien Communists 

Item 30. Committee recommendation — H.R. 10, 81st Congress, pro- 
viding for the supervision and detention of undeportable aliens, should 

21-204—63 11 



152 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

be enacted into law in order to deal with thousands of alien Com- 
munists refused acceptance by the country of their birth (contained 
in House Report No. 1950, 81st Congress, dated March 15, 1950). 

Action — Present law, § 242(c)-(h) of the Walter-McCarran Immigra- 
tion Act (66 Stat. 210-212; 8 U.S.C. § 1252(c)-(h)) provides for deten- 
tion and supervision of such aliens. 

In the 87th Congress, the following bills seek to strengthen the 
provisions of § 242(c)-(h) of the Walter-McCarran Immigration Act, 
by giving the Attorney General wider power to return to detention 
aliens under final order of deportation who have violated any require- 
ment or restraint imposed upon them under certain provisions of said 
§ 242, whenever the Attorney General determines that the national 
security requires the detention of that alien. 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under 
study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961 ; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under 
study. 

H.R. 388 (Mr. Hiestand), dated January 3, 1961, referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary; now pending. 

Immunity for Congressional Witnesses 

Item 41, Committee recommendation — Legislation to effect a greater 
latitude in granting immunity from prosecution to witnesses appearing 
before congressional, executive, or judicial hearings (contained in 
House Report No. 2431, 82nd Congress, dated February 17, 1952). 

Action— FvQSQni law (68 Stat. 754 Ch. 769 ; 18 U.S.C. § 3486) author- 
izes a grant of immunity from prosecution to witnesses compelled to 
give testimony tending to incriminate them, in the course of an 
investigation, relating to an attempt to endanger the national security 
of the United States, held by Congress or by a congressional committee, 
or in any case or proceeding relating to such subject matter before 
any grand jury or court of the United States. 

In the 87th Congress, the following bills propose to amend 18 U.S.C. 
§ 3486 to add membership in the Commimist Party as a means whereby 
the national security may be endangered, so that § 3486 as amended 
by such bnis will permit the compelling of testimony relating to such 
membership and the granting of immunity from prosecution in con- 
nection therewith: 

H.R. 2302 (Mr. Smith of California), dated January 9, 1961; 
referred to the House Committee on Un-American Activities; now 
pending and under study. 

H.R. 7388 (Mr. Brooks of Louisiana), dated June 1, 1961; referred 
to the House Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and 
under study. 

H.R. 8O43 (Mr. McDonough), dated July 10, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and 
under study. 

A Senate bill proposes to amend 18 U.S.C. § 3486 in other respects: 

S. 1386 (Mr. Keating), dated March 20, 1961, proposes that in 
any proceeding before a grand jury or court of the United States the 
compelling of testimony and the granting of immunity from prosecu- 
tion in connection therewith be extended to aU evidence which in the 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 153 

judgment of a United States attorney is necessary to the public 
interest. 

The bill was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary and 
is now pending. 

Restrictions on Travel by Soviet and Satellite Diplomats 

Item 42. Committee recommendation — That reciprocal restrictions 
be enforced by this country on the travel of Soviet and satellite 
diplomats (contained in House Report 2431, 82nd Congress; dated 
February 17, 1952). 

Action — H.J. Res. 153 (Mr. Rivers of South Carolina), dated 
January 18, 1961, proposes that the United States withhold from 
representatives of foreign nations privileges which such nations with- 
hold from representatives of the United States. Among the privileges 
which are listed as being withheld from diplomatic, consular, and 
military representatives of the United States are the privileges to be 
free to visit areas having no military significance, and to be free to 
use transportation and communication facilities. The duty of re- 
ciprocal restraint upon foreign diplomats is placed on the officers of 
the United States whose duties relate to the granting of privileges to 
representatives of foreign nations, and wilful violation of this duty 
is made punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 
-^ This bill was referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs 
and is now pending. 

Revocation of Commission in Armed Forces 

Item bb. Committee recommendation — That in any instance where 
a person holding a commission in the armed services chooses to refuse 
to answer questions concerning his present or past membership in the 
Communist Party, such commission shall be immediately revoked 
(contained in House Report No. 1192, 83rd Congress, dated February 
6, 1954). 

Action— H.R. 224 (Mr. Hiestand), dated January 3, 1961, proposes 
a standard of loyalty to the United States Government to be pre- 
scribed for military personnel. The bill prescribes procedure for the 
determination of the loyalty of such personnel. Wlienever it is deter- 
mined after proper hearing that there is a reasonable doubt as to the 
loyalty to the United States Government of a member of one of the 
Armed Forces, he sliall be discharged according to specified methods. 

In determining whether there is reasonable doubt as to the loyalty 
of any individual, activities and associations of that individual of 
certain categories may be considered. Among these categories is (6) 
membership in an organization found by Congress to have been or- 
ganized or utilized for the purpose of advancing the objectives of the 
Communist movement, and (8) refusal to testify, upon grounds of 
self-incrimination, in any authorized inquir^y relating to subversive 
activities conducted by any congressional committee, Federal court, 
Federal grand jury, or any other duly authorized Federal agency, as 
to any question relating to subversive activities of the individual 
involved or others, unless the individual, after opportunity to do so, 
satisfactorily explains his refusal to testify. 

The bill was referred to the House Committee on Armed Services 
and is now pending. 



154 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Denial of Second-Class Mailing Privileges to Subversive 

Publications 

Item 59. Committee recommendation — That legislation be enacted 
forbidding the use of the United States mails under second-class mail- 
ing privileges to subversive publications emanating either from foreign 
sources or from sources within the borders of the United States 
(contained in House Report No. 67, 84th Congress, dated January 
26, 1955). 

Action — The following bills, now pending, contain provisions to 
deny the use of the United States postal service for the carriage of 
Communist political propaganda : 

H.R. 9411 (Mr. Derwinski), dated September 23, 1961, referred to 
the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service and now 
pending. 

H.R. 94.55 (Mr. Rousselot), dated September 26, 1961, referred to 
the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service and now 
pending. 

H.E. 9465 (Mr. Beermann), dated September 26, 1961, referred to 
the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, now pending. 

H.R. 9250 (Mr. Mills), dated September 15, 1961, proposes to 
amend § 305 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1305) to prohibit 
the import of Communist propaganda. This bill was referred to the 
House Committee on Ways and Means and is now pending. 

H.R. 9120 (Mr. Walter), dated September 11, 1961, proposes to 
amend the Subversive Activities Control Act oj 1950 so as to require the 
Postmaster General in certain cases to give notice of the use of the 
mails for the dissemination of Communist propaganda. The bill was 
referred to the House Committee on Un-American Activities and is 
now pending. (See Item 128-B, p. 170.) 

Affidavit by Government Contractor 

Item 74. Committee recommendation — That appropriate legislation 
be enacted requiring an affidavit by any person bidding for a Govern- 
ment contract, that he is not now and has not been within the past 
10 years a member of any organization advocating the overthrow of 
the Government by force and violence (contained in House Report 
No. 53, 85th Congi-ess, dated Januarv 2, 1957). 

Action— H.R. 9066 (Mr. Rogers of Texas), dated September 6, 1961, 
requires Government contractors, their officers, employees, and the 
labor organizations representing tliem, to file loyalty affidavits in the 
office of the contractor before the Government may enter into a 
contract with such employer. The bill was referred to the House 
Committee on the Judiciary and is now pending. 

Protecting the Security of Confidential Files 

Item 80 (6). Committee recommendation — That means be provided, 
during criminal or civil proceedings in which the United States is a 
party, for the withholding of information contained in confidential 
Government files the production of which would be prejudicial to the 
secm'ity of the United States (contained in the Internal Security 
Amendments Act of 1958, dated January 13, 1958, H.R. 9937, 85th 
Congress, presented by the committee chairman, Mr. Walter). 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 155 

Action. — Present law (18 U.S.C § 3500) contains such a provision 
but makes it applicable to criminal cases only, and omits any refer- 
ence to the effect of the production of such Government files upon 
the security of the United States, stressing mainly the relevancy of 
same. 

In the S7th Congress, The following bills provide a means in any 
civil or criminal proceeding to which the United States is a party for 
withholding any documents of a Federal agency which contain infor- 
mation of a confidential nature, the disclosure of which the Attorney 
General concludes would be prejudicial to the public interest, safetj'', 
or the security of the United States. Provision is made for the pro- 
tection of the constitutional rights of the party affected thereby: 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities, now pending and under study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961 ; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

Unauthorized Disclosure of Certain Defense Information 

Item 80(8). Committee recommendation — That it be made unlawful 
for any person who has obtained mformation which is classified "top 
secret," "atomic top secret," "secret," or "atomic secret" by Presi- 
dential Executive Order, to communicate same to any person who is 
not authorized by law to receive such information (contained in 
the Internal Security Amendments Act of 1958, dated January 13, 1958, 
H.R. 9937, 85th Congress, presented by the committee chairman, 
Mr. Walter). 

Action — The following bills carry such a provision : 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

Revocation of Naturalization Illegally Procured 

Item 80(15). Committee recommendation — That the Walter-Mc- 
Carran Immigration and Nationality Act (§ 340(a)) be amended to 
provide that a United States Attorney shall on his own initiative or 
upon affidavit showing good cause therefor, institute proceedings to 
revoke naturalization illegally procured, or procured by concealment 
of a material fact or by wilful misrepresentation (contained in the 
Internal Security Amendments Act of 1958, dated January 13, 1958, 
H.R. 9937, 85th Congress, presented by the committee chau-man, 
Mr. Walter). 

Action — Present law (8 U.S.C. § 1451(a)) provides that the United 
States Attorney shall institute proceedings, only upon affidavit show- 
ing good cause therefor, and omits as a ground for such revocation, 
that the naturalization was illegally procured. It is true that 
§ 1451(g) provides for revocation of naturalization procured in viola- 
tion of law, but it must have been "knowingly" so procured. 

In the 87th Congress, the following bills contain the exact wording 
of the committee's recommendation: 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 



156 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

H.E. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

Loss OP Nationality of Native-Born or Naturalized Citizen 

Item 80(16). Committee recommendation — That § 349(a) of the 
Walter-McCarran Immigration and Nationality Act be amended to 
provide that accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any 
office, post, or employment under any foreign state or any political or 
geographical subdivision of any foreign state, whether or not recog- 
nized by the United States, which is Communist-dominated, Com- 
munist-occupied, or Communist-controlled (as determined by the 
Secretary of State) , shall be grounds for loss of nationality by a person 
who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturaliza- 
tion (contained in the Internal Security Amendments Act of 1958, 
dated January 13, 1958, H.E. 9937 , 85tn Congress, presented by the 
committee chairman, Mr. Walter). 

Action — Present law (8 U.S.C. § 1481(a)(4)) provides for such loss 
of nationality by acceptance of such service "under the government of 
a foreign state or political subdivision thereof" if the person accepting 
same has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state, or if in 
the performance of such services an oath of allegiance is required. 
The committee recommendation omits these two prerequisites in order 
to render a person liable to loss of nationality, if such service is ren- 
dered in a country which is determined by the Secretary of State to be 
either Communist-dominated, -occupied, or -controlled. 

In the 87th Congress, the following bills contain provisions identical 
to the committee reconunendation: 

H.R. 6 (Mr, Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities ; now pending and uder study. 

Fraudulent Use of Social Security Cards 

Item 89. Committee recommendation — That § 1107 of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. § 1307) be amended by the addition of a 
provision that any person, who, for the purpose of prociu-ing, obtaining, 
or retaining employment by, in, or upon any defense facility, war 
utilities, national defense premises, or national defense utilities, shall 
exhibit to his employer or prospective employer a social security 
account number card bearing a false, assumed, or fictitious name, 
without disclosing his true identity shall be fined not more than 
$1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year or both (contained in 
House Report No. 187,^ 86th Congi'ess, dated March 8, 1959). 

Action — The following bills carry the identical provision recom- 
mended: 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities ; now pending and under study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 



annual report for the year 1961 157 

Surveillance by Technical Devices 

Item 90. Committee recommendation — Information obtained through 
surveillance by technical devices should be permitted as evidence in 
matters affecting the national security, provided that adequate safe- 
guards are adopted to prevent any abuse of civU liberties (contained 
in House Report No. 187, 86th Congress, dated March 8, 1959). 

Action — The following bills contain such provisions: 

II.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961, proposes that in the 
conduct of any investigation to detect or prevent any offense against 
the security of the United States, any security investigative agency 
may, upon express written authorization given by the Attorney Gen- 
eral to the head of such agency, intercept any wire or radio communi- 
cation if that interception is specifically described as to place and time 
in the authorization given. Information thus obtained may be dis- 
closed (1) to the head of the security investigative agency or his officer 
or agent, makmg the investigation, (2) by the head of such mvestiga- 
tive agency to the President, the National Security CouncU, the head 
of any department or agency in the executive branch, or the head of 
any other security investigative agency, (3) by any officer or agent of 
a security investigative agency in givmg testimony in any criminal 
proceeding before any court, grand jury, or court-martial of the United 
States for the prosecution of an offense against the security of the 
United States, and (4) to any attorney for the United States who is 
duly authorized to engage in or supervise the prosecution of that 
offense. 

In any such proceeding, evidence so obtained, if otherwise admis- 
sible, shall not be excluded because of the means by which it was 
obtained. Unauthorized disclosure of information obtained through 
authorized interception is made punishable by fine or imprisonment 
or both. 

This bill was referred to the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities; is now pending and under study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961, contains a provision 
identical to that contained in H.R. 6. H.R. 7 was referred to the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities; is now pending and 
under study. 

H.R. 387 (Mr. Hiestand), dated January 3, 1961, contains a pro- 
vision identical to that contained in H.R. 6. H.R. 387 was referred 
to the House Committee on the Judiciary and is now pending. 

H.R. 8U2 (Mr. King of New York), dated July 13, 1961, provides 
that no Federal law shall be construed to prohibit the interception 
by a State agency or law enforcement officer in compliance with State 
law of any wire or radio communication, and divulgence of same in 
State court, if such interception was made after determination by the 
State court that reasonable grounds existed for belief that such inter- 
ception might disclose evidence of the commission of a crime. 

This bill was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary 
and is now pending. 

H.R. 896 Ji- (Mr. Walter), dated August 29, im\— Federal Wire 
Interception Act — makes it unlawful to (1) intercept or attempt to 
intercept or to conspire to intercept or attempt to intercept, any 
wire communication or (2) divulge to any person the contents of any 
wire communication. 



158 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

Permits the following persons to intercept any wire communication: 

(1) the sender; (2) the intended recipient; (3) a person authorized by 
either the sender or intended recipient; (4) an agent of a communica- 
tions facility in the normal course of his employment; and (5) an 
investigative officer as hereinafter described. 

Permits the follo\ving persons to divulge the contents of any wire 
communication: (1) the sender and the intended recipient; (2) any 
third party when such information has been divulged by either the 
sender or intended recipient, or any person while giving testimony as 
hereinafter provided; and (3) any person when complying with the 
provisions of this Act. 

Authorizes the Attorney General to approve applications empower- 
ing Federal law enforcement officers to intercept any wire communica- 
tion, provided the Attorney General determines there is reasonable 
ground for the belief that (1) a felony has or is about to be committed; 

(2) essential evidence will be obtained thereby; and (3) no other 
means are readily available for obtaining such evidence. 

Permits the Attorney General to authorize any Federal law enforce- 
ment officer to apply to a judge for leave to intercept a wire com- 
munication to obtain evidence or prevent the commission of a felony 

Permits State and local law enforcement officers, when authorized 
by law, to make application to a judge for leave to intercept a wire 
communication in order to obtain evidence or to prevent the commis- 
sion of a felony. 

Empowers judges to enter ex parte orders granting leave to inter- 
cept wire communications subject to conditions (1), (2), and (3) supra. 

Requires applications and orders to be specific, definite, and 
particular. 

Limits period covered by orders granting leave to intercept a wire 
communication to 60 days. 

Lists purposes for which lawfully intercepted information may be 
used. 

Prescribes penalties for unauthorized interception or disclosure of 
wire communications. 

Requires judges to file reports within 30 days relating to the 
approval or denial of applications to intercept wire communications. 

Amends the Communications Act oj 1934 to reflect the foregoing 
changes. 

This bill was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary and 
is now pending. 

S. 1493 (Mr. Dodd), dated March 30, 1961, contains practically the 
same provisions contained in H.R. 8964- S. 1495 was referred to the 
Senate Committee on the Judiciary and is now pending. 

S. 1822 (Mr. Hruska), dated May 8, 1961, provides that no Federal 
law shall prohibit the interception by a State agency or law-enforce- 
ment officer in compliance with State law, if such interception was 
made after determination by a court of such State that probable cause 
existed for belief that a crime has been, or is about to be, committed 
and that the particular wire facility involved is being, or will be used 
in the furtherance of the commission of that crime. Leave granted 
to intercept shall be for a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 
30 days. 

This bill was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary 
and is now pending. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 159 

Statute of Limitations for Subversive Activities 

Item 92. Committee recommendation — That the statute of limitations 
for prosecution of the offenses of treason, espionage, sabotage, and 
other subversive activities be amended so as to permit prosecutions 
for a period not to exceed 15 years from the time of the commission of 
the offense (contained in House Report No. 187, 86th Congress, dated 
March 8, 1959). 

^c/wn— Present laws (50 U.S.C. § 783(e) and 18 U.S.C. § 3291) 
provide for a 10-year limitation period. 

In the 87th Congress, the following bills contain a provision proposing 
an amendment to extend the 10-year period, for treason, espionage, 
sabotage, sedition, and subversive activities, within which an offense 
for same may be prosecuted to 15 years: 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

Admissibility of Confessions 

Item 97. Committee recommendation — That evidence, including state- 
ments and confessions, otherwise admissible, shall not be inadmissible 
solely because of delay in arraignment, provided that such delay shall 
be considered as an element in determining the voluntary nature of 
such statements and confessions. The introduction into evidence of 
confessions, etc., made to law enforcement officers should be prohibited 
unless the arrested person has been advised that he is not required to 
make a statement and that any statement so made may be used 
against him (contained in H.R. 1990, 8'6th Congress, introduced by 
the committee chairman, Mr. Walter, on January 9, 1959). 

Action — The following bills were introduced in the 87th Congress, 
carrying provisions on this subject. 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961, and H.R. 7 (Mr. 
Scherer), dated January 3, 1961, include provisions which are iden- 
tical to the recommendation. They were referred to the House Com- 
mittee on Un-American Activities; are now pending and under study. 

H.R. 1^67 (Mr. McCulloch), dated January 3, 1961, and H.R. 2785 
(Mr. Poff), dated January 16, 1961, and H.R. 3248 (Mr. Cramer), 
dated January 25, 1961, contain provisions identical to the recom- 
mendation, except for the omission of the requirement that delay in 
arraignment shall be considered as an element in determining the 
voluntary nature of such statements and confessions. These three 
bills were referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary and 
are now pending. 

H.R. 654 (Mr. Colmer), dated January 3, 1961, provides that no 
confession or other statement, otherwise admissible, shall be inad- 
missible in evidence solely because of delay in taking the person 
making such confession or statement before a commissioner or other 
judicial officer. This bill was referred to the House Committee on 
the Judiciary and is now pending. 

H.R. 7053 (Mr. James C. Davis), dated May 15, 1961, apphes only 
to the District of Columbia, and provides that in the courts of the 
District of Columbia, evidence, including statements and confessions, 



160 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Otherwise admissible, shall not be inadmissible solely because of delay 
in taking an arrested person before a commissioner or other officer 
empowered to commit persons charged with offenses against the laws 
of the United States. However, no statement or confession made by 
any person during an interrogation by a law enforcement officer made 
while such person is under arrest shall be admissible unless prior to 
such interrogation the arrested person had been advised that he is 
not required to make a statement and that any statement made by 
him may be used against him. 

This bill was passed by the House on June 12, 1961, was referred 
to the Senate Committee on the District of Columbia on June 13, 
1961, and is now pending. 

S. 2067 (Mr. Ervin, for himself, Mr. Eastland, Mr. Johnston, Mr. 
McClellan, and Mr. Byrd of Virginia) dated June 13, 1961, provides 
that in the courts of the United States or the District of Columbia 
voluntary admissions and confessions shall be admissible in any crimi- 
nal proceeding and the finding of the trial court in respect to the 
voluntariness of the admission or confession shall be binding upon 
any reviewing court in the event it is supported by substantial evidence. 

This bill was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary 
and is now pending. 

Espionage and Censorship — Jurisdiction Extended 

Item 98. Committee recommendation — That the jurisdiction of the 
United States relating to espionage and censorship be extended to acts 
committed anywhere in the world. The provisions hitherto in effect 
extended only within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the 
United States, on the high seas, and within the United States. (Com- 
mittee's recommendation was contained in H.R. 1992, 86th Congress, 
which was introduced by its chairman, Mr. Walter, on January 9, 
1959, and which was passed by the House on March 2, 1959.) 

Action — In the 87th Congress, tliree bills were introduced: H.R. 2730 
(Mr. Poff), dated January 16, 1961, H.R. 6746 (Mr. Celler), dated 
May 2, 1961, and S. 1895 (Mr. Eastland), dated May 17, 1961. 

H.R. 2730 extends the apphcation of Chapter 37 of Title 18 of the 
United States Code, relating to espionage and censorship, to acts 
committed anywhere in the world. The bill was enacted into law 
and is now Public Law 87-369. 

Judicial Review of Final Order of Deportation 

Item 99. Committee recommendation — The committee's recom- 
mendation was embodied in H.R. 2807, 86th Congress, introduced 
by its chairman, Mr. Walter, on January 19, 1959, and passed by the 
House on July 7, 1959. 

H.R. 2807 establishes a sole and exclusive procedure for the judicial 
review of all final orders of deportation. It limits the venue of such 
hearings to (1) the judicial circuit in which the administrative pro- 
ceedings before the special inquiry officer were conducted, or (2) the 
judicial circuit wherein the petitioner resides. It provides that such 
action shall be brought against the Immigration and Naturalization 
Service, as respondent, and that, except for a determination as to a 
claim that the petitioner is a citizen of the United States, the petition 



ANNTJAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 161 

shall be determined solely upon the administrative record upon which 
the deportation order is based. It specifies that the findings of fact 
by the Attorney General, if supported by reasonable, substantial, and 
probative evidence on the record considered as a whole, shall be 
conclusive. 

It specifically provides that nothing contained in this section shall 
be construed to require the Attorney General to defer deportation of 
an alien after issuance of a deportation order because of the right of 
judicial review or to preclude the Attorney General from detaining 
or continuing to detain an alien at any time after issuance of a de- 
portation order. 

It specifically provides that any alien against whom a final order 
of exclusion has been made may obtain judicial review of such order 
by habeas corpus proceedings and not otherwise and that such orders 
shaU not be reviewed until the alien has exhausted the administrative 
remedies available to him. 

Action— H.R. 187 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961, contains 
the identical provisions of the recommendation. H.R. 187 was 
passed by the House on July 10, 1961, and was referred to the Senate 
Committee on the Judiciary on July 11, 1961. 

S. 2212 (Mr. Ervin), dated July 10, 1961, is identical to II.R. 187. 

S. 2237 (Mr. Pastore, for himself and Mr. Dirksen), dated July 12, 
1961, was passed by the Senate with provisions covering only the 
entry of certain eligible alien orphans. It was referred to the House 
Committee on the Judiciary on August 15, 1961, which reported it 
out on August 30, 1961 {House Report No. 1086), with the provisions 
of H.R. 187 incorporated as section 5 of the bill. It was thus passed 
with the provisions concerning judicial review of orders of deportation 
which are identical to the committee's recommendations. The bill 
was enacted as Public Law 87-301 . 

Definition of Treason Broadened 

Item 100. Committee recommendation — That the United States Con- 
stitution be amended to broaden the constitutional definition of 
treason so as to include adherence to any group which advocates tl;e 
overthrow of the Government by force or violence (contained in 
H.J. Res. 100, introduced by the committee chairman, Mr. Walter, 
on January 7, 1959). 

Action— H.J. Res. 482 (Mr. Bennett of Florida), dated July 17, 
1961, contains such a provision. The Resolution was referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary and is now pending. 

Loyalty Oath for Federal Judges 

Item 101. Committee recommendation — That the oath of ofiice 
prescribed for justices and judges of the United States include a 
direct oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United 
States (contained in H.R. 4106, 86th Congress, introduced by the 
committee chairman, Mr. Walter, on February 4, 1959). 

Action — H.R. 1985 (Mr. Utt), dated January 6, 1961, contains the 
identical provision recommended. This bill v^as referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary and is now pending. 



162 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

S. 7 85 (Mr. Thurmond), dated January 31, 1961, contains the 
recommended provision. This bill was referred to the Senate Com- 
mittee on the Judiciary and is now pending. 

Attorney General's Powers to Supervise Deportable Aliens 

Item 102, Committee recommendation — The committee's recommen- 
dation is contained in H.R. 5136, introduced by its chairman, Mr. 
Walter, on March 2, 1959. 

It permits the Attorney General to detain until deportation any 
alien in the interest of national security whenever such alien has 
violated certain rcquhements or restraints, under the order initiating 
deportation proceedings. It otherwise broadens the authority of the 
Attorney General to supervise and/or restrict activities of aliens, to 
(1) insm-e continued availability for departure of such alien; (2) aid 
the Attorney General in taking evidence concerning the privilege of 
any person to travel or reside in the United States; and (3) to aid in 
the determination of v/hether the alien is or has (a) violated a penal 
statute of the United States, or (b) engaged in conduct dangerous to 
public safety or security. 

Action— H.R. 6. (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961, and 
H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961, both contain the 
identical provision recommended. These two bills were referred to 
the House Committee on Un-American Activities; are now pending 
and under study. 

Effectiveness of State Sedition Laws 

Item 104. Committee recommendation — That H.R. S, 86th Congress, 
which passed the House on June 24, 1959, be enacted into law. The 
bill contains provisions similar to recommendations made by the 
committee in its report for the year 1958 {see Item 82), and provides 
that no act of Congress should be construed as indicating a congi'es- 
sional intent to occupy the field in which such act operates, to the 
exclusion of all State laws on the subject matter, unless such act 
contains an express provision to that effect. The enactment of such 
a law would counteract the decision of the Supreme Court of the 
United States in the case of Pennsylvania v. Nelson, 350 U.S. 497 
(1956), which held that the Smith Act preempted the field of sedition 
and subversion in favor of the Federal Government (contained in 
House Report No. 1251, 86th Congress, dated February 8, 1960.) 

Action — The following bills, now pending in the 87th Congress, 
contain provisions similar to those recommended: 

H.R. 3 (Mr. Smith of Virginia), dated January 3, 1961; referred to 
House Committee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

H.R. 284 (Mr. Abernethy), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 392 (Mr. Hiestand), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 536 (Mr. Poff), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on the Judiciary. 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 163 

H.R. 568 (Mr. Selden), dated January 3, 1961 ; referred to the House 
Committee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 649 (Mr. Colmer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 654 (Mr. Colmer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 1191 (Mr. Matthews), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. S245 (Mr. Cramer), dated January 25, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 4096 (Mr. Flynt), dated February 9, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 7146 (Mr. Meader), dated May 17, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on the Judiciary. 

S. 3 (Mr. McClellan, for himself and others), dated January 5, 
1961 ; referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. 

Clarification of the "Advocacy" Clause of the Smith Act 

Item 106. Committee recommendation — The committee urges the 
adoption of H.R. 1991, introduced in the 86th Congress by the com- 
mittee's chairman, Mr. Walter, and the consideration of any other 
legislative proposal which would renew the effectiveness of the Smith 
Act as a weapon in the national defense and the internal securit}'' of 
the country. 

H.R. 1991 defines the terms "advocate," "teach," "duty," "neces- 
sity," "force," and "violence" as used in that section of the Federal 
Criminal Code dealing with advocating overthrow of the Government 
{The Smith Act). (Contained in House Report No. 1251, 86th Con- 
gress, dated February 8, 1960.) 

Action — The recommended provision is contained in H.R. 6 (Mr. 
Walter) and H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred 
to the House Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending 
and under study. 

Communist Lobbying Activities 

Item 111. Committee recommendation — That the Federal Regulation 
oj Lobbying Act (2 U.S.C. §§ 267(a) and 261) be amended so as to 
require certain additional information from persons required to 
register as lobbyists, including disclosure of Communist Party mem- 
bership at any tune since January 1, 1948 (contained in House Report 
No. 1251, 86th Congress, dated February 8, 1960). 

Action — The recommended provision is contained in H.R. 6 (Mr. 
Walter) and H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred 
to the House Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and 
under study. 

Order of Subversive Activities Control Board To Eegister 
Made Applicable to Successor Organization 

Item 112. Committee recommendation — The Committee recom- 
mended the enactment of H.R. 8429, 86th Congress, introduced by its 
chairman, Mr. Walter, on July 28, 1959, and passed by the House on 
September 7, 1959. 



164 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

The bill provides a procedure whereby a final order of the Sub- 
versive Activities Control Board requiring an organization to register 
as a Communist organization, or determining it to be Communist 
infiltrated, shall apply to an organization determined by the Board to 
be a successor organization. 

Authorizes the Attorney General to file with the Board a petition 
for a determination that an organization is a successor. Permits 
joinder of affiliated organizations. Permits an organization, within 
6 months after such determination, to petition the Board for a deter- 
mination that it is no longer a successor. Provides for speed, when 
required. 

Requires the Board, in maldng such determination to consider the 
identity between the (1) managers; (2) policies; (3) assets; and (4) 
membership of the alleged successor organizations and the Commun- 
ist predecessor organizations. Requires the Board, after hearing, 
to state in writing findings of fact and conclusions on the issues, and 
enter its order thereon. 

Action — The recommended provisions are contained in H.R. 6 
(Mr. Walter) and H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; 
referred to the House Committee on Un-American Activities; now 
pending and under study. 

Loyalty op Grand and Petit Jurors 

Item 114. Committee recommendation — Enactment of legislation 
which would require that a grand or petit juror take an oath or 
affirmation that he does not advocate, nor is he a member of an organi- 
zation which advocates, the violent overthrow of the Government 
(contained in H.R. 1185, 86th Congress, introduced by the committee 
chairman, Mr. Walter, on January 7, 1959). 

Action — The following, bills now pending, contain the recom- 
mended provisions: 

H.R. 6 (Mr, Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities; now pending and under study. 

H.R. 7 ((Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities ; now pending and under 
study. 

H.R. 189 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961 ; referred to the House 
Committee on the Judiciary. 

Loss OF U.S. Nationality — Burden of Proof 

Item 115. Committee recomm-endation — The committee's recommen- 
dation is contained in H.R. 10512, 86th Congress, introduced by its 
chairman, Mr. Walter, on February 17, 1960. It provides that when 
loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action under a 
Federal statute, the burden of proving such loss by a preponderance 
of the evidence shall be upon the party claiming that such loss oc- 
curred. The bill raises a rebuttable presumption of voluntariness in 
the case of any person who commits an act of expatriation. 

Action — The identical provision is contained in H.R. 192 (Mr. 
Walter) dated January 3, 1961. 

S. 2237 (Mr. Pastore, for himself and Mr. Dirksen), dated July 12, 
1961, was passed by the Senate with provisions covering only the entry 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 165 

of certain eligible alien orphans. It was referred to the House Com- 
mittee on the Judiciary on August 15, 1961, which reported it out on 
August 30, 1961 {House Report No. 1086), with the provisions of 
§ 5 of H.R. 192 (covering burden of proof of loss of U.S. nationality) 
incorporated as § 19 of ^S. 2237. The bill was enacted with this pro- 
vision and is now Public Law 87-301. 

Communist Not To Appear as Counsel Before Executive 

Agencies 

Item 117. Committee recommendation — The committee's recom- 
mendation is embodied in H.R. 12793, 86th Congress, introduced by 
its chairman, Mr. Walter, on June 23, 1960. 

It prohibits any person to appear as counsel before executive 
agencies, congressional committees, or judicial proceedings, who has 
been a member of the Communist Party or other similar organization 
which urges the forcible overthrow of the Government, mthin the 
5 years next preceding such appearance. Prohibition applies to one 
who was identified under oath as such a member, unless he has sworn 
under oath that such identification is not true. It provides a penalty 
of not over $1,000 or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both, 
for violation or attempted violation of this provision. 

Action— H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter) and H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated 
January 3, 1961, contain the identical provisions recommended. 
Both these bills were referred to the House Committee on Un-Ameri- 
can Activities; now pending and under study. 

The recommendations that follow are all contained in the Com- 
mittee's Annual Report for 1960, House RepoH No. 2237, 86th Con- 
gress, dated January 2, 1961. 

Passport Security 

Item 120. Committee recommendation — The adoption of legislation 
authorizing the Secretary of State to deny passports to persons whose 
purpose in traveling abroad is to engage in activities which will ad- 
vance the objectives of the Communist conspiracy. 

Action — The following bills, now pending, contain similar pro- 
visions : 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), dated January 3, 1961; referred to House 
Committee on Un-American Activities. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), dated January 3, 1961; referred to House 
Committee on Un-American Activities. 

H.R. 388 (Mr. Hiestand), January 3, 1961; referred to House Com- 
mittee on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 935 (Mr. Collier), January 3, 1961; referred to House Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 973 (Mr. Hosmer), January 3, 1961; referred to House Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 1086 (Mr. Selden), January 3, 1961; referred to House Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 2485 (Mr. Judd), January 12, 1961; referred to House Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 2538 (Mr. Derounian), January 12, 1961; referred to House 
Committee on Foreign Affairs. 



166 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 

H.R. S170 (Mr. King of New York), January 24, 1961; referred to 
House Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 4077 (Mr. Curtis of Missouri), February 9, 1961; referred to 
House Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 4461 (Mr. Rogers of Florida), February 16, 1961; referred to 
House Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 5722 (Mr. Stafford), March 20, 1961; referred to House Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 7079 (Mr. Adair), May 16, 1961; referred to the House Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 7529 (Mr. Burleson), June 7, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

H.R. 9427 (Mr. Gubser), September 23, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Foreign Affau's. 

S. 229 (Mr. Wiley, for himself, Mr. Bennett, and Mr. Butler), 
January 9, 1961; referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign 
Relations. 

S. 16 14 (Mr. Hruska), April 13, 1961; referred to the Senate Com- 
mittee on Foreign Relations. 

Misbehavior of Witnesses and Others Before Congressional 

Committees 

Item 121. Committee recommendation — Legislation to amend sec- 
tions 102 and 104 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. §§ 192, 194) to 
prohibit and punish misbehavior of witnesses and others in the pres- 
ence of, or so near thereto as to obstruct either House or any committee 
thereof in the performance of its duties. 

Action — The following bills, now pending, contain such provisions. 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), January 3, 1961 ; referred to the House Com- 
mittee on Un-American Activities. 

H.R. 179 (Mr. Walter), January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on the Judiciary. 

The Smith Act 

Item 122. Committee recommendation — That the Smith Act be 
strengthened by appropriate legislation defining the term "organize" 
to include continuing acts of organizing and recruiting. 

Action — H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter) and H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), January 3, 
1961, were referred to House Committee on Un-American Activities 
and are now pending. 

H.R. 3247 (Mr. Cramer), January 25, 1961, was passed by the 
House on May 15, 1961, was referred to the Senate Committee on 
the Judiciary on May 16, 1961, and is now pending. 

Federal Employee Security Program 

Item 123. Committee recommendation — That legislation be enacted 
to stem the serious breach in the Federal Employee Security Program 
opened in 1956 by the decision in Cole v. Young, 351 U.S. 536. The 
committee recommends a measure that would permit the head of any 
department or agency of the Federal Government, in his absolute 



AXNTUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 167 

discretion and when deemed necessary in the interest of national 
security, to suspend, without pay, any civiHan officer or employee of 
the Government. It requires that such person be notijQed of the 
reason of his suspension and given an opportunity within 30 days to 
show why he should be reinstated. All employees of any department 
or agency of the United States shall be deemed to be employed in an 
activity of the Government involving national security. The Civil 
Service Commission, upon request of the employee, shall review the 
agency's decision and the determination of the Civil Service Commis- 
sion snail be final. 

Action~H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter) and H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer). January 
3, 1961, both contain the recommended provisions. These bills were 
referred to the House Committee on Un-American Activities; are now 
pending and under study. 

Industrial Security 

Item 124. Committee recommendation — It is urgently recommended 
that Congress authorize the President to prescribe regulations, relat- 
ing to Government contracts with industry, creating industrial per- 
sonnel security clearance programs, to assure the preservation and 
integrity of classified information, and reposing in the President a 
summary or discretionary power to deny clearance, without judicial 
review, to those not clearly loyal or who may be security risks, with 
authority to subpena witnesses to testify under oath in matters relat- 
ing to any investigation or hearmg provided for by such regulations. 

Action — There is at present in effect Executive Order No. 10865, 
issued February 20, 1960, which provides for the safeguarding of 
classified information within industry. Under this Order, however, 
the heads of the departments concerned are not empowered to sub- 
pena witnesses. 

The committee's recommendation seeks to empower the President 
to subpena witnesses, to empower the district coiu't to issue an order 
to appear to anyone who fails to heed the subpena so issued, and to 
empower the court to punish as for contempt anyone who fails to obey 
such court order. 

Action — The following biUs, now pending, carry provisions similar 
to those recommended. 

H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities. 

H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), January 3, 1961; referred to the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities. '.V 

H.R. 972 (Mr. Hiestand), January 3, 1961, the Federal Security Act; 
referred to the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service. 

Obstruction of Defense Materials in Foreign Commerce 

Item 125. Committee recommendation — Amendment of the Comrnu- 
nist Control Act of 1954 to prohibit interference by certain persons with 
the free movement of defense materials in foreign commerce. Legisla- 
tion should prohibit agitation, conduct, or inaction by labor organiza- 
tion representatives which obstructs the free movement of defense 
materials in foreign commerce in national emergency or war. Violation 
should be punishable by fine of not more than $25,000 or imprisonment 
for not more than 10 years or by both. 

21-204—63 12 



168 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Action — These provisions, identically, are contained in H.R. 6 
(Mr. Walter), H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), and H.R. 596 (Mr. Younger), 
dated January 3, 1961. They were referred to the House Committee 
on Un-American Activities; are now pending and under study. 

S. 2631 (Mr. McClellan, for himself, Mr. Curtis, Mr. Holland, and 
Mr. Mundt), September 23, 1961, prohibits strikes in strategic defense 
facilities, and provides for an emergency board to settle labor disputes 
involving employees in such a facility. This bill was referred to the 
Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare and is now pending. 

H.R. 7015 (Mr. Hoffman of Michigan), May 11, 1961, H.R. 7036 
(Mr. Martin of Nebraska), May 15, 1961, and H.R. 7097 (Mr. Hoffman 
of Michigan), May 16, 1961, prohibit strikes, work stoppages, and 
slowdowns at critical defense facilities, and authorize the district 
courts of the United States to issue injunctions with respect to viola- 
tions. These bills were referred to the House Committee on Educa- 
tion and Labor and are now pending. 

S. 2401 (Mr. Case of South Dakota), August 10, 1961, makes it an 
unfair labor practice for a labor organization to call a strike in an 
industry if the President has certified that an interruption of work in 
such industry would threaten or impair the national security. This 
bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare 
and is now pending. 

Executive Order 10946 (26 F.R. 4629), which establishes a program 
for labor disputes at missile and space sites, instructs the Commission 
established thereunder to develop with the Federal contracting agen- 
cies and with the parties programs for obtaining in collective bargain- 
ing contracts or other agreements or arrangements covering work at 
missile and space sites, the inclusion of effective commitments that 
there will be no lock outs or work stoppages at such sites. 

Vessel and Port Security 

Item 126. Committee recommendation — Amendment of the Sub' 
versive Activities Control Act so as to provide that no individual who 
wilfully fails or refuses to answer, or falsely answers, certain questions 
relating to subversive activities, when summoned to appear before 
certain agencies, shall be employed on any merchant vessel of the 
United States or within certain waterfront facilities in the United 
States. 

Action— H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), January 3, 1961, fl'.i?. 7 (Mr. Scherer), 
January 3, 1961, H.R. 4469 (Mr. Walter) February 16, 1961, and 
H.R. 4470 (Mr. Scherer), February 16, 1961, the United States Mer- 
chant Vessel and Waterfront Security Act contain this provision. These 
four bills were referred to the House Committee on Un-American 
A p 1 1 VI 1 1 PS 

H.R. 4469 was reported out on February 23, 1961 (H. Kept. 25) 
and was passed by the House on March 21, 1961. It was referred to 
the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on March 22, 1961, and is 
now pending. 

Federal Employee Communist Activities Testimony Act 

Item 127. Committee recommendation — Amendment of the Sub- 
versive Activities Control Act oj 1950 so as to provide that any Federal 
officer or employee who wilfully fails or refuses to answer, or falsely 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 169 

answers certain questions relating to Communist activities, when sum- 
moned to appear before any Federal agency, shall be removed from 
his office or employment. 

Action— H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter) , January 3, 1961, H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), 
January 3, 1961, H.R. 9S25 (Mr. Walter), September 20, 1961, and 
H.R. 9%39 (Mr. Scherer), September 25, 1961, all contain this provi- 
sion. These four bills were referred to the House Committee on Un- 
American Activities; are now pending and under study. 

H.R. 2928 (Mr. Rivers of South Carolina), January 18, 1961, pro- 
vides that any Federal employee who refuses to answer a question of a 
committee of Congress with respect to Communist, Communist-front, 
or subversive affiliations, shall be removed immediately from his 
office or employment. This bill was referred to the House Committee 
on Post Office and Civil Service and is now pending. 

H.R. 7914 (Mr. Scherer), June 28, 1961, provides that any indi- 
vidual subpenaed or ordered to appear before any Federal agency 
who wilfully fails or refuses to appear or answer under oath any 
question concerning Communist activities, shall be ineligible for any 
right, privilege, or benefit under any law of the United States in- 
cluding the holding of any office or place of honor, profit or trust, 
and the holding of any certificate, license, passport, or other document 
issued under the law of the United States, which confers any right, 
privilege, or benefit upon such individual. This bill was referred to 
the House Committee on Un-American Activities; is now pending 
and under study. 

Registration of Domestic Organization Controlled by Foreign 

Government 

Item 128-A. Committee recommendation — Amendment of the Sub- 
versive Actiitities Control Act so as to require the registration of certain 
additional persons disseminating political propaganda within the 
United States as agents of a foreign principal, and the establishment 
of an Office of the Comptroller of Foreign Propaganda in the Bureau 
of Customs of the Department of the Treasury. This provision was 
originally contained in H.R. 12753, 86th Congress, introduced by the 
committee chairman, Mr. Walter, on June 21, 1960, and passed by 
the House on August 22, 1960. 

Action — The recommended provisions, including a provision for an 
Office of the Comptroller of Foreign Propaganda, are contained in 
H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), January 3, 1961, H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), January 
3, 1961, and in H.R. 5751 (Mr. Walter), March 21, 1961, and H.R. 5839 
(Mr. Scherer), March 22, 1961, all referred to the House Committee on 
Un-American Activities, and in 8. 1508 (Mr. Dirksen, for himself and 
Mr. Bennett), April 6, 1961, referred to the Senate Committee on the 
Judiciary. H.R. 2786 (Mr. Poff), January 16, 1961, contains the 
registration provisions only. It was referred to the House Committee 
on the Judiciary. 

H.R. 470 (Mr. McCulloch), January 3, 1961, contains the registra- 
tion provisions only. This bill was enacted into law and became 
Public Law 87-366. It includes within the definition of a "foreign 
principal" as the term is used in the Foreign Agents Registration Act, 
domestic organizations which are substantially supervised, directed, 
controlled, or financed by a foreign government or foreign political 



170 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

party. It clarifies the commercial exemptions of the Foreign Agenfs 
Registration Act by providing that a foreign principal, in order for its 
agents to be eligible for exemption from registering mider the act, 
must be engaged only in activities which are private and nonpolitical, 
financial or mercantUe. 

Dissemination of Communist Propaganda in the United States 

Item 128-B. H.R. 6761 (Mr. Walter), listed above in Item 128-A, 
was reported out favorably in its original form on April 26, 1961 
(H. Report No, 309). 

On September 14, 1961, the committee submitted a supplemental 
report {H. Report No. 309, Part 2), striking out all after the enacting 
clause and inserting a provision concerning notice by the Postmaster 
General with respect to Communist propaganda being distributed in 
the maU. The purpose of this bill is to combat the Communist 
propaganda items entering the United States by first-class mail. Such 
mail is not opened for inspection. 

H.R. 6761 now provides that in order to alert the recipients of mail 
and the general public to the fact that large quantities of Communist 
propaganda are being introduced into this country from abroad and 
disseminated in the United States by means of the United States 
maUs, the Postmaster General shall publicize such fact (1) by appro- 
priate notices posted in post offices, and (2) by notifying recipients of 
mail, whenever he deems it appropriate in order to carry out the pur- 
poses of this section, that the United States mails may contain such 
propaganda. The Postmaster General shall permit the return of 
mail containing such propaganda to local post offices, without cost to 
the recipient thereof. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to 
authorize the Postmaster General to open, inspect, or censor any maU. 
The Postmaster General is authorized to prescribe such regulations as 
he may deem appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section. 

The bill was passed by the House on September 18, 1961 and was 
referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 19, 1961. 
It was reported out by the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 
21, 1961 {Senate Report No. 1106), was debated in the Senate on Sep- 
tember 26, 1961 (Daily Cong. Record 9/26/61, p. 20012-20016) and 
is now pending. 

Communists Not To Be Licensed Under the Federal Communi- 
cations Act of 1934 

" Item 129. Committee recommendation — Amendment of the Subver- 
sive Activities Control Act so as to prohibit the issuance and authorize 
the revocation of licenses under the Federal Communications Act oj 
1934 of any individual who wilfully fails or refuses to appear before a 
Federal agency, when subpenaed, or to answer any question concern- 
ing membership in, activities of members of, or participation in activi- 
ties of the Communist Party. "Communist Party" shall mean the 
Communist Party of the United States, or successors or subsidiaries 
thereof. 

Action — This provision is now contained in H.R. 6 (Mr. Walter), 
January 3, 1961, and H.R. 7 (Mr. Scherer), January 3, 1961. Both of 
these bills have been referred to the House Committee on Un-American 
activities ; are now pending and under study. 



ANlSnjAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 171 

Part IV. Bills Urgently Recommended 

Federal Employee Security 

The committee recommendation in this respect is dealt with under 
Item 123, and likewise in its Annual Report for 1960, at page 130ff. 

The committee's recommendation as to the form such legislation 
might take is set forth in Sec. 320 of H.R. 6, introduced by Congress- 
man Francis E. Walter on January 3, 1961. The bill amends the 
Act of August 26, 1950 (64 Stat. 476), to make clear that the powers 
granted by Congress therein to the Executive Branch are not to be 
limited to "sensitive" positions only. The bill gives summary author- 
ity to the head of any department or agency of the United States 
Government to suspend any civilian officer or employee. _ The 
individual whose employment is suspended shall have notification of 
the reasons for his suspension with an opportunity to submit his reply. 
A hearing procedure is established, of which the employee may avail 
himseK prior to termination of his employment. 

It is urgently recommended that legislation be adopted to close the 
serious breach opened in the Federal employee security program as a 
result of the decision in Cole v. Young, 351 U.S. 536 (1956). Cole v. 
Young cut down the applicability of the Act oj August 26, 1950, to 
"sensitive" positions only, which Justice Clark in his dissent described 
as unrealistic, for as Justice Clark pointed out, "The janitor might 
prove to be in as important a spot security-wise as the top employee 
in the building." The responsibilities of the Executive in the execu- 
tion of law, and appointing for that purpose those who will faithfully 
serve that end, reasonably suggest the concomitant power of sus- 
pension and termination of the employment of those who are disloyal 
or security risks, without regard to whether or not an employee 
occupies a position commonly but often mistakenly described as 
nonsensitive. 

National Security Agency 

The committee is in the course of preparation of a proposal for 
legislative action to cure former deficiencies in security procedures 
at the National Security Agency disclosed as a result of an extensive 
investigation conducted by this committee which was prompted by 
the defection in June 1960 of two NSA employees to the Soviet Union. 
The proposal is to establish a legislative base for improved security 
procedures which were instituted after the Martin and Mitchell 
defection and to strengthen the capability of the Secretary of Defense 
and the Director of the NSA to achieve maximum security. 

Such legislation should establish a security standard and prohibit 
the employment in the Agency of any person who has not been the 
subject of a full field investigation. Further, to assist the Secretary 
of Defense and Director of NSA in carrying out their personnel 
security responsibilities, one or more boards of appraisal, to be ap- 
pointed by the Director of NSA, should be established in the agency. 

In view of the special nature of the Agency's activities, the proposal 
would further expressly exempt the Agency from the provisions of the 
Civil Service laws with respect to appointments to the Agency, and 
from the requirements of the Performance Rating Act of 1950. More- 
over, the Secretary of Defense should be authorized summarily to 
terminate the services of employees whenever such action is necessary 



172 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

in the interest of the United States, should he determine that the 
procedures prescribed in other provisions of law relating to termina- 
tion of employment cannot be invoked consistently with the national 
security. 

The National Security Agency investigation and conclusions drawn 
therefrom are dealt with in a separate chapter of this report. (See 
pp. 76-92.) 

Industrial Security 

The committee is in the course of preparation of specific legislative 
proposals, in addition to those discussed under Item 124, supra, and 
in its Annual Keport for 1960 (at p. 133ff), which would provide an 
express legislative authorization for the Secretary of Defense to estab- 
lish a security program with respect to defense contractors and their 
employees, for the protection of classified information released to or 
within industry or any enterprise within the United States. In view 
of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Greene v. McElroy, 360 
U.S. 474, decided June 29, 1959, which, in part, struck down the 
personnel security clearance review program of the Department of 
Defense, it is considered that congressional action is mandatory. A 
failure to assert congressional authorization for a security program, 
such as that established under Executive Order 10865, may result in 
extensive damage claims against the Government. 

Wiretapping 

The committee has made repeated recommendations for legislation 
that would authorize the interception of communications by wire or 
radio, under appropriate circumstances and safeguards, in the conduct 
of investigations and for the prevention and prosecution of crime. 
This recommendation has been dealt with in part under Item 90, 
supra. The urgency of legislation of this type is again emphasized. 
Moreover, both Federal and State officials, within reasonable limita- 
tions, should be authorized to acquire and intercept communications 
for such purposes and with respect to selected criminal activity within 
their respective jurisdictions. 

In the case of State law enforcement, it is felt that the prohibitions 
of Section 605 of the Communications Act oj 1934 should be made 
inapplicable to the interception or divulging of any communication 
by wire or radio which is authorized pursuant to the statutes of any 
State for the purpose of enforcing the criminal laws of the State. 
Each State should be free to exercise a clear constitutional privilege 
of determining its own public policy with respect to persons and crimes 
committed to its jurisdiction. 

The committee advocates legislation designed to give law enforce- 
ment capabihties consistent with the scientific and technological 
progress of this modern age, and to relieve law enforcement of the 
handicap of being forced to operate \vith the tools of the horse-and- 
buggy era. Wiretapping does not involve the introduction of a new 
principle of law enforcement, but simpl}^ brings law enforcement 
abreast of the modern techniques utilized by the criminal of today. 
Many serious crimes cannot be prosecuted because of the status of 
existing law. Legislation on this subject has long been overdue. 



ANlSnjAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 173 

Passports 

The committee's recommendation is set forth in Item 120. How- 
ever, the importance of the adoption of legishitioii having this objec- 
tive is strongly emphasized. The historic discretion of the Secretary 
of State to issue, withhold, or limit passports must be strengthened 
by the enactment of legislation which will authorize him to deny 
passports to persons whose purpose in traveling abroad is to engage 
in activities which will advance the objectives of the Communist 
conspiracy. The necessity for such legislation is posed in the cases 
of Kent and Briehl v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, and Dayton y. Dulles, 357 
U.S. 144, which are dealt with more fully in the committee's Annual 
Report for the Year 1960, at page 122f. 

The Internal Security Act of 1950, which is now effective with 
respect to the passport provisions of Section 6 thereof, applies to 
members of Communist-action organizations only, and does not com- 
pletely solve the problems in this area. The operation of the pro- 
visions of this act are effective only on proof of the actual Communist 
Party membership of the individual concerned. Evidence before the 
committee has conclusively demonstrated that, pursuant to security 
practices of the Communist Party organization, many persons affil- 
iated knomngly with the Communist Party and obedient to its 
instructions, have not assumed provable membership. Where the 
Secretary of State has good cause to beheve such persons are travel- 
ing abroad in support of the objectives of the Communist conspiracy, 
it appears intolerable that they should receive froni a Government 
they seek to injure and destroy, the recommendation of character 
and protection which a passport implies. 



174 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 



•§ 

03 



03 




09 




9) 




U 




6« 




a 




o 




u 




A 




■«« 




l> 




00 






m 

> 

1— t 


a 


H 


•PN 


<1 


S 


OQ 


^3 


Ph 


© 


fW 


a 


W 


a 


Ph 


1-4 


^ 


m 


o 






S 


w 


n 




•4^ 


O 


a 


u 


C8 




;»> 




o 








o 




Pi 











I? 



a 
o 



o 




•. *. 


o 




•. •> 




ss 




S^ 




(— 1 






r^ 








F-1 1— « 


00 


i-H 


f-H i-H 


X, 


o 


h-.-^05 


o 


r-M-oi 




^C^CS 




-HCN<N 


o 

00 


.-H »-(f-40 


l-li-H fH 






■^ c<j (X 






■^cooo 


o 


!^ 


^<N(N 


o 




-HMOl 



eo^- 



'"rt' 



S 



oj- .c^ CM r^ oT -IN c^ 1^ 

O - . <NOl 

?-H CO O »-iC» 



_- o w 

, , , O I-H ,»-! , , , ,1-H , , 

^lO .^ .C^^ .OO-'^tHiO'^ -o -o o -^ <-> "^ O O • •00 

i-< -H >0 -O 6- N O O (N O t- (N 11 IN (N O O .55 C5 00 b- IN 

^H I-H lO I-H 03 <0 l-< 05 I-H ^H II ^H I-H C» 1-H I-H ^H ^H I-H I-H lO 1-H I— I OS Oi I-H 



■a .a 






CO ja 

I? 

'"'is "■ 

33SB 

73 -3 O o 

a a qa 
PMPh 



a ° 
S g 
o O 

<D° 

-Sg 

I? 

tog S 
-o O o 

H aw 

Ph 



O-H © 

tj-Hja 

2-at^ 

3 SCO 

W - 

ai 63 o  

'»-,— I M"^ 
I CO ^ ^ 



.as 

®i-H 

■so 

p3co 
C.00 

.9 1-; 

en a 
03 = 

 Ocu 



CO 

03 
H? bo 

a 



.3 ^i;'> §52 §— ° o o d d "5 d d d d d d d o 
a » t 03 a o "S fl ' " ' ' '-0 3 11111111 



o fe 

"J 

3 



6 6ddd.25?'§ 

■O "d T) "O 'O ■g -3 § 3 




P3 






(O ^ »0 C^ »0 00 O W5 CO 
OiM ■^'*J«t^00Nt^OCD00CD0S'i!j<»CC^C*3000S00O00C0C00000 
00 06 (M ob 00 00 Oi «0 t^ CO to Oi -^ "3 CO b* t^ O ^-t 05 CO ■^ •C l^ t^ r* 
i^S Jsi C^ CO CO CO ■<** -^ »0 *0 »0 «C to 05 OS Oi ^ W rH C4 CI ei N C^ N 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TEAR 1961 



175 



r^ o ■<r (M .o-'tf^oco 

rHi— 1<-Hi— t OS»— <i— (.— (i— I 



O . . . .000 

Oi t^ r-- OS Oi CN M 

.-H 1-H ^ CS (M ^ ^ 



W r^OO 



(N C^ t^ 



QiO'«**^0 t^^ t^ .Ot^ . . -O 

«CSO -C^» .C^ »0 Tj< t^Oa OC^O CN c^ o»o»cso 






§^ 

CO 

GO'S 






•9oo«s.aoo 



2 a 

-Jo. 
c^ .- . 

S3§S 

O 03 

ass 

ITS r-J-^ 



, o) 



o o 



o o o 



r!-S •« 






^ 
^ 



3 . ft 

CO -r? r^-*^ CO 

^* o S - I 

ft'^T-l — 



CO 



0)^ 



w 

o 

"Sen ^ 



3 a 

3°th 
• ceto ^ 



"Op^ g'^-OTS-O-O 



o g'£;j-o SS^'g.B d o^^ ®5 o d o o d d d d d d d -^ ^ v^ 

S-H 5 o S 



o o o o o o 
'O 'O t^ '^ X) 'O 




SCS'^IO'Mrt 



CS CO CO CO CO Tf* TJ< Tl« ■«<« ^ -^ -^ W3 »o »o »o 



C5 CC CO *O(OC0 

CO 00 -^ .-H CO lO 

00 .-H r^ oo o 

lO CO CO t*t>- 1^ 



cocs 

lO 00 

—1^ 

C:t^CDOOC5W3^COC^^cDOOO»0'-Ht-Oi»OiO . , 

r^as'^ociCSTp.-<Tt<-^cDcoOTC*»oc^i-HC^co*oco w w 

00»-<fC*0»OOSO.-H050Q«-HC^fO't}<Tt<Tj<'<*«Tt« 0) O) 
t^t^t^b-r^I>-t-»0000000060S050SOSOSOsOiO&(^rrf 



176 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 



o 

a 






•♦J 

o 



a 
o 

OS 
09 



OS 
09 

a 
o 






_.1C»OCIO t^Ol OiC^Ot 

»-t i-( ^H rj^ 05 ^ .-t c^ oa Oi OiO» Oa»-t'-< 



Cl 

o 



ttt 



*^ CO 

o fe 

« (35 
03 u 

li 



O 03 

M o ^ 

a <u '^ 



5dcioooooo--T^— . 

t3 t3 -O -O T3 "O t3 13 "O rt fl "O t* s-;;: >-' 



^— "^^ ' w ^ ^ ' 
'iu^m « o "" 



■o-o 



s ^ 



-a 
o 



09 

PQ 

d 

► 












<2 



1 

s 

o 
O 



^ ►- oi t, " 3 a> 



a 5 

M^ O O O 






ij'Sii'a'a'a-s.a'O'a 



o o 

XIXI 



°^ 



o 

-4-3 

3 



2«a 






S <3 






J2 

3 
Ph 
t3 

a 
a 

u o 
o-o 

03 



-J ° 

■20. 



3 u 






§^ 



43 oi O-S 



5.9 

> > 






o 

Z 

a 

pq 



. . coiooo-^ Oi M >c r^ _ 

o> »o cc as o .-H «o c^ cs ;0 ^^ ococo 

(N CO cc Tj" 55 ^ t^ 00 00 oc^ c^i -^ to 

cdcdodododcQcdoQcdcd odoo cdodod 



PART VI. INDEX TO COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS 

A 

Item No. 

Affidavit of Government contractor 74 

Armed Forces, revocation of commission of person refusing to answer 

questions regarding Communist Party membership 55 

Attorney General's powers to supervise activities of aliens 102 

Attorneys, Communist, not to appear as counsel 117 

C 
Censorship, jurisdiction extended 98 

Commissions : 

In Armed Forces. (See Armed Forces.) 

Independent Commission on Federal Loyalty 11 

Communications : 

Intercepting. (See Wiretapping.) 

Licensing of Communists under Communications Act of 1934 for- 
bidden 129 

Communications Act of 1934, Communists not to be licensed under 129 

Communist Party, outlawing 5 

Communist organizations : 

Restriction of tax-exemption privileges 17 

Successor organization, applicability of S.A.C.B. order to register 112 

Communists: 

Attorneys not to appear as counsel 117 

Detention of undeportable aliens 30 

Licensing under Communications Act of 1934 forbidden 129 

Lobbying activities 111 

Passport security provisions 120 

Confessions, admissibility in evidence, delay in arraignment 97 

Confidential Government files, protecting security of 80(6) 

Congressional committee investigations: 

Immunity for congressional witness 41 

Punishment of disruptive conduct 121 

Refusal of Federal employee to answer questions regarding Com- 
munist activities 127 

Contracts. {See Government contracts.) 

D 

Defense. (See National defense.) 

Defense plants {see also Government contractors): 

Employment of subversives, safeguards against 2fc 

Non-Communist affidavit of contractor 74 

Deportation of subversive aliens: 

Attorney General's powers broadened 102 

Detention of undeportable aliens 30 

Judicial review of final order of deportation 99 

Refusal of foreign country to accept deportees 6 

E 

Education: Tax-exemption privileges denied to Communist educational 

institutions 17 

Embassies of foreign countries: Restrictions on travel of Soviet and 

satellite diplomats, reciprocity 42 

Employment in defense facilities or in Government service. {See Defense 
plants; Federal employee security program.) 

Espionage, jurisdiction of United States extended 98 

Evidence {see also Wiretapping): 

Confessions, admissibility, delay of arraignment 97 

Information in confidential Government files, withholding 80(6) 

Loss of nationality, burden of proof 115 

Executive agencies, Communist attorneys not to appear as counsel 117 

177 



178 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

F 
Federal employee security program: item No. 

All Government employment deemed sensitive 123, and pt. IV (p. 171) 

Federal Employees Communist Activities Testimony Act 127 

Independent Commission on Federal Loyalty 11 

Military personnel 55 

Refusal to testify before Federal agencies regarding Communist 

activities 127 

Summary suspension, certain conditions 123 

Federal judges, loyalty oath 101 

Federal jurors, loyalty oath 114 

Federal preemption of field of sedition 104 

Foreign agents (see also Foreign propaganda): Registration of domestic 
organizations directed or financed by foreign government or political 

party 128 

Foreign countries: 

Outlawing organizations under foreign control 5 

Refusal to accept deportees from the United States 6 

Foreign propaganda (see also Foreign agents): 

Labeling of foreign Communist propaganda 128 

Office of Comptroller of Foreign Propaganda 128 

Registration as agents of a foreign principal, of persons disseminating. _ 128 

G 

Government contracts (see also Defense plants): 

Non-Communist affidavit of contractor 74 

Security standards for access to classified information 124, 

and pt. IV (p. 172) 

Government files, protecting security of 80(6) 

I 

Immigration and Naturalization: 

Deportation. (See Deportation of subversive aliens.) 

Nationality, loss of, burden of proof 80(16) 

Naturalization illegally procured, revocation 80(15) 

Immunity for congressional witnesses 41 

Independent Commission on Federal Loyalty 11 

Industrial security (see also Defense plants): 

Employment of subversives in defense plants, safeguards 29 

Non-Communist affidavit of contractor 74 

Personnel security clearance 124 

Information classified: 

Defense information, unauthorized disclosure 80(8) 

Protecting security of confidential Government files 80(6) 

Security standards for access to 124 

Internal Security Amendments Act of 1958, omnibus security bill 80 

J 

Judges, loyalty oaths 101 

Jurors, loyalty oaths 114 

L 
Labor: 

Employment of subversives in defense plants, safeguards 29 

Obstruction of defense material in foreign commerce in war or national 

emergency 125 

Licensing of Communists under Communications Act of 1934 forbidden ._ 129 

Limitation of actions, subversive activities 92 

Lobbyists to disclose Communist Party membership 111 

Loyalty oaths: 

Federal judges 101 

Grand and petit jurors 114 

M 

Mailing privileges, denial to subversive publications 59 

Merchant seamen. (See Vessel and port security.) 

Military personnel, loyalty standards 55 



ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 179 

N 

National defense: item No. 

Disclosure of defense information without authority 80(8) 

Obstruction of defense materials in foreign commerce in war or 

national emergency 125 

National Security Agency pt. IV (pp. 171-172) 

Nationality: 

Loss of, burden of proof 115 

Revocation by acceptance of office, etc., in Communist country 80(16) 

Naturalization. (See Immigration and Naturalization.) 

O 
Oaths: 

Federal judges 101 

Grand or petit jurors 114 

Obstruction of defense material in foreign commerce in war or national 

emergency 125 

Outlawing Communist Party 5 

Outlawing political organizations under foreign control 5 

P 

Passport security 120, and pt. IV (p. 173) 

Political propaganda. {See Foreign propaganda.) 

Port security 126 

Public contractor, non-Communist affidavit 74 

Propaganda. (See Foreign propaganda.) 

R 
Radio communications: 

Communists not to be licensed 129 

Interception 90 

Reciprocity, restriction on travel of Soviet and satellite diplomats 42 

Registration — 

Of Communist-front organizations, dissolution or reorganization not 

to affect proceedings under Internal Security Act of 1950 112 

Of domestic organizations controlled by foreign government 128 

Of foreign agents. (See Foreign agents.) 

Of lobbyists, disclosure of Communist Party membership 111 

Of persons disseminating political propaganda as agents of foreign 

principal 128 

Restriction of tax-exemption privileges of Communist education and 

charitable organizations 17 

Revocation — 

Of commission in Armed Forces 55 

Of nationality by acceptance of office, etc., in Communist country.. 80(16) 
Of naturalization illegally procured 80(15) 

S 

Second-class mailing privileges, denial to subversive organizations 59 

Secretary of State, denial of passports to Communist abettors 129 

Sedition, enforcement of State statutes 104 

Smith Act, amendment of: 

Clarification of "advocacy" clause 106 

Clarification of "organization" clause 122 

Social security cards, fraudulent use 89 

Soviet diplomats, restriction on travel 42 

State sedition laws, enforcement of 104 

Statute of limitations, subversive activities 92 

Subversive activities, limitation of actions 92 

Subversive Activities Control Board, applicability of order to register, to 

successor organizations 112 

Surveillance of communications by technical devices 90 



180 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

T 

Item No. 
Tax-exemption," restriction of privileges of Communist educational and 

charitable organizations 17 

Technical surveillance, use of information gained by 90 

Travel: 

Passport denial by Secretary of State to Communists 120 

Restriction on travel of Soviet and satellite diplomats 42 

Treason, definition broadened 100 

U 

United States Merchant Vessel and Waterfront Security Act 126 

United States nationality. {See Nationality.) 

V 
Vessel and port security 126 

W 

Waterfront facilities, security of 126 

Wiretapping 90, and pt. IV (p. 172) 

Witnesses before congressional committees: 

Immunity 41 

Misbehavior 121 

Refusal of Federal employee to testify regarding Communist activities . 1 27 



CHAPTER VI 
REFERENCE SERVICE FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 

The committee maintains extensive files of public source material 
on individuals, organizations, and publications which are related to, or 
concerned with, the question of communism. The number of reports 
on organizations and individuals furnished to Members of Congress 
in response to written requests and based on information in these 
files has tripled in the last 5 years. 

During the year 1961, the committee received 3,200 inquiries from 
Members of the Congress, an increase of 45 percent over 1960, These 
requests for information required checks on approximately 5,100 
individuals and 2,600 organizations and periodicals. They resulted 
in the compiling of almost 2,500 reports, a 26 percent increase over 
1960. 

Although the committee's files are not open to the public, they are 
made available to investigative agencies of the executive branch. 
The files were utilized on 2,100 separate occasions by representatives 
of executive branch agencies in 1961. 

The files are in constant use, of course, by members of the com- 
mittee's staft' for the preparation of exhibits, hearings, consultations, 
legislation, House reports, etc. During 1961, the reference section 
prepared 3,800 exhibits for staff personnel, an increase of 192 percent 
over 1960. The number of visits to the files for the above purposes 
totals in the many thousands during the course of a year. 

181 



CHAPTER VII 

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF COMMITTEE PUBLICATIONS FOR THE 

YEAR 1961 

During the year 1961, approximately 88,250 copies of 11 new 
committee hearings ' and reports were printed. AUhough most of 
these copies were not off the press until the last 2 months of the 
year, by January 1962, more than 43,000 of them had been used for 
distribution to Members of Congress and Government agencies and 
to fill requests received by the committee from private individuals 
and organizations. In addition, 475,000 reprints of 17 publications 
issued by the committee in previous years were ordered and received. 
More than 215,000 of these reprints were used to fill a backlog of 
requests. 

Following is a list of conmiittee hearings and reports published 
during the 1st session of the 87th Congress: 

HEARINGS 

Hearings Relating to H.R. 4700, To Amend Section 11 of the Sub- 
versive Activities Control Act of 1950, As Amended (The Fund 
For Social Analysis), May 31, June 7, and August 16, 1961. 

Hearings Relating to Revision of H.R. 9120 and H.R. 5751, To Amend 
the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, September 13, 1961. 

Manipulation of Public Opinion by Organizations Under Concealed 
Control of the Communist Party (National Assembly for Demo- 
cratic Rights and Citizens Committee for Constitutional Liberties), 
Parts 1 and 2, October 2, and 3, 1961. 

Communist Penetration of Radio Facilities (CONELRAD — Com- 
munications) — Part 2, October 26, 27, and November 29, 1961. 

Hearings on Structure and Organization of the Communist Party 
of the United States, November 20, 21, and 22, 1961. 

REPORTS 

Rules of Procedure, Committee on Un-American Activities, Revised 

1961. 
U.S. Merchant Vessel and Waterfront Security Act of 1960, House 

Report 25, 87th Congress (to accompany H.R. 4469), February 

23, 1961. 
Amending the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, House 

Report 309, 87th Congress, Parts 1 and 2 (to accompany H.R, 5751), 

April 26, 1961 and September 14, 1961. 
Supplement to Cumulative Index to Publications of the Committee 

on Un-American Activities, 1955 through 1960, June 1961. 

' The committee held 42 sessions of executive hearings for which no transcripts were published. 

183 

21-204—63 13 



184 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1961 

Dissemination of Communist Propaganda in the United States, 
House Report 309 — Part 2, 87th Congress (to accompany H.R. 
5751), September 14, 1961. 

The Truth About the Film "Operation Abohtion," House Report 
1278— Part 1, October 5, 1961. 

Manipulation of Public Opinion by Organizations Under Concealed 
Control of the Communist Party (National Assembly for Demo- 
cratic Rights and Citizens Committee for Constitutional Liberties), 
House Report 1282 — Parts 1 and 2, 87th Congress, November 30, 
1961. 

Guide to Subversive Organizations and Publications (And Appen- 
dixes), December 1, 1961. 

Communist Penetration of Radio Facilities (CONELRAD — Com- 
munications) — Part 2, House Report 1283, December 5, 1961. 

The Truth About the Film "Operation Abohtion," House Report 
1278— Part 2, December 27, 1961. 

The New Role of National Legislative Bodies in the Communist 
Conspiracy, December 30, 1961. 

Annual Report for 1961. 



INDEX 

INDIVIDUALS 

A Page 

Abernethy, Thomas G 162 

Abrams, Henrv 36-38, 66 

Abt, John J... 62 

Adair, E. Ross 166 

Alekseyeva, Nina 44 

Allen, James S 56 

Andreu Iglesias, Cesar 143 

Aptheker, Herbert 53, 54, 56, 62 

Arnautoff , Victor 64 

Axelrod, Albert A 116, 117 

B 

Baird, William T 67 

Baran, Paul A 53, 54 

Baum, Richard W 64 

Beermann, Ralph F 154 

Bender, William 15, 16,73-75 

Bennett, Charles E 161 

Bennett, Wallace F 166, 169 

Benson, Elmer A 64 

Bentley, Elizabeth Terrill (aliases: Helen; Mary; Helen Johns; Helen 

Johnson; Helen Grant)__ 12, 22, 52 

Berman, Martin 94, 95 

Bittelman, Alexander 110-112 

Black, Hugo Lafayette 136, 139, 140 

Blauvelt, Mildred (alias Mildred Brandt ; Sylvia Vogel) 64 

Blumenthai, Stanley 75 

Borrow, (Morton) 76 

Bown, Vernon 121, 122 

Braden, Carl 144 

Brandt, Joseph 61 

Brennan, William J 136 

Bridges, Harrv Renton (also known as Harry Dorgan) 17, 27, 28, 119 

Briehl, (Walter) 173 

Brooks, Overton 102, 149, 152 

Browder, Earl 13, 109 

Brown, Archie 41, 42 

Brown, Sam 55 

Brownell, Herbert, Jr 18 

Bryant , Valeda J 64 

Budenz, Louis Francis 12, 22, 52 

Burgos De Pagan, Consuelo 143 

Burgum, Edwin Berry 64 

Burleson, Omar 166 

Butler, John M 151, 166 

Byrd, Harry Flood 160 

C 

Cahill, Gerard M 71 

Carberry, Matthew C 116-118 

Case, Francis 168 

Castro (Fidel) 141 

Castro, Raoul 141 

I 



tl INDEX 

Page 

Celler, Emanuel 160 

Cerney, Edwio H 64 

Cerney, Isobel M. (Mrs. Edwin H. Cerney) 64 

Chambers, Whittaker (also known as Carl; David Whittaker Chambers; 

J. Vivian Chambers; Cantwell; Dwyer; David Breen; Carl Shroeder).. 12, 22 

Chase, Homer B_. 110, 111 

Chatley, Joseph A 64 

Chernin, Rose. {See Kusnitz, Rose.) 

Cherry, Francis A 10, 11, 18, 19, 23, 24, 26, 27 

Chou En-lai. - 141 

Christopher, George 116, 120 

Clark, Tom C 136, 171 

Clinger, Moiselle J.. 11, 12 

Coe, Frank. {See Coe, Virginias Fiank.) 

Coe, Virainius Frank 52 

Cole (Kendrick M.)... 171 

Collier, Harold R 165 

Colmer, William M 169, 163 

Corales, Juan Saez. {See Saez Corales, Juan.) 

Cramer, WiUiam C 159, 163, 166 

Criley, Richard L. (Dick)... 62, 67 

Cronan (William C.) 76 

Crowley, Francis X 93 

Cruz, Ramon Diaz. {See Diaz Cruz, Ramon.) 

Cuesta, Jose Enamorado. {See Enamorado Cuesta, Jose.) 

Curtis, Carl T 168 

Curtis, Thomas B 166 

Cvetic, Matthew 65 

D 

Davis, Benjamin J., Jr 60, 62 

Davis, James C 159 

Davton (Weldon Bruce) 173 

Dean, Max 64 

Dees, Bowen C 96, 100 

Dennis (Eugene) 108, 140 

Dennis, Raymond (or Ray) 10 

De Pagan, Consuelo Burgos. {See Burgos De Pagan, Consuelo.) 

Derounian, Steven B 165 

Derwinski, Edward J 154 

De Schaaf, Xelhe 67 

Diaz Cruz, Ramon 143 

Dirksen, Everett McKinley 161, 164, 169 

Dodd, Bella V 52, 65 

Dodd, Thomas 36, 37, 158 

Douds, 137, 130 

Douglas, William Orville 136, 139, 140 

Duclos, Jacques 109 

Dulles, Allen W 7 

Dulles (John Foster) 173 

Dunham, Barrows 52, 54, 55 

E 

Eastland, James O 160 

Edwards, Theodore 40 

Eisenhower, Dwight D - 85, 114, 141 

EmmanueUi Morales, Juan 143 

Emspak, Julius (Jules) (alias Juniper) 52 

Enamorado Cuesta, Jose 143 

Engels, Frederich (Frederick) 127 

Ernst, Morris L 12 

Ervin, Samuel J., Jr 160, 161 

F 

Feinglass, Abe 29 

Fishman, Moe 62, 64 

Flory, Ishmael P 62 



INDEX m 

Pagre 

Flvnn, Elizabeth Gurley 60 

Flynt, John J., Jr 163 

Foreman, Clark Howell 63 

Foster, WiUiam Z 108, 109, HI 

Frankfurter, Felix 136, 138, 139 

Friedlander, Miriam 60, 61 

Friedman, Robert (alias Robert Mann) 106 

Fritchman, Stephen H 64, 66 

Furst, Joseph B 64 

G 
Gal van 138 

Garcia Rodriguez, Pablo Manuel 143 

Gardner, Fred 10 

Gates, John 109, 111 

Gates, Thomas S., Jr 77 

Gatewood, Ernestine 65 

Gluck, Sidney J 64 

Gojack, John Thomas 144 

Graham, Shirlev (Mrs. W. E. B. DuBois) 64 

Green, Gilbert.".. 42 

Greene (William L.) 172 

Grumman, Frank 144 

Grundfest, Harrv 94, 95, 98, 100 

Gubser, Charles S 150, 166 

Gundlach, Ralph H 64 

H 

Hackney, John R 9, 10, 19, 20 

Hagen, Harlan 149 

Hall, Gus 32-35, 39, 42, 45, 59, 110, 129, 130 

H arisiades (Peter) 138 

Harlan, John M._ 136 

Harrison , William 64 

Hauser, Stanley M 75 

Hawes, John Peter 143 

Henderson, Warren 11 

Hiestand, Edgar W 150, 152, 153, 157, 162, 165, 167 

Hill, Charles A 66 

Hinton, William H 63 

Hiss, Alger 22 

Hitler, Adolf - 21, 30, 46 

Hoffa, James (R.) (Jimmy) 27 

Hoffman, Clare E 168 

Holland, Spessard L 168 

Hoover, J. Edgar (John Edgar) 4, 

12, 29, 37, 40, 45, 65, 88, 89, 115-117, 11&-121, 123, 134 

Hosmer, Craig 165 

Hruska, Roman L 158, 166 

Huber, John G 52 

Hyun, Peter 68 

I 

Iglesias, Cesar Andreu. (See Andreu Iglesias, Cesar.) 

Ilowite, Ralph 74 

J 

Jackson, James E 63 

Jacobs, Paul 118 

Jagan, Cheddi 44, 45 

Jagan, Janet (Mrs. Cheddi Jagan) 44 

Johnson, Joseph 41 

Johnson, Oakley C 60-62, 65 

Johnston, Olin D 160 

Jones, Rudolph William 75 

Judd, Walter H 165 



Iv INDEX 

K Fage 

Kaplan, Irving 51, 52, 54, 55 

Kaufman, Edna A 68 

Keating, Kenneth B 152 

Keeney, Mary Jane (Mrs. Philip O. Keeney) 51 

Kehoe, Joseph F 16, 73 

Kennedy, John F 42, 114, 141 

Kennedy, Robert F 18, 69 

Kent, Rockwell 63, 65, 173 

Kerner, William 68 

Khrushchev, Nikita Sergeevich 31-33,35, 

39-41, 46, 103, 105, 106, 108, 109, 111, 112, 126 

Kimple, William Ward (also known as WiUiam Wallace) 65 

King, Carleton J 157, 166 

Ki rbv, George 11 

Kozak, Jan 124-126 

Kratokvil, Frank M . 71, 72 

Kusnitz, Rose (Mrs. Paul Kusntiz; nee Chernin; born Rachmiel Czernin) 62 

L 

LaFleur, Joseph E__ 93 

Lautner, John 12, 53, 55 

Lehrer, Robert 143 

Lenin, V. I. (alias for Vladimir Il'ich Ul'ianov; also known as Nikolai 

Lenin) 107, 114, 124 

Lenske, Aryay 63 

Lewis, Albert Jorgenson 41 

Lewis, Gordon K 53 

Lima, Albert (J.) (Mickie or Mickey) 12 

Lima, Mickey. (See Lima, Albert J.) 

Liu Shao-chi 141 

Livingston, David 39, 40 

Londe, Sol 65 

Lorch, Lee 94,95,98, 100, 101 

Loth, David 12 

Lustig, James 18 

Mc 

McCann, Richard D 123 

McClellan, John L 160, 163, 168 

McCulloch, William M 159, 169 

McDonough, Gordon L 149, 152 

McElroy (Neil M.) 172 

McManus, John T 63, 65 

McNamara, Francis J 108 

McNamara, Robert S 86 

McTernan, John Trip 40, 65 

M 

Magdoff, Harry Samuel 51, 52, 54 

Magil, A. B 108, 109 

Malis, Victor (Michael) 143 

Mandel, William 121 

Mann Robert. (See Friedman, Robert.) 

Mao Tse-tung 68, 111 

Markward, Mary Stalcup 65 

Martin, David T 168 

Martin, William Hamilton _. 76-78, 81-84, 87, 88, 90, 171 

Marx, Karl 124, 127 

Marzani, Carl Aldo (also known as Tony Whales) 62 

Matthews, D. R. (Billy) 163 

Mayville, Henry Harrison 41, 66 

Meader , George 163 

Meany , George 28, 35 

Meisenbach, Robert 122 

Melendez Perez, Gertrudis 143 

Melish, William Howard 61-63, 65 



INDEX y 

Mendez, Cristino Perez. (See Perez Meiidez, Cristino.) P&gt 

Mignon, Michael (also known as Paul Leonard) 16 

Miller, Marion (Mrs. Paul Miller)... 13 

Mills, Wilbur D 151 

Mitchell, Bernon Ferguson 76-78, 81-84, 87-90, 171 

Moore, Stanley William 52, 54, 55 

Morales, Juan Emmanuelli. (See Emmanuelli Morales, Juan.) 

Morford, Richard 62, 65 

Mulzac, Hugh N _ 66 

Mundt, Karl E _._ 168 

Murphy, George B., Jr 65 

N 

Nathan, Otto 65 

Nebbia 138 

Needleman, Isidore Gibby 53-55 

Nelson, Carl 9, 19 

Nelson, Leon 106, 107 

Nelson, Malcolm C ^^ 67 

Nixon, Russell Arthur 52, 54, 55 

O 
O'Connor, Harvey 143 

P 

Pastore, John O 161, 164 

Pauling, Linus (Carl) 38 

Perez, Gertrudis Melendez. (See Melendez Perez, Gertrudis.) 

Perez Mendez, Cristino 143 

Pevzner, Sam 63 

Pincock, Dee W 71, 72 

Poff, Richard H 159, 160, 162, 169 

Popper, Martin 143 

Port, A. Tyler 18 

R 

Rivera, Juan Santos. (See Santos Rivera, Juan.) 

Rivers, L. Mendel 153, 169 

Roberts, Holland DeWitte 42 

Rodriguez, Pablo M. Garcia. (See Garcia Rodriguez, Pablo Manuel.) 

Rogers, Paul G 166 

Rogers, Walter 154 

Rothenberg, Donald (Don) 65 

Rousselot, John H 154 

Rubin, Daniel 65 

Rubinstein, Annette T 51. 52, 54. 65 

Ruiz, Frank (also known as Eusebio Ruiz Martinez and Frank Ruiz 

Martinez) 143 

Rumsey, Walter W 66 

Russell, Norton Anthony 144 

Ruttenberg, Charles B 96, 100 

S 

Saez Corales, Juan 143 

Samter, Alfred James 143 

Santos Rivera, Juan 143 

Sarvis, David 65 

Schappes, Morris U 65 

Scherer, Gordon H 150-152, 155-157, 159, 162-170 

Schlesinger, Hymen 65 

Schneider, Anita Bell (Mrs. Virgil A. Schneider, alias Seeta) 68 

Scott, Louis B 65 

Seeger, Peter (Pete) 38, 39, 43, 44, 144 

Selden, Armistead I., Jr 163, 165 

Selly, Joseph P 16, 73-75 



vl INDEX 

Shapiro, Marvin. (See Shapiro, Milton.) Paee 

Shapiro, Milton (Marvin) 74,75 

Shaughnessy 138 

Shields, Art 38 

Shoul, Bernice 54 

Silber, Bernard 144 

Silberman, Charles Lee 16, 73 

Simmons, Charles LeBron 66 

Sklar, Martin J 53 

Smith, H. Allen 149, 152 

Smith, Howard W 162 

Solomon, Mark I 67 

Spencer, Donald O 66 

Stafford, Robert T 166 

Stalin, Josef ---- 21, 40, 103-107, 114 

Stern, Meyer 10, 39 

Stewart, Potter 136 

Sugar, Maurice 66 

Sullivan, Elliott (also known as Ely) 143 

Sweezy, Paul M 53 

T 

Thompson, Robert (Bob) 42 

Thurmond, Strom 117, 162 

Tito 105, 107 

Tormey, Joseph 61 

Travis, Maurice E H 

Truman, Harry S 22 

Tselos, George 41 

Turner, Jeanette A 66 

Turoff, Sidney (alias Michael Xapoli) 144 

Tyne, George (Buddy) (also known as Martin (Buddy) Yarus) 143 

U 
Utt, James B 161 

V 

Van Kieeck, Marv 66 

Vinson (Fred M.)" 140 

Voros, Sandor 12 

W 

Wachter, Douglas 120 

Wales, Tony. (See Marzani, Carl Aldo.) 

Walsh, J. Raymond 52, 53 

Walter, Francis E 150-152, 154-157, 159-171 

Wardwell, Loron Whitnev 74, 75 

Warren, Earl 1 136, 139 

Waterman, Alan T 94-100 

Weinstock, Louis 18, 63 

Wheeldin, Donald C 143 

Wheeler, William A US 

White, Burton 118 

White, Eliot 66 

Whittaker, Charles Evans 136 

Wilev, Alexander 166 

Wilkinson, Frank 144 

Williams, William Appleman 53 

Winocur, Jacob (Jack) 75 

Winston, Henry 42, 43 

Y 

Yellin, Edward 93-95, 98-100, 102, 103, 144 

Youns (Philip) 171 

Younger, J. Arthur ^"° 

Z 
Zenkl, Petr 126 



INDEX vll 

PUBLICATIONS 

A Page 

Abolition 4 

About the Possible Transition to Socialism by Means of the Revolutionary 

Use of Parliament and the Czechoslovak Experience (book) 124 

AC A News (American Communications Association) 3, 73 

America as a Colonial Power: The Puerto Rican Experience (book) 54 

American Commissar 12 

American Road to Socialism (book) 111 

D 

Daily Calif ornian (University of California, Berkeley, Student newspaper). 118 

Daily People's World 143 

Daily Worker, The 106, 108 

Dispatcher, The 3 

E 

Economic Notes 4 

F 

Facts for Farmers 4 

Freedomwaj^s 4 

Fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism (book) 112, 125, 126 

G 

Glas Naroda (The People's Voice, Slovene) 3 

Glos Ludowy (People's Voice, Polish) 3 

Guild Lawyer, The (monthly) 4 

J 

Jewish Currents (magazine) 2, 6, 63 

Jewish Life 2 

L 

Law in Transition (quarterly) 4 

Ludove Noviny (People's News, Slovak) 3 

M 

Mainstream 2, 56 

MiUtant, The ___ _ 5 

Mine-Mill Union, The _._ _ 3 

Morning Freiheit 3 

N 

Narodna Volya (People's Will, Macedonian-Bulgarian) 3 

National Guardian 2, 6, 63 

Negro Slave Revolts, Documentary History of the American Negro (book). 53 

New Horizons for Youth 4 

New Times 59 

New World Review 2 

New York Teacher News 3, 6 

Nok Vilaga (Women's World) 3 

Nova Dobo (newspaper) 3 

P 

Party Voice... 106 

Peace Groups in the United States (series of articles) 33 

People's World 2, 5 

Political Affairs 2, 56 

Political Economy of Growth (book) 53 

Pravda 39 



vlil INDEX 

R 

Page 

Report on the American Communist (book) 12 

Reporter, The 118 

Rights (bulletin) 4 

Russky Golos (newspaper) 3 

S 
Science and Society 4 

Shaping American Diplomacy 1750-1955, The Tragedy of American Diplo- 
macy (book) _. 53 

Social Questions Bulletin 4 

Statement issued by the Conference of Representatives of 81 Communist 

Parties, Moscow, December 1960 31, 125, 127, 128 

T 

Tom Duggan Show (TV program) 118 

Turning Point 5 

U 
UE News 3 

Ukrainian Daily News 3 

V 

Vanguard 5 

Vilnis 3 

Vistnik (Messenger, Carpatho-Russian) 3 

W 

Worker, The._ 2, 5 

Workers World 5 

World Marxist Review 43 

Y 
Young Socialist, the 5 

ORGANIZATIONS 

A 

ACA. {See Communications Association, American.) 
AFL. {See American Federation of Labor.) 

Afro-American Heritage Association 62 

All Pacific and Asian Dockworkers' Trade Union Conference, May 11-13, 

1959, Tokyo, Japan 17 

Allis-Chalmers (Milwaukee, Wis.) 21 

Aluminum Co. of America (ALCOA) (Cleveland, Ohio) 21 

American Broadcasting Co 15, 74 

American Civil Liberties Union 118 

American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born 67, 69 

American Communications Association. {See Communications Associa- 
tion, American.) 

American Federation of Labor (AFL) 28 

American Nazi Party 46 

American Peace Crusade (organized in 1951, with national headquarters 

at 1186 Broadway, New York 1, N.Y.) 68 

Northern California Peace Crusade 68 

San Diego Peace Forum 68 

Southern California Peace Crusade 68 

American Russian Institute (for Cultural Relations with the Soviet 
Union) : 

Los Angeles 35 

San Francisco 35 

American-Russian Trading Corp. ( Amtorg) 53, 55 

Amtorg. {See American-Russian Tradinc Corp.) 

B 

Barnard College (New York City) 55 

Bay Area Student Committee for th(! Abolition of the House Committee 

on Un-American Activities (BASC) 118 



INDEX Ix 

Pajt« 
Bethlehem Steel Corp 20 

Boston University (Boston, Mass.) 54 



CIO. {See Congress of Industrial Organizations.) 

California Senate Fact Finding Committee on Un-American Activities. . 34, 116 

California Teachers Association 121 

Carnegie-Illinois Steel Corp 93 

Chicago Committee of the National Assembly for Democratic Rights. 
[See entry under National Assembly for Democratic Rights.) 

Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights 67 

Chicago Youth Committee for National Assembly for Democratic Rights. 
(See entry under National Assembly for Democratic Rights.) 

Citizens Committee For Constitutional Liberties 58-70 

Citizens Committee To Preserve American Freedoms 59 

Civil Rights Congress 63, 65 

Columbia University (New York City) 94 

Cominform. {See Communist Information Bureau.) 

Committee for a Sane Nuclear PoHcy (SANE) {See National Committee 
for a Sane Nuclear Policy). 

Committee for Constitutional Liberties (San Francisco, Calif.) 66 

Committee To Defend the Bill of Rights (Minnesota). {See Minnesota 
Committee To Defend the Bill of Rights.) 

Communications Association, American (AC A) 3, 

1.5-18, 22, 27, 28, 73, 74, 78, 137, 139 

Communications Workers of America (CWA), AFL-CIO 16 

Communist Information Bureau (Information Bureau of the Communist 

and Workers' Parties; Cominform) 40 

Communist Party of America ^ 60 

Communist Party of the United States of America. 40, 69, 70, 103-112, 125, 135 
National Structure: 

National Board 63 

National Committee 12, 32, 42, 56, 59-62, 106, 110, 111, 129 

Draft Program Committee 56 

Executive Committee 63, 109, 110 

Secretariat 110-112 

National Conventions and Conferences: 

Sixteenth Convention, February 9-12, 1957, New York City... 56, 109 
Seventeenth Convention, December 10-13, 1959, New York City. 59, 

110, 115 

New England District 110, 111 

Northern California District 12 

States and Territories: 

New York State 53, 106, 107 

Control Commission 53 

State Committee 144 

Communist Party, Soviet Union 40, 127, 132 

Central Committee 108 

Congresses: 

Twentieth Congress, February 1956, Moscow 40, 105, 125 

Communist Political Association (May 1944 to July 1945) 53 

Conference Against the Spread of Nuclear Weapons, May 2-7, 1961 (Oslo, 

Norway) 38 

Conference of Greater New York Peace Groups 38 

Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) 16 

Constitution Liberties Information Center (Hollywood, Calif.) 67 

Crosscurrents Press, Inc 7 

D 
•Distributive, Processing and Office Workers of America (DPOWA) 28 

E 

Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, United (UE) 3, 

18, 22, 27, 28, 55 
Emergency Civil Liberties Committee 4, 53, 59, 60, 63 



X INDEX 

F 

Page 

Fair Play for Cuba Committee, Los Angeles 41 

Farm Equipment and Metal Workers of America, United, CIO 28 

Farm Research, Inc 4 

Fellowship of Reconciliation 32 

Fishermen and Allied Workers of America, International, CIO 28 

Food, Tobacco, Agricultural and Allied Workers Union of America, CIO-. 28 

Four Continent Book Corp 7, 55 

French Cable Co 15,74 

Friends of Pete Seeger 43 

Fund for Social Analysis, The 49-57 

Fur and Leather Workers Union of the United States and Canada, Inter- 
national - 28,29 



Greater New York City Chapter of SANE. {See entry under National 
Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy.) 

H 

Harvill (Los Angeles, Calif.) 21 

Hollywood for SANE Committee (see also National Committee for a Sane 

Nuclear Policy) 34 

I 

Imported Publications and Products 7 

International Arts and Sciences Press _- 7 

International Harvester (Chicago, 111.) 21 

International Monetary Fund 52 

K 

KCOP (television station, San Francisco, Calif.) 118 

KPIX (television station, San Francisco, Calif.) 114, 118, 122 

KRON (television station, San Francisco, Calif.) 114, 118, 122 

L 

Labor Research Association 4 

Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union, International (ILWU) 3, 

17, 22, 27, 28, 41 

Los Angeles Committee for Protection of Foreign Born 62 

M 

Marine Cooks & Stewards, National Union of 29 

Maryland Committee for Democratic Rights 68 

Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Amalgamated 

AFL 28, 29 

Methodist Federation for Social Action 4 

Michigan Committee of the National Assembly for Democratic Rights. 
{See entry under National Assembly for Democratic Rights.) 

Midwest Committee for Protection of Foreign Born 67 

Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers, International Union of 3, 

10, 11, 18, 19, 21-29 

District 3 10 

International Executive Board 19 

Local 392 11 

Minnesota Committee To Defend the Bill of Rights 1- 41, 66 

N 

National Academy of Sciences. {See entry under U.S. Government.) 
National Assembly for Democratic Rights (Sept. 23-24, 1961, New York 

City) 58-70 

Chicago Committee 67 

Chicago Youth Committee 67 

Michigan Committee 67 

National Broadcasting Co. (NBC) 15, 75 



INDEX xi 

National Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy (see also Student Council Page 
for a Sane Nuclear Policy ; Hollywood for SANE Committee) . . 32, 33, 35-37, 39 

Greater New York City chapter 36, 37 

National Committee To Defeat the M undt Bill 59 

National Committee To Repeal the McCarran Act 59 

National Council of American-Soviet Friendship 34, 61-63 

National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S. A 122, 123 

National Lawyers Guild 4, 63, 143 

National Science Foundation. {See entry under U.S. Government.) 
National Security Agency. {See entry under U.S. Government, Defense, 
Department of.) 

New China News Agency 141 

New Century Publishers 127 

New York Council To Abohsh the House Un-American Activities Com- 
mittee 4 

New York School for Marxist Studies, The 56 

North American Aviation Co. (Inglewood, Calif.) 21 

Northern California Peace Crusade. {See entry under American Peace 
Crusade.) 

O 

Office and Professional Workers of America, United 28 

Ohio Citizens for Constitutional Rights: Cleveland branch 68 

Oslo Conference To Stop the Spread of Nuclear Weapons. {See Conference 
Against the Spread of Nuclear Weapons, May 2-7, 1961, Oslo, Norway.) 
Overseas Chinese Returnees Association 141 

P 

Packinghouse Workers of America, United 10, 19, 39 

District 6 (New York) __. 10 

Pacific Coast Warehouse Council 27, 28 

People's Progressive Party of British Guiana 44 

Philander-Smith College (Little Rock, Ark.) 94 

Public Workers of America, United 29, 42 

Local 555. {See Teachers Union, New York.) 

Q 
Quaker Committees for Peace 32 

R 

RCA. (See Radio Corporation of America.) 
Radio Corporation of America: 

RCA Communications Inc 15, 74, 144 

Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Employees of America, United, 

CIO 28, 39 

District 65 28, 39 

S 

San Diego Peace Forum. {See entry under American Peace Crusade.) 

Seafarers' International Union of North America 29 

Sino-American Cultural and Friendship Association 141 

Socialist Workers Party 5, 40, 41 

Southern California _ 40, 41 

Southern California Peace Crusade. {See entry under American Peace 

Crusade.) 

Stanford University (Stanford, Calif.) 53 

Student Committee for Civil Liberties (SCCL) {also known as Students for 

Civil Liberties) 119 

Student Council for a Sane Nuclear Policy {see also National Committee 

for a Sane Nuclear Policy) 34 

T 
Tass (Soviet News Agencv) 39 

Teachers Union, New York (Local 555) 3, 6, 29, 42 

Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America 27 

TeleRegister Corp 15, 74 



xii INDEX 

Page 

Transport Workers Union of America, CIO 21 

Tuschman Broadcasting Corp. (Cleveland, Ohio) 15, 75 

Twin Cities Labor Forum (Minneapolis) 41 

U 

Unitarian Fellowship for Social Justice 40 

U.S. Government: 

Air Force, Department of the: 

North American Air Defense Command 14 

Atomic Energy Commission 101 

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 7 

Civil Service Commission 78 

Defense, Department of 14, 76, 77, 86, 87, 90, 92, 101 

Armed Forces Security Agency 78, 79, 87 

National Security Agency 76-92, 171, 172 

Office of Security Services 79-82, 88 

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) 14, 71, 72 

Health, Education, and Welfare, Department of 101 

Justice, Department of 58 

Federal Bureau of Investigation 90, 131, 132 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 101 

National Science Foundation 93-103 

Academy of Sciences 95, 97 

Division of Scientific Personnel and Education 102 

Post Office Department 2, 58 

Senate, U.S. 

Internal Security Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee 63 

State, Department of 58 

Subversive Activities Control Board (SACB) 10, 

18, 23, 27, 50, 61, 135, 136, 139 

Supreme Court 135-1 40 

Treasury Department 58 

Veterans' Administration 86 

United Nations 52 

University of California (Berkeley, Calif.) 118, 122 

Utah Council for Constitutional Liberties 67 

University of Illinois (Urbana, 111.) 83, 90, 93, 94, 99 

University of Minnesota (Minneapolis, Minn.) 41 

Socialist Club 41 

University of Puerto Rico (Rio Piedras) 53 

University of Wisconsin (Madison, Wis.) 53 



Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade 62 

Virginia Press Association 8 

Vultee Aircraft (Los Angeles, Calif.) 21 

W 

Washington Video Productions, Inc 114, 122 

WBNX (Radio station, New York City) 15, 74 

Western Union Telegraph Co. (New York City) 15, 74, 144 

Western Union Cables 15 

Wisconsin Committee for Constitutional Freedom 67 

Women's International League for Peace and Freedom 32, 34, 38 

Woodworkers of America, International, AFL-CIO 21 

Y 

Young Communist League, USA 63 

Young Socialist Alliance 41 

Youth To Abolish the House Un-American Activities Committee (formerly 
known as Youth Against the House Un-American Activities Com- 
mittee) 4 



o