(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 "Current strategy and tactics of Communists in the United States, Greater Pittsburgh area. Hearings"

♦ 






^» 



i 




1 



5 P-r :^.^ 



HARVARD COLLEGE 
LIBRARY 




GIFT OF THE 

GOVERNMENT 
OF THE UNITED STATES 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY IN INDUSTRIAL ESTAB- 
^ LISHMENTS HOLDING DEFENSE CONTRACTS 
(Greater Pittsburgh Area — Part 2) 



HEARINGS 



BEFORE THE 



COMMITTEE ON UN-IMERICIN ACTIVITIES 
HOUSE OE REPRESENTATIVES 



EIGHTY-SIXTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 



MARCH 11, 1959 
(INCLUDING INDEX) 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Un-American Activities 



HARVARD COLLEGE LIBRARY 

DEPOSITED BY THE 
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 



JUN 15 1959 




UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
40i)r,7 WASHINGTON : 1959 



COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 
United States House of Representatives 

FRANCIS E. WALTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman 

MORGAN M. MOULDER, Missouri DONALD L. JACKSON, California 

CLYDE DOYLE, California GORDON H. SCHERER, Ohio 

EDWIN E. WILLIS, Louisiana WILLIAM E. MILLER, New York 

WILLIAM M. TUCK, Virginia AUGUST E. JOHANSEN, Michigan 

Richard Arens, Staff Director 
II 



CONTENTS 



Page 

Synopsis 391 

March 11, 1959: Testimony of — 

A. Tyler Port, Robert Applegate, and Robert T. Andrews 397 

Thomas Quinn 410 

Afternoon session: 

Thomas B. Wright 438 

John W. Nelson 447 

Robert C. Kirkwood 452 

Frank J. Donner 455 

Index I 

m 



Public Law 601, 79th Congress 

The legislation under which the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities operates is Public Law 601, 79th Congress [1940], chapter 
753, 2d session, 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 
4= 4= ^ H: ^ 4: 4: 

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

Rule XI 

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 

•!• •(• •!! Sp !|6 JfC S|C 

(q) (1) 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 diffusion 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, 

^ 9ii 4: H: >N 4= 4= 

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 
shall 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. 

V 



RULES ADOPTED BY THE 86TH CONGRESS 
House Resolution 7, January 7, 1959 

^ i(S !)f Sjt !|f ^ ^ 

Rule X 

STANDING COMMITTEES 

1. There shall be elected by the House, at the commencement of each Con- 
gress, 

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

4: 4: ^ ^ :}: ^ ^ 

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. 

26. 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 agencies in the executive branch of the Government. 

VI 



SYNOPSIS 



Problems of Security in Industrial Establishments Holding 

Defense Contracts 

(Greater Pittsburgh Area— Part 2) 

Problems of security in industrial establishments holding defense 
contracts was one of the three phases of public hearings held in Pitts- 
burgh, Pa., March 10, 11, and 12, 1959.^ 

Mr. A. Tyler Port, Director of the Office of Security Policy, Office 
of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower, Personnel and 
Reserve, accompanied by Mr. Robert Applegate of the same office, 
and by Mr. Robert T. Andrews, of the Office of the General Counsel, 
Office of the Secretary of Defense, testified that : 

United States industry is a prime target of the Communist 
movement in the United States. It is a primary concern to 
the Communist movement that it obtain from American in- 
dustry information concerning the defense structure of the 
United States, particularly with reference to modern weapons 
of war. To this extent, the Communist Party has been con- 
sistently interested in penetrating defense industries where 
classified work is being performed and also basic industries, 
which, while not engaged in classified work, mny be in sup- 
port of industries performing modern weapons' manufacture. 

Continuing, Mr. Port testified that, under existing law and pro- 
cedures, Defense Department contracts do not preclude employment 
of Communists within a defense facility, or from working on material 
that may eventually become part of a hightly classified weapon, pro- 
vided they do not have access to classified information. 

Mr. Port testified further that, under existing law, the Defense 
Department is not impowered to preclude Communists from support- 
ing defense facilities such as powerplants and communications facili- 
ties. 

Mr. Port warned that : 

The potential for bringing defense production to a halt 
by sabotage of power facilities is enormous and the reper- 
cussions would be, I think, disastrous because if the power it- 
self 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. 



1 For the other two phases of the hearings see "Current Strategy and Tactics of Com- 
niimists in the United States (Greater Pittsburgh Area — Part 1)," March 10, 1959, and 
"Problems Arising in Cases of Denaturalization and Deportation of Communists (Greater 
Pittsburgh Area — Part 3)," March 12, 1959. 



392 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

He stated that there are five prime contractors in the Pittsbiirfjh 
area having contracts with the Department of Defense in plants in 
Avhicli the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America 
have bargaining rights. ISIr. Port also asserted that a Communist- 
dominated and controlled labor organization holding such bargaining 
rights for \Yorkers within defense facilities could serve the cause of 
international communism by calling strikes, collecting dues from 
members of the union to provide financial help to the Communist 
operation, and engaging in propaganda activities. 

In April 1955, Secretary of the Army Wilber Brucker, who was 
then Counsel to the Department of Defense, appeared before the 
Internal Security Subcommittee of the Senate and expressed grave 
concern over the fact that the tie lines and lease lines carrying wire- 
less messages out of the Pentagon were serviced by the American 
Communications Association, a Communist-controlled labor organ- 
ization. Excerpts from Governor Brucker's testimony Avere read to 
Mr. Port in the instant hearings, including the following: 

Mr. Brucker. Yet I appear before you today with a knowl- 
edge that there are known subversives now working in vital 
defense facilities w^ithout there being adequate authority in 
the Federal Government to meet this potential threat to our 
productive capacity and therefore to our military etfective- 
ness. 

H: H: ^ 4: sH 

This authority does not extend, however, to the removal 
of potential dangerous individuals from facilities where un- 
classified, though highly important defense work is being 
performed, or to removal of such individuals from support 
facilities such as powerplants, basic material plants, trans- 
portation facilities, communications facilities and several 
others. 

*f* *^ '^ *^ 

Mr. Arens. Are you cognizant of the fact that there has 
been testimony before the Internal Security Subcommittee 
to the effect that persons under discipline of the Communists 
controlling the American Communications Association now 
have access to messages coming from the Pentagon by a 
monitor system whereby they can plug in, listen to conver- 
sations 

Mr. Brucker. Regrettably, yes, I know that. 

Mr, Arens. Are you conversant with the facts wdiich have 
been revealed by the Internal Security Subcommittee of the 
Senate, to the effect that restricted telegrams coming in from 
the Pentagon have been intercepted by persons under dis- 
cipline of the Communist-controlled American Communica- 
tions Association? 

Mr. Brucker. I am aware of that. 

Mr. Arens. Are you conversant with the fact that the 
North Atlantic cable which carries very important messages 
vital to the security of our Nation is now serviced by the 
American Communications Association, a Communist-con- 
trolled labor organization ? 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 393 

Mr. Brucker. I have learned that, too. 

Mr. Arens. And I take it, if I am not being a little bit re- 
dundant here, that under the present law and under the pres- 
ent powers vested in the Defense Department, the Defense 
Department is absolutely helpless to cut off that access to the 
messages ? 

Mr. Brucker. That is correct. 

4: 4: 4: 4: 4c 

Mr. Arens. Is it not true that coded messages of the Penta- 
gon, highly confidential coded messages of the Pentagon 
which go out over the tielines and leased lines serviced by 
the Communist-controlled American Communications Asso- 
ciation are in such situation or status that they can be avail- 
able by a monitoring system even though in code to persons 
under discijjline of the Communist-controlled American 
Communications Association ? 

Mr. Brucker. You have described it correctly. * * * i 
feel, sir, that that situation is nothing short of deplorable to 
be allowed to continue any longer than is absolutely necessary. 

Mr. Port testified in the instant hearings that the situation described 
in 1955 by Governor Brucker, now Secretary of the Department of the 
Army, is substantially the same as it was in 1955. 

There was included in the record a compilation listing persons who 
now hold, or have held in the recent past, key positions in UE and 
who have been identified as members of the Conununist Party (for 
compilation, see p. 425 ) . 

Four officials of the United Electrical, Eadio and Machine Workers 
of America and its general counsel appeared in response to subpenas, 
and were interrogated during this phase of the hearings. 

Thomas Quinn, a field organizer for UE, who had been previ- 
ously identified by 2 witnesses as a member of the Communist Party 
and who, in 1953, invoked his constitutional privilege against self- 
incrimination when interrogated by a congressional committee re- 
specting Communist Party membership, denied both present and 
past membership in the Communist Party. In 1953, Mr. Quinn was 
president of Local 601, UE in East Pittsburgh, and was employed 
in the Westinghouse Electric Corporation plant in East Pittsburgh. 
Subsequent to his appearance in 1953 before another congressional 
committee, Mr. Quinn was discharged from the Westinghouse Electric 
Corporation plant but was then hired in his present position as UE 
field organizer. 

Thomas B. Wright, the managing editor of the UE News, invoked 
his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination when interro- 
gated by the committee in response to a number of questions in regard 
to the Trade Union Service, Inc., which previously printed the UE 
News. Mr. Wright estimated the circulation of the UE News to be 
around 100,000 ; that it is issued every other week, and that the dues 
of the individual members pay for the publication of UE News, which 
is sent to each member of the union. Mr. Wright further testified that 
Julius Emspak is the editor of UE News, and that James J. Matles, 

40067—59 2 



394 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

director of organization of UE, participates in the operation of UE 
News. Mr. Wrio;ht denied membership in the Communist Party at 
the time of the hearing-s in Pittsburgh, but invoked his constitutional 
privilege against self-incrimination when interrogated with respect 
to membership in the Communist Party immediately prior to his 
appearance. 

John W. Nelson, president of UE Local 506 in Erie, Pa., denied 
present membersliip in the Communist Party, but refused to answer 
questions concerning Communist Party membership prior to 1949, 
at wdiich time he had signed a non-Communist affidavit under the 
Taft-Hartley Act. 

Robert C. Kirkwood, business agent of UE Local 610, denied pres- 
ent Communist Party membership, but refused to answer questions 
concerning Communist Party membership prior to 1949, at which 
time he had signed a non-Communist affidavit under the Taft-Hartley 
Act. 

Frank J. Donner, who had been identified by responsible witnesses 
under oath before the committee as a member of the Communist Party 
and who on June 28, 1956, invoked constitutional privileges in re- 
sponse to questions respecting his membership and activities in the 
party immediately prior to his appearance, testified in the instant 
hearings that he became general counsel to UE a short time after his 
appearance before the committee on June 28, 1956. Mr. Donner 
denied present membership in the Communist Party, but invoked, 
by reference to previous testimony, his constitutional privileges in 
response to questions respecting past membership in the Communist 
Party, 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY IN INDUSTRIAL ESTABLISH 

MENTS HOLDING DEFENSE CONTRACTS 

(Greater Pittsburgh Area — Part 2) 



WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 1959 

United States House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Pittsburgh^ Pa. 

PUBLIC HEARINGS! 

The subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities 
met, pursuant to recess, at 10 :05 a.m., in Courtroom No. 6, New Fed- 
eral Building, Pittsburgh, Pa. Honorable Edwin E. Willis (sub- 
committee chairman) , presiding. 

Subcommittee members present : Representatives Edwin E. Willis, 
of Louisiana ; William M. Tuck, of Virginia; and Gordon H. Scherer, 
of Ohio. 

Staff members present: Richard Arens, staff director; George 
G. Williams and William Margetich, investigators. 

Mr. Willis. The subcommittee will please come to order. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, before we proceed, I would like to 
acknowledge the presence in the hearing room this morning of Mr. 
Ervin Rhodes, a prominent member of the Cincinnati and American 
Bar Associations, who has devoted his finances, energies, and abilities 
over many years to the fight against the internal subversion of the 
United States. 

Mr. Wilms. We are glad to have you, Mr. Rhodes, and acknowledge 
your contribution to the cause that you make. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest to the chairman 
that this record reflect an order by yourself that Mr. and Mrs. 
Golden, who have heretofore testified, shall be under a continuing 
subpena of this committee for an indefinite period of time for the 
purpose, as they understand, of their own protection. 

Mr. Willis. Yes. Let it be understood officially that Mr. and Mrs. 
Golden are under continuing subpena and, therefore, within the direct 
jurisdiction of this committee and thus the Government of the 
United States. 

In opening the proceedings here in Pittsburgh, I stated yesterday 
that there would be three phases to the hearings and that in advance 



1 For resolution of committee, authorizing and directing the holding of these hearings 
beginning March 10. 1959. In Pittsburgh, and the Order of Appointment of the subcom- 
mittee to conduct such hearings, see "Current Strategy and Tactics of Communists In the 
United States (Greater Pittsburgh Area — Part 1)." 

395 



396 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

of each of the phases I expected to make a brief statement so that 
the record would be clear on the issues with which we were dealing. 

We come now to the second phase of these hearings, namely, prob- 
lems of security in industrial establishments holding defense contracts. 
The first witnesses whom we shall hear are representatives of the 
Department of Defense from whom we expect to elicit information 
for the record on the broad policies and procedures of the Defense 
Department insofar as these policies and procedures bear upon the 
problems of Communist infiltration, penetration, or influence in indus- 
trial establishments holding defense contracts. 

Do present procedures preclude Communists from employment in 
industrial establishments holding defense contracts ? 

Does the Communist conspiracy in the United States have a direct 
or indirect control over production of vital facilities by way of domi- 
nation of labor organizations having contracts with industrial estab- 
lishments which produce defense materiel ? 

Do identified Communist agents in such labor organizations influ- 
ence, directly or indirectly, the actions of innocent, rank-and-file mem- 
bers of such labor organizations ? 

Are there loopholes in our existing security system whereby 
Communists may have access to supporting facilities, such as power- 
plants and waterworks, that are necessary auxiliaries of principal 
industrial establishments? 

These and related questions will be of concern to this subconomittee 
as we delve into the subject matter of the second phase of the hear- 
ings. In passing, may I say that a distinguished member of this 
subcommittee, to my right, the Honorable Gordon H. Scherer of 
Ohio, has recently introduced a bill in the House of Representatives, 
which bears the number House Resolution 3693, which would au- 
tliorize the Federal Government to take certain measures in order to 
guard strategic defense facilities against individuals believed to be 
disposed to commit acts of sabotage, espionage, or other subversion. 

This bill has been largely prompted by factual material which 
the Committee on Un-American Activities has developed over the 
course of the last many months on the very subject matter with which 
we shall now deal. 

In addition to hearing the representatives of the Department of 
Defense, we shall interrogate in the second phase of these hearings 
certain persons who have been identified in sworn testimony of respon- 
sible witnesses as persons w^ho now are, or who in the recent past 
have been, members of the Communist Party and who, it is believed, 
are now, or in the recent past have been, engaged in activity for the 
accomplishment of Communist objectives in this vital industrial area. 

May I point out that some of these witnesses whom we shall hear 
have heretofore been interrogated by the committee as Communists in 
connection with other subjects and other activities. It will be our 
objective to elicit information res])ecting their present activities 
in connection with the specific subject matter now mider inquiry, and 
we will not repeat grounds heretofore covered. 

Based upon our experience in other hearings, we do not expect to 
receive much significant direct infoi'mation from these persons when 
they testify but, likewise, based upon past experience, we do expect 
to receive significant information by indirection, as well as some 
supporting information by direct testimony. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 397 

Here again may I say that in pursuance of our legislative objectives 
we shall only be looking for samples or ptiitterns of activity. 

Mr. Arens, please call your first witness. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, the first witnesses representing the De- 
partment of Defense are three gentlemen who will be sworn, if you 
please, sir, together and will testify together, each adding informa- 
tion which might be germane to the then pertinent question. The gen- 
tlemen, if they will please come forward, are Mr. Tyler Port, Mr. 
Eobert Applegate, and Mr. Robert Andrews. 

If you gentlemen wall please remain standing while the chairman 
administers an oath? 

]Mr. Willis. Please raise your right hand, gentlemen. Do you 
solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

]Mr. Port. I do. 

Mr. Applegate. I do. 

Mr. Andrews. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF A. TYLEE PORT, ROBERT APPLEGATE, AND 

ROBERT T. ANDREWS 

Mr. Arens. Will each of you kindly give his name and a word 
about your own position in the Department of Defense and perhaps 
a word about your backgromid and period of service in the De- 
partment of Defense. 

Mr. Port. My name is Tyler Port. I am director of the Office of 
Security Policy, Office of the xVssistant Secretary of Defense for Man- 
power, Persomiel, and Reserve. I am also director of the Office of 
Industrial Persomiel Security Review of the Office of the Secretary 
of Defense. I have been an employee of the Govermnent, including 
military service, for the past IG years. 

Mr. Arens. Would the gentleman to your immediate right, please, 
Mr. Port, give his name and a similar description of his position and 
a word of his background ? 

Mr. Applegate. I am Robert Applegate. I am acting staff director 
of the Security Programs Division within the office which Mr. Port 
represents. I have been with the Secretary of Defense Office ever 
since there has been one, starting before that with the Munitions Board 
in June of 1946. And since November of 1947 I have been directly ac- 
tive in the security program of the Office of the Secretary of Defense. 

Mr. Arens. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Andrews. I am Robert T. Andrews, Office of the General Coun- 
sel, Office of Secretary of Defense. I have been a Government at- 
torney since 1948. 

Mr. Arens. May I suggest, gentlemen, if it is agreeable with you, the 
chairman, and the committee that Mr. Port be the principal responder 
to the questions and then, at his desire, each of you two other gentle- 
men supplement or implement, assist him in such manner as he might 
feel would be most expeditious and profitable to the committee in this 
^proceeding. 

Mr. Port, would you first of all give us a word about the jurisdic- 
;tion of the office of which you are the chief. 



398 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. PoKT. The Office of Security Policy is responsible, within the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense, for the formulation of security 
policy pertaining to the military security program of the Department 
of Defense, the Federal employee program of the Department of 
Defense, and the industrial security program. 

Within these areas we formulate policies pertaining to personnel se- 
curity, pertaining to the safeguarding of classified information, and 
pertaining to physical security policies. 

Mr. Arens. Now, sir, would you, in a preliminary way, give us the 
benefit of your background and experience insofar as it equips you 
to appraise the general emphasis placed by Communists on infiltrat- 
ing basic industry and a rough percentage of Communists who are 
in basic industry ? 

Mr. Port. You are referring to my own personal experiences in the 
field? 

Mr. Arens. And information you have gained from security sources. 
I am not asking you for specific information at this time. Just in gen- 
eral, what degree of emphasis does the Communist operation place 
upon infiltration of basic industry and, in general, how would you 
characterize the percentage or proportion of Communists of the entire 
Communists' operation who are presently in basic industry ? 

Mr. Port. Let me say in answer to your question, Mr. Arens, that 
my office is not directly concerned with investigative matters. We are 
not directly concerned with intelligence operations. My office is basi- 
cally a policy formulating office. It also is an office which reviews 
individual security cases arising out of industry. In the time 

Mr. ScHERER. Pardon me. 

Mr. Port. Beg your pardon ? 

Mr. ScHERER. Do I understand though that in determining policy, 
however, you have at your fingertips information from investigative 
and security agencies of this Government ? 

Mr. Port. I was coming to that Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. I am sorry. 

Mr. Port. In the formulation of this policy, we rely upon the ex- 
periences of the organizations established within the military de- 
partments themselves in these fields and also call upon other agencies 
of the Government that are engaged in investigative work. The com- 
bined experience of these operating elements is what we use in for- 
mulating our security policies to Government ]5rograms that we are 
responsible for. The military departments, in turn, implement these 
programs. 

Mr. Scherer. I understand then that the witness is going to tes- 
tify on the basis of his own laiowledge concerning the policy of the 
Department and insofar as he can also on the basis of the informa- 
tion that comes to his Department from these investigative and secu- 
rity agencies of the Federal Government which enable him to deter- 
mine the policy his agency does determine. 

Mr. Port. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Now with that word of explanation, Mr. Port, would 
you proceed to give us the benefit of the information you have. I 
am asking not specifics, as you understand, only in general the 
degree to which the Communist operation in the United States covets 
or attempts to infiltrate basic industry and, coupled with that, a 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 399 

rough percentage of the persons engaged in the Communist opera- 
tion who are penetrating or have penetrated or are working in 
basic industry. 

Mr. Port, United States industiy is a prime target of the Com- 
munist movement in the United States. It is a primary concern to 
the Communist movement that it obtain from American industry 
information concerning the defense structure of the United States, 
particuLirly with reference to modern weapons of war. To this ex- 
tent, the Coimnunist Party has been consistently interested in pene- 
trating defense industries where classified work is being performed 
and also basic industries, which, while not engaged in classified 
work, may be in support of industries performing modern weapons' 
manufacture. 

I do not have, at the present time, specific percentage figures of 
the number of Communists in basic United States industry. I do 
recall, however, that Mr. J. Edgar Hoover, in 1950, in connection with 
the discussion of the Internal Security Act, stated that 48 percent 
of the Communist Party were in basic United States industry. 

Mr. Arens. Now, gentlemen, does the Department of Defense have 
prime contracts in the Greater Pitsburgh area with companies in 
which UE, the United Electrical Workers, has bargaining contracts ? 

Mr. Port. Yes, it does. 

Mr. Arens. With how many prime contractors does the Depart- 
ment of Defense have contracts of this character ? 

Mr. Port. There are five prime contractors in this area who have 
Department of Defense contracts. 

Mr. Areks. To give us an idea of the volume of the business, just 
of the prime contractors, could you tell us something of the dollar 
value of these contracts, say for 1958 ? 

Mr. Port. The dollar value is approximately $142 million. 

Mr. Arens. Do these contracts include electronic equipment and 
other similar material needed for the defense of this Nation? 

Mr. Port. Yes. they do. 

Mr. Arens. Do these five principal contractors in District 6, that 
is, UE District 6 here, with which the Department of Defense 
has prime contracts, have in turn subcontracts with other business 
or industrial establishments in this vicinity ? 

Mr. Port. Our records do not show specific dollar value of sub- 
contracts which a prime contractor ma}^ let. However, it is our ex- 
perience that all prime contractors have subcontractors. It is, there- 
fore, I think a very safe assumption that prime contractors in this area 
do have subconstractors in the same area and outside the area. 

Mr. Arens. Are all five of the prime contractors in the Pittsburgh 
area, having contracts with the Department of Defense and in 
which plants the United Electrical Workers have the bargaining 
rights, cleared for classified work ? 

Mr. Port. All of those five contractors do have facility clearances 
with the Department of Defense ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us next, if you please, sir, what percentage, roughly 
speaking, of the money expended by the Department of Defense for 
contracts is for classified work, generally speaking ? 

Mr. Port. A rough approximation would be that one-quarter of 
every procurement defense dollar is allocated for classified defense 
work. 



400 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Arens. In the contracts which the Defense Department pres- 
ently holds, and by practice in the past has been using for procure- 
ment, do these contracts ])reclude Communists from defense facilities ? 

Mr, Port. No, they do not. 

Mr. Arens. Does the Department of Defense have authority to pre- 
clude, by its contracts, employment of Communists in positions with- 
in a defense facility in which they would — the employees — have access 
to classified information? 

Mr. Port. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. May I recapitulate this in a form of question to be sure 
our record is clear and for the clarification of the members of the 
committee? Is it a fact, Mr. Port, that the contracts between the 
Department of Defense and the defense facilities — and let us confine 
our attention at the present time to the Pittsburgh area, which, of 
course, would be true across the board, but we are concerned now prin- 
cipally with the Pittsburgh area — these contracts, do not preclude 
the employment of Communists in the defense facilities per se, do 
they? 

Mr. Port. No. 

Mr. Arens. But they do preclude or permit the removal of Com- 
munists in defense facilities if those Communists have or would have 
access to classified information, is that correct? 

Mr. Port. Yes. I would like to explain that, if I may, because this 
involves the concept of the industrial security program of our 
Department. 

Any prime contractor which the Department of Defense intends to 
use in which classified work is going to be performed must first have 
a facility clearance from the Department of Defense. Our prime con- 
cern here is the safeguarding of classified defense information. Now 
we go about this by first executing with such a facility a basic security 
agreement. Under this agreement the facility contracts to abide by 
the Department of Defense industrial security policies. 

Now, a part of this industrial security policy is the arrangement 
which we make for the clearance of people who may be engaged with- 
in that facility in the manufacture of classified material. The con- 
tractor, for his part, must tell us what employees he is going to use in 
the classified work. Those emploj^ees then are cleared. If there are 
Communists among them, they are not cleared. 

Mr. Arens. When you say "cleared," you mean they are cleared 
or not cleared from the standpoint of access to classified information, 
is that correct ? 

Mr. Port. That is correct, yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Is the record abundantly clear and is your testimony 
abundantly clear that the Defense Department contracts do not cover 
the subject of whether or not a Communist can be hired by a contract- 
ing company ? 

Mr. Port. No. 

Mr. Arens, 5Vhen you say "No" that is an affirmation of my asser- 
tion. 

Mr. Port. The contract itself makes no mention of whether Com- 
munists may be hired or not. 

Mr. Arens. Now, then the only impediment from the standpoint of 
the contracts between the Department of JDefense and these prime con- 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 401 

tractors to the engagement of Communists is that there cannot be, 
to the knowledge of the Department of Defense, engagement of Com- 
munists who would have access to classified inform^ation, is that cor- 
rect ? 

Mr. Port, That is correct, yes. 

Mr. WiLus. You said that the employees are cleared. By that you 
mean they are investigated. Wlio investigates them and clears them? 

M:r. Port. Prior to that employee having access to classified infor- 
mation m connection with the performance of his job in the plant, he 
must have what we call an industrial security clearance up to the level 
of the classified material which he will have access to in connection 
with his work. 

If he is going to be engaged in work that is classified confidential, 
he will need a confidential clearance. If he is going to be engaged in 
work that is classified secret, he will need a secret clearance, and 
so forth. 

Mr. Willis. You did not answer my specific question. Who does 
the investigation and makes the determination that Mr. John Brown 
is OK or is not OK ; is it the contractor or is it the Government, or 
both? ' 

Mr. Port. The Government is the only agency in our body politic 
with authority to investigate and to grant clearances. These are 
Government clearances which we are speaking of. 

Mr. Arens. These Government clearances are not across the board, 
are they? They are only with reference to people in their employ- 
ment who may have access to classified information, isn't that correct ? 

Mr. Port. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Let us pose a hypothetical case. Let us assume that 
this microphone here which is now before me, on which I have my 
hand, is a highly secret classified instrument to be used in some mili- 
tary weapon. Is there anything in the agreement or in the policies or 
procedures of the Department of Defense or in the law, which pres- 
ently precludes a Communist from working on part of this highly 
classified instrument, if he does not have access to classified infor- 
mation ? 

Mr. Port. If he does not have access to classified information ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Port. He is not precluded from working on that. 

Mr. Arens. The next question, if you please, sir: Is there any 
prerequisite to clearance by a contracting plant for contracts with the 
Defense Department for defense w^ork that the plant not contract 
with a Communist controlled, dominated and led labor organization ? 

Mr. Port. There is nothing, no. 

Mr. Scherer. The present status of the law would not permit such 
a contract as counsel has asked you about ; would it ? 

Mr. Arens. Oh, yes. As I shall show very shortly in the interro- 
gation of the witness it not only jiermits, but in many instances here 
in Pittsburgh and elsewhere it is in vogue, and the UE in particular 
in the Pittsburgh area is Communist dominated and controlled by 
Communist agents and is presently the bargaining agent for at least 
five principal contractors. 

40067—59 3 



402"^ PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr ScHERER. I understand that. I meant there is nothing in the 
law that prohibits the Government from entenng mto such a contract 
as you indicate. 

Mr. Arens. Is that not correct, Mr. Port i , ■ j- • 

I^Ir. Port. That is correct. I assume we are speaking ot a union 
which has been certified 

Mr. ScHERER. That is right. . 

Mr. Port, —as a bargaining agent for a particular company under 

the Labor Kelations Act. ^ , . -r, i ^ ^i 4- 

Mr Arens If the National Labor Relations Board at the present 
time certifies as a bargaining agent a labor organization which is 
dominated and controlled lock, stock, and barrel by the Communist 
Party which labor organization has the contract with a defense plant, 
the Department of Defense does not preclude a contract with that 
labor organization as a prerequisite to the consummation o± its own 
contract with the plant, is that not correct ? 
Mr. Port. That is correct. 

Mr Willis. I think, Mr. Arens, you should point out, under the 
Communist Control Act and under the Internal Security Act, par- 
ticularly the first, that such labor unions dominated as you said by 
Communist influences are not supposed to have bargaining power. 1 
think vou should explain that. That is the point. In other words, 
what you say is, if they pass the first hurdle and are certified as 
bargaining agent, then there is nothing the Defense Department can 

do. Right? . V n ^1 • 

Mr. Port. We are not authorized to do anything. . ^ ^i • 

Mr. Willis. You camiot authorize. I think you should point this 

Mr. Arens. My question was not intended as criticism of your 
policy. 

Mr. Port. I understand. . . ,. ^. .-u- a 

Mr Arens. It was criticism or a direction of attention on this record 
to what is obviously an open door for Communist control. Under 
the Communist Control Act, as the chairman has said, the law pre- 
scribes that the National Labor Relations Board is precluded from 
certifying as a bargaining agent a labor organization which is found 
by the Subversive Activities Control Board to be Communist infil- 
trated But to this day they have not gotten around to a certification 
or decertification of a single Communist-led labor organization, is 
that not a fact? 

Mr. Port. That is correct. , ,r ^ i i. 

Mr Scherer. Would you explain for the record, Mr. Counsel, why 
they have not gotten around to a certification or decertification of the 
Communist-controlled labor unions as provided m the 1954 Commu- 
nist Control Act ? , i _^ i • ^ 

Mr Arens I would say this, without m any sense undertaking to 
testify, that notwithstanding the provisions of the Internal Security 
Act of 1950, which is the basic act providing for a finding that the 
Communist Party itself is a Communist-action organization, because 
of a series of legal manipulations and because of a series of appeals, 
reversals, rehearings, and the like, this Government has jet, under 
the Internal Security Act passed in 1950, to have a finalfindmg that 
the Communist Party itself is a Communist-action organization with- 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 403 

in the purview of the Internal Security Act, so we are a long way 
from finding that the Communist-controlled labor organizations are 
Communist infiltrated within the purview of the Communist Control 
Act of 1954. 

Mr. ScHERER. I notice, Mr. Counsel, you have been very careful 
in making any criticisms of the decisions of the Supreme Court. This 
committee might not be as careful and as discreet. 

Mr. Arens. I would say I occupy a diilerent status here from a 
Congressman. I just work here. 

Now in a plant, Mr. Port, which is presently engaged in classified 
work, is there authority in the Department of Defense to preclude 
employment of Communists if the Communists do not have access 
to classified information ? 

Mr. ScHERER. Repeat that question again, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Arens. In a plant presently engaged in the Pittsburgh area in 
classified work, working on some secret device, is there presently in the 
Department of Defense authority to preclude employment of Com- 
munists, if the Communists do not have access to classified informa- 
tion? 

Mr. Port. No. There is no such authorization. If the individual 
concerned does not have access to classified information and is not 
going to have access to classified information, the Department of 
Defense has no basis for excluding that individual from the defense 
facility. 

Mr. Scherer. Just a minute. Even though he may be performing 
some work on part of a project that is highly classified? 

Mr. Port. So long as that particular gadget that he is working on 
is not itself classified, and a security clearance is not required in order 
to work on it, we have no authority to exclude him from that work 
even though it may eventually become part of a highly classified piece 
of material. 

Mr. Arens. Now I should like to invite your attention to another 
entire area of concepts in this industrial security field which we will 
subsequently, in a few moments, tie in with the area which we have 
just covered. 

Based upon your background and experience and the access which 
you have had over the course of many years to problems of indus- 
trial security, would you kindly express to this committee the degree 
to which a supporting facility, such as a power plant or a waterworks, 
is critical or vital in the production of defense equipment? 

Mr. Port. We are fully aware that no defense plant is completely 
self-contained in terms of its ability to generate within its four walls 
all of the functions essential to the production of a particular piece 
of material. Any given plant may require electricity from the out- 
side. It relies upon communications system from the outside and it 
requires, in many cases, the power sources from the outside. 

Mr. Arens. Let us use a hypothetical case, if you please, sir. Let 
us assume this building we are in right now is a defense facility. Let 
us assume it is producing critical materials for the defense of this 
Nation, but that it obtains its power for this operation three blocks 
away from a facility known as a supporting facility. Based upon 
your background and information and the present procedures, is the 
Department of Defense in any way impowered to preclude from that 
supporting defense facility 100 Communists? 



404 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Port. No, it is not. 

Mr. Arens. Is it in any way impowered to preclude trained sabo- 
teurs who may be, at any instant, ready to pull the switch? 

Mr. Port. No, it is not. 

Mr. Arens. Based upon your background and experience — and this 
is almost a ludicrous question because it seems so obvious — would 
you care to give an appraisal as to the potentiality in such a situation 
from the standpoint of stopping defense facilities or of sabotaging 
defense facilities based upon the hypothesis which I have posed? 

Mr. Port. 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, de- 
fense plants cannot produce, and we would thus be denying ourselves 
the weapons which are so essential to our national defense effort. 

Mr. ScHERER. In some instances, the cutting off or sabotaging of 
communications facilities would also create as much damage, would 
it not, as the cutting off of power facilities ? 

Mr. Port. Yes, it could. 

Mr. Arens. Before we get to the specifics of devices which might 
be conceived, including the Scherer bill which the chairman has al- 
luded to tliis morning, I should like to ask you, based upon your back- 
ground and experience in security work, the access you have to se- 
curity information, to give your appraisal, Mr. Port, of the manner in 
which a Communist-dominated and Communist-controlled labor or- 
ganization holding bargaining rights for workers within defense fa- 
cilities could serve the cause of international communism. 

Mr. Port. I believe the first and most important way in which such 
a union could affect the national defense effort and serve the cause 
of communism would be through the calling of strikes. Calling a 
strike in a vital defense industry would have the same effect of sabo- 
tage in my mind, in that it would bring to a halt production in that 
facility. Another way in which 

Mr. Scherer. May I inten-upt at this point, Mr. Chairman ? 

It is my recollection that there was a witness by the name of Joseph 
Klein who testified a few years ago in Kansas City, Mo., shortly before 
he died. Klein had been a high functionary in the Communist Party 
and, as such, was aware of Communist activities in the UE at Schenec- 
tady, N.Y. He testified that the Communist Party controlled that 
local union. When he was asked why the Communist conspiracy 
Avanted to obtain control of tliat union, he said it was obvious that if 
Russia was an ally production could be accelerated more readily and if, 
by chance, there was any internal upheaval in this country or we were 
at war with the Soviet Union, sabotage could be accomplished so much 
more easily. I merely make reference to that testimony because I think 
it fits in with what the witness has just said. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly proceed to give the basis upon 
which, or the judgment which you presently entertain as to how, a 
Communist-controlled labor organization could serve the cause of 
international communism in a defense facility in which it had the 
bargaining rights? 

Mr. Port. As I have indicated, my first thought would be in any 
way in which the union could bring to a halt production in that plant, 
which could be either by calling workers out on strike or, of course, 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 405 

by physical acts of sabotage, through either membership in the union 
or through the exercise of its disciplinary powers over rank and file 
members who may not necessarily be members of the Communist 
Party. 

Also, the union, I believe, could serve the cause of communism by 
one means, the collection of dues from members of the union, w^hether 
they be Communists or not. This would provide financial help to 
carry on the work of the union to the detriment of the defense effort. 
Also a Conununist-dominated union engages in propaganda activities 
of one sort or another which are generally designed to reduce the 
degree or enthusiasm or energy with which a community, a given 
community, supports the war effort. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Port, this committee, and it will probably be re- 
vealed in the course of this afternoon, has compilation of information 
from our public records of live witnesses under oath identifying not 
less than 41 key people in the UE, key people in leadership capacity, 
such as secretaries, field organizers, international representatives, and 
the like, as members of the Communist Party who are presently in 
the UE, with contracts now in dozens of plants in this heavy indus- 
trial area. 

Would you, or would the Department of Defense, if these people 
instead of working within the labor organization itself in their 
operations as Communists, if they were applying for jobs directly 
within the plant, w^ould the Department of Defense clear them for 
access to classified information ? 

Mr. Port. No. It Avould not. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Port, at the present time, are the tie lines and lease 
lines which carry messages out of the Pentagon itself serviced by a 
Communist-controlled labor organization? 

Mr. Port. I have understood that that is the situation; yes. 

Mr. Arens. Do messages presently of a restricted variety go over 
those tie lines and lease lines out of the Pentagon itself, which tie 
lines and lease lines are serviced by Communist-controlled labor or- 
ganizations? 

Mr. Port. Yes, they do. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Port, I should like to allude to certain testimony 
given before a committee. It was the Senate Internal Security Sub- 
committee, of which I was then staff director, and we were interro- 
gating Governor Brucker. And who is Governor Brucker at the 
present time ? 

Mr. Port. Secretary of the Anny. 

Mr. Arens. At that time, that was in 1955, Governor Brucker was 
then the counsel to the Army, was he not ? 

Mr. Port. He was counsel to the Department of Defense. 

Mr. Arens. And now he is Secretary of the Army? 

Mr. Port. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. At that time there was pending before the committee 
legislation similar to the Scherer bill, was there not, which we are 
going to discuss in a few minutes ? 

Mr. Port. Yes, that is right. 

Mr. Arens. I should like to read you certain excerpts of the testi- 
mony at that time and ask if you are familiar with that testimony. 



406 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

This is Governor Brucker testifying. This is from page 8 of the 
hearings, held in April of 1955 : 

Yet I appear before you today with a knowledge that there are known sub- 
versives now working in vital defense facilities without there being adequate 
authority in the Federal Government to meet this potential threat to our produc- 
tive capacity and therefore to our military effectiveness. 

Continuing on page 8, speaking of the then authority of the De- 
partment of Defense which you have very competently described to- 
day, Mr. Port, Governor Brucker says : 

This authority does not extend, however, to the removal of potential dangerous 
individuals from facilities where unclassified, though highly important defense 
work is being performed, or to removal of such individuals from support facili- 
ties such as power plants, basic material plants, transportation facilities, com- 
munications facilities and several others. 

Are you familiar with this testimony ? 

Mr. Port. Yes, I am. 

Mr. Arens. I should like to invite your attention as we peruse the 
then situation as described by Governor Brucker, to a recommenda- 
tion then made by a Senate committee which Governor Brucker quotes : 

"The necessity for the removal of Communists from defense facilities is of 
paramount importance to the security of the United States because of possible 
espionage and possible sabotage." 

That appears on page 10 of this testimony. 

I should like to invite your attention, please, sir, to page 11 of 
this testimony in which Governor Brucker continues : 

"Eather it is our intention," speaking of the authority which was 
sought by the then legislation 

Rather it is our intention that this authority shall be used selectively on a 
case-by-case basis in vital facilities concentrating on a limited number of known 
Communists. 

I should like also to invite your attention to page 16 of that testi- 
mony in which there is a colloquy between Governor Brucker and 
myself and I was interrogating him : 

Mr. Akeins. Are you aware of the fact — 

And I am speaking to Governor Brucker — 

that the tie lines and leased lines out at the Pentagon at this very hour are 
serviced by the American Communications Association which has repeatedly 
found to be a Communist-controlled organization? 

Mr. Brucker. I see your point, and I am very glad that you raised that. Yes, 
and we are disturbed. 

******* 

Mr. Akens. Are you cognizant of the fact that there has been testimony before 
the Internal Security Subcommittee to the effect that persons under discipline 
of the Communists controlling the American Communications Association now 
have access to messages coming from the Pentagon by a monitor system whereby 
they can plug in, listen to conversations — 

Mr. Brucker. Regrettably yes, I know that. 

Mr. Arens. Are you conversant with the facts which have been revealed by 
the Internal Security Subcommittee of the Senate to the effect that restricted 
telegrams coming in from the Pentagon have been intercepted by persons under 
discipline of the Communist-controlled American Communications Association? 

Mr. Brucker. I am aware of that. 

Mr. Arens. Are you conversant with the fact that the North Atlantic cable 
which carries very important messages vital to the security of our Nation is now 
serviced by the American Communications Association, a Communist-controlled 
labor organization? 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 407 

Mr. Beuckek. I have learned that, too. 

Mr. Arens. And I take it, if I am not being a little bit redundant here, that 
under the present law and under the present powers vested in the Defense De- 
partment, the Defense Department is absolutely helpless to cut ofC that access to 
the messages? 

Mr. Bkucker. That is correct. 

tt it: * * * * * 

Mr. Arens. Is it not true that coded messages of the Pentagon, highly confi- 
dential coded messages of the Pentagon which go out over the tie lines and 
leased lines serviced by the Communist-controlled American Communications 
Association are in such situation or status that they can be available by a moni- 
toring system even though in code to persons under discipline of the Communist- 
controlled American Communications Association? 

Mr. Brucker. You have described it correctly * * * I feel, sir, that that situ- 
tion is nothing short of deplorable to be allowed to continue any longer than is 
absolutely necessary. 

Mr. ScHERER. That was 1955 ? 

Mr. Arens. That was in 1955. 

Mr. Scherer. And this is 1959. 

Mr. Arens. Are you familiar, Mr. Port, with this testimony ? 

Mr. Port. Yes, I am familiar with the testimony. 

Mr. Arens. Is the situation described by Governor Brucker, now 
Secretary of tiiS Department of the Army, before that subcommittee 
in 1955, substantially the same today as it was then? 

Mr. Port. Yes, it is. 

Mr. Scherer. And the American Communications Association has 
been expelled from the CIO because the CIO found it to be Commu- 
nist dominated and controlled ; is that not right, Mr. Counsel ? 
■ Mr. Arens. That is correct. 

Now, Mr. Port, I should like to invite your attention to the Scherer 
bill, H.K. 3693, a bill which was previously alluded to by Mr. Willis. 

Is the Scherer bill substantially in import and provisions the same 
approach, the same type of legislation which the Department of De- 
fense and the military have been advocating for these many years in 
order to preclude access of Communists to defense facilities? 

Mr. Port. This is identically the same bill I would say. 

Mr. Arens. Could you tell us the history, in resume form, of the 
advocacy by the Department of Defense of legislation of this type? 

Mr. Port. As I recall, the first witness to testify before the Con- 
gress on this problem was the former chairman of the Munitions 
Board, Mr. Jack Small, who testified, I believe, in 1952, concerning 
the problem of the Communist-dominated union in defense facilities 
and also the problem of the individual who may be or concerning 
whom one might have reason to believe would engage in sabotage, es- 
pionage, or other acts of subversion. 

I believe Governor Brucker was the next witness to appear and 
discuss this problem, and he did so in 1955. I believe Mr. Ralph Stohl, 
who was at that time head of administrative services in the Office of 
Secretary of Defense, testified in that same period. 

Mr. Applegate on my right testified in 1957 in connection with in- 
quiries being made by this committee and made reference to the inter- 
est of the Department of Defense in legislation which would close the 
gap between the exclusion of security risks from classified work and 
their exclusion from defense facilities generally. 

I myself appeared before this committee in 1957, and I believe that 
is the resume, as I recall, of such testimony. 



408 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Arens. The facts wliicli Governor Brucker was deplorin*?, as 
(hen counsel to the Army, had actually been testified to in public 
tesHmony 2 years prior to his testimony in 1955, is that not correct? 

Mr. Port. Yes. I believe the Governor was here in April of '55 
and I believe Mr. Small was in March of '52 so it would be a 3-year 
period. 

Mr. Arens. At least it has be-en 6 years now since this situation, 
in which Communist-led labor organizations have had control within 
defense facilities and in which the De]:)artment of Defense is power- 
less to preclude Communists from defense facilities, has been made 
public ; isn't that correct ? 

Mr. Port. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, just for the record, I think it should 
be noted that H.R. 3693, the bill we are discussing, has not been 
referred to this committee for consideration but is before another 
committee of the House. Some ])eople may wonder why this com- 
mittee does not report out this bill. Of course, personally I feel that 
this bill should be before this committee, but that is beyond my con- 
trol. 

Mr, Arens. You understand, Mr. Port, that the reason we are mak- 
ing the inquiry and the reason the Committee on Un-American Ac- 
tivities is developing the facts on this is that the bill itself, though 
technically pending before another committee, deals with a subject, 
namely communism, which is within the jurisdiction of the Committee 
on Un-American Activities. 

]Mr. Port. Perliaps I, too, for the record should point out that the 
appearances of Mr. Applegate and myself in 1957 were not in connec- 
tion with hearings on this particular bill, but in connection with hear- 
ings which the Un-American Activities Committee held on 
other matters. During the discussion of those matters references to 
legislation in this field did come up and testimony was taken with 
respect to that. 

Mr. Arens. You are cognizant also, are you not, INIr. Port, that 
the Committee on Un-American Activities has repeatedly within its 
jurisdiction made strong recommendations for legislation to try to 
cope with this situation ? 

Mr. Port. I certainly understand that. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I would respectfully suggest that we 
might take a recess for a few minutes if it is agreeable with the chair- 
man and the committee. 

]Mr. WiLETS. We will take an informal recess. 

( Subcommittee members present : Representatives Willis, Tuck, and 
Scherer.) 

(A brief recess was taken.) 

( Subcommittee members present : Representatives Willis, Tuck, and 
Scherer.) 

Mr. Willis. The subcommittee will come to order. 

Proceed, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, that will conclude, if you please, sir, 
the staff interrogation of these witnesses. 

Mr. Willis. Any questions, gentlemen ? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Ikit I would like to say at this l)oint that I think our counsel is 
doing an excellent job in eliciting information from these witnesses 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 409 

which should prove to be of tremendous importance and be very effec- 
tive in giving the Congress information for consideration of these 
various measures that come up for action. 

Mr. Arens. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Tuck. I was especially interested in the testimony given by 
the gentleman, particularly the statement to the effect that strikes oc- 
cur in essential public utilities and things that are essential to govern- 
mental contracts for national defense, which is almost sabotage as 
such. The states themselves cannot cope with this problem. It would 
seem from that statement to be in the public interest for us also to 
give consideration to that subject. I know of my own personal 
knowledge that in a number of states that is true. We should deal 
with this problem on a nation-wide basis in a way to have an advan- 
tageous effect upon the carrying out of national defense contracts. 

I want to thank, also, these gentlemen from the Defense Depart- 
ment for coming here and making available to the committee the 
information that they brought. 

Mr. Willis. Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Port, I do not suppose at this time that the De- 
fense Department has made any estimate of the cost of enforcing pro- 
visions of H.K. 3693, has it ? 

Mr. Port. No, sir. It has not. 

Mr. Scherer. But am I correct in saying the cost of enforcement 
of the provisions of this bill would be relatively small compared to 
the loss of perhaps one bomber as the result of sabotage ? 

Mr. Port. I would certainly subscribe to that statement, yes, sir. 

Mr. Scherer. Today we hear a great deal of conversation from some 
quarters about the inadequacy of our defense setup with the threat 
we are facing in Berlin. I do not expect you to comment on the issues 
in the debate that is now taking place because I know of your posi- 
tion in the Defense Department. We find that some of those who are 
talking about the inadequacy of that defense, to which I, of course, do 
not subscribe, are unwilling to support the provisions contained in 
this bill. Of course, if we do not take some action to prevent possi- 
ble sabotage should there be an outbreak of hostilities it could result 
in tremendous losses to this Government in defense, equipjnent, and the 
strength of our defense posture. 

It seems just incredible to me that we have not followed the advice 
of the Defense Department. The Department of Defense made a re- 
quest for this legislation way back in 1952. 

We are deeply grateful for the testimony of you gentlemen m sup- 
port of this legislation here today. Thank you. 

Mr. Willis. Thank you very much, gentlemen. 

Mr. Port. You are welcome. 

^ Mr. Willis. The witnesses will be excused if counsel has completed 
his examination. 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Port. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Willis. Call your next witness. 

Mr. Arens. If you please, Mr. Chairman, the next witness will be 
Thomas Quinn. 

Please come forward and remain standing while the chairman ad- 
ministers an oath to you. 

40067—59 4 



410 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. DoNNER. I object to the taking of pictures both before and after 
the witness is sworn. 

]Mr. Willis. We have no jurisdiction 

Mr. DoNNER. This is a legislative hearing and not a circus. This 
is Federal property, and the chairman of this committee has the 
power to stop these photographers, and I demand that they stop. 

Mr. Willis. That is enough. But we have no jurisdiction until 
witnesses have been sworn. 

Mr. DoNNER. You have jurisdiction over the people in the court- 
room, and you have jurisdiction over the witnesses, and you have 
jurisdiction over the photographers. 

Mr. Willis. Kindly raise your right hand. 

Mr. DoNNER. I am not the witness. I am his lawyer. 

Mr. Willis. I am sorry. 

Mr. QuiNN. I object also. 

Mr. DoNNER. I have been objecting to the taking of the pictures. 
This is scandalous. 

Mr. ScHERER. Come on. You fellows talk about the freedom of 
the press. Let us have it. 

Mr. DoNNER. You are interested in a circus and not finding facts. 

Mr, Willis. Kindly raise your right hand. Witness. Do you 
solemnly swear that the testimony you shall give will be the truth, the 
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. QuiNN. I do. 

Mr, Willis. Now that you are under our jurisdiction the photog- 
raphers will desist, please. 

TESTIMONY OF THOMAS QUINN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

PEANK J. DONNER 

Mr. Arens. Please identify yourself by name, residence, and 
occupation. 

Mr. Donner. I have a motion to file before the witness is sworn. 
The motion is addressed 

Mr. Willis. We will not entertain a motion. If you have a state- 
ment that is typewritten, you may present it to the staff director. 
That is the rule of this committee and counsel will proceed. 

Mr. Donner. Mr. Chairman, how can you rule on the motion with- 
out reading it ? 

Mr. Willis. You are only entitled to file the statement. You have 
read the rules. The rules are served on the witnesses. You are an 
attorney and you know the rules. 

Mr. Donner. Mr, Chairman, I am in an American tribunal and an 
American courtroom, and I am filing a motion, and I would like to 
have it ruled on. 

Mr. Arens. Identify yourself by name, residence, and occupation. 

Mr, Scherer. May I interrupt so the record is clear ? The courts 
have said repeatedly that we have no authority to rule on any motion, 
that if any counsel has any motion, he must file that motion in the 
proper court. 

Mr. Donner. Mr. Scherer, j^ou know very well the chairman can 
decide whether it is engaged in legislative purpose. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, the counsel will be advised his sole and 
exclusive prerogative is to advise his client. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 411 

Would you identify yourself by name, residence, and occupation? 

Mr. DoNNER. May I file the motion and the record show I filed it ? 
May the record show I am now filing an original ? 

Mr. Willis. The record will show you are handing a document to 
our staff director. 

Mr. DoNNER. And I would like to add to the grounds of that 
motion. The ground that the committee has no jurisdiction 

Mr. Willis. We have announced 

Mr. DoNNER. — not considering a' bill which is committed to this 
committee 

Mr Willis. We have announced the legislative purpose at length 
at the beginning of the hearings. Now please proceed. 

Mr. Arens. Kindly identify yourself by name, residence, and occu- 
pation. 

Mr. QuiNN. My name is Thomas Quinn. I reside at 4002 Berger 
Lane, Monroeville, Pa., and I am a field organizer for the United 
Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, the union you 
just lied about 1 hour ago. 

Mr. Arens. You are appearing today, Mr. Quinn, in response to a 
subpena which was served upon you by the House Committee on Un- 
American Activities ? 

Mr. Quinn. Unfortunately, yes. 

Mr. Arens. And you are represented by comisel ? 

Mr. Quinn. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Counsel, would you kindly identify yourself ? 

Mr. Donner. My name is Frank J. Donner. I am an attorney-at- 
law, and my office is 342 Madison Avenue, New York City. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Quinn, how long have you occupied your present 
position as field organizer for the UE ? 

Mr. Quinn. What has that got to do with the subject of inquiry 
here ? 

Mr. Arens. I will be very happy to tell you, sir. 

Mr. Quinn. I wish you would. 

Mr. Arens. The Committee on Un-American Activities is presently 
engaged in accumulating factual information for the purpose of de- 
veloping legislation to protect the internal security of this Nation. 
That is pursuant to Public Law 601 of the Congress, in which this 
committee is mandated not only to conduct investigations for the pur- 
pose of devising legislation, but likewise for the purpose of maintain- 
ing a continuing surveillance over the administration and operation of 
existing security laws, including the Communist Control Act, the 
Internal Security Act, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, nu- 
merous amendments, numerous provisions of tlie security laws of this 
Nation. 

In pursuance of that duty this committee has come to this heavy in- 
dustrial area of Pittsburgh. It has come here pursuant to a mandate. 
This subcommittee is here pursuant to a mandate of the full Com- 
mittee on Un-American Activities. This mandate was read by the 
chairman of this subcommittee in the opening session. 

Among other things, this subcommittee is to acquire factual infor- 
mation Inspecting Communists in labor organizations which have, 
bargaining rights in defense facilities. 



412 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Now as to you, sir, you have been repeatedly identified by live 
witnesses under oath before congressional committees as a hard-core 
member of the Communist conspiracy 

Mr. QuiNN. That's a lie, 

Mr. Arens. — one who is dedicated to the overthrow of the Govern- 
ment of the United States 

Mr. QuiNN. That is a lie. 

Mr. Arens. — by force and violence. 

Mr. QuiNN. That's a lie. You still haven't answered my question 
why you called me here. 

Mr. Arens. Now, sir, the reason we have called you is that at the 
time of the last appearance of yourself before a congressional com- 
mittee, of which I happen to then have been staif director, the Senate 
Internal Security Subcommittee on the Senate side, at which I inter- 
rogated you 

Mr. QuiNN. Weren't you satisfied with my answers then ? 

Mr. Arens. You at that time, sir, occupied a different position with 
the United Electrical Workers. You occupied at that time the posi- 
tion of president of a particular local of the UE. Thereafter, by 
devices and processes which we do not presently know, your position 
was shifted from president of a local to a field organizer. 

We want to explore with you now, sir, questions respecting your 
activities, respecting the shift of yourself since these last hearings 
from president of a local to a field organizer of the United Electrical 
Workers. 

Now with that explanation, Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest 
the witness now be ordered and directed to answer the last outstand- 
ing principal question. 

Mr. Willis. Will you restate the question. 

Mr. Arens. The question is, how long have you been field organizer 
forUE? 

Mr. QiHNN. I am not satisfied with your explanation, but I have 
been a field organizer since 1954. 

Mr. Arens. And what was your position immediately prior to 
that? 

Mr. Quinn. Wliere? 

Mr. Arens. Where you worked ? 

Mr. Quinn. I worked in the Westinghouse Electric Corporation 
plant in East Pittsburgh. 

Mr. Arens. And in what capacity ? 

Mr. Quinn. You mean what job did I have ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Quinn. I was a welder. 

Mr. Arens. And were you at that time holder of an officer's post 
inUE? 

Mr. Quinn. At what time? 

Mr. Arens. The time you worked at Westinghouse, immediately; 
prior to your employment as a field organizer. 

Mr. Quinn. AVhat has that got to do with the inquiry ? 

IVfr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the record now 
reflect the explanation which I have heretofore on this record given 
and that the witness now be ordered and directed to answer the 
question. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 413 

Mr, QuiNN. You said you were investigating problems of security 
in defense industries. What does my occupation before 1954 got to 
do with that ? 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. QuiNN. I am asking you a question. Will you tell me what 
that has to do with it ? 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer. 

Mr. QuiNN. You are not going to sit up there and tell me I am 
directed to answer the question you asked. It has to have a valid 
legislative purpose, as you well know. The Supreme Court said that. 
The Supreme Court said that in the case in which I was involved in 
1955. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question for the simple 
reason that the rules require that we direct you to answer a question 
as a warning to you that we do not accept your refusal and that your 
refusal may lead to a citation for contempt. We are doing that. I 
am directing you to answer as a warning that that may result, so you 
may not be taken by surprise. That is the reason for the order. 

Mr. Arens. Now would you kindly answer the question please ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. QuiNN. Would you please repeat the question ? 

Mr. Arens. The question is, at the time you were working in West- 
inghouse, immediately prior to your employment as a field organizer 
of UE, were you then an officer of a labor organization or of a local 
organization of UE ? 

Mr. QuiNN. No. 

Mr. Arens. Were you, at any time, an officer of a local labor organ- 
ization prior to the time of your employment as a field organizer 
bylJE? 

Mr. QuiNN. That is in the testimony of 1953. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly answer the question ? 

Mr. QuiNN. It is in the testimony. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness now 
be ordered and directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question for the rea- 
sons I have stated. 

Mr. QuiNN. I just want to know whether I have to answer every 
question you ask me. 

Mr. ScHERER. Look. Proceed to the next question. He has been 
given an opportunity. Let us proceed to the next question. 

Mr. QuiNN. The answer to the question is that at one time I was 
president of Local 601 UE in East Pittsburgh, which I testified 
to in 1953. 

Mr. Arens. Over what period of time were you a president of 
Local 601 UE in Pittsburgh ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Quinn. I don't recall the period of time. 

Mr. Arens. Your best recollection, if you please, sir ? 

Mr. Quinn. Possibly a year. 

Mr. Arens. And during what year was that? Do you recall? 

Mr. Quinn. 1953. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a president of a local of UE as of the time 
you were interrogated before the Senate Internal Security Subcom- 
mittee ? 



414 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. QuiNN. You have the testimony in front of you. 

Mr. Arens, Would you kindly answer the question. That was in 
1953. Were you then a president of a local of UE ? 

Mr. QuiNN. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. What caused your disassociation from Westinghouse ? 

Mr. QuiNN. What has that got to do with it ? 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that the witness 
now be ordered and directed to answer the question and that the 
record now reflect the explanation of relevancy and pertinency which 
I heretofore on this record gave. 

Mr. QuiNN. I don't accept that explanation. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness how 
be ordered and. directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Willis. I do not accept the refusal, and you are ordered to 
answer the question. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. QuiNN. Repeat the question. 

Mr. Arens. What caused your disassociation, please, sir, from 
Westinghouse ? 

Mr. QuiNN. According to the record I was dismissed. 

Mr. Arens. Why ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. QuiNN. The company claimed that I was guilty of falsifying 
records. 

Mr. Arens. What was the nature ? 

Mr. QuiNN. Of course I had no opportunity to deny that. 

Mr. Arens. What records was it claimed you falsified ? 

Mr. QuiNN. Time records I presume they were referring to. 

Mr. Arens. And when were you dismissed from Westinghouse? 

Mr. QuiNN. I don't recall the exact date. 

Mr. Arens. When were you dismissed from Westinghouse, in rela- 
tion to the time of your appearance before the Senate Internal Se- 
curity Subcommittee? Were you dismissed from Westinghouse be- 
fore you appeared or after you appeared ? 

Mr. QuiNN. After. I know it was after. I still want to know 
what the question, that has to do with the subject of security in the 
defense industries. 

]\Ir. Arens. You will see I believe a little bit clearer as we go along. 
Were you a member of the Communist Party while you were em- 
ployed at Westinghouse ? 

Mr. QuiNN. A^Hiat time are you talking about ? 

Mr. Arens. At any time during your employment at Westinghouse ? 

Mr. QuiNN. What has that got to do with the inquiry ? 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness be 
ordered and directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. QuiNN. I was here when you read your statement at the be- 
ginning of the hearing in which you said you were going to investi- 
gate matters 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer. 

Mr. DoNNER. Give an explanation. 

Mr. QuiNN. — of the recent 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. I do not 
want a speech from you. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 415 

Mr. QuiNisr. I want to know whether I have to answer every ques- 
tion you ask me. 

Mr. Willis. Yes. Not only do you have to — I am ordering you 
to answer the question because I am required to order you. 

Mr. QuiNN. I have been called before the Senate Internal Security 
Subcommittee in 1953. 

Mr. ScHERER. Proceed to the next question. 

Mr. Willis. Proceed. 

Mr. QuiNN. And I was called by this commitee in 1949. Now you 
asked me similar questions. I want to know what you are talking 
about now. What is it you want to find out now ? 

Mr. SciiERER. Proceed. 

Mr. Willis. Proceed with the next questions. 

Mr. QuiNN". You asked the same questions. 

Mr. Arens. Were you discharged from Westinghouse on security 
grounds ? 

Mr. QuiNN. I think I was discharged because the company wanted 
to get rid of me because I was actively working for the UE and that 
plant at that time was under certification to the lUE. 

Mr. Arens. Were you then a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. QuiNN. At the time I was discharged ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. QuiNN. The answer is "No." 

Mr. Arens. Were you at any time a member of the Communist 
Party during your employment at Westinghouse ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. QuiNN. What does that got to do with the subject under in- 
quiry ? 

Mr. Arens. IMr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness be 
ordered and directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Willis. You are ordered to answer the question. 

Mr. QuiNN. Why ? I think I ought to have a word of explanation. 
You can ask me where I was last night, and say I direct you to answer 
the question. What does that got to do with this inquiry ? 

Mr. Arens. Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. QuiNN. I want to know what period you are talking about. 
You asked me a question. 

Mr. Arens. I respectfully suggest now the status of this record 

Mr. QuiNN. You asked me about my discharge from Westinghouse. 
That was in 1953. 

ISIr. Arens. On the status of this record I respectfully suggest that 
the witness be now ordered to answer the question : Are you now, or 
have you ever been, a member of the Commmiist Party? 

Mr. QuiNN. I am not now, and never was, a member of the Com- 
munist Party. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been knowingly under Communist 
Party discipline ? 

Mr. QuiNN". I wouldn't know what that would be. I still would like 
to know what the question, defense industries, has to do with what 
I might or might not have been. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly tell us the jurisdiction of District 6 
in which you are a field organizer ? 



416 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. QuiNN. Western Pennsylvania. 

Mr. Akens. How much of Western Pennsylvania ? 

Mr. QuiNN. All of it. 

]\Ir. Arens. How many plants in District 6 are workers engaged 
in represented by UE ? 

Mr. QuiNN, That is pretty hard to give you an exact figure because 
we have so many people laid off. I would say somewhere around 
15,000 workers are in the plants represented by UE in Western Penn- 
sylvania employed at this time. 

Mr. Arens. How many different plants have workers represented 
byUE? 

Mr. QuiNN. What do you mean different plants? Do you mean the 
names of the plants or numbers of the plants ? 

Mr. Arens. How many different plants, industrial establishments? 

Mr. QuiNN. About 15 or 17. I wouldn't be sure of that. 

Mr. Arens. How many of those plants have defense contracts? 

Mr. QuiNN. How would I know ? 

Mr. Arens. Do you know ? 

Mr. QuiNN. No, I do not know. I just asked you how would I 
know. I have notching to do with the contracts. 

Mr. Arens. Plow many of the plants, the IT plants, are engaged 
in W' orking on defense material ? 

Mr. QuiNN. I don't know. I have no access to the information on 
what kind of material the company is producing. 

Mr. Arens. Does each w^orker in UE receive the UE News? 

Mr. QuiNN. What does that got to do with the subject under 
inquiry ? 

Mr. SciiERER. I ask you to direct the witness to answer. 

Mr. QuiNN. I am asking the question : "Wliat the paper they read 
has to do with security in defense industries? I think you ought to 
settle that question. You called me down here to talk about our 
organization ? 

Mr. Willis. You are directed 

Mr. QuiNN. The staff director he makes a big statement earlier 
about Communist domination and Communist leadership and so on. 
I say that is a lie. And I dou't see what our newspaper has to do with 
the problems as you said earlier, the problems of security in defense 
industries. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question if you know 
the answer. 

Mr. Qtjinn. Obviously your staff director knows the answer, too. 
They have been fishing around for 10 years trying to find something 
in our union. 

Mr. Willis. Proceed with the next question. 

Mr. SciTERER. UE was expelled by the CIO. 

Mr. QuiNN. That is a lie, too. We left the CIO because we dis- 
agreed Avith tlieir policies in 1049. 

Mr. Arens. Wlio is your immediate superior in UE ? 

Mr. QuiNN. Who was my immediate superior ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. QuiNN. Wliat has that got to do with the problems of security 
in defense industries? 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 417 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness be 
ordered and directed to answer that question. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. ScHERER. Let us get this of record. 

Mr. QuiNN. You are aware the director for our organization is 
James Matles. 

Mr. Arens. Is he the immediate superior of yourself ? 

Mr. QuiNN. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. I beg your pardon. 

Mr. QuiNN. He is superior of all field representatives on the staff. 
He is a director of organization, as you well know. 

Mr. Scherer. Before we go any further let us get this record 
straight. Witness, you say that UE left the CIO and that it was not 
expelled by the CIO because of its Communist domination and control, 
is that right ? 

Mr. QuiNN. We left the CIO, the CIO pulled one of those deals 
where you say, you can't quit, I am going to fire you, but we quit. 

Mr. Scherer. You are telling this committee now, while you are 
under oath, that you were not expelled by the CIO because you 
were Communist dominated ? 

Mr. QuiNN. After we left the organization, they conducted what 
they called an expulsion procedure. 

Mr. Scherer. And they found that you were Communist dominated 
and controlled, did they not ? 

Mr. QuiNN. I can't testify to that. 

Mr. Scherer. You do not know ? You mean to tell me that you do 
not know that as a matter of fact? The UE organizer in UE does 
not know what happened ? 

Mr. QuiNN. Sure. I know what happened. I just told you what 
happened. We left the CIO. 

Mr. Scherer. That is not my question. Witness. My question was 
what 

Mr. QuiNN. We have no control over what they would do after we 
left the organization. 

Mr. Scherer. I understand that. Now listen to my question. The 
question was whether or not the CIO made a finding that UE was 
Communist dominated and controlled and entered an order of ex- 
pulsion by reason of that finding ; is that not a fact? 

Mr. QuiNN. What has that got to do with me ? 

Mr. Scherer. I ask that you direct the witness to answer. 

Mr. QuiNN. Why should I testify to you what the CIO did ? Call 
the CIO in here and ask them the question. 

Mr. Willis. You brought it up by characterizing it as a lie. 

Mr. QuiNN. He brought it up. I didn't. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. QuiNN. It happened in 1949. I still want to know what that 
has to do with your investigation today of problems of security in de- 
fense industries. What does that got to do with it ? 

Mr. Scherer. Wait a minute. I want to get this record straight be- 
cause I am going to make a motion to refer this man's testimony to 
the Department of Justice for consideration of perjury prosecution, 
and I want to get this record straight. And also I am going to make 
a motion that this subcommittee recommend to the full committee of 

40067—59 6 



418 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

the Committee on Un-American Activities that he be cited for con- 
tempt of Congress, too. 

Mr. QuiNN. I don't have contempt for Congress, just contempt of 
this committee. Make that clear. 

Mr. ScHERER. I understand that. 

Mr. QuiNN. I have eveiy respect for the institutions of our country, 
including the Congress, 

Mr. ScHERER. All Communists have contempt for this committee. 

Mr. QuiNN. Don't call me a Communist because I told the director 
that is a lie. 

Mr. ScHERER. All right. We will let the Department of Justice 

Mr. QuiNN. If you have that opinion, that is fine. It is nice to 
be able to set up there and call people names. 

Mr. Willis. What is the outstanding question ? 

Mr. ScHERER. You are directed to answer. Proceed to the next 
question. He had ample opportunity to answer that question. 

Mr. QuiNN. I said the question has no valid legislative purpose as 
the Supreme Court has said in 1955 in the case in which I was involved. 

Mr. Arens. Do you presently, in your capacity as a field organizer 
for UE, have access to these various plants, these 17 plants in which 
UE has bargaining rights ? 

Mr. QuiNN. I don't have access to any plant. 

Mr. Arens. Do you go to the plants to talk to the workers ? 

Mr. QuiNN. No, I don't. The only time any staff representative is 
at a plant is when he meets with the company for the purpose of 
negotiating either contracts or grievances, and those are conducted in 
the company's offices, not in the plant, as you well know, 

Mr. Arens. Do you have access to the plants ? Have you been pre- 
cluded from access to the plants? 

Mr. QuiNN. Generally we don't go into the plants, because the 
offices aren't in the plant. 

Mr, Arens. I am not speaking generally. In any instance? 

Mr. Scherer. Wait just a minute, I ask the chairman to direct the 
witness to answer counsel's question. Let us get the record clear. 

Mr. Willis. Will you repeat the question ? 

Mr. Arens. Do you, in your capacity as field organizer of UE, have 
access to the plants in which UE represents the workers ? 

Mr. Quinn. Only with tlie permission of the management, for the 
purpose of negotiating contracts or grievances. 

Mr, Arens, Have you, to your knowledge, been precluded from 
access to any of the 17 plants in which UE represents the workers ? 

Mr. Quinn, I have nothing to do with the 17 plants, I only 
have 

Mr, Willis. That is not the question. 

Mr. Arens. To your knowledge, liave you been precluded from ac- 
cess to any of the 17 plants in which UE represents workers in Dis- 
trict 6? 

Mr, Quinn, I don't have access to the plants, I go to the company 
offices, 

Mr, Willis, That is not the question, 

Mr, Quinn. I go to the company offices. I don't have access to any 
plant. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 419 

Mr. Willis. That is not the question. The question is, as far as 
you know, have you been denied access to those plants. Have you 
been so notified? 

Mr. QuiNN. No. I have never been denied the opportunity to enter 
the plant and go to the company offices for the purposes of carrying 
out the provisions of our collective bargaining agreement. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been denied access to any of the facilities 
of the plants other than the company offices ? 

Mr. QuiNN. Never asked. TVHiy should I be denied ? 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever attempted to enter or entered any part 
of any of these 17 plants other than the company offices ? 

Mr. QuiNN. There might be some occasions where in the investiga- 
tion of a particular grievance, which is very seldom, that, together 
with a committee of the management and the other labor representa- 
tives in the plant, we might go to a particular machine to observe the 
operation of the machine in the course of collective bargaining nego- 
tiations. That might be possible. 

Jjtlr. Arens. To your laiowledge, have you ever been as an individual 
denied access to any segment, any part, any parcel of any of the 17 
plants ? 

Mr. QuiNN. The only time I would have any access was when I was 
invited 

Mr. Willis. You are not answering the question 

Mr. Qdinn. — by the management. 

Mr. Willis. — as I suppose you realize. But I am going to direct 
you to answer it. 

Mr. QuiNN. I don't know what the intention of the question is. 

Mr. Willis. All right. 

Mr. QuiNN. If he is saying, am I going around snooping into plants, 
is he ? If I get in and nobody is keeping me out ? The only time I go 
to the plant is when invited to go there. 

Mr. Willis. The question is, have you been denied access to any 
portion of any of these places ? 

Mr. QuiNN. No. I haven't been denied because I haven't been 
asked. 

Mr. Willis. The answer is that you have not been denied ? 

Mr. QuiNN. That is right. 

Mr. Willis. All right. Proceed. 

Mr. Arens. Did you invoke the constitutional privilege against giv- 
ing testimony that might be incriminating before a congressional 
committee at any time in the past when you were asked a question 
as to whether or not you were, or ever have been, a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. QuiNN. What legislative purpose is that going to serve? 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest this is a very 
crucial question of this interrogation of this witness, and I respect- 
fully suggest the witness now be ordered and directed to answer the 
question. 

Mr. Qtjinn. Since you are aware of that 

Mr. Willis. Yes, and it has great bearing on his previous testimony. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Willis. And I direct you to answer it. 



420 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. QuiNN. The committee is aware that I used it because you have 
the record, and the reason I used it is because I was fearful and I 
am still fearful. I am fearful of what you are going to do to me 
because of my appearance here today after listening to Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. You have a right to be fearful. 

Mr. QuiNN". Yes, sir, because I know this committee's intention is 
to try to smear me or frame me and my union and has no other 
purpose. 

Mr. x\jtENS. Are you cognizant of the fact that you have been identi- 
fied 

Mr. Scherer. Just a minute. Did the CIO frame you when it ex- 
pelled you ? 

Mr. QuiNN. I don't have anything to do with the CIO. 

Mr. Arens. Are you cognizant of the fact that you have been iden- 
tified under oath before a congressional committee as a person who 
has been a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. QuiNN. By whom ? 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness now 
be ordered and directed to answer that question. 

Mr. QuiNN. Can I ask that question, by whom ? 

Mr. Willis. The question is, are you aware of that fact ? 

Mr. QuiNN. I ask the question, by whom. 

Mr. Scherer. I ask you to direct the witness to answer the ques- 
tion. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question now. 

Mr. QuiNN. There are two chairmen now. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. QuiNN. I suppose you are referring to Cvetic or Mazzei or 
some of these guys, the guys that are described as FBI undercover 
men. Is that who you are talking about identifying me ? 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly answer the question ? 
'Mr. QuiNN. I am aware that people like that lied about me. 

Mr. Scherer. Did they lie when they said you were a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. QuiNN. They did. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever attended any Communist 

Mr. QuiNN Of course, they were on the Government payroll when 
they were lying. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever attended any closed Communist Party 
meetings ? 

Mr. QuiNN. Why would I attend closed Communist Party meet- 
ings if I wasn't a Communist? 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness now 
be ordered and directed to answer that question. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. QuiNN. This is one of those trick questions I suppose. I 
would say that I never knowingly attended — what you call it — a 
closed Communist meeting. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that will con- 
clude the staff interrogation of this witness. 

Mr. Scherer. Were you ever a member of the Communist appa- 
ratus underground, without being a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. QuiNN. What kind of nonsense is that ? 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 421 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask that you direct the witness to answer the ques- 
tion because there are many persons who never actually held a party 
card, 

Mr. QuiNN. I don't know what it is, what is it? How about you 
telling me what this underground is? 

Mr. ScHERER. Just a minute. Mr. Chairman, we know there are 
many individuals who have been members of the Communist under- 
ground without ever having been a party member of a Communist 
cell. I am asking the witness whether he has ever been a member of 
the Communist apparatus underground in this country. 

Mr. QuiNN. You can't win. Is that it? If you say you are not a 
Communist, why you don't accept that. You start asking me ques- 
tions about some underground that I don't know anything about. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask you to direct the witness to answer. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer. 

Mr. Qltinn. So the answer is no. 

Mr. ScHERER. All right. 

Mr. QuiNN. Does that make you happy, Mr. Scherer ? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Willis. The witness is excused. 

We will take an informal recess for just a few minutes. 

( Subcommittee members present : Eepresentatives Willis, Tuck, and 
Scherer. ) 

(A brief recess was taken.) 

(Subcommittee members present: Representatives Willis, Tuck, 
and Scherer.) 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, before we adjourn for the noon recess, 
I would like to read into the record from the daily proceedings of 
the Eleventh Constitutional Convention of the CIO, held in Cleve- 
land, Ohio, November 2, 1949. I am reading from page 21 of those 
proceedings : 

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT— 

1. This Convention finds that the Certificate of AflSliation heretofore granted 
to the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America has fallen into 
the control of a group devoted primarily to the principles of the Communist Party 
and opposed to the constitution and democratic objectives of the CIO, and in 
particular to the following declaration, in the Preamble of the Constitution of 
the CIO : 

"In the achievement of this task we turn to the people because we 
have faith in them ; and we oppose all those who would violate this 
American emphasis of respect for human dignity, all those who would 
use power to exploit the people in the interest of alien loyalties." 

Without reading the resolution further I ask that this resolution 
which was eventually adopted be mcluded in full in our record at this 
point. 

Mr. Willis. It is so ordered. 

(The information referred to follows :) 

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT : 

1. This Convention finds that the Certificate of Affiliation hereto- 
fore granted to the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers 
of America has fallen into the control of a group devoted primarily to 
the principles of the Communist Party and opposed to the constitu- 



422 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

tion and democratic objectives of the CIO, and in particular to the 
following declaration in the Preamble of the Constitution of the CIO : 

"In the achievement of this task we turn to the people be- 
cause we have faith in them; and we oppose all those who 
would violate this American emphasis of respect for human 
dignity, all those who would use power to exploit the people 
in the interest of alien loyalties.", 

and, in conformance with the provisions of Article III, Section 6 of 
our Constitution, this convention hereby expels the United Electrical, 
Radio and Machine Workers of America from the Congress of In- 
dustrial Organizations and withdraws the said Certificate of 
Affiliation. 

2. This Convention recognizes that the overwhelming majority of 
the membership of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Work- 
ers of America are not members of the Communist Party, and further 
recognizes the desire of the working men and women in the electrical 
and allied industries for a free and autonomous union affiliated with 
the CIO and devoted to the constitutional principles and policies of 
the CIO. 

3. This Convention hereby authorizes and directs the Executive 
Board immediately to issue a Certificate of Affiliation to a suitable 
organization covering electrical and allied workers which will genu- 
inely represent the desires and interests of the men and women in those 
industries. 

4. This convention calls upon the working men and women in the 
electrical and allied industries to join in the building of a strong, 
autonomous union affiliated with the CIO that will fight on a sound 
trade union basis for the interests of its members as workers and 
American citizens and which will join wholeheartedly with the CIO 
in its struggle to obtain the benefits of collective bargaining, includ- 
ing higher wages and better working conditions, to safeguard the 
economic security and promote the social welfare of the workers of 
America, and to protect and extend our democratic institutions and 
civil rights and liberties. 

5. This Convention calls upon all the affiliates of the CIO to sup- 
port with all their strength the determination of the electrical work- 
ers to free themselves from Comniunist domination and to create a 
strong, aggressive and democratic union affiliated with the CIO. 

With the full support of the CIO, the organized workers in the elec- 
trical and allied industries will win their campaign for freedom from 
the degradation of automatic obedience to a foreign dictatorship. 

A victory here for democratic unionism will strengthen the con- 
stant drive of all American labor against economic monopoly and 
against all those forces which would deny to American working men 
and women the economic security and the democratic liberties which 
belong to all Americans. 

We salute the rank and file members of the UERMWA as the way 
is opened for them to walk out of the shadows of Communist con- 
spiracy, double-talk, division, and betrayal, into the sunlight of de- 
mocracy to be enjoyed in the CIO and cherished and made equally 
available to all men and women who prize freedom, honesty and 
loyalty to their ideals and their union brothers and sisters. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 423 

In this cause and with this faith, we of the family of CIO shall 
defeat our open and our secret enemies; we shall grow stronger in 
numbers and in moral stature. Thereby the mission of the CIO, as 
stated at its founding, shall be realized in happy men and women, 
secure in their jobs, in their homes and in their trust in one another. 



Mr. Willis. The subcommittee will come to order. Let the record 
show specifically that during the recess a moment ago upon the motion 
of Representative Tuck, seconded by Representative Scherer, and 
unanimously carried, it was resolved that this subcommittee recom- 
mend to the full House Committee on Un-American Activities the 
submission to the Department of Justice of the entire record made 
today, including the testimony of other witnesses previously sworn, 
for the purpose of determination by the Departm.ent of Justice of 
whether or not the witness Thomas Quinn be prosecuted for perjury, 
whether perjury proceedings should be instituted against him; that 
is to say, for the purpose of determining whether perjury prosecu- 
tion should be instituted against that witness or any other witnesses 
whose testimony on the subject may be in conflict or may be involved. 

And that it was further resolved that the staff of this committee 
study the record made up this morning to determine whether or not 
this subcommittee should recommend to the full committee that the 
witness should be cited for contempt of the Congress. 

That is the witness Thomas Quinn. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Willis. I suppose we better adjourn. 

Mr. Scherer. I respectfully suggest, Mr. Chairman, that we would 
adjourn at this time until 2 o'clock. 

Mr. Willis. The subcommittee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. 

(Whereupon, the hearing in the above-entitled matter recessed at 
12 : 11 p.m. Wednesday, March 11, 1959, to reconvene at 2 p.m., of 
the same day.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 1959 

(Subcommittee members present : Representatives Willis, Tuck, and 
Scherer.) 

Mr. Willis. The subcommittee will please come to order. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, may I make an observation at this 
time? 

Mr. Willis. Certainly. 

Mr. Scherer. At lunch today I was reading today's Pittsburgh Sun- 
Telegraph. One of its editorials is entitled "The Hidden FBI." In 
this editorial the Sun-Telegraph pays a fine tribute to the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation and to Mr. and Mrs. Hamp Golden for their 
service to the Government and their patriotism. 

I ask that this editorial be incorporated in the record. 

Mr. Willis. Let it be incorporated in the record. 

(The editorial reads as follows:) 

The Hidden FBI 

The Federal Bureau of Investigation sprang another one 
of its incredible traps on the Communist conspiracy in Ameri- 
ca when it was disclosed yesterday that a Crafton man and 



424 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

wife, Mr. and Mrs. Hamp L. Golden, were simultaneously 
Communist Party members and agents for the FBI. 

It has seemed to us that the evident willingness of the FBI 
to uncover its hidden agents for relatively trivial reasons 
demonstrates that there are many, many agents who remain 
uncovered. 

The Goldens' experience as undercover agents was much the 
same as others previously described. They suffered from the 
scorn of their neighbors for the Communist activities and the 
disfavor of their Red comrades for any participation in nor- 
mal American social or religious life. 

Life under these conditions is never pleasant and sometimes 
dangerous, and the Goldens deserve the thanks of the com- 
munity and the Nation for their services. We can be sure that 
the workings of the Communist conspiracy in this area is 
pretty accurately known because of the patriotism of the 
Goldens and others still unrevealed. 

Mr. ScHERER. It is significant, Mr. Chairman, that this editorial 
is followed by another editorial in the Sun-Telegraph entitled, 
"French Communists." And let us see how significant that editorial 
is. It reads : 

In local elections in France on Sunday the French Com- 
munists were able to restore much of their strength. In a 
word, they again showed a strength of approximately 25 per- 
cent, which makes them a threat to General de Gaulle. Local 
elections in France are generally significant because French 
mayors often are also elected to the national assembly. They 
are very close to the people and express local opinion. What 
this can mean is that some of de Gaulle's startling popularity 
has worn off. To this challenge General de Gaulle must im- 
mediately respond, as he cannot afford to permit the Commu- 
nists to destroy his regime. It may be necessary for hiin to 
take strong steps against the French Communists, especially 
because of the Berlin situation. 

Then the editorial concludes with this significant statement: 

The leadership of the French Communist Party is com- 
pletely dominated by the policies of the Kremlin and would, 
if it came to a pinch, betray France in the interest of Russia. 

In the light of the testimony before this committee here in Pitts- 
burgh and the testimony that this committee has taken in other parts 
of the country that last paragraph could easily read, "The leadership 
of the American Communist Party is completely dominated by the 
policies of the Kremlin and would, if it came to a pinch, betray 
America in the interest of Russia." 

I have nothing further. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectively suggest that there now be 
included in the body of the record a compilation prepared by the re- 
search unit of the staff of the Committee on Un-American Activities 
which contains the listing of persons who now hold, or have held in 
the recent past, key positions in the United Electrical, Radio and 
Machine Workers Union and who have by competent, live witnesses 
under oath been identified as members of the Communist Party. This 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 425 

list does not purport to be all-inclusive. It does list, however, the 
general secretary, the director of organization, chief counsel, some 
field organizers and international representatives, all of whom have 
been identified by reliable witnesses under oath before congressional 
committees as members of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Willis. The documents will be included in the body of the 
record. 

(The information follows:) 

Mattes^ James J . 

Director of organization James J. Matles, and his first lieutenant 
Julius Emspak, are at the helm of the United Electrical, Radio and 
Machine Workers of America. 

James Matles' role as a leader in both the Communist Party and the 
UE has been described by several former members of the Communist 
Party in testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities. 

Although Matles did not formally assume his role as director of 
organization of the UE until 1937, Joseph Zack Kornfeder, in testi- 
mony on September 30, 1939, stated that Matles was a member of the 
Communist Party and one of the principal organizers of the UE. On 
October 30, 1939, William C. McCuistion testified that he first laiew 
Matles when the latter was organizational secretary of the Communist 
Party in the New York district. McCuistion further testified that 
Matles was a member of the Central Committee of the Communist 
Party. On April 23, 1940, Thomas H. O'Shea in sworn testimony 
stated that he knew Matles as a Communist and that Matles had 
taken union funds and used them for party purposes. In testimony 
before the Committee on Un-American Activities on July 25, 1947, 
Salvatore Vottis told of his association with Matles in the Communist 
Party and in the UE. The witness described small party fraction 
meetings where strategy was outlined; he stated under oath that 
Matles had attended these meetings, which upon occasion, were held 
at Vottis' home. • 

Louis Budenz testified on October 6, 1949, at hearings conducted 
by a special subcommittee of the House Committee on Education and 
Labor, investigating Communist infiltration of the UERMWA. Ac- 
cording to Mr. Budenz, Matles was an important member of the New 
York State and National Trade Union Commissions of the Commu- 
nist Party and was engaged in the Red trade imion movements m the 
early 1930's. 

Mr. Budenz further testified he knew Matles later served as the 
"political representative of the Communist Party in the UE" and 
was rated by the party as one of the ablest and most trusted comrades. 
Mr. Budenz then described an occasion on which Mr. Matles made 
a report to the Trade Union Commission of the Communist Party 
on the necessity of Communists getting control of union organization 
in the radio, transport, and maritime industries in the port of New 
York. 

On December 5, 1949 James J. Matles appeared as a witness be- 
fore the Committee on Un-American Activities. He refused to answer, 
questions pertaining to his Communist Party membership or activities. 

In March 1957 Federal Judge Walter Bruclihausen revoked the 
citizenship of James J. Matles on the ground that he had misrepre- 
sented the facts regarding his Communist Party affiliation in seeking 



426 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

naturalization. Judge Bruchhausen stated "Matles also committed 
fraud in his petition and oath of allegiance when he stated he re- 
nounced all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign state or sovereignty, 
when in fact he gave allegiance to the Soviet Government and its 
agencies and affiliates." ^ 

On March 20, 1956, when Matles refused to be sworn in at a pre- 
trial examination in connection with the denaturalization proceeding, 
Judge Matthew T. Abruzzo found him to be in contempt of court 
and imposed a 3 month penitentiary sentence on him. 

This sentence, as well as his deportation order, was appealed to the 
Supreme Court. In a decision handed down on April 7, 1958 the 
Supreme Court reversed both the denaturalization order against 
Matles and his contempt of court conviction. 

ETnspak, Julius 

One of the triumvirate controlling the destiny of the United Elec- 
trical, Kadio and Machine Workers union is its general secreta^ry, 
Julius Emspak. 

His "notorious Communist" record ^ is well established, as is his in- 
fluence over the union in which he has occupied a position of leader- 
ship since it was first established in 1936. 

The United Electrical, Kadio and Machine Workers of America 
came into formal existence at a meeting of several independent unions 
held in Buffalo, New York, in May 1936. Julius Emspak became its 
first secretary-treasurer. The original name for the union was the 
United Electrical and Radio Workers of America. At its second an- 
nual convention in Philadelphia in 1937 the present name was adopted. 

In addition to his positions in the union as its first secretary-treas- 
urer, an office he still holds, Julius Emspak has been editor of the UE 
News. This official newspaper, published and paid for by its dues- 
paying members, the great bulk of which are loyal Americans, has, 
under the editorship of Emspak, been a consistent propaganda agency 
for the Communist Party. 

On July 25, 1947, in testimony before the Committee on Un-Ameri- 
can Activities Salvatore M. Vottis, a former Communist Party mem- 
ber and union official identified Julius Emspak as a member of the 
Communist Party. On July 14, 1950, in testimony before this com- 
mittee Victor Decavitch testified that he had known Emspak as a 
member of the Communist Party. 

The witness recalled an incident in which Emspak telephoned na- 
tional Communist Pary secretary Eugene Dennis, and upon complet- 
ing his conversation, declared that certain forces within the Com- 
munist Party had decided to replace Earl Browder. According to 
Mr. Decavitch, Emspak instructed them to prepare the members of 
the Communist Party within the labor unions for the removal of Earl 
Browder as party secretary. 

On October 6, 1948, Louis Budenz testified before a special subcom- 
mittee of the House Committee on Education and Labor investigat- 
ing Communist infiltration of the UE. The former managing edi- 
tor of the Daily Worker identified Julius Emspak as a member of 



1 New York Times, March 27, 1957, p. C-17. 

2 Special Committee on Un-American Activities, House Report No. 1311, March 29, 
1944, p. 12. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 427 

the Communist Party whose party name was "Comrade Juniper". 
Budenz also told of a meeting of the editing committee of the Com- 
munist Party in 1945 where Emspak was praised by John W. Wil- 
liamson as a "tried and trusted comrade, who has always lived up to 
every injunction of the party." 

In 1949 the Committee on Un-American Activities conducted hear- 
ings regarding the Communist infiltration of labor unions. On De- 
cember 5 of that year Julius Emspak appeared as a witness before the 
committee and refused to answer pertinent questions asked of him by 
the committee. He was thereafter cited for and convicted of contempt 
of Congress. In March, 1951 he was fined $500 and sentenced to six 
months in jail. In 1952 the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the con- 
viction. However, the Supreme Court on May 23, 1955, overruled the 
lower courts, and reversed the conviction. 

Donner^ Frank J. 

Frank Donner was identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by several witnesses in testimony before this committee. 

Herbert Fuchs, a former Communist, testified on December 13, 1955 
that he knew Donner as a member of the Communist Party. On 
December 14, 1955, Mortimer Riemer, another former member of the 
Communist Party, confirmed Fuchs' testimony regarding Frank Don- 
ner. Donner was again identified by ex-Communist Harry Cooper 
on March 1, 1956. 

On June 28, 1956, Frank Donner appeared as a witness before this 
committee and invoked the first and fifth amendments to the Constitu- 
tion in refusing to answer any questions regarding his membership) 
in the Communist Party. 

Subsequent to his appearance before the committee in 1956, Donner 
was appointed general counsel to the United Electrical, Radio and 
Machine Workers of America. He was summoned to appear as a 
witness during the current hearings. His testimony will be found on 
page 455. 

Brashear^ Dewey Franhlin 

During its investigation of subversion and espionage in defense 
establishments, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investiga- 
tions heard the testimony of Cyril Sille, a former member of the 
Communist Party. 

On February 20, 1954 Mr. Sille testified that he had attended Com- 
munist Party meetings at which Dewey Brashear was present. 

In testimony before the same subcommittee on January 3, 1955, 
another former Communist, Dante De Cesare testified that he knew 
Dewey Brashear to be a member of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Brashear appeared as a witness before the subcommittee on 
February 20, 1954, at which time he invoked the fifth amendment to 
the Constitution and refused to answer any questions pertaining to his 
Communist Party membership. 

The records of the House Committee on Un-American Activities 
show that Dewey F. Brashear has served as field organizer for the 
United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America. 



428 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Briney^ Harold 

Harold Briney occupied tlie post of president of UE Local 601 for 
10 years. He has also served the UE in the capacity of field organizer. 

On December 8, 1954, in testimony before the Senate Permanent 
Subcommittee on Investigations, former Communist Frank Nestler 
identified Mr. Briney as a member of the Communist Party. 

Appearing as a witness before the Senate Internal Security Sub- 
committee on November 10, 1953, Briney refused to answer questions 
pertaining to his Communist Party membership. 

On January 3, 1955, in testimony before the Senate Permanent Sub- 
committee on Investigations, Briney denied present party membership 
but invoked the fifth amendment in response to questions regarding 
past membership in the Communist Party. 

Choion^ Paul 

Paul Chown has been engaged by the UE in the capacity of field 
organizer. 

Mr, Chown was identified as a member of the Commaunist Party 
by former FBI undercover agent Dickson P. Hill in testimony before 
the Committee on Un-American Activities on December 2, 1953. The 
following day Charles Blodgett, former Communist and reporter 
for the Daily People's World, also testified that he knew Paul Chown 
as a member of the Communist Party. 

Appearing as a witness before the committee on December 3, 1953, 
Mr. Chown refused to answer all questions pertaining to his Com- 
munist Party membership. 

DeMaio^ Ernest 

Ernest DeMaio has been an active leader in the UE since 1936 
when he was a union representative in Shelton, Connecticut. In 1946 
DeMaio was president of UE District 10, covering the Illinois-Min- 
nesota area. He has also occupied the office of president of UE Dis- 
trict 11 in Chicago, and general vice president of the international 
union. 

On July 14, 1950, Ernest DeMaio was identified as a member of 
the Communist Party by Victor Decavitch, former Communist Party 
member and UE official, in testimony before the Committee on Un- 
American Activities. 

At hearings held by the committee on March 16, 1954, Walter W. 
Eumsey testified that he too knew DeMaio as a Communist. 

Mr. DeMaio was also identified on December 4, 1956, in testimony 
before this committee by Anzelm A. Czarnowski, former midercover 
agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

On December 4, 1956, Mr. Ernest DeMaio appeared as a witness 
before the committee and refused to answer any questions pertain- 
ing to his membership in the Communist Party. 

Dunman, Paul E. 

Paul Dunman has served in the employ of the UE as a field or- 
ganizer. 

Mr. Dunman was identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by Arthur Paul Strunk, former undercover agent for the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation, in testimony before this committee on Sep- 
tember 13, 1954. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 429 

Fiering, Clara Wernich 

Clara Fiering has been employed by the UE as a field organizer in 
various sections of the country. 

She was identified as a member of the Commimist Party in testi- 
mony before this committee by Victor Decavitch, on July 14, 1940. 

Mrs. Fiering was also identified in testimony before this committee 
on September 13, 1954, and again on June 4, 1956, by Arthur Strunk 
and William Cortor, respectively. 

Fiering, Henry W. 

Henry Fiering has been in the employ of the UE since 1937, and 
has served in various capacities including that of field organizer and 
international representative. 

At hearings held by the committee on June 4, 1956, William W. 
Cortor identified Henry Fiering as a member of the Communist 
Party. Mr. Cortor, a former member of the Communist Party, ceased 
party activities in 1947. In 1951, at the request of the Federal Bu- 
reau of Investigation, he allowed himself to be "reactivated" into 
the party where he served as an undercover agent for the Bureau 
until 1954. 

In his testimony the witness recalled visiting Fiering in 1945. 
" His host was then the international representative for the UE in the 
State of Ohio. He introduced Mr. Cortor to another Communist as 
one of his "prize recruits." 

Mr. Fiering also had previously been identified as a member of the 
Communist Party in testimony before this committee by Arthur 
Strunk on September 13, 1954, and Victor Decavitch on July 14, 1950. 
Under oath, Arthur Strunk described Fiering as a "very active" 
Communist Party member and a "veiy active" union representative. 
Mr. Decavitch testified that he had been requested to join the Com- 
munist Party by Henry Fiering. His testimony further disclosed 
that Fiering replaced Arthur L. Garfield as UE international repre- 
sentative while the latter served in the armed forces. According to 
the witness, Fiering traveled throughout Ohio and "became a courier 
for the party also. He would carry the messages all over the State." 

Henry W. Fiering was summoned to appear as a witness before 
the Committee on Un-American Activities on August 30, 1950. He 
testified that he had been employed by the United Electrical, Radio 
and Machine Workers union since 1937 when he was financial secre- 
tary for Local 1108 in St. Louis, Missouri. In 1939 he became a field 
organizer for the international union in Ohio. He advanced to the 
post of international representative in the early 1940's and retained 
that office until 1948 when he again returned to field organizing. 
From 1946 to 1948 Fiering was UE international representative in 
Winston-Salem, North Carolina. He then moved to Pennsylvania in 
the position of field organizer. 

Heniy Fiering was questioned by the committee regarding the 
affiliation between the UE and the Communist Party. _He refused to 
answer questions about his Communist Party membership or activities. 

Fitzpatrick, Thomas J. 

Tom Fitzpatrick entered the employ of t:he UE in the late 1930's, 
and has served the union in various capacities. He was president of 
UE District 6 for several years but resigned in 1948 to become presi- 
dent of UE Local 601. 



430 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Fitzpatrick was identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by several witnesses in testimony before this committee. On July 25, 
1947, James Josepli Conroy stated under oath that Tom Fitzpatrick, 
international vice president of the UE, was a member of the Commu- 
nist Party. 

He was again identified on August 9, 1949, by former Communist 
Charles Edward Copeland, and on February 21, 1950, by Matthew 
Cvetic in testimony before the committee. 

In testimony before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee on 
November 19, 1953, Frank Nestler identified Tom Fitzpatrick as 
the Communist Party leader in UE Local 601 who made most of the 
decisions for the local. 

On February 21, 1950, Matthew Cvetic told this committee that Tom 
Fitzpatrick was a leading member of the Communist Party movement 
in Western Pennsylvania. He further testified that Fitzpatrick, as 
a member of the District Committee of the Communist Party, often 
reported to the party on the Communists' progress within the UE. 

On November 12, 1953, at hearings of the Senate Internal Security 
Subcommittee, Mr. Cvetic testified further regarding Tom Fitzpat- 
rick. The witness stated under oath that Fitzpatrick was the head 
of the Electrical Commission of the Communist Party in Western 
Pennsylvania and had received instructions from the party to refuse 
to answer questions when he was called to appear as a witness before 
the Committee on Un-American Activities in August 1949. 

As a witness before the Committee on Un-American Activities on 
August 10, 1949, Mr. Fitzpatrick invoked constitutional privileges in 
refusing to answer questions regarding his Communist Party mem- 
bership and activities. 

He appeared before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee on 
November 12, 1953, where he again invoked his constitutional 
privileges. 

Fishman^ Harry 

Harry Fishman has been employed by the UE in the capacity of 
field organizer. 

Mr. Fishman was identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by former Communist Jack Davis in testimony before the Committee 
on Un-American Activities on April 9, 1954. 

Fried^ ETnanuel Joseph 

Emanuel Fried was employed by the UE as an international repre- 
sentative. He was identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by Jack Davis in testimony before this committee on April 9, 1954. 

On the same day Mr. Fried appeared as a witness and refused to 
answer any and all questions put to him by the committee. 

Harley^ Hugh 

Hugh Harley entered the employ of the United Electrical, Radio 
and Machine Worters as a field organizer in 1940. He has worked 
for the UE in that capacity in several states in the eastern part of 
the country. 

On August 11, 1949, the Committee on Un-American Activities held 
hearings regarding the Communist infiltration of labor unions. A 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 431 

sworn affidavit of Richard W. McClellan was introduced into tlie rec- 
ord in which Mr. McClellan, a former UE official, stated : 

Hariey informed me that he was a member of the Communist Party and 
.showed me his dues book as such member. At the invitation of Hariey I at- 
tended meetings of the Communist cells in the city of Erie.^ 

Hugh Hariey was again identified as a member of the Commmiist 
Party on April 9, 1954. In testimony before the Committee on Un- 
American Activities, Jack Davis identified Hugh Hariey as a mem- 
ber of the official UE family who attended Communist Party meet- 
ings at which Communist affairs as they applied to the UE were dis- 
cussed. 

Haug^ Fred 

Fred Haug entered the employ of the UE in 1937 and has been en- 
gaged by the union in the capacities of business agent, field organizer, 
and international representative. 

Mr. Haug was identified as a member of the Communist Party by 
Victor Decavitch on July 14, 1950, and William Cortor on Jmie 4, 
1956 in testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities. 

Witnesses John Edward Janowitz and Charles Eimer also identi- 
fied Fred Haug as a member of the Communist Party in testhnony 
before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee on April 17, 1952. 

Appearing as a witness before the Senate Internal Security Sub- 
committee on April 18, 1952, Mr. Haug invoked the fifth amendment 
and refused to answer questions regarding his Communist Party 
membership put to him by the subcommittee. 

Haug^ Marie Reed 

Marie Haug (IMrs. Fred Haug) has also been employed by the UE 
as a field organizer. She has been identified as a member of the Com- 
mimist Party by several former members of the Communist Party. 

Victor Decavitch testified before the Committee on Un-American 
Activities on July 14, 1950. In addition to identifying Mrs. Haug as 
a member of the Communist Party, the witness further testified that 
Mrs. Haug spent more time teaching Communist classes than she did 
organizing for the union. 

In testimony before the committee on June 4, 1956 William Cortor 
also identified Mrs. Haug as a member of the Communist Party. 

Mrs. Haug was also identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by former Commmiist Charles Eimer in testimony before the Senate 
Internal Security Subcommittee on April 17, 1952. The following 
day Mrs. Haug appeared as a witness before the subcommittee and 
refused to answer pertinent questions put to her by the committee. 

Infante^ Joseph 

Joseph C. Infante who was employed by the UE as a field organizer 
was identified as a member of the Communist Party by former FBI 
undercover agent Charles V. Eegan on October 2, 1957 in testimony 
before this committee. Mr. Regan's testimony was confirmed on 
October 3, 1957 by Joseph A. Chatley, also a former agent for the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

On June 6, 1957 Mr. Infante appeared as a witness before the Senate 



' Committee on Un-American Activities, hearings regarding Communist Infiltration of 
Labor Unions, pt. 1, Aug. 9, 10, and 11, 1949, p. 637. 



432 - PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Internal Security Subcommittee and denied that he was, as of that 
moment, a member of the Communist Party but he invoked the fifth 
amendment and refused to answer questions regarding his past mem- 
bership in the party. Mr. Infante denied knowing Fred Gardner who, 
according to the subcommittee counsel, had testified that Infante "was 
active in the Communist Party." 

Jiminez^ Michael 

Michael Jiminez has been in i\\Q employ of the UE in the capacity 
of international representative. Mr. Jiminez was identified as a 
"member of the Communist Party" by FBI undercover agent Fred 
Gardner and was advised of this fact when he appeared as a witness 
before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee on June 6, 1957. 

Mr. Jiminez denied present party membership but invoked the fifth 
amendment in response to questions regarding his past membership 
in the Communist Party. Mr, Jiminez also invoked the fifth amend- 
ment when committee counsel asked him if he knew Fred Gardner who 
had "testified" that Jiminez was a "member of the Commmiist Party." 

Kaplan^ Flarry. 

Harry Kaplan is another identified Communist who has been en- 
gaged by the UE as a field organizer. 

Mr. Kaplan was identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by former FBI undercover agent Harold W. Mosher, during hear- 
mgs in connection with an investigation of Communist activities in 
the New Haven, Connecticut area, held by the Committee on Un- 
American Activities on September 24 and 25, 1956. Mr. Mosher 
testified further that Harry Kaplan was a member of the Howe Street 
branch of the Communist Party. 

Lumer^ Hyrtian 

Hyman Lumer, former educational director for the UE in Ohio, 
was identified as a member of the Communist Party by Arthur Strunk 
in testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities on 
September 13, 1954. On November 26, 1956, former Communist Da- 
vid W. Garfield and former FBI undercover agent Frank Peoples 
also identified Mr. Lumer as a Communist Party member. 

In testimony before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee on 
April 17, 1952, Edward Janowitz stated under oath that he knew 
Hyman Lumer when the latter was educational director for the UE. 
The witness testified that he also knew Lumer as a member of the 
Communist Party. 

Testimony of the witnesses further revealed that Hy Lumer was at 
one time educational director for the Communist Party schools in 
Dayton, Ohio, and more recently was a member of the Ohio State 
Committee of the Communist Party. 

Appearing as a witness before the committee on November 27, 1956, 
Mr. Lumer refused to answer questions regarding his Communist 
Party membersliip and activities. 

Mr. Lumer, who is currently the national education secretary of the 
Communist Party, also testified during the current hearinp-<:;. His 
testimony appetx-s in Part 1, page 382 (Current Strategy and Tactics 
of Commmiists in the United fetates, Greater Pittsburgh Area). 

Lustig^ James 

James Lustig has been one of the leading figures in the United Elec- 
trical, Kadio and Machine Workers union since its earliest daysj 



PROBLEMS OP SECURITY 433 

Although his most recent position in the union is that of field or- 
ganizer, Lustig has held the positions of section organizer and dis- 
trict representative of the New York District of the UE in the 1940's. 

On April 23, 1940, Thomas H. O'Shea testified before the Special 
Committee on Un-American Activities. Mr. O'Shea, a former Com- 
munist, identified James Lustig as a member of the Communist Party 
who had been an organizer for the Communist Party in the Bronx 
prior to his position with the UE. 

O'Shea's testimony was corroborated by Joseph Zack Kornfeder 
on August 11, 1941, in testimony before the Special Committee on 
Un-American Activities. Mr. Kornfeder, a former member of the 
Central Committee of the Communist Party and director of labor- 
union activities for the party, stated under oath that at one time Lus- 
tig was engaged in Communist Party work under his direction. The 
witness further testified that Lustig w^as a former section organizer 
for the Communist Party in the Bronx but that he was then in charge 
of the New York District of the UE. 

At hearings regarding communism in labor unions in the United 
States, held by the Committee on Un-American Activities on July 
25, 1947, James J. Conroy testified that he knew James Lustig as a 
member of the Communist Party and had attended party meetings 
with him. 

James Lustig was again identified as a member of the Communist 
Party on March 29, 1955, by foraier Communist Ernest Charles 
Moyer in testimony before the Senate Internal Security Subcommit- 
tee. 

Appearing as a witness before the Commitee on Un-American Ac- 
tivities on April 4, 1946, James Lustig refused to either affirm or 
deny his Communist Party membership. 

Mates, David 

David Mates was a Communist Party functionary as early as 1930, 
when he was "section organizer of the Communist Party" ^ and active 
in trade union movements in the Chicago area. In 1934 it was an- 
nounced that Dave Mates would teach "Principles of Communist 
Organization" ^ at the Gary, Indiana, Workers School. 

David Mates has been in the employ of the United Electrical, 
Radio and Machine Workers union since 1943 when he was given the 
assignment of field organizer. He was business agent for District 
Council 9 for the year 1948 and was international representative for 
the union in the early 1950's. 

As well as being identified as a Communist in party publications, 
David Mates was identified as a member of the Communist Party in 
testimony before the Commitee on Un-American Activities by former 
FBI undercover agents Milton Joseph Santwire on April 28, 1954, 
and Harold M. Mikkelsen on May 4, 1954. 

Mates' appearance as a witness before the committee was postponed 
at his request on two occasions. However on April 25, 1955, he 
appeared and was sworn. The witness told the committee that he was 
born in Russia in 1907 and was a citizen by virtue of derivative citi- 
zenship. He refused to answer questions put to him by the commit- 
tee regarding his activities in behalf of, and membership in, the Com- 
munist Party. 

1 Daily Worker, February 17, 1930, page 1 and 8, 
• Dally Worker, February 10, 1934, page 9. 



434 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

McCann^ Joseph 

Joseph McCann was identified as a member of the Communist 
Party by Thomas F. Delaney, former Communist and UE organizer, 
in testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities on 
October 13, 1952. 

Mr. McCann, who has been employed by the UE as an international 
representative, was also identified as a member of the Communist 
Party by Ernest Charles Moyer in testimony before the Senate In- 
ternal Security Subcommittee on March 29, 1955. The witness also 
told of a conversation he had with the UE official, in which McCann 
told Moyer that he was a member of the Communist Party. 

Mugford^ 'Walter 

Walter Mugf ord, who has served as a field organizer for the United 
Electrical, Kadio and Machine Workers of America, was identified 
as a Communist Party functionary in the UE by former undercover 
agent Matthew Cvetic in testimony before the Commitee on Un-Amer- 
ican Activities on February 22, 1950, and again on March 13, 1950. 

Murdoch^ 'William, 

William Murdock has been employed by the UE in the capacity 
of field organizer. 

In testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities on 
April 9, 1954, former Communist Jack Davis identified William Mur- 
dock as a member of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Murdock was again identified as a member of the Communist 
Party on July 19, 1954, by William H. Teto, a former undercover 
agent for the FBI, in testimony before the Senate Pennanent Sub- 
committee on Investigations. 

Herbert Philbrick identified Bill Murdock as a member of the Com- 
munist Party in testimony before the Massachusetts Special Commis- 
sion on Communism in January 1956.^ 

Mr. Murdock appeared as a witness before the Massachusetts Special 
Commission on Communism in 1955. He refused to answer questions 
of the commission pertaining to his Communist Party membership or 
activities. 

Niehur^ Richard 

In testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities on 
July 14, 1950, Victor Decavitch identified Richard Niebur as a member 
of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Decavitch testified further that Niebur, a UE international 
representative, worked for the union for a few years before the Com- 
munists were successful in persuading him to join the Communist 
Party. In the late 1940's Niebur signed a card and became a member 
of the Communist Party, according to Decavitch. 

Nixon^ Russell 

Russ Nixon entered the employ of the United Electrical, Radio and 
Machine Workers of America in November 1941 and was put in charge 
of the union's Washington office, which was then being opened. He 
has remained in their employ since that time in the capacity of Wash- 



1 Eighth Interim Report of the Massachusetts Special Commission on Communism, 
Report No. 3023, March 1956, p. 48. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 435 

ington representative, with the exception of service in the Armed 
Forces from 1944—1946. In 1948 for a period of 6 months his services 
were divided between the UE and the Progressive Party. 

On July 14, 1950, Mr. Victor Decavitch testified in public hearings 
before the Committee on Un-American Activities and identified Russ 
Nixon as a member of the Communist Party. 

On October 15, 1952, during the committee's investigation of Com- 
munist activities in the Philadelphia area, Nixon was again identified 
as a member of the Communist Party. Samuel J. DiMaria, a former 
member of a local commission of the Communist Party whose function 
was to reorganize Communist Party cells within industry, stated under 
oath that Nixon was the person to whom he (DiMaria) had to report 
on the work of the commission, because Nixon was in charge of this 
Communist project on a national basis. Nixon told DiMaria that 
Communist Party organizations had to be rebuilt on a solid founda- 
tion within General Electric, Westinghouse, and RCA plants if the UE 
was to be able to carry on its program and policies within these plants. 

Dorothy K. Funn testified before the Committee on Un-American 
Activities on May 4, 1953. When describing Communist Party lead- 
ers she had known when she was a member of the party, she identi- 
fied Russ Nixon, legislative representative of the UE, as one of those 
leaders. 

In testimony before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee on 
July 23, 1957, William Aloysius Wallace identified Nixon as a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party, and further testified that it was to Nixon 
he reported when on party business in Washington in 1951. 

Russell Nixon has on two occasions appeared as a witness before 
the Committee on Un-American Activities. He first appeared on 
June 9, 1953, and again on November 13, 1956 ; on both occasions he 
refused to answer questions put to him by the committee, regarding 
his Communist Party membership or activities. 

Perry ^ Douglas Neil 

Douglas Perry entered the employ of the UE in 1947 when he was 
a business agent for one of its locals. In 1948 he was appointed field 
organizer and has been engaged in that capacity since that date. 

On March 18, 1958, Douglas Perry was identified as a member of 
the Communist Party by Armando Penha, former FBI undercover 
agent, in sworn testimony before the Committee on Un-American Ac- 
tivities. Mr. Penha also testified that Perry had furnished funds for 
Communist Party expenses and charged them to his expenses for 
the UE. 

On the following day Douglas Perry appeared as a witness before 
the committee and refused to answer questions pertaining to his 
Communist Party membership or activities. 

Quinn^ Thovias J. 

Thomas J. Quinn was identified as a member of the Communist 
Party by former FBI undercover agent Matthew Cvetic in testimony 
before the Committee on Un-American Activities in February and 
March 1950. 

Mr. Quinn appeared as a witness before the committee on August 
11, 1949, at which time he testified that he had been a member of the 
UE since 1940, and had occupied the posts of section steward from 



436 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

1944 to 1947, representative of UE District 6 from 1947-1949, and 
was then employed by the UE as a field or<2;anizer. 

In response to committee questions ref^ardin^ Communist Party 
membership, Mr. Quinn said: "I feel that the political beliefs, opin- 
ions, and associations of the American people can be held secret if 
they so desire." He further stated that he refused "to discuss with 
the committee questions of that nature." 

Appearinoj before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee on 
November 10, 1953, Mr. Quinn testified that he was a representative 
of the UE in East Pittsburgh in the capacity of president of Local 
601. In addition to the union posts mentioned in previous testi- 
mony, Mr. Quinn stated that he was for two years legislative chair- 
man of the local union. 

He refused to answer questions of the subcommittee regarding his 
Communist Party membership or activities, 

Mr. Quinn appeared as a witness during the instant hearings. His 
testimony will be found on page 410. 

Raley^ Tdlmadge 

Another identified Communist who has been in the employ of the 
UE as a field organizer is Talmadge Raley, 

On July 15, 1950, Marjorie Elaine Steinbacher, a former Commu- 
nist who was at one time Raley's secretary, identified him as a member 
of the Communist Party. 

On July 14, 1950, Raley was identified as a Conmiunist by former 
party member Victor Decavitch. 

Appearing as a witness on July 14, 1950, Mr. Raley refused to 
answer questions respecting his Communist Party membership or 
activities. 

Steiner, Charles 

Charles Steiner has also served in the employ of the UE as a field 
organizer. 

Mr. Steiner appeared as a witness before the Senate Internal 
Security Subcommittee on July 6, 1957. The witness denied that he 
was, at that time, a member of the Communist Party, but when ques- 
tioned by committee counsel regarding past membership in the party, 
Mr. Steiner invoked the fifth amendment : 

Q. "Do you know a man named Arthur Strunk ?" 
A. "I decline to answer, and use the fifth amendment." 
Q. "Do you know that he has stated that you were on the Com- 
munist Party dues list in Dayton, Ohio ?" 
A. "I decline to say, and use the privilege." 

Thamel, William 

On September 13, 1954, Arthur Strunk testified that he had collected 
Communist Party dues from William Thamel, He further testified 
that Thamel was a "very active" member of the Communist Party in 
Ohio and a UE field organizer. 

William Thamel was also identified as a member of the Communist 
Party by two witnesses in testimony before the Senate Internal 
Security Subcommittee on October 13, 1954, by Herman E. Thomas, 
and again on March 29, 1955, by Ernest C, Moyer, 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 437 

Tomassetti^ Nichols 

Nicholas Tomassetti has been employed by the UE in the capacity 
of field organizer. 

Mr. Tomassetti was identified as a member of the Communist Party 
by former Communist Jack Davis in testimony before the Committee 
on Un-American Activities on April 9, 1954. 

Tormey, Donald 

Donald Tormey's first employment with the UE was as an organizer 
in 1941. With the exception of army service in 1942-43, liis employ- 
ment in that union (in the capacity of field organizer and later inter- 
national representative) continued at least as late as 1955. 

Tormey's record as a devoted member of the Communist Party and 
a zealous advocate of Communist principles while serving as a UE 
leader was revealed in public testimony before the Committee on Un- 
American Activities on July 23, 1951, by former FBI undercover 
agent, Herbert Philbrick, and on April 9, 1954, by Jack Davis. 
Tormey was also identified as a Communist by William Teto in testi- 
mony before the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 
on July 19, 1954. 

As a witness before the Committee on Un-American Activities on 
October 11, 1951, Mr. Tormey invoked the fifth amendment and re- 
fused to answer any questions inquiring into his Communist Party 
membership or activities. 

Van Tyne, Charles H. 

Former FBI undercover agent Charles V. Regan, in testimony be- 
fore the Committee on Un-American Activities on October 2, 1957, 
identified Charles Van Tyne as a member of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Van Tyne has been employed by the UE as a field organizer. 

Wright J Thomas B. 

In sworn testimony October 6, 1948, before the Special Subcom- 
mittee of the House Committee on Education and Labor investigating 
Communist infiltration of the UERMWA, Louis Budenz identified 
Tom Wright, managing editor of the UE News, as an individual who 
came regularly to Communist Party headquarters "for the purpose of 
checking up to see that the UE News was always in line with the 
Daily Worker." Mr. Budenz further testified that Tom Wright at- 
tended meetings of "Communist" labor editors. 

Confidential information retained in committee files shows that the 
meetings were for Communist labor editors and that Tom Wright 
was one of that group. 

Mr. Wright appeared as a witness during the present hearings. 
His testimony appears on page 438. 



Mr. Arens. The next witness, if you please, Mr. Chairman, will 
be Thomas Wright. 

Kindly come forward and remain standing while the Chairman 
administers an oath. 

Mr. Willis. Please raise your right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help 
you God ? 

Mr, Wright. I do. 



438 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. DoNNER. I renew my objection to the cameras, Mr. Chairman. 
Mr. Willis. What was that? 

Mr. DoNNER. I said I renewed my objection to the cameras. 
Mr. Willis. Oh, yes. 

The photographers will respect the protest and desist from taking 
pictures, please. 

TESTIMONY OF THOMAS B. WRIGHT, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

FRANK J. DONNER 

Mr. Arens. Kindly identify yourself by name, residence, and 
occupation ? 

Mr. Wright. I am Tom Wright, the managing editor of the UE 
News and I live at 4138 48th Street in Long Island City. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have a middle initial, Mr. Wright ? 

Mr. Wright. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. And a middle name, I take it. Would you kindly give 
us that? 

Mr. Wright. Yes. My name is Thomas B. Wright. 

Mr. Arens. And what does the "B" stand for, please, sir? 

Mr. Wright. Bouton. 

Mr. Arens. You are appearing today, Mr. Wright, in response 
to a subpena which was served upon you by the House Committee 
on Un-American Activities ? 

Mr. Wright. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. And you are represented by counsel ? 

Mr. Wright. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Counsel, kindly identify yourself on this record. 

Mr. Donner. Frank J. Donner, 342 Madison Avenue, New York 
City. 

Mr. Arens. How long have j^ou been employed as the editor of UE 
News ? 

Mr. Wright. Sir, I am not the editor. I am the managing editor. 

Mr. Arens. The managing editor — I beg your pardon — of UE 
News? 

Mr. Wright. I have been managing editor of the UE News, well, as 
long as there has been a UE News. It is a matter of 20-odd years, I 
should say. Approximately 20 years. 

Mr. Arens. And UE News is published by what group or organiza- 
tion? 

Mr. Wright. It is published by the United Electrical, Radio & 
Machine Workers, sir, the UE. 

Mr. Arens. Is there a board of editors or directing entity of the 
UENews? 

Mr. Wright. I am not quite sure I follow you. The constitutional 
editor of the UE News is the secretary-treasurer of the union. There 
is a provision of the constitution of the union that the secretary-treas- 
urer shall be the editor of the UE News. 

Mr. Arens. Who is he, please, sir, now ? 

Mr. Wright. He is Julius Emspak. He is now and has been since 
the union was founded. 

Mr. Arens. And you may have said so a moment ago but I don't 
believe the record is quite clear, at least my recollection isn't quite 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 439 

clear. What is Julius Emspak's status in the UE News ? What title 
does he bear? 

Mr. Wright. Editor, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Is he your immediate superior ? 

Mr. Wright. Yes, I would think that was correct. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us, if you please, sir, what entity prints the UE 
News ? 

Mr. Wright. Entity? Do you mean 

Mr. Arens. What company ? 

Mr. Wright. You mean who is our printer ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Wright. We are printed by a firm in East Fourth Street. I 
don't see what possible relevance that has to inquiry into sabotage or 
espionage or blowing up powerplants, as you gentlemen have sug- 
gested during the earlier parts of this hearing was for the purpose of 
your inquiry. 

I would like to say to you, sir, that as far as any question of sabotage 
or espionage, no organ of the union nor any member of the union so 
far as we have ever been able to discover or so far as any responsible 
authority has ever charged, has ever been guilty of any of these things, 
and I think that it wasn't quite candid of this committee when it had 
three men from the Department of Defense here and when Mr. Arens 
was spinning his web and, as a matter of fact, giving 99 percent of the 
testimony that was heard this morning, that you should not have 
asked them at that time if they had examples of sabotage or espionage 
that involved in any way this union. I am perfectly certain the 
answer would have been no. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly answer the last outstanding principal 
question, namely, what company prints the UE News ? 

Mr. Scherer. For the record we might note that most of Russia's 
early atomic knowledge came as the result of espionage in this country. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr, Wright. I don't think it really makes a great deal of difference, 
sir, in this instance. The name of the firm that does the actual print- 
ing work on the UE News is the International Newspaper Printing 
Co. of New York City. 

Mr. Arens. Has the Trade Union Service, Inc., ever printed the 
UE News? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wright. I think, sir, under the circumstances as you have an- 
nounced in advance of my appearance here and during the conclusion 
of the testimony of the last witness, that you intend entrapment of 
any witness you could find. 

Mr. Willis. No such statement or intimation was made. 

Please answer the question. 

Mr. Wright. That is the way I interpret it, sir. 

Mr. Willis. All right, sir. Go ahead. 

Mr. Wright. I shall decline to answer that question on the grounds 
it has nothing to do with this inquiry, that is, the inquiry was set 
forth, and that it is a completely irrelevant thing that I don't see 
any reason why it should become involved in this sort of remote area. 

Mr. Arens. *Mr. Chairman, I respectfully request the witness be 
ordered and directed to answer the question. 



440 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Willis. You, of course, have not invoked any constitutional 
grounds. So I order and direct you to answer the question. 

Mr. Wright. I shall not answer this question, sir. I do not in- 
tend to indulge you in any fishing expedition to remote issues, issues 
unrelated to the inquiry, issues that involve an attempt to intimidate 
and smear the editor of the newspaper of the miion. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Wright. And I shall invoke all constitutional privileges, the 
first amendment to the Constitution, which completely prohibits you 
in making any inquiries of this sort from me. I am not answerable to 
you, sir, and I am not answerable to Congress for what is in the 
UE News or where it is published or who writes it or what they think 
or what they have said in the past or wdiat they shall say in the future. 

Mr. Willis. So you invoke the protection of the first amendment, 
is that it? 

Mr. Wright. And I absolutely invoke my constitutional privileges 
for all of the reasons you have given me. 

Mr. Willis. Under the first amendment? 

Mr. Wright. The first amendment and the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. Do you honestly apprehend, if you told this com- 
mittee whether or not Trade Union Service has been the printer of 
UE News you would be supplying information which might be used 
against you, sir, in a criminal proceeding ? _ 

Mr. Wright. I am perfectly sure that if I were to enter into these 
fields I would be placed in jeopardy by this committee. This com- 
mittee has many unlawful and unconstitutional ways of harassing and 
punishing people and it has exercised them very abundantly in the 
past, as you, Mr. Arens, certainly know. 

Mr. Scherer. It is only the courts that can do that. 

Mr. Wright. No, sir, that is not true. That is not true. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest this witness be 
ordered to answer the last outstanding question, namely: Do you, 
sir, honestly apprehend that if you told this committee truthfully, 
while you are under oath, whether or not the Trade Union Service 
to your certain knowledge has been the printer of UE News, you 
would be supplying information which might be used against you 
in a criminal proceeding ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wright. I stand on my answer, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the record now 
reflect a direction of the witness to answer that question. 

Mr. Willis. Yes. You are directed. 

Mr. Wright. I stand on my answer, sir. I have given you my 
reasons for refusing to answer. 

Mr. Arens. How long has the present printer printed UE News? 

Mr. Wright. Well, different times, sir. 1 can't tell you. 

Mr. Arens. How long over the present time ? 

Mr. Wright. At the present time ? 

Mr. Arens. How long has the present firm been publishing or 
printing UE News? 

Mr. Wright. Oh, it is a matter of just oh, now, wait a minute, 

sir. He printed it years ago for a period of years. I can't tell you 
just how many. I just don't recall. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 441 

Mr. Arens. How long has the present firm that prints UE News 
been printing it ? 

Mr. Wright. You will have to allow me some latitude of explana- 
tion, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Go right ahead, sir. 

Mr. Wright. Because it hasn't been, it isn't all one operation, you 
see. I would say he had been doing printing composition for a matter 
of three years, roughly, printing I can't be sure. It is a matter of a 
number of years longer. 

Mv. Arens. In the course of the last several years has the printer 
Tvho prints UE News, the printing firm, likewise been printing Stu- 
dent Advocate, the National Guardian, People's Press, Hotel and 
Club Voice, and other publications of like variety, to your certain 
knowledge ? 

Mr. Wright. At the present time, I believe he prints the National 
Guardian. I don't think he prints any of the others, but I am not 
sure, sir. He prints a great variety of papers, not all union papers, 
some a good deal of commercial work, and I am not familiar with 
what lie prints. 

Mr. Arens. Were you ever president of the Trade Union Service, 
Incorporated ? 

Mr. Wright. I told you, sir, that I am not going to go into that 
field. 

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact, sir, that you were as of Sep- 
tember 19, 1955, president of the Trade Union Service, Incorporated, 
which printed a number of Commmiist publications. If that is not 
so, kindly deny it while you are under oath. 

( The witness conferred with his counsel. ) 

Mr. Wright. In September 1955? Well, it is not so, sir. But I 
don't intend here to either affirm or deny it. I am going to 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wright. I declare to you that I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Scherer. Wait a minute. You said it is not so. 

Mr. Willis. He is referring to a particular month in a particular 
year so counsel is now asking a more general question. 

Mr. Arens. That is right. 

Have you ever been president of Trade Union Service, Incorpo- 
rated ? 

Mr. Wright. I am not going to answer that, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Why? 

Mr. Wright. On the constitutional grounds and other grounds that 
I have previously given to you. 

Mr. Arens. Was Trade Union Service controlled by the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Wright. I am not going to answer that, sir. 

Mr. Arens. What is the present circulation of UE News ? 

Mr. Wright. I am not able precisely to tell j^'ou. 

Mr. Arens. Your best estimate. 

Mr. Wright. My best estimate would be around 100,000. 

Mr. Arens. I couldn't hear you. 

Mr. Wright. Around 100,000. 

Mr. Arens. How often is the publication issued ? 

Mr. Wright. It is issued every other week. 



442 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Arens. And do the individual members of UE all receive 
copies of UE News ? 

Mr. "Wright. They should, sir. It is their constitutional privilege 
to receive. 

Mr. Arens. Is the payment of their dues covered in the cost of 
publishing of UE News, in other words, I could probably put the 
question a little clearer this way. When a member of the UE pays 
his dues, do those dues cover the cost of sending to him the UE News 
every couple of weeks ? 

Mr. Wright. Well, I can answer you, I think, responsively this 
way, Mr. Arens. The UE News is published by the UE, and the UE 
News has no independent source of income and the UE has no other 
source of income than the dues of its membership. Does that respond 
to your question, sir ? 

Mr. Arens. No, not quite. I think we are not quibbling with each 
other, but I think the record isn't clear at this point. Does the in- 
dividual member of UE have to subscribe to UE News in addition 
to paying his dues as a prerequisite to receiving UE News ? 

Mr. Wright. As a separate and individual account ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. That is the question. 

Mr. Wright. I am not sure of this because this is an area that 
doesn't affect my work or that I have nothing to do with. I believe 
there may he something in his 1 can't even tell you if there is some- 
thing in his membership application. I don't know. It seems to me 
that what you are trying to ask me is. Does the union pay for the 
paper; do the dues pay for the paper? Well, in the sense tliat the 
union has no other source of income and the paper has no independent 
source of income, the dues, I suppose you would say, pay for the paper. 

Mr. Arens. I think the record is clear. 

Mr. Scherer. The membership in the union entitles him also to 
a copy of the News ? 

Mr. Wright. Entitled to it. 

Mr. Arens. Your immediate superior, you say, is Julius Emspak 
as editor, is that correct ? 

Mr. Wright. He is the editor of the paper and I am the managing 
editor. 

Mr. Arens. Does he have any type of editorial board tliat collab- 
orates with him in setting the 

Mr. Wright. I see what you are driving at. 

Mr. Arens. policy ? 

Mr. Wright. I didn't understand you before, sir. The policy of 
the UE News is the policy of the UE. It is. It always has been. 
It is determined throug;h the constitutional organs of the union. The 
policy is set by conventions which are held annually, and people from 
our locals democratically elected between those times, the general ex- 
ecutive board conducts the policy of the union. The officers conduct 
the policy of the union and the policy of the paper reflects the policy 
of the union. Now, it has been suggested, sir, quite often, that the 
policy of the UE News is dominated by interests other than the union 
or that it reflects interests and policies other than the policies of the 
union and I declare specifically to you, now, that that is not so. 

Mr. Arens. Would you please answer the question? Is there an 
editorial board or a group of officers, who participate with Emspak 
in running the paper ? 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 443 

Mr. Wright. In a formal sense, sir? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Wright. I don't know. There isn't any formal editorial board. 
Everyone participates. We have a very democratic organization and 
we all in general discuss policy, the policies and application and so 
on and so on. I don't think there is the sort of thing that you seem 
to be asking about. 

Mr. Arens. As your superior officer, does Emspak tell you what 
editorials to write and what policy to pursue in the UE News from 
month to month? 

Mr. Wright. No, sir. 

Mr. Arens. What does he do as editor ? 

Mr. Wright. Well, if there is a question he does not from month 
to month or from week to week or in any immediate direct way except 
as an issue may from time to time come up he may suggest to me or 

to others we don't stand very much on formality, sir, we are not 

a very bureaucratic organization — that here is an area that might 
be covered or that here is an issue that we might raise or a polemic 
that we might engage in with the General Electric Company, for ex- 
ample, or in any of the areas and fields that we consider proper for 
our publication. 

Mr. Arens. Does the director of organization, James Matles, par- 
ticipate in the operation of the UE News ? 

Mr. Wright. Yes, and many others, sir, in the same way. 

Mr. Arens, What is the area of participation by James Matles in 
the publication of UE News ? 

Mr. Wright. It is general, sir. There is no specific area. 

Mr. Arens. I understand you to assert a few moments ago that the 
UE News was free from any influence, from any entity other than the 
entity of UE. Is that correct, or substantially correct? 

Mr. Wright. That is substantially correct, sir. It would be proper 
to say, I suppose, of everyone on earth that he is influenced by the 
world around him and by anyone that might be in it or any views 
that might be expressed. But what I intend to convey to you, sir, is 
that there is no organization or organ or outfit of any kind outside 
of the UE itself that can or does or will or ever has determined the 
editorial policy of the UE News. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know any organization outside of UE itself 
to which Matles and Emspak belong ? 

Mr. Wright. No, sir, I don't. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not Emspak or Matles are 
members of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. AYright. No, sir. It is my opinion that they are not. 

Mr, Scherer. You know that they have been identified before 
congressional committees by more than one witness in public session 
under oath as having been members of the Communist Party at one 
time ; do you not ? 

Mr. Wright. Sir, you have been on this committee quite a long 
time and I have been around quite a long time. I don't expect that 
we would agree in public in our estimate of the sort of testimony that 
this committee customarily elicits. My estimate of it is very low. 
And the kind of testimony that you get before it 

Mr. Scherer. That is. how you characterize the Golden testimony 
before this committee yesterday? 



444 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. "Wright. I am not familiar with it, sir. 

Mr, SciiERER. Will you answer the question, whether you know 

Mr. Wright. This doesn't interest me. I told you, sir. 

Mr. Scherer. I didn't ask you whether it influences you. 

Mr. Wright. I misunderstood you. I don't believe it. 

Mr. Scherer. I misunderstood you. That is not the question I 
asked you, sir, whether it influences you, whether you have a high 
opinion or a low opinion of the testimony. My question is, Do you 
have knowledge of the fact that v/itnesses have testifled before this 
committee under oath that these two gentlemen are members of the 
Communist Party. Do you have knowledge of that fact? That is 
all I am asking you. 

Mr. Wright. Let me put it this way, sir. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, I ask you to direct the witness to 
answer. 

Mr. Wright. Let me point this out. I can't recall having been 
present when that was done. I believe I read various newspaper 
accounts and so on and I think you could say it is a pretty general 
knowledge that there has been a long, sustained effort to discredit 
and attack and smear the officers of the union and staff and its organs 
and the work that it tries to do. 

Mr. Scherer. You say you read about it in the newspaper. Doesn't 
your office, the UE office, have copies of every hearing of this com- 
mittee, particularly those hearings in which the high ranking officers 
of UE have been identified? Isn't it a fact that you know the names 
and background of every individual who has appeared before this 
committee and identified officers of your union ? 

Mr. Wright. I certainly would hate to have to enumerate them to 
you. No, sir, that is not a fact. It is a fact that we do have copies 
of some proceedings of this committee. By no means all. And I 
can't — I can't even testify of my own knowledge that we have copies 
of all in which officers have appeared or if that is what you are talk- 
ing about. I should think we would have. 

Mr. Scherer. I didn't say all of the copies of all of the hearings. 
But you certainly do have copies of the hearings in which UE officials 
have been identified under oath before this committee as members of 
the Communist conspiracy. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Scherer. I think you are a much more efficient organization 
than not to have those records before you. 

Mr. Wright. Is there a question, sir ? 

Mr. Arens. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the 
Conununist Party ? 

Mr. Wright. Well, sir, without conceding that you have any right 
to ask me that question, and for all and including in my answer all 
the objections to answering the other questions that I have refused to 
answer, that is, that this committee is without jurisdiction to ask me 
that, that this hearing is in essence a fraud, in that you made it appear 
this morning that it was a hearing on a bill, and you brought up an 
array of defense officials to support and give sort of glorification to 
this proceeding, and only at the end of it announced that the bill 
wasn't even before the committee, and because this committee has a 
long and disgraceful record of hounding, harassing people and 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 445 

punishing them by unconstitutional and extra-legal means, that is 
subjecting them to prosecution and smear and public scrutiny and 
public appearance of this sort here before photographers and televi- 
sion and so on, taking all that into account, I am going to say this to 
you : I am not a member of the Communist Party and I don't intend, 
"Mr. Arens, to play with you, your famous one o'clock, two o'clock, 
three o'clock game. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Wright. I have answered you, sir. I have answered you. I 
told you that as of now I am not and I do not intend to answer you 
for all of the reasons that I have enumerated behind this instant. 

Mr. ScHERER. Just a minute. The record isn't clear. Mr. Chair- 
man, I ask that you direct the witness to answer the question whether 
he has ever been a member of the Communist Party. He just said he 
doesn't intend to answer but he hasn't invoked liis constitutional 
privilege, if he intends to invoke it. 

Mr. Willis. That is correct. You are directed to answer the ques- 
tion and I know we won't quibble. 

Mr. Wright. No. I thought I had invoked the privilege, sir, by 
telling you that for all the reasons that I had enumerated when I re- 
fused to answer previously. That included what I said it included, 
the first amendment, it included the fiftli amendment and I specifi- 
cally invoke them if there is any doubt in your mind about it, sir. 
I didn't wish to leave you in doubt. 

Mr. ScHERER. Now, wait a minute. I think the record isn't clear, 

Mr. Wright. I refuse to answer that question for all the reasons 
that I have given. I refuse to go with you beyond this point. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly tell the committee have you been a 
member of the Communist Party any time since you were served with 
your subpena to appear before this committee today ? 

Mr. Wright. No, sir. I am not-going to go into that, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Did you resign 

Mr. ScHERER. Wait a minute. Now, Mr. Arens, keep this record 
straight. I ask the chairman to direct the witness to answer the ques- 
tion of Mr. Arens. I understand his own answer was that he refused 
to go beyond this point. He hasn't refused to answer and hasn't 
invoked any constitutional privileges, if he intends to do so. 

Mr. Wright. Well, sir, how do you say that? I do specifically 

Mr. Willis. There is a question outstanding right now. And you 
are simply saying you are not going to go into it. 

Mr. Wright. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. The question outstanding is have you been a member 
of the Communist Party at any time 

Mr. Wright. I am not going to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. since you received your subpena to appear be- 
fore this committee today ? 

Mr. Wright. I have told you that I am not going to answer that 
question. Of course 

Mr. Willis. For the identical grounds? 

Mr. Wright. The identical grounds I have outlined repeatedly. 

Mr. Willis. Including the invocation of the first and fifth amend- 
ments ? 

Mr. Wright. Yes, and including this committee's record, history 
and lack of authority in this proceeding. 



446 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Arens. Did you resign technical membership in the Communist 
Party after you were served with your subpena to appear before 
this committee so that you could appear and assert that you were 
not presently a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Wright. Haven't I answered you that question, sir ? 

Mr. Arens. No, sir. And I respectfully suggest, Mr. Chairman, 
that we insist upon an answer to that question. 

Mr. Willis. It is a specific question to which you must respond. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wright. Well, I don't want to appear to be quibbling with you, 
sir. I have told you that I don't intend to answer any of these ques- 
tions and that for all of the reasons that I have said. Now if you 

Mr. Arens. Let's get the record clear. 

Mr. Wright. — if your purpose is here simply to continue to ask 
me what is essentially the same question 

Mr. Arens, No. Our purpose here is to develop new information 
about Communist techniques. 

Mr. Wright. And then to holler "Communist, Communist, Com- 
munist, were you yesterday, the day before, the day before, the day 
before, the day before." I think, sir, that this makes somewhat of a 
mockery of this proceeding and that having given you my answer now 
and having told you that I didn't intend to answer on any of these 
questions in between 

Mr. Willis. If you had it your way, we wouldn't be questioning you 
at all. 

Mr. Wright. I think that would be true of any decent person that 
understood the history of this committee, sir. 

Mr. Willis. That is your opinion. 

Mr. ScHERER. Just a minute. He said I have been on this commit- 
tee a long time. I have seen experts dance around these questions and 
then when you look at the cold record there is not a proper declina- 
tion ; I submit the record as it now stands does not show a declination 
to answer this specific question. 

Mr. Willis. That is absolutely right and I order you to answer it 
and I do so 

Mr. Wright. What is the question, sir, please, that you seem to 
think you have before you ? 

Mr. Arens. The question is did you resign technical membership in 
the Communist Party after you received your subpena to appear be- 
fore this committee solely for the purpose of being able to take an 
oath and say you were not presently a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Wright. I decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Why ? 

Mr. Wright. On all of the gi-ounds previously stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. Now we are all right. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly tell us whether or not you intend to 
reaffiliate with the Communist Party as soon as you are released from 
your subpena and the pains and penalties of perjury? 

Mr. Wright. No, sir, I do not, because I think you knew all of the 
time perfectly well. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that will conclude 
the staff interrogation of this witness. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 447 

Mr. Willis. The witness is excused. 

Mr. Wright. Do I sign a voucher ? 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, I think he has objected to taking of 
pictures. 

Mr. Wright. I don't object particularly, sir, if it is a bona fide 
member of the i^ress. I do somewhat object if you have agents here 
that are flashing lights in our faces to disconcert us. 

Mr. Scherer. The only agents that are here are agents of the press 
and local television and radio stations. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Willis. We will take two minutes informal recess. 

( Subcoimnittee members present: Representatives Willis, Tuck, and 
Scherer. ) 

^ Brief recess.) 

(Subcommittee members present: Representatives Willis, Tuck, 
and Scherer.) 

Mr. Willis. The subcommittee will please come to order and coun- 
sel will call the next witness. 

Mr. Arens. John W. Nelson, kindly come forward and remain 
standing while the Chairman administers an oath. 

Mr. Willis. Please raise your right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help 
you God. 

Mr. Nelson. I do. 

Mr. Donner. May the cameras be halted ? 

Mr. Willis. Yes. 

TESTIMONY OF JOHN W. NELSON, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

FKANK J. DONNER 

Mr. Arens. Kindly identify yourself by name, residence, and occu- 
pation. 

Mr. Nelson. John W. Nelson, 2656 Putnam Drive, Erie, Pa. I 
am President of Local 506 of the United Electrical, Radio and Ma- 
chine Workers. 

Mr. Arens. Please tell us, Mr. Nelson, the jurisdiction geographi- 
cally of Local 506 ? 

Mr. Nelson. Local 506 is the certified bargaining agent for the 
production and maintenance workers at the Erie plant at the General 
Electric Company. 

Mr. Arens. And how many persons are in Local 506, please, sir? 

Mr. Nelson. At the present time, due to considerable number of 
layoffs, I would say approximately 2,500. 

Mr. Arens. How long have you been president of 506 ? 

Mr. Nelson. I have been the president for fifteen years. 

Mr. Arens. Where are you employed ? 

Mr. Nelson. I am emploj^ed, as I stated, by Local 506 at the United 
Electrical Workers. 

Mr. Arens. I said where. Where is your place of employment? 

Mr. Nelson. In Erie, Pennsylvania. 

Mr. Arens. Where in Erie, Pennsylvania? 

Mr. Nelson. 3923 Main Street. 



448 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been employed 

Mr. Willis. Identify counsel. 

Mr. Arens. I beg your pardon. 

You are appearing today in response to a subpena which was served 
upon you by the House Commitee on Un-American Activities? 

Mr. Nelson. For no other reason. 

Mr. Arens. You are represented by counsel ? 

Mr. Nelson. I am. 

Mr. Arens. Counsel, kindly identify yourself. 

Mr. DoNNER. My name is Frank J. Donner. My, office is 342 Madi- 
son Avenue, New York City. 

Mr. Arens. During the last fifteen years, you say you have been 
president of Local 506 ? 

Mr. Nelson. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Have you been employed elsewhere in addition to your 
presidency of Local 506 in the course of that period of time ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Give us the principal employments which you have 
had in addition to your presidency of Local 506, please. 

Mr. Nelson. I was employed by the General Electric Company. 

Mr. Arens. Over what period of time, please, sir? 

Mr. Nelson. From May 1, 1941, until March 11, 1954. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity were you employed by GE ? 

Mr. Nelson. I was a machine setup man. 

Mr. Arens. And w^iat caused your disassociation from GE in 
1954? 

Mr. Nelson. I was discharged from the General Electric Company 
on that date. 

Mr. Arens. Why? 

Mr. Nelson. Because I had appeared previously as you well know, 
you are counsel for the Butler Committee, and because I availed 
myself of my constitutional privilege I was discharged by the Gen- 
eral Electric Company. 

Mr. Arens. But you continued as president of Local 506, is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Nelson. I did. 

Mr. Arens. Was your period of service as president of Local 
506 interrupted in any manner ? 

Mr. Nelson. No. 

Mr. Arens. Suspended in any manner after your appearance before 
the Internal Security Subcommittee and after your discharge from 
General Electric in 1954 ?..... 

Mr. Nelson. No. I think it is quite obvious that my membership 
had a better appreciation of the constitutional rights of American 
citizens than did the General Electric Company and therefore there 
was no interruption in my tenor as president. 

Mr. ScHERER. Did the General Electric Company discharge you, 
as you say, because you involved the fifth amendment when asked 
about your Coimiiunist Party membership by the Senate Internal 
Security Subcommittee or did it discharge you because of the evidence 
that was adduced concerning your Communist Party activities? 

Mr. Nelson. As I stated previously, the company discharged me 
because I availed myself of my constitutional privilege. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 449 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever sifjned a non-Communist affidavit under 
the law as an officer of a labor organization ? 

Mr. Nelson. I have. 

Mr. Arens. When was the last one you signed ? 

Mr. Nelson. Oh, I would say to the best of my recollection July 
of 1958. No. I believe there was one more recent than that, I be- 
lieve it was October of 1958. I am not certain of that date. But 
it was somewhere in that area. 

Mr. Arens. Were the statements contained in the affidavit truth- 
ful? 

JNfr. Nelson. I am certain they were. If they weren't, I am sure 
tliat the Justice Department long ago would have taken appropriate 
action. 

Mr. Arens. Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Nelson. As you stated, I affirm, I have signed the non-Com- 
munist affidavit annually at least once a year for the past ten years. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask you to direct the witness. 

Mr. Nelson. I am certain, as I said before, if there were anything 
wrong with the affidavits that I submitted, the Justice Department 
long ago would have taken appropriate action. 

Mr. Arens. Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the 
Communist Party ? That is the principal question that is outstand- 
ing, please, sir. 

Mr. Nelson. I think that my affidavit states that I am not a member 
of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness now 
be ordered to answer that question. 

Mr. Willis. Yes, you are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Nelson. I have answered that question, Mr. Chairman. I said 
I am not, as my affidavit indicates, a member of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party ? 

JNIr. Nelson. My affidavit speiaks for itself. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness now 
be ordered to answer the question. 

Mr. Nelson. I decline to answer the question in the manner in 
which the question is put. I have indicated my answ^er, that I am not 
a member of the Communist Party, that I signed affidavits annually, 
at least one a year for the past 10 years. 

Mr. Arens. In these affidavits which you have signed 

Mr. Willis. That is not particularly clear. 

Mr. Arens. I can explore it with reference to the affidavit to clear 
up this point, if you please. 

Mr. SciiERER. There ought to be a direction to answer the question 
which there has 

Mr. Willis. Are you now a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Nelson. I think I said I was not. I said it three times. 

Mr. Willis. Wait a minute. 

Mr. Arens. The outstanding 

Mr. Willis. Let's not equivocate. Are you now a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Nelson, I said that I was not. 



450 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Willis. And you now said- 



Mr. Nelson. Is thait clear now ? I am not. 

Mr. Willis. Now, have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party ? 

Mr. Nelson. I said if I had been a member of the Communist Party 
and signed affidavits saying that I was not, I am sure the Justice De- 
partment would have done something about it. 

Mr. Willis. Now you have not answered my question and I order 
you to answer it. 

The question is. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party ? 

Mr. Nelson. My affidavit says that I am not. My affidavit says that 
I have not been, and that is my answer. 

Mr. Willis. You have not answered my question. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Arens. Now, the affidavit which you have signed, the Taft- 
Hai-'tley affidavit only states, does it not, on membership in the Com- 
munist Party, that you are not then at that instant of signature a 
member of the Communist Party, is that not correct? 

Mr. Nelson. Well, I don't wish to engage in semantics on the ques- 
tion of then or now or anj^thing of that kind. As far as I am con- 
cerned you know what the affidavit means. I know what the affidavit 
means. I know what the penalty for falsifying the affidavit is, and I 
assure you that I am not placing myself in jeopardy by signing a false 
affidavit. It means exactly what it says. 

Mr. Arens. Now, the affidavit says, does it not, sir, the affidavit that 
you signed, "I am not a member of the Communist Party or affiliated 
with such party," is that correct, is that the affidavit you signed ? 

Mr. Nelson. That is what it says. 

Mr. Arens. As of the time you signed the last Taft-Hartley affi- 
davit in 1958, were you a person who had ever been a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Nelson. You have my answer. 

Mr. ScHERER. All right. We haven't the answer. 

I ask you, Mr. Chairman, to direct the witness to answer that ques- 
tion. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. You are 
not answering it. 

Mr. Nelson. Mr. Chairman, I endeavored to answer the question 
honestly and fullv that I have signed affidavits 

Mr. Willis. We are not talking about affidavits at all. This is 
something brandnew. 

Mr. Nelson. — under the Taft-Hartley siuce 1949 which says that 
I am not a member of the Communist Party. And I will not go 
beyond the period which is covered by the affidavit. I will not go 
beyond that period because I do not believe it to be relevant or per- 
tinent to the stated purpose of this particular committee. 

Mr. Willis. All right. In other words, you signed or have signed 
non-Communist affidavits once a year, is that correct ? 

Mr. Nelson. At least once a year. 

Mr. Willis. At least once a year. And that affidavit provides that 
on tlie day, on the respective days that you have signed those affi- 
davits you swore that on those days, let us say maybe twelve times, 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 451 

that the only thing you have sworn to in those affidavits if you signed 
twelve of tliem, that on those twelve days that you signed them that 
you were not then a member of the Comnmnist Party. That is all 
those affidavits provide for, isn't that correct ? 

Mr. Nelson. Well, I am not so naive as to believe that the late 
Senator Taft and his associates who drew up the Taft-Hartley law 
were so foolish as to put in the Taft-Hartley law an amendment that 
covered the moment that I placed my pen on the paper. The affi- 
davit means exactly what it says, that for the past 10 years and any 
given moment of those 10 years that you can name or anybody else 
can name, I was not a Communist, or a member of the Conununist 
Party. 

Mr, Willis. Now, let me ask you, forgetting the affidavits, have 
you been a member of the Communist Party at any time for 1 min- 
ute, or 3 hours, or 3 months during that period of time ? 

Mr, Nelson. I have not. 

Mr. Willis. All right. Now, have you ever been a member of the 
Communist Party at any time in your lifetime? 

Mr. Nelson. Prior to 1949, which was the first affidavit I signed, 
I decline to answer on the basis that it is remote and irrelevant and 
is not pertinent to the stated purpose of this particular hearing. 

Mr. Arens. Now, Mr. Chairman, may I explain on this record the 
pertinency and relevancy of that question to the subject under in- 
quiry, and the relevancy and pertinency of the specific question inso- 
far as it pertains to this particular witness ? 

It is the infonnation of this committee, sir, we have had some testi- 
mony to the effect, that upon the passage of the non-Communist affi- 
davit provisions in the Taft-Hartley Act, a number of dedicated, 
hard-core members of the Communist Party resigned technical mem- 
bership in the Communist Party, solely and exclusively for the pur- 
pose of being able to comply with the technical provisions of the law, 
namely, that they were not at the time members, technical ULembers 
of the Communist Party. 

Were you a member of the Communist Party now, sir, immediately 
prior to the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act? 

Mr. Nelson. I think I just got done indicating that I would de- 
cline to answer any questions concerning that period prior to 1949. 

Mr. Arens. Why? 

Mr. Nelson. For the stated reasons. 

Mr. Arens. What stated reasons ? 

Mr. Nelson. That they are remote, irrelevant, and not peitinent 
to the stated purpose of this particular hearing. 

Mr. Arens. Are those the only reasons that you are invoking now 
for declining to answer those questions? 

Mr. Nelson. Those are the only reasons. 

Mr. Arens. Now, Mr. Chairman, so the record may be abundantly 
clear, I respectfully suggest that this record now reflect an order to 
this particular witness now to answer the question which I shall now 
repeat, were you a member of the Communist Party immediately 
prior to the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act ? 

Mr. Nelson. I have already answered that question, 

Mr. Willis. I direct you to answer the question which in effect 
means two things, that we do not accept your reasons and this is in- 
tended to warn you that we do not. So I direct you. 



452 Problems of security 

Mr. Nelson. You can accept tliem or not accept them. That is my 
answer. 

Mr. Willis. In other words, despite my order, that is the same 
answer ? 

Mr. Nelson. That is the answer. 

Mr. Arens. I respectfully sucr^est, Mr. Chairman, that will con- 
clude the staff interrogation of this witness. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Willis. Next witness. 
^Mr. Arens. The next witness, if you please, sir, will be Mr. Robeit 
Kirkwood. 

Please come forward and remain standing while the chairman ad- 
ministers an oath to you. 

Mr. Willis. Please raise your right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help 
you God ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. I do. 

TESTIMONY OP ROBERT C. KIRKWOOD, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

FRANK J. DONNER 

Mr. Arens. Please identify yourself by name, residence, and occu- 
pation. 

Mr. Kirkwood. Robert C. Kirkwood, Greensburg, Pa., R.F.D. 3, 
business agent of Union Local 610. 

Mr. Arens. You are appearing today, Mr. Kirkwood, in response 
to a subpena which was served upon you by the House Committee 
on Un-American Activities? 

Mr. Kirkwood. I am. 

Mr. Arens. And you are represented by counsel ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. I am. 

Mr. Arens. Counsel, kindly identify yourself on this record. 

Mr. DoNNER. Frank J. Donner, 342 Madison Avenue, New York 
City. 

Mr. Arens. How lone: have you been business agent of Local 610 ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. Eleven years. 

Mr. Arens. What was your employment immediately prior to your 
pre-sent employment ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. I was an international representative for the UE. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been known by any name other than the 
name Robert Kirkwood ? 

]Mr. Kirkwood. Not to my knowledge. 

]\rr. Arens. Have you ever used or been known by the name of 
Steward Warner in any capacity ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever appeared before a congressional com- 
mittee ? 

Mr. KiRKw^ooD. I have, as you know. 

Mr. Arens. Where and wjfien ? 

Mr. KiRKAvooD. I appeared before the Internal — well, forget the 
technical name, the Butler committee, of which you were the counsel, 
in Pittsburgh, Pa. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 453 

Mr. Arens. Where were you employed at the time you apj^eared 
before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee ? 

Mr. KiRKWooD. I was employed by UE Local 610. 

Mr. Arens, Were you employed in the same capacity in which you 
are presently employed ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. I was. 

Mr. Arens. Did your status at any time change after your appear- 
ance, your status in UE change at any time after your appearance 
before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. It did not. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been employed in any of the plants 
which are engaged in this general area ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. No, I haven't. 

Mr. Arens. Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Kirkwood. Mr. Arens, I am not a member of the Communist 
Party and since 1949, for the past ten yeai^, I have met the require- 
ments of the Federal statute by annually — after my election by mem- 
bership — signing the Taft-Hartley non-'Communist affidavits. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been resigned from the Communist 
Party? 

Mr, Kirkwood. Now, Mr. Arens, let's not have any trick questions. 

Mr, Scherer, I ask you to direct the witness to answer, 

Mr, WiELis. Well, were you a member of the Communist Party 
prior to 1949 ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. I beg your pardon, sir ? 

Mr. Willis. Were you ever at any time before 1949 a member of 
the Communist Party? 

Mr. Kirkwood, I would refuse to testify on any period prior to 
1949. 

Mr. Arens, Why ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. For three reasons : One, the period is remote, two, 
it doesn't meet the definitions of recent period by any stretch of the 
imagination that was outlined by this committee, and, thirdly, it could 
serve no possible legislative purpose. 

Mr. Arens. I would like to explain to you a legislative purpose. 
Under the Taft-Hartley Act provision is made for certain union 
officials to sign, take an oath that they are not as of the time they 
sign the affidavit members of the Communist Party, One of the 
strategies which we have been developing which has been used by the 
conspiracy and by persons who have been Communists is to resign 
technical membership, just technical membership in the entity known 
as the Communist Party, but to remain and continue as Communists 
for all intents and purposes as part of the apparatus. 

For that reason, sir, we should like to ask you now whether or not 
prior, immediately prior 

Mr. Kirkwood. Just a minute before you ask a question. Just one 
moment. 

Mr. Willis. Let him finish the question. 

Mr, Arens. Immediately prior to enactment of the Taft-Hartley 
Act were you a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Kirkwood. Just one moment, Mr. Arens. Now, you testified, 
because you have been testifying most of the day. What you say 
may be true or may not be true, I don't know. And your narrow 



454 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

definition of what is on the statement of the affidavit of the Taft- 
Hartley Act is not accurate, and you know it. It says I am not a 
member of the Communist Party or affiliated with that party in 
any way nor do I belong to any organization that believes in the 
violent overthrow of the United States Government. Now, it is not 
just a narrow document as you try to make light of. 

Mr. Arens. Now, would you kindly answer the question. Were 
you a member of the Communist Party immediately prior to the 
passage of the Taft-Hartley Act ? 

Mr. KiRKWooD. I would refuse to answer. 

Mr. Arens. Why ? 

Mr. KiRKw^ooD. On the reasons previously stated. The three rea- 
sons previously stated. 

Mr. Arens. Do you honestly apprehend, sir, if you told • 

]Mr. Scherer. He has not invoked the fifth or any other constitu- 
tional amendments. Therefore I ask you to direct the witness to 
answer. 

Mr. Willis. Yes. 

Mr. KiRKWooD. I have given my answer, sir. 

Mr. Willis. I direct you to answer the question. 

Mr. KiRKWOOD. I have given my answer. I refuse to answer for 
the three reasons that I stated. 

Mr. Arens. Did you invoke 

Mr. Scherer. Wait just a minute. He said the three reasons he 
stated. As I remember the three reasons the witness stated, none 
of the three reasons included either the first amendment as a basis 
for his refusal to answer or the fifth amendment as a basis of his 
refusal to answer. Is that correct, Witness ? 

Mr. KiRKwooD. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that will con- 
clude the staff interrogation of this witness. 

Mr. Kirkwood. Just one minute, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Willis. The witness is excused. 

Mr. Kirkwood. I would like to know when you are going to ask 
me about the questions that you outlined this morning in relation to 
the plants that I represent. 

Mr. Willis. The witness is excused. 

Mr. Kirkwood. After all, you asked me here to get some information 
on pending legislation. When are you going to ask me those ques- 
tions ? 

Mr. Willis. Call your next witness. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Arens. The next witness, if you please, Mr. Chairman, will be 
Mr. Frank Donner. 

Please stand and be sworn. 

Mr. Willis. Do j^ou solemnly swear that the testimony you are 
about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 
truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I do. 

Now Mr. Chairman, before I proceed, I have a motion here which 
flows from the fact that this is an interference with a right to counsel 
and my right to represent these people. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 455 

I have been representing five people here and I think it is scan- 
dalous that I should be called while representing my client in this 
courtroom and I object to it most strenuously and I don't mind telling 
it to you. 

And I have 

Mr. Willis. You were regularly subpenaed. 

Proceed, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. DoNNER. May I file my motion ? 

Mr. Willis. You may file the paper with the member of the staff. 

Mr. Arens. Please remain standing while the chairman administers 
an oath. 

Mr. DoNNER. I believe I just took it, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Willis. He has. 

Mr. Arens. Then please have a seat. 

TESTIMONY OF FRANK J. DONNER 

Mr. Arens. Kindly identify yourself by name, residence, and 
occupation. 

Mr, Donner. My name is Frank J. Donner. I am an attorney 
and I live at Dock Road, Norwalk, Conn. 

Mr. Arens. You are appearing today, Mr. Donner, in response to a 
subpena that was served upon you by the House Committee on Un- 
American Activities ? 

Mr. Donner. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. And where and w^hen was that subpena served, do you 
recall ? 

Mr. Donner. It was served on my birthday, February 25, in New 
York City. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Donner, are you 

Mr. Donner. And directly after the investigators of the commit- 
tee asked my clients who their lawyer was. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Donner, are you general counsel to UE ? 

Mr. Donner. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. How long have you been general counsel to UE ? 

Mr. Donner. About 18 months. Somewhere in there. Should I 
have asked you before I took the job ? 

Mr. Arens. About when was it that you did assmne your duties, do 
you recall? 

Mr. Donner. I don't exactly. 

Mr. Arens. Did you assume your duties since June 28, 1956? 

Mr, Donner. Yes. 

Mr. Arens, Where were you on June 28, 1956, do you recall? 

Mr, Donner. I recall it very well. I was appearing before this 
committee, an appearance which one is hardly likely to forget since 
you conduct it like a circus. 

Mr. Arens. And as of June 28, 1956, when you appeared before 
this committee were you advised by the committee that Mr. Herbert 
Fuchs had identified you under oath as a person known by him to 
have been part of the conspiratorial apj)aratus in this country known 
as the Communist Party and were you advised at that time that under 
oath a Mr. Mortimer Riemer had likewise testified under oath that he 
knew you as a member of the conspiratorial apparatus known as the 
Communist Party ? Were you so advised ? 



456 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. DoNNER. You know whether I was advised. That is in the 
records of the committee. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly answer the question ? 

Mr. DoNNER. 1 was advised that someone said I was a Communist 
in 1942. 

Mr. ScHERER. Were they lying when they said that to the com- 
mittee? 

Mr. DoNNER. I don't have to answer that. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask you to direct the witness to answer the question 
whether the witness he referred to was lying. 

Mr. DoNNER. I will incorporate the same answers I gave to the com- 
mittee when it called me and I adopted those answers here. 

Mr. SciiERER. I ask you to direct the witness to answer my ques- 
tions. He raised the issue and I ask whether the witness to whom 
he referred who identified him as a member of the Communist Party 
was lying or not. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. DoNNER. The purpose of this is quite transparent but the fact 
remains that I answered the committee then. I am not in a permanent, 
political, supervisory payroll to this committee. I answered the com- 
mittee then and you have my answer in the record and it stands there. 

I don't have to spend my life explaining my prior appearances be- 
fore this committee and I don't intend to. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask you 

Mr. DoNNER. Just because you want to make a headline. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask that you direct the witness to answer the ques- 
tion ; a typical Communist speech, I have heard them for years. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer. 

Mr. DoNNER. Look, Congressman, my indifference to your smears 
is practically stupefying. I am delighted not to share your disap- 
proval with Mrs. Roosevelt and other fine Americans. 

Mr. Willis. I direct you to answer the question. 

Mr. DoNNER. I incorporate the answer I gave then. 

Mr. Willis. Proceed. 

Mr. SciiERER. As a member of the bar, I am rather ashamed of your 
conduct. 

Mr. DoNNER. I am not proud of yours. If you had any sensitivity 
of the obligations of this calling you wouldn't snatch me from the 
counsel table to appear here as a witness. 

Mr. Arens. Are you now a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. DoNNER. No. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I will answer that question since the last time I testi- 
fied, and the answer is no. Now, two weeks ago you circulated a smear 
about me that I was a member of a national Communist elite. How 
dare you come here now and ask me whether I am a member of the 
Communist Party ? Why didn't you think of it then ? 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Donner. I incorj^orate the answer I gave before this committee. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask you to direct the witness to answer the question 
to get the record straight. 

Mr. Willis. You are directed to answer the question. 



PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 457 

Mr. DoNNER. I decline to answer the question prior to the time I 
answered before, as to the time I answered before in June 1956. 

I incorporate that answer by reference and my answer now and since 
then, I deny that I have been a Communist. Now, make the most of it. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the Communist Party as of June 
28, 1956, when you appeared before this committee? 

Mr. DoNNER. Don't play games with me, Mr. Arens. I told you that 
I will answer you since I testified that I have not been a Communist. 

Mr. Arens. We can hear you if your voice is just normal. 

Mr. Donner. I am just imitating you because vou shout plenty your- 
self. 

Mr. Arens. Now, may the record be clear, Mr. Chairman, that there 
is an outstanding question ? Namely, were you a member of the Com- 
munist Party on June 28, 1956 ? 

Mr. DoNNER. When did I testify before this committee ? 

Mr. Arens. On June 28, 1956, were you a member of the Communist 
Party ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I testified. I am telling you now and I don't want to 
play games with you, that I will say as to any political affiliations sub- 
ject to June 28, 1956. 

Mr. Arens. You mean subsequent ? 

Mr. Donner. Subsequent to. That is right. As to prior to that 
I incorporate my answer by reference. 

Mr. Arens. I do not believe this last answer is quite clear. Are you 
saying that after your appearance before the committee on June 28, 
1956, you were not a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. DoNNER. No. I am saying that up to the time 1 testified before 
this committee I incorporate by reference the statement, the response 
that I made there in response to the same question. Since that time 
I state to you that I am not a member of the Communist Party. 

Mr. ScHERER. You know as a lawyer you can't incorporate by ref- 
erence a statement you made before this committee at some other 
hearing. 

Mr. DoNNER. You may think so. Did you ever hear of the Quinn 
case ? 

Mr. SciiERER. I heard of it. 

Mr.^ Arens. Immediately prior to your appearance before this 
committee on June 28, 1956, were you 'a member of the Communist 
Party ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I incorporate by reference the answer I gave to this 
committee. There is no conceivable legislative purpose that would 
be served by your adducing from me here, in order to make a headline, 
an answer which is already incorporated in your records. 

Mr. Arens. I will be glad to explain to you the legislative purpose 
and I am very happy that you asked the question. 

Sir, this committee is here undertaking to develop factual informa- 
tion respecting the techniques, strategy and tactics of a conspiratorial 
apparatus in the United States which masquerades behind the facarJA 
known as the Communist Party. 

It is the information of this committee by sworn witnesses of proven 
credibility that you, sir, were a member of the Communist Party, 
that you were part of this conspiratorial apparatus 

Mr. Donner. You left the date out. 



458 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. Arens. in the legal phase of the operation of the Com- 
munist Party. 

It is also the information of this committee and the records reflect 
that on Jime 28, 1956, you appeared as a witness before this commit- 
tee, at which time you were publicly on a sworn record confronted with 
a number of items respecting your own background and your own 
participation in this conspiracy known as the Communist Party. 

You were also confronted with the sworn testimony of persons 
of proven credibility who appeared before this committee. You, sir, 
were then interrogated respecting your then membership in the Com- 
munist Party. Shortly thereafter, 3'ou assumed, so we now under- 
stand, your position as general counsel, one of the principal officers 
of the United Electrical, Eadio and Machine Workers. 

Mr. DoNNER. Is that so ? 

Mr. Arens. We have asked you to appear here so that this com- 
mittee can appraise the facts respecting the basis for your affiliation 
and activities as general counsel of UE. 

Now, sir, with that explanation, I respectfully suggest that the 
chairman order and direct you to answer the question. 

Mr. DoNNER. What is the question ? 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, the question is. Were you a member of 
the Communist Party immediately prior to the time of your appear- 
ance before the Coimnittee on Un-American Activities on June 28. 
1956? 

Mr. Donner. And with respect to 

Mr. Wii-Lis. You decline to answer. I direct you to answer it. 

Mr. DoNNER. With respect to that — just a moment — with respect 
to that question, I incorporate the answer I gave to the same question 
which was posed to me on tlie day I appeared in Washington. 

]Mr. Arens. Have you ever resigned technical membership in the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Donner. You see, that question, as you know, suggests some- 
thing wliich is not in evidence so I can't answer it. 

Mr. Arens. I respectfully suggest, Mr. Chairman, the witness be 
ordered and directed to answer the question or invoke his constitu- 
tional privileges. 

Mr. Donner. I can't answer that. I don't invoke my constitutional 
privileges. 

Mr. Arens. Then I respectfully suggest he be directed to answer 
that question. 

Mr. Donner. I never resigned and you have no evidence I joined, 
so there you are. 

Mr. Scherer. We have no evidence that you joined? 

Mr. Donner. Well, oh- 



Mr. Willis. We have no evidence that 

Mr. Donner. Let's — you want me to say whether I resigned from 
the Communist Party. That is like asking me when I stopped beating 
my wife. 

Mr. Arens. Were Hebert Fuchs, and ]\Iortimer Riemer is error, 
when, under oath before this committee, they swore that while they 
were in the Communist Party they knew you, sir, as a member of that 
conspiratorial apparatus ? 

Mr. Donner. Why don't you say about what time they swore ? 



PROBLEMS OP SECURITY 459 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness now 
be ordered and directed to answer that question. 

Mr. DoNNER. I incorporate in response to that question the same 
answer I gave wlien I testified in Washington about those questions. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that will conclude 
the staff interrogation of this witness. 

Mr. ScHERER. Wait just a minute. 

You were at one time an employee of the United States Government, 
were you not ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Yes. I answered that when you asked me in 1956. 

Mr. SciiERER. You were one of the lawyers in the National Labor 
Relations Board? 

Mr. DoNNER. I answered that in 1956. 

Mr. ScHERER. Were you? 

Mr. DoNNER. I incorporate the answer I gave you in 1956. 

Mr. ScHERER. Did you know Herbert Fuchs? 

Mr. DoisTNER. I incorporate the answer I gave you in 1956. 

Mr. SciiERER. He was also a lawyer in the National Labor Relations 
Board at that time, was he not ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Look, Congressman, you laiow what you are trying 
to do and I know what you are trying to do, but you are not going to 
do it, because as to all these questions I incorporated the answer I gave 
you then. 

Mr. ScHERER. Now, the fact is that you, Herbert Fuchs and a num- 
ber of others who were employees of the Government of the United 
States at that time belonged to a cell of the Communist Party operat- 
ing within the National Labor Relations Board, is that not a fact 2 

Mr. DoNNER. I incorporate the answer I gave at that time. 

Mr. ScHERER. I submit that you were not asked that question 'at 
that time and I ask the Chainnan to direct you to answer that 
question. 

Mr. DoNNER. Then I believe I was, and in any event it is irrelevant, 
remote, far before the time I ever joined the UE and I decline to 
answer it. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask that you direct the witness to answer my 
question. 

Mr. Willis. Mr. Scherer states that you were not asked that 
question. 

Mr. DoNNER. What question ? 

Mr. SciiERER. The one I just asked. 

Mr. DoNNER. Will you ask it again ? 

Mr. SciiERER. Read it, will you ? 

(The record was read by the reporter as requested.) 

Mr. DoNNER. I was asked that question and I incorporate the 
answer I gave then. 

Mr. SciiERER. Whether you were asked it or not, I ask that the wit- 
ness be directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Willis. I direct you to answer. 

Mr. DoNNER. I decline to answer it because it would serve no legis- 
lative purpose and it is purely for the purpose of getting headlines and 
trying to promote a smear here. 

Mr. Scherer. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Willis. What do you mean, promoting headlines ? 



460 PROBLEMS OF SECURITY 

Mr. DoNNER. Look, Congressman, if you are sincerely interested in 
getting facts for legislation you wouldn't come here to ask people 
questions that you already know about because you have made a 
record on it. That is not the way a congressional committee operates. 
Unless it has some ulterior purpose. 

Mr. Willis. We are spending some $48 billion a year for national 
defense. That means to defend ourselves against the Communists. 
Now, are you naive enough to believe that the Kremlin does not try to 
have agents in the United States, and do you mean to say that a con- 
gressional committee of the Congress of the United States has no 
legislative power to legislate on the subject matter of national 
defense ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I don't say it has no legislative power. I say you 
are not exercising legislative power. 

Mr. Willis. You have been saying that all afternoon. Witness 
excused. 

Mr. DoNNER. All you are here to do is attack the union and injure 
it. 

Mr. Willis. No, that is a completely untrue statement as far as 
I am concerned. It is an attack on the conmiittee. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, I ask that the transcript of the testi- 
mony taken by tape of both this last witness and Witness Quiim 
be made a part of the records of this committee because the cold 
record will not reveal the contemptuous attitude of the two witnesses 
to whom I have referred. 

Mr. Willis. So ordered. 

(Tape recordings above referred to retained in committee files.) 

Mr. DoNNER. There is something worse. Congressman, than having 
a contemptuous attitude and that is surrendering your integrity and 
give up your manhood. 

(Witness excused. ) 

Mr. Willis. We will stand in recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow 
morning. 

(Whereupon, at 3 : 50 p.m., Wednesday, March 11, the subcommit- 
tee recessed to reconvene at 10 a.m., Thursday, March 12, 1959.) 

(Subcommittee members present at the time of the recess were: 
Representatives Willis, Scherer, and Tuck.) 

X 



INDEX 



Individuals 

A Page 

Abruzzo, Matthew T 426 

Andrews, Robert T 391, 397^09 (testimony) 

Applegate, Robert 391, 397-409 (testimony) 

B 
Blodgett, Charles (David) 428 

Brashear, Dewey Franklin 427 

Briney, Harold 428 

Browder, Earl 426 

Bruchhausen, Walter 425, 426 

Brucker, Wilber M 392, 393, 405--408 

Budenz, Louis 425-427, 437 

C 

Chatley, Joseph A 431 

Chown, Paul 428 

Conroy, James Joseph 430, 433 

Cooper, Harry 427 

Copeland, Charles Edward 430 

Cortor, William W 429, 431 

Cvetie, Matthew 420, 430, 434, 435 

Czarnowski, Anzelm A '. 428 

D 

Davis, Jack 430, 431, 434, 437 

Decavitch, Victor 426, 428, 429, 431, 434-436 

De Cesare, Dante 427 

Delaney, Thomas F 434 

DeMaio, Ernest 428 

Dennis, Eugene 426 

DiMaria, Samuel J 435 

Donner, Frank J 394, 410, 427, 438, 447, 452, 455-460 (testimony) 

Dunman, Paul E 428 

E 

Eimer, Charles 431 

Emspak, Julius 393, 425-427, 438, 439, 442, 443 

F 

Fiering, Clara Wernick (Mrs. Henry W. Fiering) 429 

Fiering, Henry W 429 

Fishman, Harry 430 

Fitzpatrick, Thomas J 429, 430 

Fried, Emanuel Joseph 430 

Fuchs, Herbert 427, 455, 458, 459 

Funn, Dorothy K 435 

i 



ii INDEX 

G -Page 

Gardner, Fred 432 

Garfield, Arthur L 429 

Garfield, David W 432 

deGauUe (Charles) 424 

Golden. Hamp L 395, 423, 424, 443 

Golden. Mary (Mrs. Hamp L. Golden) 395, 423, 424, 443 

H 

Harley, Hugh 430, 431 

Haug, Fred 431 

Haug, Marie Reed (Mrs. Fred Haug) 431 

Hill, Dickson P 428 

Hoover, J. Edgar 399 

I 
Infante, Joseph 431, 432 

J 

Janowitz, John Edward 431, 432 

Jiminez, Michael 432 

K 
Kaplan, Harry 432 

Kirkwood, Robert C. (testimony) 394, 452-454 

Klein, Joseph 404 

Kornfeder, Joseph Zack 425, 433 

L 

Lumer, Hyman 432 

Lustig, James 432, 433 

M 

Mates, David 433 

Matles, James J 393, 417, 425, 426, 443 

Mazzei (Joseph D.) 420 

McCann, Joseph 434 

McClellan, Richard W 431 

McCuistion, William C 425 

Mikkelsen, Harold M 433 

Mosher, Harold W 432 

Moyer, Ernest Charles 433, 434, 436 

Mugford, Walter 434 

Murdock, William 434 

N • 

Nelson, John W 394,447-452 (testimony) 

Nestler, Frank 428, 430 

Niebur, Richard 434 

Nixon, Russell (Russ) 434 

O 
O'Shea, Thomas H 425, 4S3 

P 

Penha, Armando 435 

Peoples, Frank 432 

Perry, Douglas Neil 435 

Philbrick, Herbert 434, 437 

Port, A. Tyler 391-393,397-409 (testimony) 

Q 
Quinn, Thomas J 393,410-423 (testimony), 435, 436, 460 

R 

Raley, Talmadge 436 

Regan, Charles V 431,437 

Rhodes, Ervin 395 

Riemer, Mortimer 427,455, 458 

Rumsey, Walter W 428 



INDEX iii 

S Page 

Santwire, Milton Joseph 433 

Sille, Cyril 427 

Small, Jack 407, 408 

Steinbacher, Marjorie Elaine 436 

Steiner, Charles 436 

Stohl, Ralph 407 

Strunk, Arthur Paul 428, 429, 432, 436 

T 

Teto, William H 434. 437 

Thamel, AViliam 436 

Thomas, Herman E 436 

Tomassetti, Nicholas 437 

Tormey, Donald 437 

V 

Van Tyne, Charles H 437 

Vottis, Salvatore M 425,426 

W 

Wallace, William Aloysius 435 

Williamson, John W 427 

Wright, Thomas B 393, 394, 437, 438-447 ( testimony ) 

Organizations 



American Communications Association 392, 393, 406, 407 

C 

CIO 416, 417, 422 

Eleventh Constitutional Convention, November 2, 1949, Cleveland, 

Ohio 421, 422 

Communist Party, France 424 

Communist Party, USA : 
National Structure : 

Central Committee 425 

Trade Union Commission 425 

Districts : 

District 5 (western Pennsylvania) : 

District Committee 430 

Electrical Commission 430 

State Organization : 

New York State, Trade Union Commission 425 

Ohio, State Committee 432 

E 

Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, United 392-394 

399, 401, 405, 411, 412, 416-418, 421, 422, 424-438, 442, 443, 455, 458 

District 4 (New York) 433 

District 6 (western Pennsylvania) 399, 415, 416, 429, 436 

District Council 9 1 433 

District 10 (Illinois-Minnesota) 428 

District 11 (Chicago) 428 

New York District. (See District 4. ) 

Local 301 (Schenectady, N.Y.) 404 

Local 506 (Erie, Pa.) 394, 447, 448 

Local 601 (East Pittsburgh) 393, 413, 428, 429, 430, 436 

Local 610 394, 452, 453 

LocalllOS 429 

Electrical Workers, International Union of, CIO (lUE) 415 

G 

General Electric Co 435 

Erie, Pa. plant 447,448 



IV INDEX 

Page 
International Newspaper Printing Co. (New York City) 439 

R 
Radio Corp. of America (RCA) 435 

T 
Trade Union Service, Inc 393,439-441 

U 
U.S. Government: 

Department of Defense 391-393, 39G, 397, 399^03, 405, 407, 409 

Office of Security Policy 397, 398 

Federal Bureau of Investigation 423 

National Labor Relations Board 402, 4.59 

W 

Westinghouse Electric Corp 435 

East Pittsburgh 393, 412, 414, 415 

Publications 

Hotel and Club Voice 441 

National Guardian 441 

People's Press 441 

Pittsburgh Sun-Telegraph 423, 424 

Student Advocate 441 

UE News 393, 394, 426, 437-443 

O 



ji'iiiiiE3, 

3 9999 05706 31 3i 



This book should be returned to 
the Library on or before the last date 
stamped below. 

A fine is incurred by retaining it 
beyond the specified time. 
Please return promptly.