(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 "Investigation of Communist activities in the St. Louis, Mo., area. Hearing"

m 

; Vt < 

■ TO ' 



HARVARD COLLEGE 
LIBRARY 




GIFT OF THE 

GOVERNMENT 
OF THE UNITED STATES 



f 

INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN THE 
ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA— PART 4 



HEARING 

BEFORE THE 

(JUMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

EIGHTY-FOUKTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 



JUNE 8, 1956 



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



(INCLUDING INDEX) 




i^^mRD COLLEGE LIBRm 
\„^ DEPOSITED By THE 

f)Cl 5 1956 



UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
81594 WASHINGTON : 1956 



COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 
United States House of Representatives 

FRANCIS E. WALTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman 
MORGAN M. MOULDER, Missouri HAROLD H. VELDE, Illinois 

CLYDE DOYLE, California BERNARD W. KEARNEY, New York 

JAMES B. FRAZIER, Jr., Tennessee DONALD L. JACKSON, California 

EDWIN E. WILLIS, Louisiana GORDON H. SCHERER, Ohio 

Richard Arens, Director 

II 



CONTENTS 



Executive Hearings (See Pt. 3) 



June 2, 1956: Testimony of— P»f 

Joseph John Schoemehl 4949 

Loyal Hanimack 4966 

George V. L. Hardy 4971 

June 4, 1956: Testimony of — 

Joseph John Schoemehl (resumed) 4979 

Obadiah Jones 4981 

Public Hearings 

PART 1 

June 4, 1956: Testimony of — 

William W. Cortor 4724 

Afternoon session: 

William W. Cortor (resumed) 4758 

James H. Sage 4761 

Elliott Waxman 4784 

Leslie S. Davison 4793 

Sol S. Nissen 4794 

John William Simpson 4798 

PART 2 

June 5, 1956: Testimony of — 

John William Simpson (resumed) 4803 

William Henrv HoUand 4808 

Harvey John Day 4818 

Thelma Hecht (Mrs. Julius Hecht) 4825 

Brockman Schumacher 4829 

Thomas A. Younglove 4834 

Afternoon session: 

Thomas A. Younglove (resumed) 4845 

Orville Leach 4864 

Zollie C. Carpenter 4869 

James Payne 4876 

Helen Aukamp Sage (Mrs. James H. Sage) 4883 

PART 3 

June 6, 1956: Testimony of — 

Dr. Sol Londe-' 4889 

William Edwin Davis 4895 

Ida Holland (Mrs. William Henry Holland) 4899 

Edwin Leslie Richardson 4902 

Anne (Ann) Yasgur Khng 4912 

Afternoon session: 

Anne (Ann) Yasgur Kling (Resumed) 4920 

Gilbert Harold Hall 4940 

Richard L. Stanford 4944 

Romey Hudson 4945 

> Released by the committee August 24, 1956 and ordered to be printed. 

m 



IV CONTENTS 

PART 4 

June 8, 1956: Testimony of— ^««« 

Helen Musiel 4993 

Hershel James Walker 5000 

George Kimmel 5004 

Hershel James Walker (recalled) 5014 

Linus E. Wampler... 5017 

George Kimmel (recalled) 5026 

Afternoon session: 

Dr. John F. Rutledge 5028 

Ella Mae Posey Pappademos 5051 

Clara Perkins (Mrs. Haven Perkins) 5058 

Haven Perkins 5065 

Julius Hecht. 5069 

Sol Derman 5070 

Douglas MacLeod 5072 

Index i 



Public Laav 601, 79th Congress 

The legislation under which the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities operates is Public Law 601, 79th Congress (1946), 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 
******* 

17. Conmiittee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine members. 

Rule XI 

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 

(q) (1) Committee on Un-American Activities. 

(A) Un-American Activities. 

(2) Tlie 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, 
cliaracter, 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 neces- 
sary 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 r.nder 
the signature of the chairman of the committee or any subcommittee, or b>' any 
member designated by any such chairman, and may be served by any persou 
designated by an)' such chairman or member. 



RULES ADOPTED BY THE 84TH CONGRESS 

House Resolution 5, January 5, 1955 
******* 

Rule X 

STANDING COMMITTEES 

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

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

Rule XI 

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

17. 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 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 Constitu- 
tion, and (3) all other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress in 
any necessary remedial legislation. 

The Cominittee 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 sucli books, papers, and documents, and to 
take such testimony, as it deems necessa^\^ 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 persoa 
designated by any such chairman or member. 



INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN THE 
ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA— PART 4 



FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 1956 

United States House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

St. Louis, Mo. 
public hearing 

A subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities met 
at 9:55 a. m., pursuant to recess, in courtroom No. 3, United States 
Courthouse and Customs Building:, St. Louis, Mo., Hon. Morgan 
M. Moulder (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Committee members present: Representatives Morgan M. Moul- 
der, of Missouri, and Gordon H. Scherer, of Ohio. 
» Staff members present: Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., counsel; George C. 
Williams and Raymond T. Collins, investigators. 

Mr. Moulder. The committee will be in order. 

Call your first witness, please, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Helen M. Musiel. 

Will you come forward, please. 

Mr. Moulder. Will you stand there, please. Will you hold up 
your right hand and be sworn, please. 

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

Miss MusiEL. I do. 

Mr. Moulder. Be seated, please. 

TESTIMONY OF HELEN MUSIEL, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

R. L. WITEERSPOON 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliat is your name, please? 
Miss Musiel. Helen Musiel. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted that the witness is accompanied by 
Mr. Witherspoon as her attorney. 
Wliere were you born? 
Miss Musiel. St. Louis, Mo. 
Mr. Tavenner. Are you single or married? 
Miss Musiel. Single. 

Mr. Tavenner. Musiel is your maiden name? 
Miss Musiel. That is right. 
Mr. Tavenner. Where do you now reside? 
Miss Musiel. Chicago, 111. 
Mr. Tavenner. How long have you resided in Chicago? 

4993 



4994 coarMUNiST activities in st. louis, mo., area 

Miss MusiEL. About 6 months. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliat is your address in Chicago? 

Miss MusiEL. 424 South Central Park. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where did you reside prior to your moving to 
Chicago 6 months ago? 

Miss MusiEL. St. Louis, Mo. 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. How long had you resided in St. Louis? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Miss Musiel. I was born here. 

Mr, Tavenner. You mean you had lived here continuously up 
until the period of about 6 months ago? 

Miss Musiel. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. What periods of time did you reside outside of St, 
Louis? 

Miss Musiel, I refuse to answer that. I invoke the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is that because you were in the underground of 
the Communist Party and that you left St. Louis in order that your 
identity be preserved? 

Miss Musiel, I refuse to answer that, I invoke the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you live in Kansas City under an assumed 
name? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wlien did you go to Kansas City to live? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Under what names have you lived other than the 
name Helen Musiel? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner, I have before me a document which was read in 
evidence, entitled "Proposed Plan for Missouri State Party Building 
Conference, May 2, 3, 1946." 

Various groups of the Communist Party were named m this docu- 
ment as organizations in which groups of the Communist Party were 
to be organized, including the names of those who were to take the 
leadership in the recruiting from those groups. Among them I find 
packing, packinghouse, which is refeired to as packing, and following 
the name packing is the name Helen. 

Were you assigned to the position of doing this special recruiting in 
1946 from persons employed in the packinghouse industry? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer that. I invoke the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you become the leader of a gi-oup of persons 
emploved in a packinghouse who were members of the Communist 
Party? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. A person by the name of Ann Yasgur Kling was a 
witness before this committee, and testified that she worked in the 
district office of the Communist Party in St. Louis. Did you work 
in the district office of the Communist Part}^ in St. Louis during the 
period of time that she worked there? 

Aliss Musiel. I refuse to answer that— the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether or 
not Ann Yasgur during any of the period of her membership in the 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 4995 

Communist Party was a leader in the professional group of the Com- 
mimist Party in St. Lotiis? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that qtiestion — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavexner. Were yoti a functionary of the Commiuiist Party 
in St. Louis at any time between 1944 and 1948? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that question — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. You said you went to Chicago about 6 months ago. 
Did you go there from St. Louis? 

Miss MusiEL. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you transferred there for work in the Com- 
munist Party by the Commimist Party organization? 

Miss MusiEL. No, I wasn't. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were not. 

"vMiat employment have you had in Chicago since you went there 
6 months ago? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have j^ou been engaged in Communist Party 
activities in Chicago within the past 6 months? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. TMiat was 3'^our reason for going to Chicago? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. But you state you were not transferred there by 
the Communist Party? 

Miss MusiEL. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is that right? 

Miss MusiEL. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. "Was your Communist Party membership trans- 
ferred from St. Louis to Chicago? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Why did you leave St. Louis? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. ScHERER. What income do you have, witness? 

Miss MusiEL. ^Vhat is that? 

Mr. ScHERER. What income do you have? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. ScHERER. Do you receive a salary? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask you direct the witness to answer that question 
whether she receives a salary. It couldn't possiblj^ incriminate her. 

Mr. jVIoulder. The witness is directed to answer. 

Miss MusiEL. I decline to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you at any time serve on the review commis- 
sion of the Communist Party in St. Louis? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with Joseph Schoemehl? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Tavenner, part of the duties of the review com- 
mission, as I understand it, was to impose discipline upon members of 
the party. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you desire to give some explanation of the 
duties of the review commission? 

Miss MusiEL. No, I didn't. I was just listening to him. 



4996 COIVCMUNIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. I thought I heard you say something. 

Miss MusiEL. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. You didn't? 

Aliss MusiEL. No. 

Mr. ScHERER. She wanted to correct me. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you desire to correct my statement to the 
member of the committee as to the duties of the review commission 
of the Communist Party? Because I am certain you started tosay 
something. 

Miss MusiEL. I didn't start to say anything. I was just Hstening. 
I have nothing to say on that. 

Mr. ScHERER. You heard right, Mr. Tavenner, because I heard it. 
And she was properly stopped hj her counsel. 

Mr. Moulder. May I ask this question: 

Do 3'ou have any knowledge or information concerning un-American 
or communistic activities with which joii are not directly connected? 
Giving information on such activity would not incriminate you. 

Miss AIusiEL. I have no knowledge at all. 

If you want un-American activities I think 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mr. Moulder. You say you have no such knowledge? 

Miss ]MusiEL. No. 

(The witness confers with lier counsel.) 

Mr. Moulder. Well, do you have any knowledge of Communist 
Party activities existing at the present time? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. Moulder. Do j^ou have any knowledge of any subversive 
activities? 

Miss MusiEL. No, I don't. 

Mr. Moulder. In your opinion would Communist Party activities 
be subversive? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Moulder. You realize, don't you, Miss Alusiel, that the courts 
of our country have found and decided that the Communist Party 
of the United States is a part of an international conspiracy to 
dominate all democracies and non-Communist countries? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Miss MusiEL. I am not too familiar with the court decisions. 

Mr. AIouLDER. But if you did know that and if you were informed 
and advised of that then would j^ou not consider the Communist 
Party activities in this country as being subversive? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer — fifth amendment. 

Mr. Moulder. Proceed, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to read to you, Miss Musiel, an 
excerpt from the testimony of Mr. Schoemehl given in executive 
session to this subcommittee last Satm-day. I had asked Mr. 
Schoemehl to describe the chcumstances under which he was called 
before a review commission of the Communist Party, and this is his 
testimony: 

Mr. Schoemehl. About in December, as a rule, ever}' year they would have a, 
well, sort of a questionnaire. You would be asked to tell about where you 
worked and how much you made, because you are supposed to pay 10 percent 
of your salary as dues, and questions of that sort. What work j-ou had done for 
the party during the past year. I forget what they called that. At any rate, 



COMIMTJNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 4997 

on that was based whether or not you would receive j-our party card for the 
following year. But sometimes they would call you in any time during the year. 
And they called me in along about in May and asked me those questions. 

Mr. Moulder. Can you recall who called you in? 

Mr. ScHOEMEHL. Helen Musiel phoned me. And Jim Forrest, Romey Hudson, 
and Helen Musiel were the ones who questioned me. Ray Koch had been the 
head of the review commission up to the last that I heard. i3ut he was in Chicago 
then and had been transferred to Chicago, or at least had gone to Chicago. And 
after the questions and up to almost the very last minute nothing was said about 
this being a review commission. But then after these notes had been brought 
out — 

Aiid let me explain those were notes which he was detected taking 
during the course of a Communist Party meeting — 

then Jim Forrest advised me that this was a session of the review commission and 
they would render their decision. 

Is there an^^ statement or reference made by Mr. Schoemehl in that 
testimony which affects you untrue? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer — fifth amendment. 
Mr. Tave>j"ner. Continumg with the testimony: 

Mr. Moulder. Can you give us more identification of Helen Musiel, her occu- 
pation and so forth? 

Mr. Schoemehl. She was a packinghouse worker. And she was very active 
in the party activities when I first joined the Communist Political Association. 
She was more or less in charge, she and Sarah Kliug — Sarah Shaw, pardon me. 

Were you employed in the packinghouse, as a packinghouse worker? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer that — the same reason. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Tavenner, could I interrupt a minute? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. ScHERER. Would you go back to the first part of Mr. Schoe- 
mehl's testimony where he said what questions were asked him on this 
questionnaire before the commission? You said something — they 
would call you in during the year occasionally. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes; I have it. 

Mr. ScHERER. Take it slowly. 

Mr. Tavenner (reading): 

You would be asked to tell about where you worked and how much you made, 
because you are supposed to pay 10 percent of your salary as dues, and questions 
of that sort. What work you had done for the party during the past year. 

Mr. ScHERER. That is enough. 

In this disciplinary commission of the party they ask the same 
questions or similar questions to the ones we asked this morning. 
Now when those questions were asked a member of the Communist 
Party as to where he worked, how much he made, what work he had 
done for the party, you made them answer those questions, did you 
not? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer that — fifth amendment. 

Mr. ScHERER. They weren't allowed to invoke the fifth amendment 
before that review commission as you have been invoking the fifth 
amendment to the same questions a committee of your Congi-ess was 
asking you this morning. Isn't that right? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer that — same reason. 

Mr. ScHERER. And if they refused to answer the questions they 
were expelled from the Communist Party. Right? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer that — same reason. 



4998 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. ScHERER. And if they attempted to invoke the fifth amend- 
ment, if such a thing were even thought of, they would be expelled 
from the party; would they not? 

Miss MusiEL, I refuse to answer that — same reason. 

Mr. ScHERER. That is all I have. 

There is a difference. 

Before the commission he had to answer the very questions she 
was asked. This morning she refused to answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. During the course of Mr. vSchoemehl's appearance 
before the com^mittee I asked him several questions regarding the 
Joseph Weydemeyer School. My question was this: 

You have told us about the Basic Training Institute. Was there any other 
course of training made available to members of the Communist Party in this area? 

_Mr. ScHOEMEHL. Well, they had the Joseph Weydemeyer School of Social 
Science. But it was not confined strictly to party members. 

Mr. Tavenner. In other words, it operated on about the same principle as 
the Jefferson School of Social Science in New York? 

Mr. ScHOEMEKL. Yes, sir. They used the same textbooks that they used 
there. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you attend this school? 

Mr. Schoemehl. I did. 

Mr. Tavenner. Can you tell us the year in which that occurred? 

Mr. Schoemehl. Just off hand, I can't remember. There were several sessions 
of it, that is, in several years there. About 2)4 years that I remember. 
,- Mr. Tavenner. Who were the instructors as far as you can now recall? 

Mr. Schoemehl. There was Jim Forrest, Dorothy Forrest, Ray Koch — Nathan 
Oser was at one of those. He was really not an instructor. Heinerely appeared 
at one of the sessions. Al Murphy, Bob Manewitz. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are those all that you can now recall? 

Mr. Schoemehl. Those are the only ones I can recall off hand. 
- Mr. Moulder. Where were the sessions of the classes held of the Weydemeyer 
school? 

Mr. Schoemehl. At the Communist Party headquarters, 1041a North Grand 
Avenue. You see, each of these instructors had a separate class, and I did not 
attend all of the classes. That is, I picked out certain classes that I attended. 

Mr. Tavenner. I believe each of tho.se named by you as instructors in the 
Joseph Weydemeyer School were also instructors in the Basic Training Institute? 

Mr. Schoemehl. Most of them were. 

]Mr. Tavenner. Was there any instructor in the Joseph We3-deme}^er School, 
as far as you can remember, not a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Schoemehl. To the best of my knowledge, there was none but Communist 
Party members that I know offhand. 

Did you attend the Weydemeyer School? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — ^the same reason. 
, Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what the pur- 
pose of the Communist Party was hi assigning certam of its members 
to underground activities? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer that — same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. You have refused to answer a question as to 
whether or not you went to Kansas City where you worked under an 
assumed name as part of an midergiound dkective of the Commimist 
Party. But then at a later time you went to Chicago, about G 
months ago. 

Now, the committee has found out from its investigation in different 
places m the country — very recently in North Carolma and in other 
places — that persons who had been m the undergi-ound of the Com- 
munist Party are now coming out from luiderground ; they are assum- 
ing then- real names; thev are being active again in the Communist 
Partv. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 4999 

Will you enlighten the committee on that from any information 
that you have on that subject? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer — the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it not true that many of those who have been 
underground m the Communist Party now for a period of time are, 
m fact, coming out and becommg activel}" engaged in Communist 
Party activities now? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer; the same reason. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Isn't that true in your own case? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer; same reason. 

Mr. Tavexner. Were you very active in the raising of funds for 
the defense of the 12 ■ 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Just a moment. The 12 who were the first tried 
under the Smith Act case in New York? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer; the same reason. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Didn't you raise substantial funds in St. Louis 
that went to Ben Gold in New York City for use in the defense ofthe 
Smith Act defendants? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer; the same reason. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Are you a member of the Communist Party now? 

Miss Musiel. I refuse to answer; the same reason. 

Mr. Tavexxer. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Moulder. Questions, IVIr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no questions. I just have this observation 
to make, Mr. Chairman: 

From the testunony of Mr. Schoemehl, which we heard on last 
Satm-day in executive session, together with the testimony of this 
witness, it appears that the Communist Party set up these review or 
disciplinary commissions which met from time to time and questioned 
members of the Communist Party in detail, asking them the same 
type questions that we ask of this witness called before us in these 
hearings. They held these hearings to determine whether or not 
those members of the party were loyal to the party, whether they 
had followed the party line. 

We have got this same group of individuals. 

Of com-se, as I pointed out here, there was no chance of invoking 
the fifth amendment before those disciplinary commissions. They 
would either answer the questions or else. 

Now these same people and many of then- followers throughout the 
country who are not members of the party object seriously when we 
ask these same individuals these same questions to determme not 
their loyalty to the party but to determine their loyalty to this 
country. 

I just want to make that observation in connection with the testi- 
mony of Schoemehl and this witness. 

Mr. Moulder. Yes. 

Did you answer the question as to the reason you changed j'-our res- 
idence from St. Louis to Chicago? 

Miss Musiel. ^\1iat was that? 

Mr. Moulder. Was that question asked you? 

Miss Musiel. Yes; it was asked. 

Mr. Moulder. What cause did you say moved you from St. Louis 
to Chicago, and what was your answer? 



5000 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer; the fifth amendment, 
Mr. Moulder. Ai-e you now engaged in any illegal occupation or 
work in the city of Chicago? 

Miss MusiEL. I refuse to answer; fifth amendment. 
Mr. Moulder. Very well. 
Any other questions? 
Mr. SCHERER. No. 

Mr. Moulder. The witness is excused. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Hershel Walker. 

Mr. Moulder. Hold up your right hand and be sworn, please. 
^ Do you solemnly swear that the testimony which you are about to 
give before the subcommittee will be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Walker. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF HERSHEL JAMES WALKER, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, R. L. WITHERSPOON 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your name? 

Mr. Walker. Hershel James Walker. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted for the record that the same counsel is 
appearing with this witness as the former witness. 

When and where were 3^ou born, Mr. Walker? 

Mr. Walker. February 20, 1909, Forrest Cit}^, Ark. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you now reside? 

Mr. Walker. 1382 Arlington, St. Louis, Mo. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will a'ou raise 3^our voice a little. It is rather 
difficult to hear. 

By whom are you now employed? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. Wagner Electric Corp. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you been employed there? 

Mr. Walker. About 14 years. 

Mr. Scherer. Would the mtness repeat his address. I didn't 
hear it and I don't think the press did. 

\h\ Walker. 1382 Arhngton, St. Louis, Mo. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long did you say you had been emploj'^ed at 
Wagner Electric? 

Mr. Walker. About 14 years. 

Mr. Tavenner. 14 years. 

How do you spell your first name? 

Mr. Walker. H-e-r-s-h-e-1. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you hold any official position or occupation of 
any type in the union which has bai'gaining rights at Wagner Electric? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have yon ever held a position — in a union hav- 
ing bargaining rights at Wagner Electric? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have here a letter addressed by you, piu'portedly 
addressed by you to the membership of your union. Will 3'ou examine 
it, please, and state whether or not tlie signature appearing on the 
letter is yoiu* signatm'e. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5001 

(Document handed to tlic witness and his counsel.) 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I will refuse to answer that 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your answer, please? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. What was the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. The question was whether or not the signatm'e 
appearing at the bottom of the letter is yom' signature. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer; it might tend to incriminate me. 
On the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. I ask that the document be marked "Walker 
Exhibit No. 1" for identification only. 

Mr. Moulder. The document referred to will be so marked. 

(The document referred to was marked "Walker Exhibit No. 1," 
and filed for the information of the committee.) 

Mr. Tavenner. This letter is adch-essed to "Dear Brothers and 
Sisters." That referred to the membership of yom- local union, did 
it not? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. The letter states, in part: 

The Negro Labor Council of St. Loiiis is sponsoring a meeting November 25th, 
1951, at 2 P. M. for the delegates who went to the National Convention of the 
Negro Labor Council that was held in Cincinnati, Ohio, on October 27 and 28, 1951. 
We ask that you inform your membership that they are invited to come to this 
meeting at which the report on the national convention's activities will be dis- 
cussed. 

Also we hope you will send an official delegate from your local union to attend 
this meeting. 

Fraternally yours, 

H. Walker, 
Secretary, St. Louis Labor Council. 

Will you tell us what the St. Louis Labor Council was in 1951. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I decline to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wasn't it a legitimate labor organization here in 
the city of St. Louis? 

Mr. Walker. I decline to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Or was it? 

You refuse to answer? 

Mr. Walker. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you one of the delegates who attended the 
founding convention of the National Negro Labor Council? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. You became an official of that organization in the 
city of St. Louis; did you not? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. The local chapter of the National Negro Labor 
Council of St. Louis was organized and established by the Communist 
Party ; wasn't it? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. You at that time were a m.ember of the Com- 
munist Party; weren't you? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 



5002 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Moulder. In the beginning of youi' testimony you stated 
that you did not hold any official position in the gi'oup, the first group 
referred to by Mr. Tavenner in his question. 

Is that stni the position you take? In any answer you wish to 
make? 

Mr. Walker. I didn't understand you. 

Mr. Moulder. Were you secretary of the organization referred to 
in the letter which Mr. Tavenner read a moment ago? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now a member of the State board of the 
Commxunist Party for the State of Missouri? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Scherer. Where did you say you were employed at the present 
time? 

Mr. Walker. Wagner Electric. 

Mr. Scherer. Do they have any defense contracts? 

Mr. Walker. I don't know. 

Mr. Scherer. Does Wagner have any defense contracts? 

Mr. Walker. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Scherer. What type of work do you do with Wagner Electric? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I am the oven operator. 

Mr. Scherer. What is an oven operator? 

Mr. Walker. It is an oven that gets hot. And it bakes paint on 
whatever part you want to paint. 

Mr. Scherer. Bakes what? 

Mr. Walker. Paint on parts for motors. 

Mr. Scherer. Do you know whether yoin* company makes any 
security checks on its employees? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Scherer. You shook your head. You don't know or they do 
not? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I don't know. 

Mr. Scherer. Did you file an application for employment for this 
position with Wagner Electric? 

Mr. Walker. Yes, 

Mr. Scherer. How long ago was that? 

Mr. Walker. 14 3-ears ago. 

Mr. Scherer. You have been there 14 j^ears. How old are you 
now? 

Mr. Walker. Forty-seven. 

Mr. Scherer. I have no further questions, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Weren't you a member of the CIO Council be- 
tween 1945 and 1947 at the time that Mr. Younglove was also a mem- 
ber of it? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were not? 

Have you at any time been a delegate to the CIO Council? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. Never have. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you at an}" time attend any of its meetings? 

Mr. Walker. Never did. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IX ST. LOUIS, :M0.. AREA 5003 

Mr. Tavenner. Ai-e you acquainted with Mr. Younglove? 
(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. Ask the question again. 

Mr. Tavenner. Arc you acquainted with ]Mr. Younglove? 

Mr. Walker. No: I am not acquainted %vitli him. 

Mr. Tavenner. Ai-e you acc|uainted with Mr. Cortor?. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Cortor testified that he served with you on 
the St. Louis Defense Committee in the work of the St. Louis Defense 
Committee. Was he correct in that testimony? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Air. Cortor also testified that he worked with you 
in the Negro Labor Council. Was he correct in that? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have before me the April 12, 1948, issue of the 
St. Louis Post-Dispatch in which appear the names of members of 
the State Committee of the Wallace Third Party, referred to here 
as Progressive Party candidates. And from the 13th District the 
appointees to the State committee appear here as Hershel Walker, 
Ray Wolverson, and another person whose name has not been men- 
tioned in connection with Communist activities, and, therefore, I shall 
not name that person. And a Miss Hauber. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether or 
not you were acquainted with Miss Hauber? 

Mr. Walker. Will you state your question again? 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether you 
were acquainted with Miss Hauber? 

Air. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with Ray Wolverson? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did either or both of those persons serve with 
you as a member of the State committee of the Progressive Party in 
1948? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the State committee from 
the 13th District? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Air. Tavenner. Are you now the head of the industrial section 
of the State board of the Communist Party in Alissouri? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been a member of the Communist 
Party at any time that I have not specifically inquii-ed about? 

Air. Walker. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Air. Tavenner. Ai*e you now a member of the Communist Party? 

Air. Walker. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Air. Tavenner. I have no further questions, Air. Chairman. 

Air. Moulder. Air. Scherer? 

Air. Scherer. I have no questions. 

Air. AIouLDER. I have just one. I am curious to know. 

Yoii say that you arc 47 j-ears of age? 

81594- 



5004 COIVIMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Walkee. Yes. 

Mr. Moulder. And that you started your employment or work at 
Wagner Electric 14 years ago? 

Mr. Walker. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. At that time then you would have been 33 years 
of age. 

Mr. Walker. I would have to count. Right now I wouldn't know 
offhand. 

Mr. jMoulder. Did you serve in the Armed Forces? 

Mr. Walker. No. 

Mr. Moulder. How old were you in 1942? 

Mr. Walker. How old was I in 1942? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. I was born in 1909. 

Mr. Moulder. That would be 33 years of age in 1942 then. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Moulder. Were you worldng for Wagner Electric at that 
time? 

Mr. Walker. I was. 

Mr. Moulder. Were you deferred from military service because of 
your emplojanent in that plant? 

Mr. Walker, They didn't say that. They just sent me a card and 
put me in 2-B. You probably kno\v what that is; I don't know. 

Mr. Moulder. Were you married at that time? 

Mr. Walker. Yes. 

Mr. Moulder. How many dependents did you have at that time? 

Mr. Walker. Four. I had four children and a wife. It would be 
five. 

Mr. Moulder. The witness is excused. 

Did you want to have a recess? Would it help to give the reporter 
an opportunity to rest? 

The committee will stand in recess for 5 minutes. 

(Whereupon, a short recess was taken, there being present at the 
time of taking the recess Kepresenta lives Moulder and Scherer.) 

(The subcommittee was reconvened at the expiration of the recess, 
there bemg present Representatives Moulder and Scherer.) 

Mr. Moulder. The committee will be in order. 

Call your next witness, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. George Kimmel, wUl j^ou come forward, 
please, sir. 

Mr. Moulder. Please hold up your right hand and be sworn. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony which j'^ou are about to 
give before the subcommittee will be the truth, the whole truth 
and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Kimmel. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF GEORGE KIMMEL, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

JOSEPH CORN 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your name, please, sir. 

Mr. Kimmel. George Kimmel. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted that you are accompanied by counsel; 

Will counsel please identify himself for the record. 

Air. CoHN. Joseph Cohn, C-o-h-n, Missouri and Illinois bar. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5005 

Mr. Tavenner. When and where were you born, ^^r. Kimmel? 

Mr. Kimmel. In St. Louis, in 1908. 

Mr. Tavenner. A^liat date? 

Mr. Kimmel. 1908. October 10. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what your 
formal educational trairiing has been. 

Mr. Kimmel. I went to grade school and had completed 2 years of 
high school. 

Mr. Tavenner. ^Miere do you now reside? 

Mr. Kimmel. Ste. Genevieve, Mo. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you lived in Ste. Genevieve? 

Mr. Kimmel. Since about the middle of 1937. 

Mr. Tavenner. How are you now emplo3'ed? 

Mr. Kimmel. I am not employed. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your last employment? 

Mr. Kimmel. At the Mississippi Lime Co. 

Mr. Tavenner. "W^ien was that? 

Mr. Kimmel. October 16, 1954 or 1955. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is that at Ste. Genevieve? 

Mr. Kimmel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long were vou employed by Mississippi Lime 
Co.? 

Mr. Kimmel. Since 1947. 

Mr. Tavenner. Prior to 1947 what was your emplojonent? 

Mr. Kimmel. I resigned and worked on the farm I have in St. 
Genevieve County. 

Mr. Tavenner. Over how long a period of time did you operate 
the farm without other outside emploAonent? 

^Mr. Kimmel. About 2}^ years. 

Mr. Tavenner. Prior to that 2^-year period what was 3^our 
■employment? 

]\lr. Kimmel. I worked at the Mississippi Lime Co. 

Mr. Tavenner. During what years? 

Mr. Kimmel. From, I believe, April of 1938 until 1944; sometime 
in 1944. 

Mr. Tavenner. During the period of time that you worked for 
Mississippi Lime Co. was it organized by labor? 

Mr. KiAiMEL. It was. 

Mr. Tavenner. What union had the bargaining rights during that 
period? 

Mr. KiMMEL. Well, the first period that I worked there, it was the 
AFL. I believe it is quarry workers. 

Mr. Tavenner. Quarry workers. That is from 1938 to 1944? 

Mr. KiMiyiEL. Right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Very well. And then the second period? 

]Mr. Kimmel. Mine, mill, and smelter workers. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you hold any official position in the Inter- 
national Union of Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers? 

Mr. Kimmel. No, not at that tune. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, at any time. 

Mr. Kimmel. I have at times been an international representative 
in the area. 



5006 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell us during what period of time you 
were international representative of Mine, Mill, and Smelter, 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. In 1953. 

Wliat I was questioning my attorney about was 

Mr. Tavenner. You needn't tell us. You have a perfect right to 
confer with counsel at any time without any explanation. 

Mr. KiMMEL. All right. 

Mr. Tavenne... What was the date? 

Mr. KiMMEL. In the period of part of 1953. I don't know exactly 
when I was 

Mr. Tavenner. That is, you became international representative 
of Mine, Mill, and Smelter, m 1953? 

Mr. KiMMEL. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. And for how long a period of time? 

Mr. KiMMEL. That is what I wanted to tell you about. It is just 
a short period of time. See, I was able to go to another local from 
my own and assist the people in that local with the grievance pro- 
cedure. That is merel}^ — that is the onh" connection I had as a 
representative. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Had the Mine, Mill and Smelter been expelled from the CIO at 
that time? 

Mr. KiMMEL. Yes, I believe they had. 

Mr. Tavenner. Weren't you president of Local 883 of Mine, Mill 
and Smelter? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I was. 

Mr. Tavenner. When was that? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I can't recall each year because there was a tune 
when someone else was president, elected to it. But I believe for a 
period of 5 j'ears. 

Mr. Tavenner. During approximately what period of time? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I believe one period was in 1948, starting in the latter 
part of the year because of the resignation of the first president 
elected. And 1949, I believe. 

Mr. Tavenner. And that was before the Mine, Mill and Smelters 
were expelled from the CIO. Isn't that correct? 

Mr. KiMMEL. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. I understood you to say that 3^ou met with 
grievance committees. Was that part of your duty? 

Mr. KiMMEL. My dut}^ was to meet with the grievance committee 
when they were with the company in gi'ievance procedure. 

Mr. Tavenner. In performing that work did you become ac- 
quainted with a person by the name of Philip Koritz, K-o-r-i-t-z? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I did meet him. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know where Mr. Koritz was from? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. No, I don't know. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was his employment with Mine, Mill and 
Smelter? 

Mr. KiMMEL. Well, at the time he was international representative, 
as far as I know. 

Mr. Tavenner. Over what period of time? 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IX ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA o007 

^Ir. KiMMEL. I can't say exactly because I don't know. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wasn't it during the period of time that you were 
president of your local? 

Mr, KiMMEL. It can possibly be. I wouldn't sav. 

Mr. Tavenner. In 1948 and 1949? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I only knew him for a short while, or met him while 
he was in for a short period. So I don't recall exactly. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know whether Philip Koritz was a member 
of the Communist Party? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. To my personal knowledge, he wasn't. 

Mr. Tavenner. To your personal knowledge he was not? 

Mr. Kimmel. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. You mean he w^as not identified with the Com- 
munist Party at Ste. Genevieve? 

Mr. Kimmel. No, he was not identified to me as a Communist by 
anyone. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you know whether or not he was a member of 
the Communist Party in North Carolina and engaged in Communist 
Party activities there? 

Mr. Kimmel. I don't know. 

Mr. Tavenner. Or in Boston? 

Mr. Kimmel. I don't know that either. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Koritz was shown by testimony before the 
committee, by a number of persons, to have been an active worker 
in the Communist Party in Boston. Pie was subpenaed before this 
committee about a year ago in connection with his activities in the 
National Commit tee to Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case. Herefused 
to testify on the ground that to do so might tend to incriminate him. 

But both verbal testimony and documentary evidence were produced 
at^that hearing showing the paj^ment of funds to him by the national 
organization of that committee that I mentioned, as well as his 
participation in Communist Party activities, one of which was to be 
one of the leaders in the organization of that committee in Boston. 

The committee for some time lias been making a study of activities 
of the Communist Party within the Mine, Mill, and Smelter Union. 
This was particularly true in its hearing held m Denver Alay 14. 

I want to ask you questions relating to Communist Party activities 
within the Mine, Mill, and Smelter at Ste. Genevieve while you held 
the various positions with that union. 

Were you a m.ember of the Communist Party at any time while 
3'ou held a position in the Mine, Mill, and Smelter Union? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kimmel. "\Miat dates are you referring to? 

Air. Tavenner. At any time. 

Mr. Kimmel. At any time. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kimmel. Well, I have signed the non-Communist affidavit, 
and I beheve that — ■ — 

Mr. Tavenner. I know you have, su*. That was in 1952. But 
my question was whether you have been a Communist Party member 
at any time. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

]SIr. CoHN. Is there a question before him at this time? 



5008 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. Would you repeat it, please. 

Mr. Tavenner. The question was: 

Have you been a member of the Communist Party at any time 
while holding any of the positions which you say you have held in the 
Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers Union? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I will refuse to answer that question under the privi- 
lege granted me under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, you indicated that at one time you signed 
an affidavit, the non-Communist affidavit required by law under the 
Taft-Hartley Act. 

Do you recall how many times you signed such an affidavit? 

Mr. Kimmel. No; I don't. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have 2 photostatic copies of such affidavits, one 
bearing date of February 27, 1952, and another bearing the date of 
May 4, 1953. Will you examine them, please, and state whether 
or not they are the affidavits which you signed? 

(Documents handed to the witness and his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. The affidavit under date of February 27 is marked 
for identification as "Kimmel Exhibit No. 1." And the other is 
marked for identification as "Kimmel Exhibit No. 2," to be filed for 
the information of the committee. 

Mr. Moulder. So ordered. 

Mr. CoHN. Pardon me. You said May 27. Is that what you 
mean? Or February 27? 

Mr. Tavenner. February 27 for the first one, and May 4 for the 
second one. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. CoHN. Pardon me. Is there a question now? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. 

Will you identify those documents as the non-Communist affidavits 
signed by you? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kimmel. They appear to be the affidavits. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party on 
February 27, 1952, the date of the signing of the first affidavit? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kimmel. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party on 
June 1, 1952? 

Mr. Kimmel. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party on 
January 1, 1950? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kimmel. I refuse to answer under the privilege granted me 
under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. January 1, 1951? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kimmel. For the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. You refuse to answer? 

Mr. Kimmel. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. So sometime between January 1, 1951, and 
January 1, 1952, there was a change in your situation, was there not, 
with respect to the Communist Party? 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5009 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was the date of that change? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now a member of the Communist Party? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiAiMEL. No. 

Mr. Moulder. May I ask how do you distinguish between your 
not being a member of the Communist Party and being a member of 
the Communist Party? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I don't know, sir. I have been in this courtroom for 
a couple of days now listening to the testimony, and I don't get the 
drift of how do joii identify yourself as belonging to the Communist 
Party. 

Mr. Moulder. Well, there are some people, according to oiu* in- 
formation and investigations that have been conducted and testimony 
that has been heard before the committee, who sometimes take the 
position that after they cease to be a dues-paying member and are 
removed from the active membership rolls, that they are then justified 
in saying that they are no longer a member of the Communist Party 
when, in fact and in truth insofar- as their philosophy and sympathy 
and cooperation with the Communist Party activities are concerned, 
they remain the same. 

I was asking j^ou the question as to whether or not you desu-e to 
give any explanation of why you ceased to be a member of the Com- 
munist Part}^, if you so did cease to be a member of the Communist 
Party. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. Well, I can't quite understand your explanation of 
it, sir. 

Mr. Moulder. I am askmg you for the explanation. 

Mr. KiMMEL. Well, you are telling me, didn't you, what constitutes 
membership in the Communist Party? 

Mr. Moulder. No. I say that is the interpretation and reasoning 
that some people give. You are here now as a witness and are given 
the opportunity of making a very patriotic and loyal American 
citizenship explanation of why you left the Communist Party, if you 
so desire to take advantage of that opportunity. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Moulder. If you have actually left the Communist Party. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. Sir, that explanation that you have given is still just 
a little beyond my comprehension. And, so, I will say this: that I 
have never said that I was a member of the Communist Party or 
that I left it. And so, with the inference that your question poses, 
I invoke the fifth amendment, which is for the innocent as well as the 
guilty. 

Mr. Scherer. Witness, did I understand you in answering Mr. 
Tavenner 's question as to your present membership in the Communist 
Party — didn't you answer his question saying that you were not a 
member of the party? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I did. 



5010 COMMUXIST ACTIV^ITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Ml-. ScHERER. Were you a member of the party yesterday? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. No, su'. 

Mr. ScHERER. Were you a member of the party last year? 

Mr. KiMMEL. No, sir. 

Mr. ScHERER. Were you a member 5 years ago? 

(The witness confers ^vith his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I claim my privilege under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. ScHERER. Were you a member of it 4 years ago? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I wasn't a member 4 years ago. 

Mr. ScHERER. Then Mr. Moulder, of course, was correct in asking 
you the questions he did. It is obvious that 3'ou have left the Com- 
munist Party between 4 and 5 years ago, and he just wanted to give 
you the opportunity to explain the circumstances under wiiich you 
left and why 3^011 left. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. CoHN. Pardon me, sir. Was that a question you were ad- 
dressing to hun? 

Air. ScHERER. Yes; it was a question. 

Mr. KiMMEL. Will you repeat the question, please. 

Mr. ScHERER. I said it is obvious from the recent answers you 
gave to the questions I just asked you that you left the Communist 
Party somewhere between 4 and 5 years ago from this day, or you 
contend that you left the party sometime between 4 and 5 years ago. 
Therefore, the committee was interested in knowing why 3'ou left 
and under what cu'cumstances 3'ou left the Communist Party. Will 
you tell us that? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Air. KiMMEL. I did not say that I left the Communist Party, and I 
invoke the fifth amendment. 

Mr. ScHERER. I know you didn't say that you left it, but I said 
that it was obvious from A^our answers that you did leave between 4 
and 5 years ago. You can't draw an^^ other conclusion than that 
from your testimony. 

My question is, if you want to tell us, what were the circumstances 
that caused you to leave the party? Do you want to tell us or not? 
You don't have to tell us. You can invoke the fifth amendment. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I don't want to say anything because I use the privi- 
lege of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. ScHERER. Thank you. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Kimmel, you would not answer as to whether 
you were a member of the Communist Party on January 1, 1951. 
You said 3'ou were not a mem.ber of the Communist Party on January 
1, 1952. Was there any change in your employment during that 
period of tune with Mine, Mill, and Smelter? 

Mr. KiMMEL. Any change in 1113^ employment? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. KiMMEL. Where? 

Air. Tavenner. With Mine, Alill, and Smelter. 

Air. Kimmel. No. 

Air. Tavenner. You held the same position straight through? 
There was no change? 

Air. Kimmel. Now let me get this straight. 



COaiMXJNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5011 

Mr. Tavexner. Well, you became an organizer for Mine, Mill, and 
Smelter at what date? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I can't say what date exactly. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is why I am asking 3^011 as to whether 
there was anj'^ change in your official relationship to Mine, Mill, and 
Smelter at any time during that period of 1 year to which you have 
not said yea or nay as far as membership in the Communist Party is 
concerned. 

Mr. KiMMEL. I don't believe there was an}'' change. 

Mr. Tavenner. You don't think there was an}' change. 

Let me ask you this: Were 3^ou a member of the Communist Party 
as late as December 1, 1951? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I decline to answer on the same privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now we are down to the month of December. 

January 1, 1952, you were not a member. December 1, 1951, you 
won't say. 

Now let me ask you this question: Were you advised by any of the 
leadership of the Aline, Mill, and Smelter Union that you should 
^vithdraw from the Communist Party in order that you might comply 
with the law requiring the filing of this non-Commimist affidavit of 
February 27, 1952? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. T.WENNER. So something happened in December of 1951 then, 
didn't it, which affects your testimony here today? 

Let me ask 3^ou if the Communist Party leadership gave jon any 
advice in December of 1951 as to what 3'ou should do as to your 
affiliation with the Communist Party in light of the fact that 3'ou were 
required by law to give this non-Communist affidavit. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I decline to answer under the privilege of the fifth 
amendment. 

Air. Tavenner. This was a very acute matter at the time or just a 
little before you signed this first affidavit, as to how Comm.unist 
Part}" members were going to get around signing the affidavit which 
would subject them to prosecution for perjury if they were stilJ 
members of the Communist Party. That was a very acute question, 
wasn't it? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. Did you say acute? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, acute; serious question. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. A question which provoked a great deal of argu^ 
ment and discussion within the Conmiunist Party and also within the 
leadership of the Mine, Mill, and Smelter Union. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer on the privilege of the fifth 
amendment. 

Mr. ScHERER. The fact is you merely formally resigned from the 
Communist Part}'- in order that you might sign this affidavit and not 
fear prosecution for perjury. You never really got out of the Com- 
munist Party, did 3'ou? You merely did it so you could freely sign 



5012 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

or at least feel free to sign this non-Communist affidavit as required 
by the Taft-Hartley law. Is that not right. Witness? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. ScHERER. Isn't that what happened in your case? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. ScHERER. Isn't that the reason you sparred with Mr. Moulder 
when he asked you the question about your leaving the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer under the privilege of the fifth 
amendment. 

Mr. ScHERER. It is clear to the committee that that is what hap- 
pened in 3'oiu" case because we know it has happened in many cases. 
It is obvious from the testimony that is what you did. I doubt 
whether you left the Communist Party actually. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Kimmel, that is a matter to which this com- 
mittee has given a great deal of thought and study. It was the basic 
consideration for this com.mittee's sponsorship of the 1954 amendment 
to the Internal Security Act. It was based on the belief by this com- 
mittee that this affidavit didn't mean anything if a member of the 
Communist Party resigned formall}^ or organizationally speaking, you 
might say, from the Communist Party, and yet retained his affiliation 
with the Communist Party. 

It is for that reason that this committee sponsored the legislation 
it did. And it is still considering the question. 

You are in a position, if you would tell us the facts in your own case 
or in cases that you have knowledge of, to be of great assistance to 
this committee and to the Congress. 

Now you made a very significant statement. You indicated to the 
chairman that there was some uncertainty in your own mind as to 
what constituted Communist Party membership. 

I am going to ask you whether or not you made that statement 
because, beginnhig with Febrviary 27, 1952, or shortly before that, it 
was considered that voii were no longer a member of the Communist 
Party organizationally speaking, but at the same time you were 
actually and in .fact just as much affiliated with it as you had been 
before. 

Isn't that the reason for your statement to the chairman? 

(The witness confers ^\^th his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer that. 

Air. Moulder. May I ask one question, Air. Tavenner. I am 
sorry to interrupt. 

During the year of 1951 did you make contributions to the Com- 
munist Party, financial contributions? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. "Well, I refuse to answer that question under the 
fifth amendment. 

Air. AIouLDER. During the year of 1952 did you make financial 
contributions to the Communist Party? 

Air. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Air. AIouLDER. During the year of 1953 did you make any financial 
contributions to the Commimist Party? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 



COMJVIUNIST ACTR^ITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5013 

Mr. jNIouLDER. During the your of 1954 did you make financial 
contributions to the Communist Party? 

(The witness confers with his counseh) 

Mr. KiMMEL. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Actually the only difference in your affiliation with 
the Communist Party during the year 1953 and 1950 or 1951 was 
that you were not considered on the rolls of the Communist Party, 
isn't it? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

^Ir. ScHERER. In 1951 it was formal dues, and in 1952 and 1953 
donations. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is right. 

Mr. Moulder. The question was whether he was making any 
financial contributions to the Communist Party at the time ho signed 
the non-Communist affidavit, which you referred to, and after he 
signed it. 

(The witness confers Avith his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Kimmel, were 3^ou acquainted with Loyal 
Hammack? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kimmel. I refuse to answer under the privilege of the fifth 
amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Hammack testified in executive session before 
this committee. He stated that he had himself been a member of 
the Communist Party, that he had withdi'awn from the Communist 
Party and was no longer connected with it, and he gave the com- 
mittee certain information that he had, and this is taken from his 
testimony: 

Mr. Hammack testified that he gave his Communist Party dues on 
one occasion to you to deliver to Mr. Koch, I believe it was, who was 
the organizational secretary of the Communist Party. And I asked 
him: 

Did you tell Mr. Kimmel that those Avere Communist Party dues? 

Mr. Hammack said: 

Yes, sir, I did. 

Then Mr. Hammack proceeded to state: 

In that conversation Mr. Kimmel told me that he had not paid his dues for 
some time but that he was in organization work for Mine, Mill, and Smelter I be- 
lieve at Herculaneum, Mo., and that work done for the organization of Mine, Mill, 
and Smelter would serve in lieu of paying dues. Those were not his exact words, 
but his meaning. 

Will you tell the committee, please, whether or not that is true, 
that you were relieved to some extent from the payment of dues be- 
cause you worked for and performed organization work in Mine, Mill, 
and Smelter. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

]VIr. Kimmel. I refuse to answer that on the privilege of the fifth 
.amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions, Mr. Chan-man. 

Mr. Moulder. Any questions, Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no questions. 

Mr. Moulder. The witness is excused. 



5014 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, ]M0,, AREA 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, before we proceed with the next wit- 
ness that Mr. Tavenner desires to call, I would like to ask you to recall 
the witness Hershel Walker. There were a few questions I forgot to 
ask him. 

Mr. Moulder. Is Mr. Walker in the courtroom? 

Mr. Walker, since you were excused as a witness I would like for you 
to be sworn again. 

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

Mr. Walker. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF HERSHEL JAMES WALKER, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, R. L. WITHERSPOON -Recalled 

Mr. ScHERER. Ma}' I ask the witness a few questions? 

Mr. Moulder. Yes, Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Walker, I l^ave before me a pamphlet that was 
distributed here in St. Louis sj^ortly before the committee came, 
and it mav be presentlv being distributed, entitled "Don't Trv to 
Lose Us. Let's Talk Some About Civil Riglits." 

You were one of tlie three authors of this pami^hlet, were you not? 

(Tlie witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. Mav^ I see it? 

Mr. Scherer. Yes. 

(Document handed to the witness and his counsel.) 

(Tile witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Scherer. Will you answer the question? 

Mr. Walker. Would you ask the question over again? 

Mr. Scherer. I just asked wliether or not you, Hershel Walker, 
Ella Mae Posey and Romey Hudson were not tlie autliors of this 
pamphlet. 

(The v/itness ■: (Pilfers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. That is my name there. 

Mr. Scherer. I am sorry. Did you say tliat is yoin- name or you 
are one of the authors of the pamphlet? 

Mr. Walker. I helped on it. 

Mr. Scherer, You helped write it, and you thi'ce signed it? 

Mr. Walker. I am just sj^eaking for myself as for the signing. 

Mr. Scherer. You know Romey Hudson and the other person who 
signed the pamphlet? 

Mr. Walker. Well, I say I am only speaking for mvself. 

Mr. Scherer. I am asking you the question: you know Romey 
Hudson, do you not? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that. 

Mr. Scherer. You said 3^ou helped write it. And I want to know 
whether the other two persons, Romey Hudson and Ella Mae Posey, 
whose names appear at the end of this pamphlet along with yours, 
also helped write the painphlet. 

Mr. Walker. I still refuse to answej- that. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, I ask that you direct the witness to 
answer the question. Since he admits he is one of the authors of the 
pamphlet he certainly now must answer. He can't use the fifth 
amendment as to who the others were. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5015 

Mr. IMouLDEK. The witness is dii'ected to answer, and it is ex- 
plained to you in giving this dii-ection it is not in the spirit of a threat 
but to advise you of the dangers, that we do not accept your response 
to the question, and to advise you of the dangers of possibh' being 
guilty in so refusing, of contempt of Congress. 

Mr. Walker. I decline for the same reason. 

Mr. Moulder. You still decline to answer for the reasons stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. You, Romey Hudson and Ella Mae Posey are all 
three active members of the Communist Party at this very moment, 
are you not? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that — same reasoiL 

Mr. Scherer. And this pamphlet was distributed in Negro neigh- 
borhoods, was it not? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. Well, as far as I know, it wasn't confined to Negro 
neighborhoods, as far as I know. 

Mr. Scherer. I didn't ask j'^ou whether it was confined. Was it 
distributed in Negro neighborhoods? 

Mr. Walker. Some of them. 

Mr. Scherer. How many of these were published? 

Mr. Walker. I don't know. 

Mr. Scherer. Were they paid for by the Conmiunist Party? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Scherer. Did you pay for them? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that for the same reason. 

Mr. Scherer. I ask that you du"ect the witness to answer both of 
my questions since he has admitted being one of the authors of this 
publication. 

Mr. Moulder. The witness is so du-ected to answer. 

Mr. Walker. I decline for the same reason. 

Mr. Scherer. This pamplilet is designed to incite racial animosities; 
is it not? 

Mr. Walker. Is you telling me or do you want me to — • — 

Air. Scherer. Yes; I am asking you a question. 

Is this pamplilet not designed to incite racial animosities against 
this committee and particularly against Mr. Moidder? 

Mr. Walker. Oh, you want a "Yes" or "No" answer. Or do you 
want to make a statement about it? 

Mr. Scherer. I want you to say 3'es or no. I am asking you if it 
is not true that this pamphlet was designed to incite racial animosities. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Walker. No. The pamphlet was designed to let the people 
know, to give them some understanding about the committee. And 
some additional additions as for civil rights, and which myself feel in 
particular, with a person on this panel that signed the Southern }vlani- 
festo, which, in my opinion, was subversive activit^^ within itself. 

Mr. Scherer. You say it was designed to acquaint people with 
civil rights? And yet j^ou attack Mr. Moulder. 

Mr. Walker. Facts about civil rights. 

Mr. Scherer. You attack Mr. Moulder and the committee, 
inferring that he is opposed to civil rights; do you not? 

Mr. Walker. Inferring that who is opposed to civil rights? 



5016 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr, ScHERER. You start your pamphlet: 

Congressman Moulder, a Democrat of the 1 1th District of Missouri, has charged 
the undersigned Negroes as being un-American. 

Was he correct? If he did charge you with being a Communist, is 
he correct in that allegation? 

Mr. Walker. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. ScHERER. I am sure that he didn't know any more than I did 
that you even existed before you took the stand. But never- 
theless 

Mr. Walker. Could I ask a question? 

Mr. Scherer. No. You are here to answer them. 

Then you continue: 

What is he investigating us for? We are all Negroes. We know who the real 
un- Americans are. 

And then you talk about lynchings in Alabama and tie Mr. Moulder 
in with being opposed to civil rights, and an oppressor of civil rights 
all through this pamplilet. 

I just want you to know that I saw this pamphlet when I first came 
to St. Louis. Yesterday I happened to be back in Washington, and 
I checked Mr. Moulder's voting, and do you know that he has con- 
sistently — and he has been in Congress a long time, longer than I have — 
voted for every civil rights bill that you Negroes back. And then 
you attack him like this in a pamphlet like this, and the whole com- 
mittee, and leave the impression that this committee is investigating 
Negroes. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Scherer. And I might say that I come from an industrial 
district where I have a large percentage of Negroes in my district. 
And we are not investigating Negroes as such. We are investigating 
Negroes who are members of the Communist Party and who are 
attempting to infiltrate Negro organizations for the purpose of getting 
them to support Communist Party activities. And the Negroes in 
my congressional district gave me their award for being interested in 
minority groups on two different occasions. And yet you charge me 
as a member of this committee with being opposed to civil rights. 

Do you think you helped the Negro cause by doing such a thing to 
Members of Congress who have supported the Negroes in their fight 
for civil rights? 

You are not interested in Negro civil rights. You are interested 
in promoting disunity because you are a Communist. 

Mr. Moulder. May I intervene by saying, as to your statement, 
that we are not investigating Negro Communists as such, but we are 
investigating communism wherever it may exist, regardless of race, 
creed, or color. 

Mr. Scherer. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. I think, Mr. Chairman, it might be well pointed 
out that as a result of our investigations over many years we have not 
found that the Negro people have fallen for the Communist line. 

Mr. Scherer. I wanted to say that because I think when we were 
questioning one of the witnesses in executive session on Saturday, I 
pointed out that the Negroes as such, more than any other group, 
have resisted the determined efforts of the Communist conspiracy to 
infiltrate their organizations. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5017 

Mr. Moulder. Om* investigations and the records of the committee 
so show. 

Mr. ScHEREK. Without any question. 

And prominent Negro citizens have testified to that fact. 

So you are doing harm to the Negroes by such things as this. But 
you are doing it because you are a member of tlie Communist con- 
spiracy and not interested primarily in civil rights, but in stnring up 
racial trouble. 

Air. Moulder. One of the few. 

Mr. ScHERER. One of the few, yes. Stirring it up because you are 
a Communist, stirring up racial dissention in order to promote the 
Communist cause. That is part and parcel of the Communist pro- 
gi-am. 

I think the Negroes of this community should resent activity upon 
the part of men like you. 

Mr. Moulder. Mr. Tavenner, do you have an}' questions? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, sh. 

Mr. Moulder. The witness is excused. 

Call the next witness, please. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Linus Wampler. 

Mr. Moulder. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony which 
you are about to give before the subcommittee will be the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Wampler. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF LINUS E. WAMPLER, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

JOSEPH COHN 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your name, please. 

Mr. Wampler. Linus E. Wampler. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted for the record that the same counsel is 
accompanying this witness as appeared for Mr. George Kinimel. 

When and where were you born, \Iy. Wampler? 

Mr. Wampler. I was born in Madison County, Mo., on Julv 31, 
1917. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliere do you now reside? 

Mr. W\\MPLER. In Flat River, Mo. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you been a resident of Flat River? 

Mr. Wampler. Oh, I have lived in that vicinity just about all my 
life, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what your 
formal educational training has been? 

Mr. Wampler. My education is 12 years of schooling. 

Mr. Tavenner. \\^iat has been your employment since 1940? 

Mr. Wampler. From 1940 up until 1946 "'l worked for the St. 
Joseph Lead Co. at River Alines, Mo., in the office. Since July 15, 
1946, I have been workmg for the International Union of Mine, 
Mill, and Smelter Workers. 

Mr. Tavenner. Up until the present time? 

Mr. Wampler. Yes, sii'. 

Mr. Tavenner. In what capacities have you worked for the Mine, 
Mill, and Smelter Union? 

Air. Wampler. I have been an international representative, and am 
at the present time. I have also been a member of the executive 
board of the International Union of Mine, Alill, and Smelter Workers. 



5018 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, over what 
period of time you were a member of the executive board? 

Mr. Wampler. From January 1, 1954, until June 30, 1955. I be- 
lieve that is correct, su". 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell us, please, with what companies the 
Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers have bargaining contracts in your 
district? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. Will you repeat the question, please? 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, with what 
companies the Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers has bargaining rights 
in your district of the Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers? 

\h\ Wampler. The National Lead Co., at Frederickton, Mo.; the 
Valley Dolomite Corp., of Bonne Terre, Mo.; the National Lead Co., 
at Baxter Springs, Ivans.; and the Humboldt Brick & Tile Co., at 
Humboldt, Kans. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Wampler, are you acquainted with a person 
by the name of Kenneth Eckert? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer that question on the basis of 
the fifth amendment. To answer a question on such an individual 
as that would degrade me, and, tlierefore, I decline to answer on the 
basis of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. ScHERER. Just a minute. 

Wliat was that answer? 

A^liat was the question now? 

Mr. Tavenner. 'Wliether or not the witness was acquainted with 
Kenneth Eckert. 

And may I say to the witness, so that he may confer with his 
counsel if he desires, that the case of Walker versus Brown in the 
Supreme Court of the United States has held that the fact, if it be a 
fact, that to answer a question might tend to degrade one is in no 
sense a matter of defense to the refusal to answer. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Air. ScHERER. That is the reason I asked what his answer was. 

I ask that you direct the witness to answer tlve question. W^e do 
not accept his answer namely, that to answer the question miglit de- 
grade him. 

Mr. Moulder. Tlie witness is so directed to answer. 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer on tlie basis of tlie fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it a fact that in 1950 there was a liearing by the 
CIO relating to Communist Part}' activities on the part of Mine, Mill 
and Smelter Union which resulted in the expulsion of the Mine, Mill 
and Smelter from the CIO? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Air. Wampler. That is wliat I understand. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a witness in that hearing? 

Mr. Wampler. No, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do 3"ou know whether Mr. Eckert was? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Air. Wampler. I am not sure. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have before me a copy of the testimony of Mr. 
Eckert before the CIO investigating committee given in January and 
Febr\iary of 1950. I will read onl}' a small part of his testimony: 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5019 

Before outlining to you the testimony which I want to give, which I tliink will 
establish, insofar as one witness can establish anything definitely, let nie say that, 
first of all, it is not to show that the Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers followed the 
Communist Party line because that is not even debatable it is so obvious. They 
followed every twist and turn of the Communist Party line at any time. And it 
has had many turns: tlie era before Hitler signed the pact with Stalin; the era 
preceding June 22; and all the various twists and turns. That is a matter of 
record. And it is very plain to any fair-minded person who wants to compare 
both records, the Daily Worker and the union paper, that there is no difference 
whatsoever in any way at any time in the policies that have been advocated by 
the Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers and the policies advocated by the Daily- 
Worker, the official organ of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Eckert, in the course of his testimony, admitted his own former 
Communist Party membership, his official positions in the Mine, 
Mill and Smelter Union. He testified as to various Communist 
Party activities that he himself engaged in, including that of l)eing an 
organizer of the Trade Union Unity League, which was notorious at 
one time. 

He testified in the course of this hearing that he took part in bring- 
ing about the merger of the die casters with the Mine, Mill ami Smelter 
Union for the purpose of strengthening the position of Reid Robinson 
in the Mine, Mill and Smelter Union as an official. That is, to 
strengthen his Communist support. 

Now the committee, beginning May 14, 1956, heard a number of 
witnesses who now hold official positions in the Mine, Mill and Smelter 
Union. They were heard in Denver. One of them was Bernard 
W. Stern, an international official; Harold C. Sanderson, also an 
international official; Graham Dolan; Rudolph B. Cook, who worked 
in international headquarters; Anthony Morton; Morris Wright, who 
was an official with the local; Alfredo Aloiitoya; a local official. All of 
those persons other than Mr. Dolan refused to answer material 
questions relating to communism. 

Mr. Dolan freely testified as to Communist Party affiliations. 

Here in district 4, I believe, of the Mine, Mill and Smelter Union 
you are one of the top officials of the Mine, Mill and Smelter in this 
area. We desire to ask you questions regarding any knowledge you 
mav have of the part that the Communist Party plays and has pla3^ed 
in the functioning of Mine, Mill and Smelter. Are you willing to 
cooperate with the committee in giving it such information as you 
have in this field? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I will answer any legitimate question which does 
not infringe upon my rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. Very well, sir. 

Are you acquainted with Mr. George Kimmel who preceded you 
to the witness stand just a short time ago? 

Mr. Wampler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. You are acquainted with the fact that Mr. Kimmel 
was an official of your union, Aline, Mill and Smelter? 

Mr, Wampler. He was a local union president, and for a time he 
was an international representative. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he known to 30U to be a member of the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Wampler. No, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you at an}^ time been a member of the 
Communist Part}^? 

81594 — 56 — pt. 4 3 



5020 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I dechne to answer that question on the basis of 
the filth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what the 
"tristate" of Missouri is. 

Mr. Wampler. Well, the tristate area of Missouri is usually con- 
sidered to be corners of the States of Missouri, Kansas, and Oldahoma. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is Joplin located within that general area? 

Mr. Wampler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you at any time been stationed at Joplin? 

Tvlr. Wampler. I worked for a period of time in that area. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with Ralph Shaw? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer for the same reasons previously 
given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know that Ralph Shaw was the Communist 
Party organizer — organizer at various dates between 1944 and 1948 of 
the district comprising Missouri and other areas, other States? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline for the same reasons previously given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you ever attend a meeting of the Tristate 
Branch of the Communist Party at Joplin, Mo.? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer for the same reason previously 
given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether or not 
at any time after 1946 you, as an official of the Mine, Mill, and Smelter 
Union, paid money into the treasury of the Communist Party for the 
use of the Communist Party, whether they were denominated dues 
or not? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. ScHERER. And how much. 

Mr. Wampler. Will you please restate the question. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you recall whether you, while an official of 
Mine, Mill, and Smelter Union paid money, either as dues or otherwise, 
into the treasury of the Communist Party or for the benefit of the 
Communist Party? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. The question is very broad, and, therefore, I invoke 
the fifth amendment and decline to answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. If that is the reason, it is a broad question and 
possibly I can break it down a little. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I am sorry, sir. I decline to answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. You just won't answer regardless of whether it is 
broad or narrow. Is that it? 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer the question for the reasons 
previously given. 

Mr. Tavenner. What I am getting at is this: 

Was there any plan by which persons on a high level of employment 
in the Mine, Mill, and Smelter Union were expected to pay a percent- 
age of their salaries or any other sum of money to the Communist 
Party? 



COMIMTJNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5021 

(The \\'itness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. Not to my Ivnowledge, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did the Communist Party endeavor to obtain 
payment of money from officials of the Mine, Mill, and Smelter as 
contributions or as dues? 

(The mtness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. Not to my knowledge, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did j^ou at any time give a percentage of your 
salarv to Kalph Shaw or anj^ other representative of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Wampler. No, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you pay dues to Ralph Shaw or any other 
member of the Communist Party, not on a percentage basis? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer, sir, for the reasons previously 
given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Wampler. No, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party in 
1946? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer for the reasons previously given. 

Mr. Tavenner. I believe, due to the positions that you have held 
in the union, it has been necessary that you sign a non-Communist 
affidavit in order to comply with the provisions of the Taft-Hartley 
Act. 

Mr. Wampler. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you recall the first affidavit that you signed? 
That is, the date of it? 

Mr. Wampler. Not offhand. I couldn't say, sir, 

Mr. Tavenner. The first that I have bears the date of December 
16, 1953, which is marked for identification "Wampler Exhibit No. 
1." Will you examine it, please, and state whether or not it is your 
affidavit. 

(Document referred to was marked "Wampler Exhibit No. 1" for 
identification.) 

(Document handed to the witness and his counsel.) 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. And after you have examined it I will hand yor a 
second affidavit to examine, which is marked "Wampler Exhibit 
No. 2." 

(The document referred to was marked "Wampler Exhibit No. 2" 
for indentification.) 

(Document handed to the witness and his counsel.) 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Moulder. The record should show that the witness has exam- 
ined "Wampler Exhibits Nos. 1 and 2." And I believe the question 
was asked as to whether or not they were true and correct copies of 
the original affidavits which you signed. 

Mr. Wampler. They appear to be photostatic copies. 

Mr. AlouLDER. Are they true and correct photostatic copies of the 
originals which you signed? 

Mr. Wampler. Weil, to that I couldn't say, but they appear to 
be, sir. 



5022 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. jMouLDER. Wlien does Exhibit No. 1 show that you signed the 
affidavit? 

Mr. Wampler. December 16, 1953. 

Mr. Moulder. Wliat date appears on Exhibit No. 2? 

Mr. Wampler. October 19, 1954. 

Mr. Moulder. Noa^', Mr. Scherer, do you wish to proceed with the 
question? 

Mr. Scherer. Were you a member of the Communist Party on the 
day you signed Exliibit No. 1? 

Mr. Wampler. No, sir. 

Mr. Scherer. Were you a member of the Communist Party the 
day before you signed it? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Moulder. May I see the exhibits? 

Mr. Wampler. I decUne to answer for tlie reasons previously given. 

Mr. Scherer. Do you mean to tell us that you were not a member 
of the Communist Party on the day you fu-st signed that first non- 
Communist affidavit under the Taft-Hartley law, but you refuse to 
say whether you were a member of the Communist Party the day 
before? Is that right? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Scherer. The fact is, witness, you resigned from the Commu- 
nist Party the day before so that you felt free to execute this affidavit 
as required by the Federal law, did you not? Isn't that a fact? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer for the reasons previously given. 

Mr. Scherer. The truth is that you merely formally severed your 
connection with the party but actually remained a Communist. 
Isn't that right? 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer for the reasons previously given. 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to offer the documents in evidence, and 
ask that they be marked "Wampler Exhibits Nos. 1 and 2," respec- 
tively, for the records for committee. 

Mr. Moulder, The documents referred to by counsel will be so 
marked. 

(The documents referred to, marked "Wampler Exhibits Nos. 1 and 
2," were filed for the information of the committee.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether or not 
you followed a plan of the Communist Party to have persons in 
positions such as you occupied resign from the Communist Party, 
organizationally speaking, but yet maintain affiliation with the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Wampler. Not to my knowledge, sir. 

Mr. Scherer. Did you do that? 

Mr. Wampler. Did I do what? 

Mr. Scherer. What ]Mr. Tavenner asked about the Communist 
Party plan — resign from the organization. 

Mr. Wampler. I dechne to answer that for the reason previously 
stated. 

Mr. >MouLDER. But retain their Communist Part}" activities. Is 
that the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. In other words, just formally resign organi- 
zationwise but otherwise 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5023 

Mr. Moulder. Retain their contacts and participation and ac- 
tivities with the party. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is riglit. 

(The witness confers with his counseL) 

Mr. Wampler. Is there a question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Wampler. Excuse me. Would you repeat it, please. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you resign from the Comnnmist Party just 
shortly prior to the date you first signed a non-Communist affidavit 
in order to comph^ technically with the law so that you could not be 
prosecuted for perjurv, but yet maintain your affiliations with the 
Communist Partv, though not as an actual dues-paying member? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Air. Wampler. I decline to answer, sir, for the reasons pi-eviously 
given. 

Mr. Tavenner. What are your duties as aji international repre- 
sentative? 

Mr. Wampler. yij duties as an international representative are 
to carry out the policy and program of tlie international union that 
is laid down in convention, that is duly assembled each year in various 
cities throughout the United States, by the rank and file of our union 
who make the policy of our union and program of our union. 

Also it is my duty as an international representative to negotiate 
with companies for wages, hours of work, and working conditions, 
and settle grievances if possible, and the other work of an international 
organizer, of organizing the unorganized. 

Mr. Tavenner. That gives you the right of access to the plants, 
does it not, in the settlement of grievances? 

Mr. Wampler. Into the company offices, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. At any rate, it places you on a very close and 
confidential basis with employees who do have access to the plant 
if A'ou are to settle theu" grievances? 

Mr. Wampler. Sure. We have to meet with, the companies along 
with the grievance representatives, sir, in order to settle differences. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether or not 
these plants which you haA'e said are plants with which Mine, Mill 
and Smelter has bargaining rights are engaged hi the manufacture of 
defense materials for the Government? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I don't know, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is the chief product, if you know, of National 
Lead? 

Mr. Wampler. At which plant, sir? 

Mr. Tavenner. At Fredericktown, sav. That is one of the plants, 
isn't it? 

Mr. Wampler. Yes, that is one of the plants. 

Mr. Tavenner. ^Miat do they manufacture? 

Mr. Wampler. They mine copper; they mine lead; the}' mine 
nickel; they mine cobalt. And let's see • 

Mr. Tavenner. Cobalt is a highly strategic material, is it not? 

Mr. Wampler. That is what I understand. 

Mr. Tavenner. In fact, all of them are. 

Ml". Wampler. I suppose thev are. 



5024 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mt. Tavbnnbr. In fact, most of the cobalt that is used in the 
manufacture of defense materials has to be imported, does it not? 
Most of it comes from the Belgian Congo? 

Mr. Wampler. Sir, I couldn't say about that. 

Air. Tavenner. There is very little of it produced in this country. 
You are aware of that, aren't 3^ou? 

Mr. Wampler. I am not too well aware of where and what metals 
are produced, su*. 

Mr. Tavenner. All right. 

You said 3"0u were acquainted with George Kimmel? 

jVIr. Wampler. Yes, sii\ 

Mr. Tavenner. I failed to ask him, and possibly you can tell me: 

You are aware of the fact that in 1948 Mr. Kimmel filed for the 
office of State auditor for the State of Missouri on the Progressive 
Party ticket? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

]\Ir. Wampler. Sure, I am aware of that. It was in all the papers 
and publicized. 

Mr. Tavenner. You know from a contact closer to the situation 
than the papers, do you not? 

Mr. Wampler. Well, sir, I know that he did run for that office. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your position in the convention in 
which he was nominated? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

^Ir. Wampler. What convention are you talking about? 

Mr. Tavenner. Of the Progi'essive Party. 

Mr. Wampler. YHiere at, sir? 

Mr. Tavenner. In Jefferson City. 

Mr. Wampler. When? 

Mr. Tavenner. 1948. 

Mr. ScHERER. Or whenever it was. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. Would you repeat the question, please. 

Mr. Tavenner. \Yliat position did you occupy in the State con- 
vention of the Progressive Party which was held in 1948? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer, sir, for the reasons previously 
given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Weren't you on the nominating committee? 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer, sir, for the reasons previously 
given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Weren't you on the credentials committee of the 
national convention which met in Philadelphia in July 1948? 

(The ^vitness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. In July 1948, were you a member of the Com- 
munist Party? 

(The witness confers vAih his counsel.) 

]\Ir. Wampler. I decline to answer for the reasons previously given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at 
the time of the holding of the State convention of the Progressive 
Party at Jefferson City in 1948? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer for the reasons previously 
given. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5025 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you enter into discussions or conferences with 
members of the Communist Party regarding the selection of candi- 
dates for the Progressive Party in the State of Missouri? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer for the reasons previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did the Communist Party in the State of Missoiu-i 
counsel and advise and direct the operations of the Progressive Party 
when it was formed in this State? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer for the reasons previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is all I desire to ask this witness, Mr. 
Chairman. 

Mr. Moulder. Mr. Scherer, any questions? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no questions. 

Mr. Moulder. You stated that on the day you signed the non- 
Communist Party affidavit that you were not a member of the 
Communist Party. You so stated in the affidavit, and you reaffirm 
that hj 3^our testim^ony here today. 

When the question was asked you as to whether or not you were a 
member of the Communist Party on the day before you signed the 
affidavit you declined to answer, claiming the privilege under the 
fifth amendment. 

Therefore, I am asking you, in order to give you the opportmiity to 
make any explanation or clarification which you may want to make as 
to the differences in the tj^pe of answers that j^ou have given to the 
committee 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I do not wish to add anything to my previous 
answer, sir. 

Mr. Moulder. I will ask you the same question I asked another 
witness. 

Do you believe that leaving the participation in organizational 
work in the Communist Party but still retaining contact and partici- 
pating actively in Commmiistic or Communist Party affaii-s would 
justify an answer that you were not a member of the Communist 
Party? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I declme to answer, sir, for the reasons previously 
given. 

Mr. Moulder. The point I am trjdng to make and also clarify is: 
assummg that a person was an active member of the Commimist 
Party on a certain date, say in 1953, and carried a card as a member 
of the party and actively participated in its affairs at party meetings, 
and paid dues and gave it his active attention, but then, the next day, 
would surrender his Communist Party card and send in a letter of 
resignation but stiU retained his contacts and actively participated 
and attended Communist Party affairs and probably continued to 
make contributions, would that justify him in taking the position that 
he was no longer a member of the Communist Party? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. I decline to answer, sir, for the reasons previously 
siven. 



5026 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. MouLDEK. Did you continue to contribute money or time or 
services to the Commuiiist Party after you signed the non-Communist 
Party affidavits referred to in the testimony, which you identified and 
which have been marked "Wampler Exhibits Nos. 1 and 2"? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Wampler. No, su*. 

Mr. Moulder. Did you at any time confer with anyone or seek the 
advice of or follow the directions of any leaders, officials or members of 
members of the Communist Party in connection with your duties and 
work as an. International representative of the Mme, Mill, and Smelter 
Workers Union? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

%h\ Wampler. Not to my knowledge, sir. 

Mr. Moulder. Any further questions? 

Air. Tavenner. No, sir. 

Mr. Moulder. Any questions, Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. No questions. 

Mr. AIouLDER. The ■\\dtness is excused. 

jMr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, may I recall another witness for 
just 1 or 2 questions? 

Mr. Moulder. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to recall Mr. George Kimmel. 

Will A'^oii come forward, please, sir? 

Mr. Moulder. Will 3^ou be sworn, please, again? 

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

Mr. Kimmel. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF GEORGE KIMMEL, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
JOSEPH COHN— Recalled 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Kimmel, I hand you a photostatic copy of a 
document entitled "Declaration of Candidate for Nomination," pur- 
portedly signed by George Kimmel. Will you examine it, please, and 
state whether or not that is a copy of your declaration? 

(Document handed to the witness and his counsel.) 

Mv. Tavenner. It is marked for identification "Kimmel Exhibit 
No. 3." 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kimmel. It appears to be. 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to mtroduce it in evidence and ask that it 
be marked "Kimmel Exhibit No. 3" for retention in the committee 
files. 

I hand you now an additional document marked "Receipt for filmg 
fee." Will you examine it, please, and state whether or not it is a 
photostatic copy of the original receipt which was given? 

(Document handed to the witness and his counsel.) 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kimmel. I refuse to answer on the privilege granted me b}^ the 
fifth am en d m en t . 

Mr. Tavenner. You admitted bhat you filed your declaration. 
Weren't you required to pay a fee cf $100? 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5027 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

IVIr. KiMMEL. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you not admit that you paid the fee that you 
were required to pay upon filing? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to offer the document in evidence, and ask 
that it be marked "Kunmel Exhibit No. 4" for retention in the 
committee files. 

Mr. Moulder. The docnnients referred to by counsel as "Kimmel 
Exhibits Nos. 3 and 4," respectively, are so received. 

(The documents referred to, marked "Kimmel Exhibits Nos. 3 
and 4," were filed lor the information of the committee.) 

Mr. Scherer. What fee was that you are talking about? 

Mr. Tavenner. It is a fee of $100 required to be paid upon filing 
his declaration for the office of State auditor of the State of Missouri 
on the Progressive Party ticket. 

Mr. Scherer. Maybe he didn't pay it. Maybe the Communist 
Party paid it. 

Mr. Tavenner. Who paid your $100 filing fee? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Scherer. Did he say he did? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, he hasn't said. He won't answer. 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer imder the privilege of the fifth 
amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Let me ask you this: 

Wasn't it actually paid by your local of the Mine, Mill, and Smelter 
Union? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer under the privilege of the fifth 
amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. And isn't the real reason why you refuse to answ^er 
the fact that the Communist Party manipidated this whole thing to 
have you run on the Progressive ticket and to use your local union to 
pay the $100 filing fee? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Isn't it also true that the rank-and-file members 
of your local knew nothing about your Communist Party associations 
and affiliations? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. vScHERER. Or to use their dues to pay for this fee? 

Mr. KiMMEL. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Weren't you instrumental in having your local 
union pay as much as $1,000 to the expenses of the campaign that 
fall for the Progressive Party? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. KiMMEL. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did they contribute any sum? 

Air. KiMMEL. Nothing that I know of. 

Mr. Tavenner. Nothing that you know of. 

Have you traveled abroad? 

Mr. KiMMEL. No, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Moulder. The witness is excused. 

And the committee will stand in recess until 10 minutes after 
2 o'clock. 



5028 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

(Whereupon, at 12:40 p. m., the subcommittee was recessed, to be 
reconvened at 2:10 p. m., there being present at the time of the recess 
Representatives Moulder and Scherer.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION, FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 1958 

(The subcommittee was reconvened at the expiration of the recess, 
at 2:25 p. m., there being present at the time of reconvening Repre- 
sentatives Morgan M. Moulder and Gordon H. Scherer.) 

Mr. Moulder. The committee will come to order. 

Call your next witness, please. 

Mr. Tavenner. Dr. John Rutledge. 

Mr. Moulder. Dr. Rutledge, will you hold up your right hand and 
be sworn. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony which you are about to 
give before the subcommittee vnU. be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Dr. Rutledge. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. JOHN F. RUTLEDGE 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your name, please. Doctor? 

Dr. Rutledge. John F. Rutledge. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you spell your last name. 

Dr. Rutledge. R-u-t-1-e-d-g-e. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you reside. Dr. Rutledge? 

Dr. Rutledge. Crystal City, Mo. 

Mr. Tavenner. Dr. Rutledge, it is the practice of the committee 
to advise all witnesses appearing before it that they have a right to 
counsel, and that they have the right to confer with counsel at any 
tune dm'ing their testimony if they so desire. 

When and where were you born, Dr. Rutledge? 

Dr. Rutledge. I was born in Illinois, November 21, 1896. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what your 
formal educational training has been. 

Dr. Rutledge. I graduated in medicine at St. Louis University 
in the year 1920, and numerous short postgraduate courses since, but 
no more formal. 

Mr. Tavenner. You are a practicing physician at this time? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are 3^ou a specialist in any field or is it general 
practice that you are engaged in? 

Dr. Rutledge. I do general practice. 

Mr. Tavenner. How far is Crystal City from St. Louis? 

Dr. Rutledge. 37 or 38 miles. 

Mr. Tavenner. Dr. Rutledge, in the hearings conducted recently 
in Los Angeles the committee was amazed to learn the extent to which 
the Commimist Party m that area had taken over what was laiown as 
the Independent Progressive Party of America in that State. Evi- 
dence was heard prior to the hearmg that I am speaking of in Los 
Angeles to the effect that the Communist Party had discovered that 
it could not make any appreciable headway in pohtics under the 
Communist Party label, and, for that reason, the Communist Party 
sought means to put another ticket in the field without the Communist 
Partv label. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5029 

The testimony at this hearing in Los Angeles demonstrated that 
the Communist Party had worked out a plan in that State to make 
of this so-called political party a mass organization of a size that this 
country had never heard of before. 

We were in the course of hearing testimony relating to a section of 
the Hollywood group of the Communist Party made up entirely of 
musicians. The testimony showed that the members of this group 
of musicians, who were all Communists, were du-ected to change their 
party registration to that of the Independent Progressive Party of 
America. They were directed to serve that organization by getting 
out and circulating petitions in order to get the proper number of 
signers that had to be gotten under the laws of the State of California 
before the ticket could be put on the ballot. 

A great deal of evidence was introduced which gave the committee 
an insight into the use that the Communist Party was making of 
that organization. 

Now it has come to the attention of the committee in the course 
of this investigation that there were various political organizations 
here in Missouri which actually preceded the formation of the Pro- 
gressive Party m Missouri. I am not certain that I have the names 
of all of tliose organizations correct, but, according to our information, 
there was a National Citizens Political Action Committee, there was 
a Progressive Citizens of America Committee, there was a Missouri 
Citizens for Wallace Committee, and, then, finally, the Progressive 
Party, organized in 1948. 

Now, of course, we know that the Communist Party, in doing work 
in mass organization, has to utilize the services and the cooperation 
of many people who are not at all members of the Communist Party. 
It would not be a mass organization if that were not true. But what 
we are anxious to learn is to what extent, if any, the Communist 
Party did here substantially what was done in California. That is, 
organizing the foundation of these so-called political groups, influenc- 
ing their operations, and, in some cases, possibly dictating who the 
candidates should be and otherwise making the organizations function. 

I would like to know at the outset whether you have any knowledge 
of Communist Party activities and influence in the field that I have 
mentioned. 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I have. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you willing to give the committee the benefit 
of such information as you have? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I am, 
^ Mr. Tavenner. Let me ask you what is the basis of your informa- 
tion. You see, I am asking you now about Communist Party activ- 
ities within those groups. What is the basis of your knowledge on 
that subject? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. In the first place, I was a Communist myself from 
December 1943 to December 1948, and I was very active in the 
leadership of all of these organizations that you mentioned. 

Mr. Tavenner. Therefore, you were, as a member of the Commu- 
nist Party during that period of time, qualified to speak on the subject? 

Dr. Rutledge. I think so. 

Mr. Tavenner. And you are willing to do so? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes, sir; I am glad to. 



5030 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Air. Tavenner. Let us go back at this point, and tell the commit- 
tee, please", first, how you happened to become a member of the Com- 
munist Party, and the chcumstances under which you became a 
member. 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. That is a long story. It goes back into the 1930's. 
It begins with my change in attitude toward labor unions. 

I had the usual opposition to labor unions that most doctors have 
that think labor union leaders have horns. I live in a community 
where, back in the 1930's and earlier in the manufacture of glass, 
there was^ — they used a lot of sand, and some workers became ill with 
silicosis, and died. That condition has now been corrected; it doesn't 
exist any more, but it did then. And some of my patients died of 
silicosis. And I resigned my position as company physician through 
disagreement with theh policy in handling those cases. 

And, on learning there were two other cases after I resigned — the 
second case coincided with a labor union organizing drive — I became 
very closely associated for the first time in my life with labor-union 
leaders, and found out that some of them weren't such bad fellows 
after all. 

That was the first change. 

And then later on I was a rather ardent New Dealer. I was inter- 
ested in so-called socialized medicine, compulsory versus the voluntary 
health-insurance schemes, and I read a lot about different systems of 
practicing medicine in Europe, including a book by Dr. Henry 
Sigerist of Johns Hopkins on medicine in the Soviet Union, in the first 
chapter of which he states that it is impossible to understand the 
situation in the Soviet Union without understanding Marxism and 
knowing something about Russian history. 

At that time my interest in Russia was very negligible. The fact 
is during the Finnish war I was rather anti-Russian. But following 
the German attack on Russia, and especially following our entrance 
into the war, I was struck by the fact that most of the prognosticators 
on Russin resistance were all wrong, including om* Secretary of War 
at that time. 

I believe it was General Marshall who predicted that Russia would 
collapse within a month. 

And some leading ex-Communists and writers, such as Louis Fischer, 
predicted on the radio from London a week after Germany had at- 
tacked Russia that if Geimany didn't defeat Russia within a month's 
time that Russia would collapse from internal corruption and so forth. 

They were all wrong, and I wondered why. 

Then my interest was purely intellectual at that thne, to start 
with. 

So things went along and I was reading everything I could find on 
the subject of Marxism and what was going on in Russia and socialized 
medicine. And in August of 1943 the Communist Party fieldman, 
named Ralph Field, called my office, and, after quite a chat on his 
experiences as a veteran in Spam and so forth, he sold me on a sub- 
scription to the Sunday Worker. 

There were certain articles in the Sunday Worker which were not 
obtainalile in the ordinary newspapers, ordinary publications, espe- 
cially about the condition of the war, the situation of the war in 
Russia. 

Ralph called on me several times after that, and one day in October 
of 1943 I was in St. Louis browsing around. I used to have a habit 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IX ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5031 

of browsing around old bookstores. I ran into a bookstore on North 
Grand Avenue about a block and a half or 2 blocks south of the 
Communist Party hall, and I had never seen it there before. So I 
went in. 

And there was Ralph Field and Helen Musicl, whom he introduced 
me to. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was that the same Helen Musiel who appeared 
as a witness hero this morning? Or were you here? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I didn't hear her testimonv. I saw her in the 
hall. 

And they told me that the Communist Party had opened up this 
bookstore, and would have it for several months until they sold off 
theu' surplus literature. 

So I browsed around and bought some books and talked to them. 
And I went back a couple of times in 2 or 3 months that they had the 
store operating, and I became more and more interested in the subject 
of what was going in Russia, why Russia had had this unexpected 
resistance, and I was rather grateful to Russia for the fact that we 
were allies in World War II. And I wanted to find out what the 
score w^as. 

So in December of 1943 I went to the Comminiist Party hall. Once 
before that, in October — one of these times I went to the bookstore — 
Ralph says, "We are having a meeting toniglit at the Communist 
Party hall. I would like to invite you to attend." 

I said, "O. K. I have to leave early." 

He said, "That is all right. You can stay and listen to the speech 
that Herbert Benjamin is going to make." 

So I went up 

Mr. Tavekner. Herbert Benjamin was a functionary of tb.e Com- 
munist Party? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. He was secretary of the Communist Party in the 
State of Missouri at that time. That was somewhere in October of 
1943. 

And I went and seated myself in this liall on 1041 North Grand, 
and I listened to the — his speech was the first thing on the program. 

And then I left — when he came in he looked at me. He had never 
seen me before. He walked up and down and looked at me, and 
Ralph Field whispered sometliing in his ear. And then he went ahead 
and nothing was said. 

The next time I saw him then was in December of 1943 when I 
went to the Communist Party hall. And I told him that I had been 
tr\ing to study Marxism and communism — I was interested in 
Russia — on my own. But I wasn't getting any wl' ere, and I inider- 
stood tbat tbey offered courses in communism and Marxism, and I 
would like to talk to him about it. 

I asked him. first, how long he thought it wouh? take me. and he 
told me it would take me about 5 years. 

I thought that sounded like a long time. 

But we talked, and he asked my background, and we talked for an 
hour or an liour and a half, maybe longer. And finally he says^ 
"Well, if your are intei'ested in joining one of our study groups, why, 
we will sign you up." 

And lie said, "There are some questions I wnnt to ask you first- 
Do von believe in socialism?" 



5032 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

And I said that I didn't know that I beheved in sociahsm or not. 
I wanted to find out. 

And then he said, "Do you befieve in the right of the labor unions 
to freely organize?" 

I said that I did. 

He said then, "Do you believe in the rights of labor unions to engage 
actively in politics?" 

I said that I did. 

He said then, "Are a^ou in favor of maldng some peace between 
Russia and the United States after this war is over?" 

I said, "I certainly am." 

And, well, he thought that sounded pretty good. And we shook 
hands, and he said that — he had me subscribe to some literature, 
some magazines, publications, which I hadn't been taking before. 
One was called The Communist, and, another, Political Affairs. 
And another one was New Masses. And I also subscribed to the 
Daily Worker, and I also subscribed to Science and Society. 

And he said that I would hear from him within a short time, that 
I would later be assigned to a study group of supposedly professionals. 

About 10 days or 2 weeks later I received an engi'aved invitation 
to attend a reception for Mr. Louis Budenz out at the bookshop 
preceding a talk that Mr. Budenz was going to make at the Kael 
Auditorium. 

Of com'se, I went. 

He also had suggested that I join the bookshop as a member, which 
I did that same afternoon. And I went out and paid $10 and joined 
this bookshop which was probably a Communist-front organization. 
But many liberals and outstanding people of St. Louis had been in- 
veigled into — or were members of it, I should say. 

That is how I started my — yes. Then about the 1st of January 
1944 I received a notice or a card to report to some house — I don't 
know the address^- at this fu'st meeting of the study group that I was 
supposed to attend. 

Mr. Tavenner. That was a study group of professionals? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Mostl}^ supposed to be professionals, yes, sir; some 
professionals. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you recall who were the instructors at that 
group? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. There were diffeient ones. I think that possibly 
Barney Strom was the instructor in the first session that I attended. 

Mr. Tavenner. S-t-r-o-m? 

Dr. Rutledge. S-t-r-o-m. 

Mr. Tavenner. \Miat was the first name? 

Dr. Rutledge. Barney. They called him Barney. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he a functionary of the Communist Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. He was a minor functionary I should say. He was 
very active in the Communist Party, and one of the organizers of the 
Civil Rights Congress in Missomi later on. 

Other instructors were — well, they took turns about. Paid Jans 
acted as instructor. 

Mr. Tavenner. Paul Jans? 

Dr. Rutledge. Paul Jans. 

Mr. Tavenner. How do you spoil the last name? 

Dr. Rutledge. J-a-n-s. 



COJVIMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5033 

Sarah Shaw, the wife of Ralph Shaw, acted as instructor one night. 

When I say instructor — they are not instructors. They led the 
discussion. 

Mr, Tavenner. So that they led in the instruction as well as being 
members of this professional group or study group? 

Dr. lluTLEDGE. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Can you recall the names of any others who either 
acted in the capacity of instructor or students? 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, Barney's wife was present at several times. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is Barney Strom's v/ife? 

Dr. Rutledge. Barney Strom's wife. 

And Joe Kozak was present. 

Mr. Tavenner. How do you spell his last name? 

Dr. Rutledge. K-o-z-a-k. 

Let's see. The personnel of the meetings changed from time to 
time. And the meetings were held ver}^ irregularly, no set system 
about it. In fact, after I had gone to a few of them I sort of com- 
plained that I wasn't getting what I thought I wanted out of it, and 
they suggested that I get a bunch of people together down in Crystal 
City. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now, first of all, do you recall whether Helen 
Musiel was a member of that group? 

Dr. Rutledge. Helen Musiel was a secretary of the St. Louis Com- 
munist Party, and she was not a member of that group. She attended 
maybe 1 or 2 meetings to enter into the discussion. 

Mr. Tavenner. What seemed to be the principal object of that 
group? 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, it was — rather than being a course in Marxism 
the object was to indoctrinate people who attended in the current 
Communist Party line. They would discuss — the meetings always 
started out with a complete discussion of current affairs, starting with 
the war situation, the international situation and the national situa- 
tion and the local situation, and it would be a rather complete discus- 
sion, a very thorough discussion I should say. But they always were 
very careful to give the Communist Party viewpoint on all of those 
things. And different controversial subjects that might arise would 
be discussed early, and then at the end sometimes they would have a 
discussion on Marxism, and sometimes we wouldn't. 

I think during those G or 7 times that I went that first year I don't 
tlimk I ever had more than 1 real talk on dialectical materialism, 
which is a Hegelean philosophy of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis 
and so forth. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was there any underlying motive that seemed to 
exist there in these classes as to what practical way these teachings 
could be applied to the individual? 

Dr. Rutledge. You see this was in the year 1944, and the Com- 
munist platform then was to win the war. That was everybody's 
platform. And they reaUy put themselves up in the front of the 
movement. It was hammering away at winning the war. Like this 
first meeting I attended ; it was on opening up the second front. They 
wanted us to open up the second front in France. And then they 
wanted everybody to contribute everything that they could to 
winning the war. In fact, they should know that many Communists 
joined the service. Every able-bodied Communist was expected to 
join the Army to help win the war, which was a very worthy object. 



5034 COIVIAIUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Their next aim, wliich was also very worthy in my opinion, was to 
win the peace. They were to begin making plans on winning the 
peace. And they began to talk on association with Russia in some 
league a long time before we actually had that sort of thing. 

And then when Roosevelt met with Stalm and Churchill at Teheran, 
that was gone mto quite thorouglily and a lot of visionary products 
were unagined out of that meeting that everything was going to be 
rosy after the war was over. Just ^\'in the war. Everything was 
going to be rosy afterwards. The United States and Russia were 

This was during the Browder period, remember. 

That was about the line. 

I had no contact with the group that was infiltrating into labor 
unions at that time. So I couldn't tell you anythmg about that. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, this included the period of the Communist 
Political Association, what you have been telling us? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Yes, that is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you have occasion to attend any State con- 
vention of the Communist Political Association? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes, I did. 

I would drop around to the hall, Communist Party hall, once in a 
while. And so on one of these occasions Mr. Benjamin invited me 
to attend as an observer at a State Communist meeting which was 
held in the basement of the Alark Twain Hotel here m St. Louis 
about July, I think it was, 1944, in which the platform and resolutions 
and program adopted by the national Communist Party in New York 
in June were formally adopted. 

So I attended the meeting as an observer. I thin.k it was on a 
Sunday. I am not sure. And that is the first meeting, that was the 
first Communist meeting I attended outside of the stud}^ groups after 
joinmg the Communist Party. 

Mr. Tavexxer. \Mieu the Communist Party was reconstituted 
and the Communist Political Association was disbanded, did you con- 
tin.ue with your membership in the Communist Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes; I did. 

Mr. Tavexner. Did you attend any State conventions of the 
Comm.unist Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes; I did. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Will you tell us about that, please. 

Dr. Rutledge. That jumps over into the 3^ear 1945. I attended 
two State meetings in 1945, one in May and one in. July, one before 
Ralph Shaw came back, and one after he came back from the Army. 

The one in the spring of 1945 actually followed the same old 
Teheran-Browder line, but the one in July of 1945 was an entirely 
different sort of thin.g. Ralph had been in the service during the 
Browder era, and he had none of the Browder-gettmg-along-with-the- 
good-capitalists idea that had prevailed while he was gone. His idea 
was somewhat of the old revolutionary type of communism. He was 
more really what I would call a Communist. 

I attended a reception for him when he first came back in July, 
and I met him at the reception. I don't think he remembered me. 
And then I attended a State meeting which he called to bring about 
this, or adopt this change from the Communist Political Association 
to the Communist Party again. 

Do you want me to describe that? 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5035 

Mr. Tavexner. Yes, brief!}'". 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Ralph made a talk on his experiences in Europe, 
and made a sort of pep talk to the bunch; I think there was 25 or 30. 
And he said that he wanted to reconstitute the Communist Party in 
the State of Missouri and put it on a more alert, vigilant, Marxist- 
Leninist basis, or some such terminology. He said there had been 
many changes while he was gone, and he wasn't even familiar with 
all the personnel. 

So he suggested that those of us present write down the names of 
people we would like to see serve on the State board of the Communist 
Party, and the one that headed the highest 12 writein votes would be 
appointed to the State board of the Communist Party. 

It happened that I was somewhere along 10th or 11th on that list. 

He came to my name, and he says, "Doc. Wlio's Doc anyway?" 

They called me Doc. Everybody was known by their first name 
or some nickname. 

And somebody spoke uj) and said, "Doc came in through a certain 
club" — I think they called it the Tom Panic Club — "professional study 
club a year and a half ago." 

He said, "Doc. He's no Communist. You are supposed to be a 
member of the Communist Party for either 2 or 3 years before you 
can become a member of the State board." 

The discussion went on, and I even momentarily considered leaving 
at that time. But I knew I was already tabbed as a Communist. 
And I recall I wanted to find out what this was all about. And, 
besides, I was somewhat attracted to Shaw's personality. 

So I kept still. And so it went on. And Ralph said, "We'll put 
him on the far n committee." 

And, if you know anything about the Commimist Party, that is a 
committee that doesn't function. They don't have any farm com- 
mittee that works. 

Mr. Tavex'Ner. Thev were filing vou among causes ended. Is 
that it? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I went to him afterward and talked to him for a 
while, and I asked him, or I told him I didn't know anything about 
farming. So he suggested that I subscribe to the Facts for Farmers 
and the magazine put out by the Missouri Farm Fedcn-ation, which 
I did. That was as far as my services on the State committee were 
concerned. 

However, Ralph put on a very active campaign in wiping out so- 
called Browder revisionism, getting back to the Marxist-Leninist line. 
And we had more frec^uent m.eetings than had ever been held before. 
And during the next 6 months I attended those meetings fairly regular 
because I wanted to find out what it was all about. And I think I 
attended once or twice a month for the next 6 months. 

I took no part except for discussion and asking oiuestions, and so 
forth, until the last meeting that I attended like that. It was early 
in January of 1946. There had been a strike of the gas workers in 
Kansas City. It lasted about 3 months. A strike that caused quite 
a little hardship. The Communist Party had no part in the strike. 
They hadn't yet given up this idea of a no-strilvc agi-eement which 
they held during World War II. I served merely as an observer. I 
gave the report of this strike to the meeting, these monthly meetings 
Ralph Shaw called. That is the oidj talk I ever made at a Commu- 

81594 — .50 — pt. 4 4 



5036 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

nist meeting. And Ralph complimented me on the clearness of the 
talk, told me he wanted to see me afterward. 

And, so, afterward I met with him in his office, and he said, "Doc, 
how did you ever happen to get started coming to the Communist 
Party hall?" 

I told him my whole story. And he said, "You shouldn't be seen 
here. This talk shows you have a grasp of the situation. You will 
never be a Communist. You are just a liberal. You are too valuable 
a;'man, and you have a good political sense. You would be very 
valuable to us politically. I would rather you wouldn't come around 
the Communist Party hall any more." 

That was agreeable with me. 

But I kept on receiving notices from the office. They probably had 
failed to tell Helen not to send notices. 

So when they had a meeting in May of 1946 

Mr. ScHERER. When you say "Helen" to whom do you refer? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I am referring to the Communist Party — for the 
State convention, I went. 

Mr. ScHERER. Pardon me, Doctor. 

You mentioned a woman's name — - — - 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Helen Musiel. That is the same one I mentioned 
before. She was secretary of the St. Louis City Communist Party. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were told by Shaw that you were too valuable 
a man to be coming to the Communist Part}^ meetings. Is that what 
I understand? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. He said I shouldn't be seen at Communist Party 
meetings. 

Mr. Tavenner. Should not be seen there? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. That you were too valuable? 

Dr. Rutledge. He said that you will be valuable to us politically. 

Mr. Tavenner. You will be valuable politically. 

By that it w^as meant that if it became general knowledge that you 
were a member of the Communist Party you would not be able to 
serve the Communist Party without going under the label of the 
Communist Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. That is right exactly. 

Mr. Tavenner. The only way the Communist Party could make 
any head v/ ay in this area was just like in California; they couldn't 
do it under the Communist Party label. 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Therefore, they had to deceive the public and to 
deceive other people who were going to be in the movement by 
concealing any possible Communist Party connection. 

Dr. Rutledge. I never denied that I was a Communist. I never 
went around telling people that I was. Nobody ever asked me until 
the FBI came to see me. Nobody ever asked me. I just went my 
merry way. 

Mr. Tavenner. All right. 

So Shaw told you to stay in the background? 

Dr. Rutledge. That in right. 

Mr. Tavenner. That you were too valuable a man. 

Now before we go any furtjier with that I would like to go back and 
ask you several questions. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5037 

You said you served on the State committee. For how long a period 
of time? That is the State committee of the Communist Party or the 
State board of the Communist Party? 

Dr. Rutledgp:. I never functioned as a member of tlie State board. 
Just that first day was the only da}' I was appointed. The only time 
that anything relating to farming at all was ever discussed was that 
first day when I askecl Ralph where I would get the information about 
farming. 

Mr. Tavenxer. Was your connection witli the State board suffi- 
cient to be able to tell us the names of other persons who were on the 
State committee or State board at that time? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I think I can name a few of them. 

There was Ralph himself, and tlien there was Bill Sentner and Al 
!f riedman and 

Mr. Tavenner. Al Friedman? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Al Friedman. 

Mr. Tavexner. Bill Sentner? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. And Al Friedman and Paul Jans. 

Mr. Tavenner. "\¥ho is that? 

Dr. Rutledge. Paul Jans. 

Mr. Tavenner. Paul Jans. 

Dr. Rutledge. I named him once before. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Dr. Rutledge. And I think one of the Kansas City people, but 
I can't remember which one. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know whether Joe Kozak was on the com- 
mittee at that time? 

Dr. Rutledge. I think he was appointed, either elected or 
appointed shortly after. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was James Sage on it at that or any other time? 

Dr. Rutledge. I believe he was on the next year, in 1946. I don't 
believe he was there in 1945, at the 1945 meeting. 

Mr. Tavenner. Very well now. Before you found out exactly 
what Shaw was holding you in reserve to do, did you have any other 
Communist Party activities later on? Were there any special meetings 
that you attended with any of the leadership of the Communist 
Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, I attended a lot of — all kinds of meetings. 
But these monthly meetings that they woidd have at the Communist 
Party hall on Sundays were the only ones in which I met with Com- 
munist Part}^ leaders. 

Mr. Tavenner. All right, then, if you will proceed to tell us how 
you found out, or what you found out Ralph Shaw meant when he 
said that you were too valuable to attend meetings and that you could 
be used politically or for political purposes. 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, the first time that was put into action, or 
the idea was in effect was the day following the dinner for Wallace. 
They had a dinner for Wallace in late May or early June in 1946, and 
the next day after that dinner they then issued a call for progressives 
and liberals and different people who received invitations to meet and 
set up a Missouri chapter of the National Citizens Political Action 
Committee. And I was one of those invited. 

I had belonged to the National Citizens Political Action Cop-mittee 
since its inception on a national basis, but there had been no State 



5038 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IX ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

chapter. And this meeting, the next day after the Wallace dinnei-, 
was to set up a steering committee to found a State chapter of the 
National Citizens Political Action Committee. I was invited. That 
was in the Jefferson Hote]. 

So I went the next afternoon. And before the meeting started a 
man came up to me and introduced himself as Bill Steinberg. He 
says, "Dr. Rutledge?" 

And I said, "Yes." 

He said, "Ralph tells me 3'ou are to be head of this committee." 

Mr. Tavenner. Ralph? 

Dr. Rutledge. Ralph, meaning Ralph Shaw. 

I said, "Is that so?" 

And he said, "Yes, that is so." 

And would I serve? 

I was sort of flattered. So I said, "I suppose so, if they want me." 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Ralph Shaw the head of the Communist 
Party in this district at that time? 

Dr. Rutledge. At that time, from eJuly 1945 until some time in 
the summer of 1948 or early fall of 1948, he served as head of the 
Communist Party. 

Mr. Tavenner. And it was the head of the Communist Party that 
said you were to act as the head of this organization? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. All right, sir, if you will proceed. 

Dr. Rutledge. Shortly after that Beany Baldwin, who is a national 
chairman — B. C. Baldwin — they call him Beany — national chairman 
of the National Citizens Political Action Committee, and the manager 
of the group from then on clear through to the Progressive Party 
days, from the executive offices in New York — approached me also, 
and he said that he understood that I was to be chairman of the 
Missouri chapter of the National Citizens Political Action Committee. 

And I said, "That is what Bill Steinberg told me." 

And he congratulated me and so forth. 

So we went ahead and had a meeting of a steering committee. 
There was about 20 people present. .\nd there was no opposition. 
I was nominated and elected without any opposition. 

We set up a committee to arrange meetings in Jefferson C^ity, to 
set up the ^Missouri chapter of the National C^itizens Political Action 
Committee, which was held early in July of 1946 at Jefferson City. 

Do you want me to go ahead from there? 

Mr. Tavenner. Just a moment at that point. 

You spoke of this meeting. Did you say at the Jefferson Hotel? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. And then you said that there was a separate meet- 
ing of a smaller group just before that meeting, if I understood you 
correctly. 

Dr. Rutledge. No. This was the smaller group. 

Mr. Tavenner. Oh, this was the smaller group. 

Dr. Rutledge. In the Jefferson Hotel, set up as a sort of steering 
committee to arrange for a meeting in Jefferson City to set up the 
State chapter of the National Citizens Political Action Committee. 

Mr. Tavenner. Can you tell me whether any of these functionaries 
of the Communist Party whose names you have already mentioned 
were present at this meeting? 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IX ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5039 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Tliey were not. 

Mr. Tavenner. They were not. All riglit, then, if you will pro- 
ceed. 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, I met with various ones of the members 
present who were all a bunch of libei-als. And we met sevej-al times 
and «irrang(Hl our meeting in JefTersoti City at which I began as 
chairman. 

Mr. Tavennek. Was this on a State level? 

Dr. Rutledge. State level. There was about 60 present, I should 
sa3\ And it was kind of a hard group to handle. There was a bunch 
of about 10 or 12 students from Washington University ])resent who 
were out to have a little fun, I guess. They started out the meeting 
by demanding that the platform adopt a statement of policy of 
organizing a group of liberals and farmers and exclude labor because 
labor had a CIO-PAC. 

Of com-se, that was contrary to al) that I had been taught, and 
really contrary to what actually I believed in. 

It was quite a difficult meeting to handle. These youngsters were 
quite persistent in their idea that they wanted an organization of 
liberals and farmers in this Political Action grou]). And after a couple 
of hours I had to call a recess and ask Charlie Wilson, who was one of 
the liberals present, to help me out in chairing the meeting. So, 
following that, about every hoiu", we would alternate — he would pre- 
side an hoin- and I would preside an hour — and we finally got the thing 
whipped through after about 6 hoiu's of meeting. 

Mr. Tavexjsjer. What was the Comnmnist Party position on that 
subject as to whether or not the party should be organized on the 
basis of farmers and liberals? 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, the Communist Party position has always 
been that the basis of ah political action is labor. And the farmer.i and 
liberals were welcomed in to fiU id the gaps for front dressing and so 
forth, but the fundamental basis of all political action is based on 
organized mass labor unions. That is the fundamental thesis of the 
Communist Party as far as I am concerned. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you in conference ^^dth Communist leaders 
in regard to this sul)ject? ' 

(Representative Aloi-gan ^I. Moulder left the hearing room at this 
point.) 

Dr. Rutledge. There were several of them there. During one of 
the intermissions I ran into Bill Massingale out m the hall, whom I 
had known as a Communist. And I said, "Bill, what is going on here 
anyway?" 

Bill says, "Oh, that's just a bunch of Trotskyites trying to v»]-eck 
the organization." 

That is the first time I had run into contact with Trotskyites as 
such. I don't know whether they were or not. 

Mr. Tavenner. That was a term the Communists used to describe 
all those who disagreed with the straight Communist line, was it not? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. 

Air. Tavenner. Did you endeavor to carry out what you laiew 
was the Communist Party theory and principle regarding the organ- 
ization at this meeting? 

Dr. Rutledge. I endeavored to carry out what I thought was best. 
And it happened in that particular time my political views were 



5040 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

pretty much the same as the Communist Party. For instance, if I 
may, I had been an ardent New Dealer in the past, and I beUeved in 
setting up or having worldwide peace. My idea was that atomic 
war would, for instance, create more problems than it could possibly 
solve. And I also knew that our economy needed a little shot in the 
arm once in a while, and I didn't like an idea of getting a shot in 
the arm from stockpiling atom bombs. I would rather have hospitals 
and roads and schools and so forth built. That fell pretty well along 
with what the Communists were after, anyway. So my actions, 
based on my own thinking, were pretty well along the Communist 
line without any too much coaching from them at that particular 
stage of current events. 

Mr. Tavenner. Very well. If you will proceed, please, with an 
account of Communist Party influence in these various organizations. 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Well, let's see. 

That was July 1946. 

In late August or early September of 1946 they had a school for 
political action m Columbia, Mo., in which the Communists weren't 
especially active. If they were they were in the background. 

Do you want the next phase? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I think the next thing worth mentioning is in the 
fall of 1946 it was decided on a national basis that the National Citizens 
Political Action Committee would dissolve and form a new national 
organization. And so in the fall of 1946 we began to make plans to 
have a new organization, and delegates were elected from the St. Louis 
area and Missouri to attend a conference in New York, which was 
done. And in December of 1946 the Progressive Citizens of America 
was formed. 

But in the changeover we had a little conflict over finances. One, 
the leaders with me of the Citizens Political Action Committee decided 
that the money that we owed we could just forget that so the new 
organization would start out with a clean slate. 

Well, being an officer of the old organization and with the old 
organization defunct, there would be no way of raising money. I felt 
I might be financially obligated. So I objected strenuously. So I 
went to Ralph Shaw about it. 

Mr. Tavenner. Ralph Shaw was still the head of the Communist 
Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. Oh, yes. 

I talked the situation over with him. And Bill Steinberg was 
around. 

Mr. Tavenner. Around where? 

Dr. Rutledge. He would attend some of those meetings yet. He 
was still in St. Louis. So he helped me, and we were able to block that 
move at that time. 

Then in January of 1947 the Progressive Citizens of America was 
launched, in which I was one of the cochahman along with Charlie 
Wilson, who is a liberal. 

Mr. Tavenner. During this period of time — that is, during the 
existence of the National Political Action Committee, and on up 
through organization of the Progressive Citizens of America — were 
you in contact with Communist Party headquarters regarding its 
policies and its method of operation? 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5041 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Fairly well. I read most of their literature. And 
every time a problem would come up that I needed some help on I 
would talk not only to all liberals but I would also consult — I would 
drop by the hall and consult Ralph Shaw. I had quite a little respect 
for his judgment. 

So I saw him, I guess, almost once a month during the period from 
July of 1946 until April of 1948. 

Mr. Tavenner. About once a month? 

Dr. Rutledge. I should say; yes, sir. Sometime it would be 
longer, maybe 2 months; but sometimes maybe twice in the same 
month. But it averaged maybe once a month. And occasionally 
Shaw told me he wanted me not to attend any more large meetings in 
the Communist Party, but he would let me know when there was 
something worth while. He would let me know certain meetings 

For instance, Ki'umbein was here in 1946 and I was notified. And 
I met liim with several other people and listened to a talk on the 
organization of railroad unions. 

And then in the fall of 1947 this same financial deal came up in 
connection with the changeover from the Progressive Citizens of 
America to Missouri Citizens for Wallace. And a certain group 
wanted to forget our obligations and start fresh again with a clean 
slate, the same people in a different organization. And I didn't 
have an3^body to help me much in the group. So I went to Ralph 
about it. And it seemed to m.e 

Mr. Tavexxer. That is Ralph Sha\v? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes; that is right. 

It seemed to me that this man named Jack Becker, who is not a 
Communist as far as I know but who worked for the United Electrical 
Workers under Bill Sentncr, had been executive secretary all this 
time. And it seemed to me that he was controlling the situation. 
And I wanted to see Bill about it to see if I could get Jack straightened 
out on this. 

So Ralph said. "Well, Ave are having a meeting the Sunday after 
this." And told me tliat Bill would be there and if I would be 
there 

Mr. Tavenner. That is Bill Sentner? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right — if I would come they would try to 
thresh this thing out. 

So they notified me where the meeting was going to be, and I went. 
And we discussed the situation, and he said that if I wanted him. to 
that he would fire Jack Becker. But I said I didn't want anybody 
fired; I just wanted this nonsense stopped. 

Mr. Taven^ner. Would fire him from what position? 

Dr. Rutledge. From any position I wanted him to be fired from 
actually. 

Mr. Tavenner. You mean from his position as — — • 

Dr. Rutledge. I don't know if that mvolved the union, but from 
his position as executive secretary with the Progressive Citizens of 
America which he filled until Katherine Shryver came m the fall. 

Mr. Tavenner. Bill Sentner had power enough to discharge the 
executive secretary of which organization? The Progressive Citizens 
of America? 

Dr. Rutledge. He said we could drop him,. Of course, that meant 
he would be dropped; that is all. 



5042 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. If the Communist Party said he would be dropped, 
he would be dropped? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. In nty opinion, he would have; jes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was the control of the Communist Party over 
that organization that tight? That it could discharge a man who 
had been elected to a position? 

(Representative Morgan M. Moulder returned to the hearing room 
at this point.) 

Dr. Rutledge. I don't think Jack Becker was ever elected to any 
position. He was assigned to us by the United Electrical Workers' 
organization. And whenever w^e needed an3"body as manager or 
executive secretary he was always available without any election. 
He served, helpmg Shryver duruig the whole 1948 campaign. 

I think he retained a loose status with United Electrical Workers 
all that time. I don't Ivuow exactly what the standing was there. 

Mr. Tavenner. To what extent did you receive the assistance of 
the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers' organization in 
carrying out your objectives in the organization with which you were 
connected such as the National Political Action Committee and the 
Progressive Citizens of America and the Missouri Citizens for Wallace? 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, I would say that they were one of the back- 
bones of the organization, especialh" in the period of the Missouri 
Citizens for Wallace when the whole setup was being Red-baited 
so that the liberals were dropping out and afraid to have anything 
to do with it. 

Organizers and prominent members of the United Electrical Work- 
ers, along with known Communists, were what carried the load for 
about 2 months there. Then the liberals started coming back after 
we got the Progressive Party set up at Jefferson City. But there 
was a period of about 2 months when the thing would have dropped 
if it had not been for the United Electrical Workers. 

Mr. Tavenner. May we have a break at this time? 

Mr. Moulder. Are you going to be much longer? 

Mr. Tavenner. Not very much longer. 

Mr. Moulder. The committee will stand in recess for a period of 
5 minutes. 

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken, there being present at the 
time of taking the recess Representatives Moulder and Scherer.) 

(The subcommittee was reconvened at the expu-ation of the recess, 
there being present Representatives Moulder and Scherer.) 

Mr. Moulder. The committee will be in order. 

Are you ready to proceed, Mr. Tavenner? 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, Dr. Rutledge, 
what your association was with the Missouri Citizens for Wallace 
Committee. 

Dr. Rutledge. I was chairman of the Missouri Citizens for Wallace 
Committee. 

Mr. Tavenner. To what extent was that committee controlled or 
influenced by the Communist Party In both its structural setup and 
m its operations? 

Dr. RuTLEGE. That is the period in which we had very little liberal 
support because of heavy Red-baiting, and the Communist Party was, 
more than ever, the backbone of that plus the aid of the leftwing 
union leaders and a few very hard-boiled liberals. That was a very 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5043 

rough period, I would say. It required a lot of good, hard work and 
good managing in order to get the thing going. 

The job was to arrange for a founding meeting of the Progressive 
Party at Jefferson City in early April 1948. And, as I said before, 
without the aid of the Communist Party and the UE — United 
Electrical Workers — the thing wouldn't have gone over at all. The 
liberals had practically all dropped away. 

Mr. Tavenner. To what extent was that organization responsible 
for the formation of the local chapter or organization of the Progressive 
Party? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Local chapter? 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, of the State. I would say the State organi- 
zation. 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, this Missouri Citizens for Wallace set the 
meeting up m Jefferson City. 

Mr. Tavenner. You mean set up the meeting for the organization 
of the Progressive Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. And they met the day before the 
meeting at Jefferson City, met in the Governor Hotel, and various 
committees met — ^a nominating committee and platform committee 
and coordinating committee and steering committee and everything 
like that. I was general chairman, and also served on the nominating 
committee. 

One of om* hardest jobs at that time was to get people to agree to 
be candidates for office in the Progressive Party. And we couldn't 
hardly get anyone to be a candidate. And pai'ticularly we had trouble 
getting someone to be a candidate for governor. 

One of the things that happened in that connection is one day 
Leonard Douglas, Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers official from the 
lead belt, called me up and said he had to go to St. Louis and would I 
care to go along with him. He said he had something interesting to 
talk about. 

So I said yes, I would go along. I could have the day off. 

So we went to Bill Sentner's house and Ralph Shaw was there. And 
we talked about a candidate for governor. And we were told Leonard 
had been trying to get a man named Wolf from Joplin to run for 
governor. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you speak a little louder, please. 

Dr. Rutledge. Leonard Douglas had been trjnng to get a man 
named Wolf from Joplin to run for governor. Wolf refused. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is on the Progressive Party ticket? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. 

So Ralph said, "Well, if nobodv else will run we can always run 
Doc." 

Mr. Tavenner. We can always run Doc? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. That is the first I had heard of 
that. But I didn't say anything. 

Then in the meeting of the— — • 

Mr. ScHERER. You didn't choose to run? 

Dr. Rutledge. The meeting at Jeft'erson City the day before the 
founding meeting — Doug Macl^eod was chairman. 

Mr, ScHERER. Douglas MacLeod? 

Dr. Rutledge. Douglas MacLeod was chairman of the nominating 
committee. 



5044 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. ScHERER. Did you Imow Douglas MacLeod to be a Com- 
munist? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I never attended a Communist Party meeting with 
Douglas MacLeod. I did attend a picnic one time in the summer of 
1947 at which we had met at the West End Club and gone out on a 
picnic in south St. Louis, m which I think everj-body else there were 
Communists except him. But I never attended a C3ommmiist Party 
meetmg with Douglas MacLeod. 

But, anyway, Douglas MacLeod was chairman of the nominating 
committee. 

Mr. Tavenner. When you say "except him" do you mean by that 
that he was not a member of the Communist Party or that you did 
not know? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I cannot say that Douglas MacLeod is a Com- 
munist. He never identified himself as such to me. He was very 
closely associated with the Communist Party, but so was I. Of course, 
I was a Communist. 

Mr. Tavenner. He was the head of this 

Dr. Rutledge. Nominating committee. 

Mr. Tavenner. Nominating committee. 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. 

And so the question came up as to who the candidate for governor 
was going to be. And Doug said, "Well, Doc Rutledge will be the 
candidate for governor." 

Mr. Tavenner. Excuse me. What did you say? 

Dr. Rutledge. He said, "Dr. Rutledge will be our candidate for 
governor." And I said that I wouldn't. 

Mr. Tavenner. Had you discussed that with him before that 
meeting? 

Dr. Rutledge. No; I hadn't. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do j^ou know how Douglas MacLeod got the in- 
formation that you were to be the candidate for governor? 

Dr. Rutledge. He never got it from me because I had never told 
anybody that. And the only one that I ever heard mention it had 
been Ralph Shaw. And I hadn't taken that too seriously at the time. 

Wlien Doug brought it up it sounded like it had been discussed 
somewhere along the line. Other members of the committee, the 
nominating committee, were Margaret Bush Wilson and her father, 
and Linus Wampler. Linus Wampler was a member of this nominat- 
ing committee also. And they were all quite surprised that I wouldn't 
run for governor. 

And I remember Mr. Bush — that is Margaret Wilson's father — ■ 
wanted to know why. I told them when I ever got this thing set up 
I was getting out of politics and going back to practicing medicine. 

He couldn't understand it. But, anyway, then they wanted to put 
Margaret Bush Wilson on as a candidate for governor. But, some- 
how, that didn't sound quite right even though she was a wonderful 
person, I think. 

And when the nominating committee finally stopped their meeting 
this was still open; the candidate for governor still had not been 
selected. 

Somewhere along about summertime I got word — I don't remember 
how it was — I was to go to Bill Sentner's room after supper. And Al 
Marcus Murphy was there, and I don't remember who was with me, 
whether it was Doug or 



COAflVIUNIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5045 

I had better not. I don't remember who was with me. Someone 
was with me. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is A1 Marcus Murphy the same person laiown as 
Al Murphy? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Yes; that is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. He was a functionary of the Communist Party, 
was he? 

Dr. Kutledge. Yes; that is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. All right. 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. The purpose of this meeting was to thresh out who 
was going to be the candidate for governor on the Progressive Party 
ticket. And it just didn't seem quite right that Margaret Bush 
Wilson would run for governor, as nice a person as she was. 

But it took Al Murphy to put the quietus on it. He made the 
statement that "She can't be candidate for governor because she 
represents no mass organization. She is just an mdividual. And 
the one to be candidate for governor should be head of some labor 
union or with mass labor following." 

So Bob Logsdon was suggested. 

Mr. Tavenner. Bob who? 

Dr. Rutledge. Bob Logsdon, one of the UE workers, United 
Electrical Workers organization. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you spell his last name. 

Dr. Rutledge. Logsdon, L-o-g-s-d-o-n. 

And then we decided that we would have Margaret Bush Wilson 
run for Congress in one of the St. Louis districts, which she did. 

Mr. Tavenner. Logsdon is from Evans viUe; is he not? Is he in 
Evansville now? 

Dr. Rutledge. I couldn't tell you. I don't know where he is. 
I haven't seen him since 1948. 

Anyway, he was affiliated with the United Electrical Workers 
Union in St. Louis. He became the candidate for governor on the 
Progressive Party ticket. 

Mr. Tavenner. In connection with these activities of yours, did 
you meet a person by the name of Hershel Walker? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes, sir. I met him at the Communist Party hall 
on several occasions. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he also active in the work of these various 
political organizations? 

Dr. Rutledge. He probably was in a different field than I was. 
He worked — I think he worked with a few labor unions. I didn't 
have any direct contact with him in connection with the Progressive 
Party. 

Mr. Tavenner. You continued after that meeting to act as chair- 
man of the founding convention of the Progressive Party in Missouri; 
did you not? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes. I opened the meeting the next day. I 
introduced Rev. Olin Whitfield, the Negro minister who gave the 
invocation, and then I turned the meeting over to Katherine Shryver 
who introduced the chairman of the day, who was a student from 
Missouri University — I can't remember his name — who did a very 
good job. He was a veteran in law school there. And then my work 
was done except for an advisory capacity after that. 

I went to Philadelpliia, of course, to the national meeting in July. 



5046 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you observe any of the activities of the Com- 
munist Party in Philadelphia? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Well, not directly. But the whole meeting — 

There was one thing, one point came up there that was very defi- 
nitely an instance of following the Communist Party line. 

In the resolutions committee somebody had put in a resolution 
about favoring the minority groups such as freedom of Ireland. 
Every political party has that. The Communists put that in. And 
there had been a resolution introduced about establishing a Free 
State of Macedonia, Greater Macedonia. And this resolution had been 
killed in committee. And when the resolutions committee gave its 
report this minority group favoring this Greater Macedonia thing 
brought the point of order to the floor of the convention for debate. 

Of course, that was at the time of the Stalin break with Tito, and 
what had once been — Tito had once been a hero of the Communist 
Party and had suddenly become a traitor at that time. This subject 
was considered too hot for the Progressive Party to handle. 

I think that was an instance of the international Communist Party 
line involving a political organization in the United States. They 
voted overwhelmingly to turn that resolution down whereas the 3"ear 
before I observed it was in the majority. 

Mr. Tavenxer. Will you tell the committee as briefly as you can 
persons that you came in contact with as a member of the Communist 
Party that you can say of your omhi personal knowledge were members 
of the Communist Party other than those you have already given. 

Dr. Rftledge. Well, there is Irma and Bob Manewitz. 

I don't know whether I mentioned Ray Koch or not. 

Mr. Tavenner. I do not believe so. 

T\Tiat was Ray Koch's occupation? Do you know? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. His occupation you say? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. The only occupation I knew he had was fulltime 
functionary of the Communists. I never knew him in any other 
occupation. He was an outstanding organizer in 1946 and 1947 and 
1948. 1947 and 1948 anyway. 

And, besides those I have already mentioned, I knew Herbert and 
Lillian Benjamin. And, of course, I knew Ann Yasgur. 

Mr. Tavenner. AVlnit did Ann Yasgur do in the Communist 
Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. Forrest. I don't remember his first name at the 
moment but when Forrest left for the service Ann Yasgur filled in 
until Ralph Shaw got back fi'om the Army. Her official title was 
educational director of the Communist Party of Missouri. She 
actually acted as the secretary of the Communist Party of Missouri 
until Ralph came back in July of 1945. 

Mr. Tavenner. At the time that Ann Yasgur was acting in this 
capacity of secretary to the Communist Party of Missouri you were 
attending and had been assigned to a professional study group of the 
Communist Party, had you not? 

Dr. Rutledge. That was in 1945. Ann Yasgur never attended the 
groups that I attended. She was sort of an overall director, and I 
never attended a study group. I attended quite a few meetings at the 
Communist Party hall at which she was present, in which she 
functioned. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5047 

Mr. Tavexner. What I am trying to find out is what opportunity 
Ann Yasgin- had to know that there was in existence a study group, 
a professional study group in the Communist Party such as the one 
tliat you attended. 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Of com'se, the one I attended w^as a very inefficiently 
run thing, and she ma3' not have considered that very much. But 
she should have known all about it. That was her 

Mr. Tavexner. Did j'ou become aware of the existence of 

Dr. Rutledge. I tliuik 

Mr. Tavexxer. Excuse me. 

Dr. Rutledge. May I say this man Forrest — Jim Forrest left in 
the fall of 1944, and Ami Yasgur became active in 1945. I never 
attended any professional groups in 1945 — verj' few; occasionally, 
I really wasn't very active. The one I was associated with wasn't 
very active during the time Ann was educational director. 

Mr. Tavexxer. During that period of time was she emploj'ed in 
the headquarters of the Communist Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. Oh, yes. But that was full time. 

Mr. Tavexxer. After 3'ou stopped attendmg these professional 
groups of the Communist Party did you become aware of the existence 
of another professional group of the Communist Party? Say after 
March 1946? I am not asking you whether you were a member. I 
am just asking whether you were aware — — 

Dr. Rutledge. Of another professional group? 

Mr. Tavexxer. Of a professional group of the Communist Party 
made up of lawyers, doctors, and professional people. 

Dr. Rutledge. I can't remember now of any group like that. Mr. 
Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Of course, you were directed to stay in the back- 
ground and not attend meetings, were you not? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right, that is right. I coiddn't answer that 
question. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Were you acquainted with Marcella Oser? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Was she known by you to be a member of the 
Communist Party? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes, sir, the wife of Nathan Oser who was also a 
member of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Tavexner. Do you know whether she was from Kansas City? 

Dr. Rutledge. Who? Marcella Oser? 

Mr. Tavexxer. Yes. 

Dr. Rutledge. I think she was originally from Ste. Genevieve. 
Her maiden name was Sexauer, I understand. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Did she assist in setting up the Progressive Party 
in Kansas City? 

Dr. Rutledge. Oh, I think she did. At least her husband was 
active out there. 

I ran into him when we had — we had about two meetings in Kansas 
City during the summer of 1948 to help get the Progi-essive Party 
started in Kansas City. And at one time I met with a small group 
including Nathan Oser. 

Mr. Tavexxer. Were you acquainted with a person by the name 
of Naomi Ring? 



5048 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Naomi Eing was in this first professional group I 
attended. She was treasurer of the first professional group I attended. 

Mr. Tavennee. Were you acquainted with her husband? 

Dr. Rutledge. Not at that time. I met her husband in Phila- 
delphia, strange to say. Never met him before. I met him in PhU- 
adeiphia in the year 1948, in July. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, you say that you left the Communist Party 
in 1948. Will you tell the committee briefly what motivated you in 
making the decision to leave the Communist Party? 

Dr. Hutledge. Weil, there are many reasons. Just what you 
heard before: the distortion of liistory; I disagreed from a philosophical 
standpoint with the philosophy of Marxism, its intolerant lack of 
spiritual values. As a doctor I laiow that people need a healthy 
philosophy on the spiritual side which the Communist Party and 
Marxism don't have. And many things. 

Then the action of this so-called Hollywood Ten in making propa- 
ganda speeches instead of answering questions was sort of ridiculous. 

Wlien the Communist members who were convicted on the Smitli 
Act broke their bail I considered that as a defiance to the Goverrmient 
which I couldn't condone. 

And from that moment on I lost all sense of loyalty to the Commu- 
nist Party. 

That is part of the reason. 

Another reason: I had broken this— I developed during the years 
that I was associated with them, I should say, a sort of false sense of 
loyalty which I was able to overcome, which current events helped 
me overcome, and just my own reasoning. 

Mr. Tavenner. ^Vliat do you mean by false sense of loyalty? 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, I am not a philosopher or a law^^^er, but I 
think that, in describing the reason or thinking about why people 
don't break away from the Communist Party — and this is one of the 
m.ost important things of all — -I know I felt the pull of it. People 
get in this thing for some reason such as maybe they are a member of 
a racial minority, or maybe they are a member of a leftwing labor 
group, or maybe they are deeply affected by events in the world. 
In my own case I was very deeply affected, for instance, by these 
gas furnaces at Dachau, Belchen, and Buchenwald. I used to feel 
so deeply about that that I couldn't hardly sleep at night. And in 
my own mind I would think "Well, Russia is doing more to destroy 
people who did that than anybody else." I built up a false sense of 
loyalty for Russia for a short period of time, which I was able to 
overcome eventually. But for a time I felt that loyalty. 

There is a pull there that you can't quite get away from. When 
you develop that false sense of loyalty you begin 

Mr. Moulder. Was that during the period of time when Russia 
was our ally? 

Dr. Rutledge. That is right. 

Mr. vScherer. I would rather call them a cobelligerent, Mr. Chair- 
man, than an ally. 

Mr. AlouLDER. At that tim.e they were a military ally. 

Dr. Rutledge. Other people have other things that affect them. 
I don't know what they are. That is something that they have to 
think out themselves. 



C0]MMI3NIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5049 

You develop a false sense of lo5^alty that makes you overlook little 
things at fu'st, and eventually you ov^erlook bigger thmgs. It takes 
sort of a jolt sometimes to bring you out of it. 

Mr. Moulder. And during the period of time when you were 
associated with or duped into being and participating with the Com- 
munist Party did 3^ou realize or know or believe and did the American 
people generally at that time recognize that the Communist Party 
was an international conspiracy with the objective of dominating the 
free world? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I think that definitely the Communist Party is an 
international conspiracy to dominate the free world. 

Mr. Moulder. I say, though, at the time you were duped into 
becoming a member of the Communist Party j^ou did not realize or 
know of that conspu-acy, did you? It was not then generally known, 
was it, when you were first admitted? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. I read the Communist Manifesto which said 
eventually it will spread over the world. 

However, I believe in — I entered this thing not as an advocate of 
communism; I entered it actually to find out, and I continued with it 
because of my political feelings. And when I was able to get rid of 
this false sense of loyalty, eventually this political thing folded up. 
So I no longer had any connection. In that connection, I think that 
there is something that is going on that could hold people as loyal to 
the Communist Party, and that is this peace movement which the 
Communist Party presents as the outstanding exponent of world 
peace, and actually it deludes some people into thinldng they are the 
only ones or main ones who are for world peajce. And a lot of well- 
meaning individuals who are not guilty of anything else feel that sense 
of loyalt}^ to a gi'oup that wants peace above everything else. People 
want peace so bad that they overlook the bad things connected \vith 
the Communist Party. 

I have been able to see through that myself for quite a while be- 
cause I remember at the stage preceding World War II when they 
were advocates of peace, and suddenl}' they became advocates of war 
when Russia was attacked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, overnight. 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Overnight; that is right. 

Mr. Moulder. The point I was making a while ago was when you 
were first brought into the Communist Party, at that time the Supreme 
Court and Government agencies had not officially declared the Com- 
munist Party as an international conspirac}'^. 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. No, I don't think so. 

Mr. Tavenxer. At a later date did any of the members of the Com- 
munist Party with whom you had been previously in contact endeavor 
to get you to aid the Communist cause in any way? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. On several occasions that happened, yes. 

In May of 1950 Helen Musiel and Jim Sage came to my office to 
get me to sign the Stockholm peace petition, which I refused to do. 
And then in the fall of 1952 John Day and Irma Manewitz came to 
my office asking for money to help defend Bob Manewitz who had 
been awaiting Smith Act trial in jail, and raise bond. 

Mr. Tavenner. Both of those individuals were kno^\Ti to 30U to be 
members of the Communist Party, were the}" not? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. That is right. 



5050 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST, LOUIS, MO., AREA 

At that time I felt pretty sony for Irma. I had always liked Irma. 
I gave her $10. That was for their own use. 

And then in July 1954, they came back and wanted money for bail, 
and I told tliem I had better warn them that I had told the FBI all I 
knew and I would tell them all I learned after that. That was the 
end of that. They changed. 

Mr. Moulder. Do I understand you have informed the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation of all the knowledge you have obtained? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Yes. sh\ 

Mr. Moulder. Of Communist activities. 

Mr. Tavetvner. Who were the individuals that came to you for 
bail? 

Dr. RuTLEDGE. Irma Manewitz and John Day. 

Mr. Tavenner. How much money had 3^ou contributed to the 
Communist Party, do you believe? 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, I don't know exactly. I used to give $10 
occasionally, a $10 so-called sustainer fee. I always managed to give 
a little more than straight dues. I estimate that I had given in 1944, 
1945, 1946 and 1947 somewhere in the neighborhood of $200 or ma^'be 
a little more to the Communist Party. $250 maybe. 

But I gave more than that to the Progressive Party and the other 
political organizations. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you asked to mortgage your home when a 
request was made that you put up bail money? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes, I told Bob and I told Irma Manewitz and 
John Day that I had no money. They said, ''You can mortgage your 
home to raise some money. That would be a good investment." 

The thought of the Smith ,A.ct defendants in New York who had 
jumped their bail sort of came to my mind, and it didn't look like a 
very good investment to me. 

Mr. Scherer. When would you get the return on that investment? 

Dr. Rutledge. Wliat? 

Mr. Scherer. Did they indicate what they meant by bemg a good 
investment? 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, they were very serious about it. 

Mr. vScherer. I understand. But I am at a loss to understand 
how they could feel it was a good investment. 

Dr. Rutledge. Well, I couldn't see it either. 

Mr. Tavenner. Doctor, you have entirely and completely severed 
all connection with the Communist Party, have you not? 

Dr. Rutledge. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. I think that is all I desire to ask the doctor. 

Mr. Moulder. .Any questions, Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no questions. 

Mr. Moulder. Dr. Rutledge, we sincerely want to make this state- 
ment to you, that you have performed a patriotic duty of great value 
to your "Government and the .American people by answering truth- 
fully the questions which have been propounded to you here by our 
counsel and by members of the committee. 

It is the opinion and the hope of this committee that former Com- 
munist Party membership should not prejudice nor be held against an 
individual whose testimony of Communist Party activities has that 
character of trustworthiness which convinces one that he has com- 
pletely and finally terminated his Communist Part}- membership, and 
that his testimonv has been given in good faith. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST, LOUIS, MO., AREA 5051 

We appreciate yom- cooperation, we respect your character and 
integrity, and we admire youi' demonstration of patriotism by testify- 
ing here before this committee. 

In the opinion of this committee, you have shown great courage. 
You have testified truthfully and in good faith, and society should not 
hold former Communist Party membership against you, nor should it 
stigmatize you in any manner whatsoever, and we do not believe that 
it will. 

We hope and believe yom- many good friends and acquaintances 
will join with us in our commendation and respect for you, and we 
sincerely wish for you and your fine, lovely family continued success 
and happiness. 

Thank you very much, Dr. Rutledge. 

Dr. Rutledge. I wish to thank the committee for then* kind con- 
sideration and help in sort of clearing the situation. I appreciate it 
very much. 

Mr. Moulder. We indeed thank you, sir. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Tavenner. Ella Mae Pappademos. 

Mr. Moulder. Will you hold up your right hand and be sworn? 

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

Mrs. Pappademos. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF ELLA MAE PAPPADEMOS, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL R. L. WITHERSPOON 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliat is your name, please? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Ella Pappademos. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted that the witness is accomiDanied by 
Mr. Witherspoon wlio has appeared prior to this time with other 
witnesses. 

Will 3^ou spell your name, please? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Which part? The full name? 

Mr. Tavenner. Both. 

Mrs. Pappademos. E-l-l-a P-a-p-p-a-d-e-m-o-s. 

Mr. Scherer. How do you pronounce it? 

Mr, Tavenner. Pappademos. Is that the correct pronunciation? 

Mrs. Pappademos. The last name or first name? 

Mr. Tavenner. What is the correct pronunciation of your last 
name? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Pappademos. 

Mr, Tavenner. Wliat was your maiden name? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Posey. 

Mr, Tavenner. Wliere were you born? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Osceola, Ark. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you now reside? 

Mrs. Pappademos. At 4006 Maffitt. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is that in St. Louis? 

Mrs. Pappademos. St. Louis, Mo. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you lived in St. Louis? 

Mrs. Pappademos. About 10 j^ears. About that. I am not sure. 

81594— 56— pt. 4 5 



5052 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavennee. Will you tell the committee, please, what your 
formal educational training has been? 

Mrs. Pappademos. High-school education. 

Mr. Tavenner. When were you married? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. In September of 1951. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what your 
employment was prior to your marriage in 1951? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. I was working at the Forest City Manufactur- 
ing Co. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long had you been working there? 

Mrs. Pappademos. About 3 months. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your employment before that? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Nothing. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Pappademos, I hand j^ou a photostatic copy 
of an application for passport bearing date November 12, 1952. 
Will you look over on the second page at the signature of Mary Posey 
Pappademos and state whether or not it is your signature? 

(Document handed to the witness and her counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you recognize the signature there as your 
signature? It is the second page. 

Mrs. Pappademos. Wliat is your question, sir? 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you recognize the signature appearing there 
as your signature? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Sir, I decline to answer that. 

Mr. Tavenner. You decline to answer? 

MrSi^ Pappademos. Yes, for the reason that it might tend to 
incriminate you. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you examine the second page again and look 
at the photograph appearing there and state whether or not it is a 
photograph of you? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. Not from this photograph it isn't. 

Mr. Tavenner. You cannot identify it from the photograph? 

Mrs. Pappademos. No, I cannot. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you affix your photograph to an application 
for a passport? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Scherer. Let me see it. 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to offer the document for identification 
purposes only marked as ''Pappademos Exhibit No. 1." 

Mr. Moulder. The document will be so marked. 

(The document referred to was marked "Pappademos Exhibit No. 
1" and filed for the information of the committee.) 

Mr. Tavenner. The application states that you desired to travel 
to Greece for the purpose of visiting the family of your husband. 
Did you visit the family of your husband in Greece? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. As a matter of fact, Mrs. Pappademos, wasn't that 
statement to the State Department of your desire to visit the family 



COMIVIUNIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5053 

of your husband in Greece a mere pretext for your going abroad, and 
that the real reason was to attend a Conference of tlie Peoples for 
Peace held in Vienna on December 9, 1952? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Why didn't you tell the State Department that 
you were going abroad for the purpose of attending this conference? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Who defrayed your expenses in taking that trip? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did the Communist Party put up the money for 
you to attend this conference? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment in refusing to answer that question. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, the committee has received testi- 
mony relating to this conference that was held on December 8, 1952. 
It was originally conceived by the World Peace Council. In countries 
throughout the world a sponsoring committee was created. Dr. 
Willard Upliaus, cochairman of the American Peace Crusade, was an 
executive secretary of the United States sponsoring committee. 

The committee has also discovered, Mr. Chairman, that a formal 
approval of this congress was adopted by the delegates to the Asian 
Pacific Conference which was held in Peipmg in October of that same 
year, 1952. An examination of the Shanghai New shows that the 
purpose of the two conferences, that is, the peace conference in October 
in Peiping was identical with the Congress of the Peoples for Peace 
in Vienna on December 5. 

The chairman of the committee may recall the t( i timon}^ of Hugh 
Hardyman in Los Angeles last year in which he refused to testify, 
but at which time it was shown he made speeches from behind the 
Iron Curtain attacking the policy of the United States and the conduct 
of the Korean war, and that in both of these conferences it has been 
shown that many delegates from the United States took the position 
that the United States was engaged in bacterial warfare in Korea. 

Mr. Scherer. Pardon me, Mr. Tavenner. As I recall Mr. Hardy- 
man's testimony also, he obtained his passport through fraud and by 
connnitting perjury the same as this witness. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Scherer. He said he was going to visit his brother in Australia. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is right. 

Mr. Scherer. He never saw his brother. I do not believe he had 
a brother in Australia. 

Did he not also l^roadcast from the Peiping radio at the time our 
boys were fighting in Korea while he was attending this conference, 
charging those boys with committing germ warfare? 

Mr. Tavenner. Exactly so. And he was broadcasting from behind 
the Iron Curtain the same Communist Party line that "our prisoners 
of war have been prosecuted for doing under compulsion, from behind 
the Iron Curtain. 

Mr. Scherer. I believe we asked in Los Angeles why this man 
was walking the streets of Los Angeles, because it was obvious that 
he had been guilty of treason. He was giving aid and comfort to the 
enemy in time of war. 



5054 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavennek. This committee, Ad^r. Chairman, referred the 
matter to the Department of Justice for prosecution. 

Mr. ScHEEER. Witness, the fact is you did not get near Greece, 
did you? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I refuse to answer that question on the fifth 
amendment. 

Mr. ScHERER. You swore at the time you made this apphcation for 
a passport that you were going to visit j^our husband's relatives in 
Greece, did you not? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Scherer. And when you so swore you lied to the State Depart- 
ment, did you not? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Scherer. You obtained this passport from the Government 
of the United States by fraud, did you not? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Scherer. And with this fraudulent passport you went to a 
Communist peace conference, did you not, the same one that was 
attended by Hugh Hardjmian, to whom we have just referred? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Scherer. You stated your maiden name was what? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Posey. 

Mr. Scherer. Ella Mae Posey? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Yes. 

Mr. Scherer. You were one of those three individuals who issued 
and signed this document that has been distributed in the last few 
w^eeks here in the city of St. Louis entitled "Don't Try To Lose Us. 
Let's Talk Some About Civil Rights," were j^ou not? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. Yes, I signed such a leaflet. 

Mr. Scherer. And you Icnow Hershel "Walker and Eomey Hudson, 
do you not, the cosigners of this document? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Scherer. Both of those two persons and you are active mem- 
bers of the Communist Party? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Scherer. Now you have been married since 195L You have 
not used the name of Ella Alae Posey since you have been married, 
have you? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. Will you repeat your question? 

Mr. Scherer. You have been married, I believe j^ou said, since 
1951 to a man named Pappademos. Did vou not say you were mar- 
ried in 1951? * 

Mrs. Pappademos. Yes, I was married in 1951. 

Mr. Scherer. And you have not used your maiden name since 
then, have you? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5055 

Mr. Pappadbmos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. ScHERER. You did not use your maiden name in 1952 when 
you made appHcation for passport. You used your married name, 
Pappademos, did j'ou not? 

Airs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Then I am going to ask you why, when you issued 
this ch'cular for distribution chiefly in colored neighborhoods of St. 
Louis, you used the name Ella Mae Posey and not jour present name? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Scherer. In fact, your name is not Ella Mae, is it? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. Well, Ella Mae is the only name I know, has 
been the only name I have known about since I was big enough to 
know about a name. 

Mr. Scherer. Wliy did you use the name Mary Posey Pappademos 
in your application for passport? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Scherer. Then you lied to this committee right this minute 
when you said the only name you ever knew about was Ella Mae. 
The fact is you knew about the name of Mary because you used the 
name Mary in 1952 when you made application for passport. 

Why did you lie? 

Mrs. Pappadeimos. I reassert my pri\'ilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Scherer. Now, I am not going to repeat what I said to one of 
the other authors of this scurrilous pamphlet when he was on the 
stand this morning, but who helped you prepare this pamphlet? 

Mrs. Pappademos. If you wish to talk about the contents of that 
pamphlet, I will talk. But I will refuse to answer under the privilege 
asserted me under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Scherer. I am talldng about the content of this pamphlet. 
We are talking about it now. I want to know who helped you pre- 
pare the content of this pamphlet. That is the thing I am asking 
you about. 

Mrs. Pappademos. I will refuse to answer that question under the 
fifth amendment. 

Mr. Scherer. Did your husband help you prepare it? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Sir, I would not testify against my husband. 

Mr. Scherer. I am not asking you to testify against your husband. 
I am merely asldng if he helped you prepare it. 

Mrs. Pappademos. That would be testifying against him. 

Air. Scherer. The rule is to testify against him in a criminal case. 
This is not a criminal case. 

Mrs. Pappademos. I stiU assert my privilege. 

Air. Scherer. This pamphlet was issued for the purpose of creating 
racial animosities, was it not? 

Airs. Pappademos. It was not. 

Mr. Scherer. What did you prepare it for? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mr. Scherer, I will withdraw the question if it takes that long. 



5056 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

You made a vicious and violent attack upon the committee. And, 
of course, we are used to that coming from Communists. We have 
had that happen to us all over the country. But you particularly 
made an attack upon the chairman of this subcommittee with reference 
to the civil rights issue insofar as it concerns Negroes. 

Did you happen to check Mr. Moulder's record before you at- 
tempted to smear him like this, his voting record on civil rights, before 
you issued this pamphlet? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. Sir, the Congress of this United States has not 
passed a civil rights law in the past 30 years. 

Mr. ScHERER. But you know that many civil rights bills were 
passed by the House. 

Mrs. Pappademos. No. I do not know. 
Mr. Scherer. That were not passed by the Senate. 
Did you know that Mr. Moulder voted for every one of them? 
(The witness confers with her counsel.) 
Mrs. Pappademos. Will you repeat your question? 
Mr. Scherer. Did you know that Mr. Moulder voted for every 
civil-rights bill that was presented to the House and whenever he 
had an opportunity to do so m committee, he did so? 
(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. Well, sir, none of the civil-rights bills that 
have ever been voted on by Congress has become law. 

Mr, Scherer. That is not my question. There have some of 
them become law. Some of the later ones, I admit, have not. There 
are later ones that have passed the House that I admit have not 
passed the Congress. I am asking you whether you have checked 
the record before you ever made these statements about the chairman 
of this subcommittee. 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mr. Scherer. Is it not a fact that you did not care about the truth 
of what you said but that this pamphlet was issued for the sole 
purpose of making it appear that this committee was attacking 

Negroes? Is that not what you 

Mrs. Pappademos. Su', if you would examine that pamphlet closely, 
you would see it is not attacking Mr. Moulder. It is merely stating 
that there are some activities that he could be investigating if he 
would. 

Mr. Scherer. You do not thinlv that was an attack upon him? 
Mrs. Pappademos. That are reaUy un-American. And I can 
name a few if you wish me to complete my answer. 

Mr. Scherer. All right, I think the document speaks for itself. 
Mrs. Pappademos. Well, it has not been examined closely. If so, 
you would see that nobody was attacking Mr. Moulder on the grounds 
that he was creating racial animosity. 

Mr. Scherer. No; you were creating racial animosity. 
Mrs. Pappademos. Has there been an incident of racial animosity 
as a result of this pamphlet? 

Mr. Tavenner. May I ask you, are you now a leader in the West 
End group of the Communist Party? 
(The witness confers with her counsel.) 
Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege. 
Mr. Tavenner. And you refuse to answer? 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5057 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been a member of the Communist 
Party during any period of time that I have not specifically inquired 
about? 

Mrs. Pappademos. No; I don't even understand your question. 

(Representative Gordon H. Scherer left the hearing room.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been a member of the Communist 
Party during any period of time that I have not specifically asked 
you about? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Have you asked me? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes; I asked you whether you were a member of 
the West End group. If you would lilve for me to be more particular, 
I wHl. 

On June 18, 1951, your name was found on a notebook in the 
possession of James Sage. Are you acquainted with James Sage? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were vou a member of the Communist Party on 
June 18, 1951? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. Will you fix — ^repeat the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party on 
June 18, 1951? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Well, I don't remember the dates, so 

Mr. Tavenner. ^Vhat is that? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I don't remember 

Mr. Tavenner. You do not know whether you were or not? 

Mrs. Pappademos. No; that is not what I said. I said I don't 
remember that date and I were not. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were not? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Yes. You asked me two questions. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were not a member of the Communist Party 
in June 1951? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Well, whatever date you quoted there. I don't 
know. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at 
any time during 1951? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Sir, if you had just gotten my birthday, you 
would realize I was quite young, was not old enough to participate in 
any political party. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wlien did you consider that you were old enough 
to participate in such a party? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Well, I was not old enough to vote in the last 
election for President. 

Mr. Tavenner. However, you were old enough to go to Europe in 
1952, weren't you? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I reassert my privilege under the fifth amend- 
ment in refusing to answer that question. 

Mr. Tavenner. Let me ask you the question again, were you a 
member of the Communist Party at any time during 1951? 

Mrs. Pappademos. You just asked that question. 

Mr. Tavenner. You have not answered it. You have evaded it. 

Mrs. Pappademos. No; I answered earlier no. 



5058 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you mean to say now you were not a member 
of the Communist Party in 1951? 

Mrs. Pappademos. I have just given you the answer. If you would 
read it in the testimony I said "No." 

Mr. Tavenner. I know exactly what you said. 

Were you a member of the Communist Party at any tune in 1951? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Sir, the answer is "No." 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at 
any time in 1952? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. The answer is still "No." 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at 
any time in 1953? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. Than answer is "No." 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at 
any time in 1954? 

Mrs. Pappademos. The answer is "No." 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at 
any time in 1955? 

Mrs. Pappadhmos. The answer is still "No." 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now a member of the West End gi'oup of 
the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Pappademos. Sir, I don't know what the West End group is. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you a member of any gi'oup of the Communist 
Party at this time? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Pappademos. I will refuse to answer that question under the 
fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no fm-ther questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Moulder. The "wdtness is excused. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Clara Perkins. 

Mr. Moulder. Mrs. Perldns, do you solemnly swear that the testi- 
mony which you are about to give before this subcommittee will be 
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God. 

Mrs. Perkins. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF CLARA PERKINS, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL 
SHEPARD R. EVANS 

Mr. Evans. Yom- Honor, I appear as her counsel, Shepard R. 
Evans of St. Louis. 

Mr. Tavenner. "V^Tiat is your name, please? 

Mrs. Perkins. Clara Perkins. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you spell your last name? 

Mrs. Perkins. P-e-r-k-i-n-s. 

Mr. Tavenner. Counsel has identified himself for the record. 

Mr. Evans. Shepard R. Evans of St. Louis. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you reside, Mrs. Perkins? 

Mrs. Perkins. In St. Louis. 

Mr. Tavenner. What address? 

Mrs. Perkins. I would rather not give my address. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it 3715 LaSalle Street? 

Mrs. Perkins. Yes. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5059 

Mr. Tavenner, Did you live there in 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what yom- 
educational training has been? 

Mrs. Perkins. I received a master of arts degree in Latin and 
Greek from New York University, I tliink it was in 1931. But I 
wouldn't hke to be Jield to tlie date. I am not sure. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you resided in St. Louis? 

Mrs. Perkins. Eleven years. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you an official in the United Electrical, 
Radio, and Machine Workers of America in 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. I would like to consult my attorney. 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Perkins. Wliat was tlie question, please? 

Mr. Tavenner. The question was whether or not you were an 
official of the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of 
America in 1951. 

Mrs. Perkins. I decline to answer that question on the grounds I 
cannot be required to be a witness against myself, 

Mr. Tavenner. How were you employed in 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. I was working for Wagner Electric. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wagner Electric? 

Mrs. Perkins. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Wagner Electric organized by the United 
Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers, more specifically by Local 
1104? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Perkins. At what time? 

Mr. Tavenner. 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did that union have bargaining rights at Wagner 
Electric in 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. What union did have bargaining rights at Wagner 
Electric in 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. The International Union of Electrical Workers. 
I think that is the name of it. It was known as the lUE. 

Mr. Tavenner. What time in 1951 did the International Union of 
Electrical Workers succeed to the bargaining rights, if you know? 

(Representative Gordon H. Scherer returned to the hearing room.) 

Mrs. Perkins. It didn't succeed to the bargaining rights in 1951. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was it some prior date when the lUE succeeded 
to bargaining rights? 

Mrs. Perkins. The lUE had the bargaining rights at Wagner in 
1951. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell us, then, why it was that you signed 
a non-Communist affidavit on February 5, 1951, in which you said 
that you were a responsible officer of the United Electrical, Radio, 
and Machine Workers of America, Local 1104? 

Mrs. Perkins. Because it was true. 

Mr. Tavenner. And you were working at Wagner Electric at the 
time? 

Mrs. Perkins. That is right. 

81594— 56— pt. 4 6 



5060 COIVIMTJNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. So you were not employed, then, on February 5, 
1951, at Wagner Electric? 

Mrs. Perkins. Yes, I was. 

Mr. Tavexner. You were. Then with what plant did Local 1104 
have bargaining rights on February 5, 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. It didn't have any. 

Mr. Tavenner. It did not have an}'? 

Mrs. Perkins. So far as I know. 

Mr. Tavenner. But it was working to get bargaining rights, is 
that it? 

Mrs. Perkins. That is correct. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was that during the period of time when you were 
an official of it? 

Were you also an official of that local of UE on the 18th day of 
December 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand you a photostatic copy of two affidavits 
marked "Perkins Exhibits Nos. 1 and 2," respectively, for identification 
purposes. 

I ask you whether those are the affidavits which you gave on the 
dates mentioned. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Perkins Exhibits Nos. 
1 and 2," respectively, for identification and filed for the records of 
the committee.) 

(Documents handed to the witness and her coimsel.) 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Perkins. I decline to answer on the grounds that I cannot 
be required to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Tavenner. The fust is a non-Communist affidavit of Clara 
Mae Perkins, 3715 LaSalle Street, St. Louis, Mo., under date of 
February 5, 1951, in which the affiant says: 

I am a responsible officer of the union named below. 

I am not a member of the Communist Party or affiliated with such party. 

Were you a member of the Communist Party on the 5th day of 
February 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. By refusing to answer? 

Mrs. Perkins. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee has received testimony here that 
you were one of the teachers or instructors in the Basic Training 
Institute of the Communist Party at approximately the year 1946. 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you either verif}^ that as being correct, or tell 
us whether it is wrong? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Mr. Douglas MacLeod an instructor or 
lecturer at that school at any time? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. It seems to me that you were shaking your head to 
indicate that you didn't know. 

Is it a fact you don't know? 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5061 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Ai-e you acquainted with Douglas MacLeod? 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. , , ^ 

Mr. Tavenner. Is he Imowu to you to be a member of the Com- 
munist Party? 

Airs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. This committee, at the request of numerous 
Representatives of Congress, undertook to investigate an organi- 
zation about a year ago known as the National Committee To Secure 
Justice in the Rosenberg Case, and subpenaed to appear before the 
committee m Washington, numerous individuals from different areas 
of the United States, including, accordmg to my recollection, Boston, 
Detroit, Chicago, Philadelphia, Allentown, Pa., and other places. 

And during the course of that investigation this telegram was 
received from you August 2, 1955: 

We protest investigation Sobell committee as violation of first amendment. 
Signed Haven and Clara Mae Perkins, 3715 LaSalle Street. ^ 

It is not my mtention to ask you any question regarding your 
husband. But you did send, you joined in the sending of that telegram, 
didn't you? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Perkins, The first amendment guarantees the citizens of the 
United States the right to petition for redress of grievances. I thmk 
Morton Sobell has a grievance. He has just filed in Federal court in 
New York City for a new trial. He charges willful use of perjured 
testimony by the prosecution, headed by the notorious Roy Colin. 

I have a right to speak my mind on what I think is an mjustice, and 
what I think has done great harm to the American people, to the name 
of America throughout the world, to justice m the United States and 
to our democracy. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have not challenged your right. 

Mr. ScHERER. Since you mention Roy Cohn, I liappcn to know 
Roy Cohn. This member of the coimnittee, at least, tliinks he is a 
fine American and denies the charge that she made against Roy 
Cohn. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now will you answer my question, please? 

(The witness confers witli her counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you answer my question? You made a 
speech but you didn't answer my question. 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. But preserve yom- privilege to speak, is that it? 

Mrs. Perkins. Correct. It is guaranteed to me by the Constitu- 
tion, and I support the Constitution. 

Mr. Tavenner. But not responsive to the questions that I ask 
you. 

Were you on August 2, 1955 a member of the Commimist Party 
here in St. Louis? 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. This committee, in tlie com-se of its investigation, 
had before it the record of receipts and disbm'sements by the Rosen- 
berg committee. It liad the names of many people over the United 
States who had acted in an official capacit}^ It could not subpena 



5062 COIVIMUNIST ACTIVITIES EST ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

everyone. It did subpena quite a few. We were considering sub- 
penaing you, but distance had something to do with our not doing it. 

We discovered quite an interesting pattern in the course of that 
testimony. We found in every city where we had made inquiry ■ 

Mrs. Perkins. I read the testimony. 

Mr. Tavenner. These Rosenberg committees — 

You have read it? Ai-e you famiUar vvith it? 

Mrs. Perkins. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Let me ask you: That testimony demonstrated 
that in every city where the committee investigated, these local 
Rosenberg committees were organized by members of the Communist 
Party. As I say, we did not make an investigation here. But 
weren't you officially connected with the local organization of the 
committee here at the time this telegraph was sent on August 2, 1955? 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert ro.y privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wasn't the Communist Party instrumental in the 
organization of this committee here? 

Mr. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. The testimony that was introduced showed that, 
with 1 or 2 exceptions, money raised from local groups and sent through 
to the national organization for use in the defense of the Rosenbergs 
was used in part to send back to the local areas to individuals who 
were members of the Communist Part}". 

I recall one, for instance, the name of Philip Koritz, whose name 
has been mentioned during this testimon}^, as having been here in 
St. Louis a while, or nearby. 

There were others in Chicago, members of the Communist Party, 
to whom money was sent back from the national headquarters in 
New York. 

Was any money sent back here? 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you receive any money sent back to St. 
Louis area from the national organization of the Committee To Secure 
Justice in the Rosenberg Case? 

Mrs. Perkins. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. You did not. 

Was any money sent back here to any other individual? 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert ray privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you aware that the name of the president of 
the Committee To Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case was kept 
secret from the public? 

Mrs. Perkins. I read about it and then I read the account of the 
heiriiigs last summer. 

Mr. Tavenner. You had never heard of the name of the president 
be '"ore our hearing, had you? 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Perkins. I don't know whether I heard or not. 

Mr. Tavenner. You do not know? 

Mrs. Perkins. I just don't know. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you recall now who he was? 

Mrs. Perkins. No, I don't. 

Mr. Tavenner. It was Mr. Louis Harap, whose name had not been 
mentioned in any connection with the activities of the organization. 
And if you knew who he was, you are the first person that this com- 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5063 

mittee has fomid that kiiew that he was connected with the national 
organization. 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Harap was a member of the Communist 
Party, according to testimony. And Mr. Harap is the editor of a 
Communist paper or publication entitled "Jewish Life." 

Our hearings clearl}^ dem.onstrated that one of the principal pur- 
poses of the Communist Party in this organization was to attempt to 
discredit the courts of justice and Gov^ernment witnesses. And this 
cora.mittee has procured a letter over your signature, bearing a date 
as late as January 12, 195G, which can be given, justly, I believe, 
that same interpretation. 

Will you examine the letter, please, and state whether or not you 
issued it? 

(Document handed to the witness and her counsel.) 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mr. ScHERER. When were the Rosenbergs executed, Mr. Tavenner, 
if you recall? 

Mr. Tavenner. It was in 1953. 

Mr. Scherer. Did not the evidence disclose that this committee 
has been kept alive solely for the purpose of raising funds from the 
gullibles so that the Communist Party will have additional funds 
available from this source? 

Mr. Tavenner. Our evidence disclosed, according to my recollec- 
tion, that there was a convention held in Chicago in which they 
changed the name to the Committee To Secure Justice for Morton 
Sobell in the Rosenberg Case. 

Mr. Scherer. It is the same committee? It is the same personnel? 

Mr. Tavenner. Virtually the same membership took over. 

(The witness confers with her counsel.) 

Mr. Scherer. It has been so long, Mr. Tavenner, I forgot the 
question. 

Mr. Tavenner. My question was whether or not the paper I 
handed her was written by her. 

(The mtness confers with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Perkins. I can't answer that because I can't be required to be 
a witness against myself. 

Mr. Moulder. Wliat is your response to his question? 

Mr. Evans. Your Honor, I wanted to explain to the committee, 
she is a little hard of hearing and that you have got to talk a little 
loud to her to make her understand. 

Mrs. Perkins. We are both a little hard of hearing. 

Mr. Moulder. I ask you to speak as much louder as you possibly 
can. 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

Mr, Tavenner. I offer the document in evidence and ask that it 
be marked "Clara Perkins Exhibit No. 3" for identification purposes 
only. 

Mr. Moulder. So ordered. 

(The document referred to was marked "Clara Perkins Exhibit 
No. 3" and filed for the information of the committee.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Your name, Mrs. Perkins, was found in a notebook 
of Mr. James Sage on June 18, 1951, indicating by the way in which 
it appeared there that you were the leader of a small group of people 



5064 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

intending to make a trip to a convention in Chicago on June 29 and 
30 of tliat year, 1951, being held under the auspices of the American 
Peace Crusade. 

Will you tell the committee, please, whether or not you agreed with 
Mr. Sage that you would attend that conference and take certain 
people with you? 

Mrs. Perkins. I have no recollection of it. 

Mr. Tavenner. No recollection of it. It is quite possible that 
your name appeared there without your knowledge, or without ever 
having conferred with you? 

Mrs. Perkins. It did. I didn't go to Chicago. 

Mr. Tavenner. You know Mr. Sage, do you not? 

Mrs. Perkins. I decline to answer that question on the grounds 
I can't be required to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Tavenner. You decline to answer? 

Mr. Moulder. We cannot hear you. 

Mrs. Perkins. I didn't go to Chicago. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was the meeting to be held in Chicago? 

Mrs. Perkins. I don't know. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you asked to go? 

Mrs. Perkins. Not that I remember. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you recall t'lat Mr. Sage went? 

Mrs. Perkins. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were vou a member of the Commimist Party on 
June 18, 1951? 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

\h\ Tavenner. According to tlie committee's information, you 
were a candidate for Congress from the Third District in 1952. Is 
that correct? 

Mrs. Perkins. Is that a crime? 

Mr. Tavenner. Not at all, not at all. 

Mrs. Perkins. I was. 

Mr. Tavenner. "Wliat part did the Communist Party play, if any, 
in bringing about your candidacy? 

Mrs. Perkins. None, to my knowledge. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you aware that in 1952 the Communist Party 
was active in sponsoring and promotion of t}ie interests of the Pro- 
gressive Party in St. Louis? 

Mrs. Perkins. To my knowledge, no. 

Mr. Tavenner. No? 

Mrs. Perkins. I heard such accusations in the newspapers, but I 
m.akc up my own mind as to what I think I sliould do and I do what I 
think is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party wlien 
you ran for Congress in 1952? 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert m}^ privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Arc you now a member of the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Perkins. I reassert my privilege. 

^[r. Tavenner. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Moulder. Any questions, Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. No questions. 

Mr. Moulder. The witness is excused. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Haven Perkins. 



CORIIMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5065 

Mr. Moulder. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony which 
you are about to give before the subcommittee will be the truth, the 
whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Perkins. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF HAVEN PERKINS, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

SHEPARD R. EVANS 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your name, please, sir? 

Mr. Perkins. Haven Perkins. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted that counsel who appeared with the 
preceding witness also is appearing with the present witness. 

"When and where were you born, Mr. Perkins? 

Mr. Perkins. October 28, 1902, in Champaign, 111. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you now reside? 

Mr. Perkins. St. Louis. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you been a resident of St. Louis? 

Mr. Perkins. About 11 years. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what your 
educational training has been, your formal educational training? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Perkins. I got a B. A. from Williams College in Massachusetts. 

Mr. Tavenner. What year? 

Mr. Perkins. 1923. 

I got a B. A. from Oxford University in 1926. 

I was a student at Chicago University for 2 years; I think it was 
1938 to 1940. 

Mr. Tavenner. How are you now employed? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Perkins. This question seems a very sunple one and it would 
seem logical to answer it. 

But I have been attending the hearings. I have observed that in a 
number of cases questions of employment have led to other questions 
which might be incriminathig. 

I am going to refuse to answer the question. 

And my reasons — I have more than one reason: 

First of all, Congress has made membership in the Communist 
Party and Communist-infiltrated organizations a crime, and, therefore, 
this question shoidd be taken up in court. 

And this committee is trespassing on the territory of the courts. 

Article 3 of the Constitution says that the judicial power of the 
courts extends to all cases arisii:ig under the laws of the United States. 

This committee is breaching article 3 of the Constitution. 

I refuse to answer also on other reasons. 

?vlr. Scherer. Let me say, as far as you have gone, the courts have 
Jiold otliervvdse. 

That question you have raised has been raised dozens of times 
l)efore tliis committee. 

Mr. Perkins. I })Gg to differ with you, Congressman, sir. I beg 
to differ with you. 

May I ask you, Congressman Scherer, liow they could have held 
this dozens of times in a law passed in 1954. How could that have 
happened dozens of times? Would you tell me that? 



5066 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Schp:rer. You are here to answer questions. I note you are 
starting right off by not answering them, but by making a speech 
and invoking the fifth amendment. 

You said it was a simple question as to where you are employed. 
You could give us a simple answer, but you have not. And when I 
ask you a question you take the fifth amendment right away. You 
just did. You said you didn't have to answer it. 

Air. Perkins. I have another reason. The first amendment to the 
Constitution says that Congress sliall make no law abridging t)ie right of 
the people peaceably to assemble and petition for redress of grievances. 

The members of the St. Louis Committee for Morton Sobell have a 
right to assemble and petition about Morton Sobell. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chauman, I ask for regular order. He is making 
a speech. 

If he wants to invoke the fifth amendment he can invoke the fifth 
amendment, but not make a speech. 

Mr. Moulder. We are very tolerant and veiy reasonable in per- 
mitting the witness to state the reasons why he chooses to decline to 
answer a question by claiming the privileges under the Constitution. 
But we, of course, cannot tolerate a witness' explanation of reasons 
why he thinks this committee shouldn't exist, reasons why he thinlvs 
it doesn't function properl}^, and many others of his reasons which are 
based upon his prejudices and hope of screening his excuses for not 
testifying. 

Therefore, please make your answer responsive to the questions by 
either claiming the privilege under the Constitution or answering the 
question. 

Mr. Perkins. I refuse to answ^er because the committee is breach- 
ing article 3 of the Constitution, because it is breaching the first 
am.endm.ent to the Constitution which says that people have a right 
to assemble and petition for redress of grievances, and I also assert my 
privilege 

Mr. Moulder. May I interrupt you again to say that you are mak- 
ing statements alleging the reasons you wUl not answer any questions 
that might be propounded to you by counsel or by the com_mittee. 

Now one simple question has been asked 3^ou, and that is where are 
you employed. 

Mr. Perkins. My answ^er is addressed to this particular question. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask that you du'ect the witness to answer the ques- 
tion. And, if he doesn't answer, let's proceed to the next question. 

Mr. Moulder. You are dbected to answer. 

And may I, as w^e have advised other witnesses, advise you to so 
answer not in the spu'it of a threat but for the purpose of informing 
you and advisuig you we do not accept your response to the question, 
and that you are bemg advised of the possible danger of being placed 
in a position of contempt of Congress. 

Therefore, once agam, we ask you to answer the question. 

Mr. Perkins. I repeat the three reasons wdiy I refuse to answer. 

Air. Tavenner. You have no other legal basis for refusing to 
answer? 

Mr. Perkins. You think three isn't enough. Air. Tavenner? 
Three parts of the Constitution? 



COaiMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5067 

Air. ScHERER. Witness, you have been told tliat you are here to 
answer questions and not ask questions of counsel or members of this 
committee. 

You haven't answered any questions. You have refused to answer 
on the basis of Constitutional privileges. 

Let it be understood that I am warning you that you are here to 
answer questions, not to lecture either the committee or counsel. 

Mr. Tavenner, proceed with the next qaestion. 

Mr. Tavenner. Alay I ask another question in regard to this 
witness' refusal to answer? 

Do you rely on the fifth amendment as a basis for your refusal to 
answer? I want the record clear about it. 

Air. Perkins. That is part of my basis for refusing to answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. You do rel.y on the fifth amendment? 

Mr. Perkins. I clearly mentioned that, Mr. Tavenner. 

Air. Tavenner. I didn't hear you. That is the reason I wanted to 
make certain. 

Air. Perkins. I beg yom- pardon. I thought I made it clear. 

Air. Tavenner. Have you been employed by the Wagner Electric 
Co. at any time in the past 5 years? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. ScHERER. Let the record show that the witness consulted with 
counsel 1 minute and 45 seconds before answering the question. 

Air. Perkins. I will assert the same tkree reasons for refusing to 
answer. 

Air. Tavenner. Does that include the fifth amendment? 

Air. Perkins. That includes the fifth amendment. 

Air. Tavenner. Have you held any position or office with the 
L^nited Electrical, Radio, and Alachine Workers of America? 

Air. Perkins. Air. Tavenner, when do I get a chance to cross- 
examine Cortor and Younglove? 

Air. AIoulder. You are directed to answer the question. 

Air. Tavenner. I ask that he be directed to answer. 

Air. AIoulder. You are directed to answer. 

Air. Perkins. Why can't I cross-examine them? 

Mr. Moulder. If you can find them you are at liberty to cross- 
examine them. 

You are directed to answer the question. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. AIoulder. You understand the committee doesn't accept your 
response to the question, and you are now du^ected to answer. 

Mr. Perkins. I give the same three reasons for refusing to answer. 

Air. Scherer. Let me ask, did Cortor or Younglove testify to any- 
thing that was imtrue? Did thc}^ lie to this committee, particularly 
when they testified about your Communist membership? 

Air. Perkins. Is it not very likely. Congressman Scherer, that 
Cortor and Younglove are witnesses who are committing perjury? 
And how can this be brought out without cross-examination? 

Air. Scherer. Let me ask 3^ou, if 3'ou say to this committee at this 
moment that Younglove and Cortor lied about you, then I vy^ill ask 
that your testimony and that of Younglove and Cortor be referred 
to the grand jury or the Department of Justice and they can deter- 
mine. 



5068 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Perkins. But why not here and now? Why not cross-examine 
here and now? 

Mr. Moulder. But you have an opportunity now to affirm or to 
deny or explain any falsehood or mi truthful statement that was made 
by either of those witnesses. 

Mr. Perkins. I want the right to cross-examine, Congressman 
Moulder. Are you denying me that right? 

Mr. Moulder. Why do you not now deny or affirm or explain 
anything about which you now com_plain? 

Mr. Perkins. Is it not the common procedure of the police in- 
former like Cortor or Younglove to get to stay on the payroll by 
fabricating and inventing new information and bringing in new 
names 

Mr. Scherer. Let me ask you again : 

You have charged these men with being informers. I am asking 
you, was anything that Younglove or Cortor said about you untrue? 

Mr. Perkins. How can anything be brought out, Congressman 
Scherer, without 

Mr. Scherer. I am not asking you that question. 

Mr. Perkins. Without cross-examination? 

Why do you deny cross-examination? 

Why didn't you allow Elizabeth Bentley to be cross-examined? 

Then, later, when she was put on the witness stand, she had to 
admit that the things she was telling this committee were not true 

Mr. Scherer. Witness, you are placing yourself in contempt. 
And I am telling you you ought to answer the question. You haven't 
answered the question. 

I ask you to direct the witness to answer the question, Mr. Chair- 
man: Whether anything that either of these two witnesses whom he 
called informers said, anything at all about him, that is untrue. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Moulder. You are so directed to answer the question. You 
have charged them indirectly with perjury. And we would like to 
have that infoimation and know as to what part of their testimony, 
particularly as stated by Mr. Scherer with reference to you, was false 
and untrue. 

Mr. Perkins. I will decline to answer for the same three reasons. 

Mr. Scherer. Sure; you will decline. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now a mem.ber of the Communist Party? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Perkins. I decline to answer for the sam.e three reasons. 

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

Mr. Perkins. I decline to answer for the same three reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Moulder. That is all. 

Call your next witness, please, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Julius Hecht. 

Mr. Moulder. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony which 
you are about to give before the subcommittee will be the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Hecht. I do. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5069 

TESTIMONY OF JULIUS HECHT, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

IRL B. BARIS 

Mr, Tavenner. Will you state your name, please, sir. 

Mr. Hecht. Julius Hecht. 

!Mr. Tavenner. Will counsel accompanying the witness please 
identify himself for the record. 

Mr. Baris. My name is Li B. Baris, attorney at law, St. Louis, 
Mo. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wlien and where were you born, Mr. Hecht? 

Mr. Hecht. St. Louis, February 25, 1915. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliere do you now reside? 

Mr. Hecht. 1600 Faris Avenue. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliat is yom' employment? 

(The \\'itness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Hecht. Well, I don't rightly know. 

As of last Friday I was employed at Bailey Technical School. 
But I was given to understand that as the result of this committee 
hearing that I could be discharged. So I don't knov/. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliat is the nature of your employment at the 
Bailey Technical School? 

Mr. Hecht. I am the assistant chief instructor. I teach physics 
and mathematics. 

]\L-. Tavenner. In June 1951, yom- name was found on a notebook 
of James Sage under circumstances indicating that you were one of a 
gi^oup proposing to attend a convention in Chicago to be held on 
June 29 and 30 sponsored by the American Peace Crusade. 

Can you enlighten us on the reason for yom" name being in that 
book? 

(The Avitness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Hecht. I refuse to answer this question on the grounds of the 
fifth amxcndment, that it might incriminate me. 

Mr. Tavenner. You seem very amused. 

Mr. Hecht. No; I am not really. 

Mr. Tavenner. This is really not an amusing matter at all. 

Mr. Hecht. I didn't think it was amusing at all. Quite the con- 
trary. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party on 
June 18, 1951? 

Mr. Hecht. I will refuse to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know anything of any activity of the 
Communist Party in St. Louis in assisting in organizing a pilgrimage 
to Chicago to attend the convention that I mentioned? 

Mr. Hecht. I refuse to answer that also, same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Mr. Sage known to j^ou as a member of the 
Communist Party? That is, Mr. James Sage. 

Mr. Hecht. I refuse to answer, same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been aware at any time since 1951 of the 
existence of an organized group of the Communist Party in St. Louis 
made up of members of the professions? 

Mr. Hecht. I refuse to answer that, same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. By professions I am referring to teachers, doctors, 
lawyers. 

Mr. Hecht. I have an idea of what a profession is. 



5070 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. You have an idea. 

Were yon a member of any such group? 

Mr. Hecht. I refuse to answer that question, same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee has received testimony here that 
Mr. Cortor was introduced to you by your wife Tbehna Hecht, and 
was told that you were a member of another group of the Communist 
Party. 

The group to which Mr. Cortor belonged was the West Side group. 

Will you tell the committee, please, of what group of the Communist 
Party were you a member? 

Mr. Hecht. I refuse to answer that question, the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Mr. Cortor telling this committee anything 
that was untrue when he said you were introduced to him as a member 
of some other group of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Hecht. I refuse to answer that question also, same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Hecht. I refuse to answer that question also, same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is there any information that you are willing to 
give this committee regarding communism among professional people 
in this area? 

Mr. Hecht. I refuse to answer that question also for the same 
reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions, Mr. Chahman. 

Mr. Moulder. Any questions, Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no questions. 

Mr. Moulder, No questions. 

You are excused as a witness. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I have a few minutes' recess? 

Mr. Moulder. The committee will stand in recess for a period of 
5 minutes. 

(^Vhereupon, a brief recess was taken, there being present at the 
time of taking the recess Representatives Moulder and Scherer.) 
^ (The subcommittee was reconvened at the expiration of the recess, 
there being present at the time of reconvening Representatives 
Moulder and Scherer.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Sol Derman, please. 

Mr. Moulder. 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. Derman. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF SOI DERMAN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
SIDNEY M. GLAZER 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your name? 
Mr. Derman. Sol Derman, D-e-r-m-a-n. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will counsel accompanying the witness please 
identify himself for the record. 

Mr. Glazer. Sidney M. Glazer, of St. Louis. 

]\Ir. Tavenner. When and where were you born, Mr. Derman? 

Mr. Derman. I was born in Poland in 1911. 

Mr. Tavenner. When did you come to this country? 

Mr. Derman. When I was about 9)^ or 10 years old, around 1922. 

Mr. Tavenner. Ai-e you a naturalized American citizen? 



COIVIMIINIST ACTIVITIES IN ST, LOUIS, MO., AREA 5071 

Mr. Derman. Yes. I have derivative papers through my father, 
and that is how I am a citizen. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your father's name? 

Mr. Derman. Aly father's name was Isaac Derman. 

Mr. Tavenner. ^Vhen and where was he naturahzed? 

Mr. Derman. Well, I guess he was naturalized somewhere in New 
York City. The papers that I got on my citizenship state "Southern 
District of New York." When I was about 18 or 16 I received the 
derivative papers. But I guess he was a citizen before I got the 
derivative. 

]Mr. Tavenner. That is right. 

So you were about 18 years of age when you became a citizen by 
derivative citizenship? 

Mr. Derman. 16 or 18; that is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do 3^ou now reside, Mr. Derman? 

Mr. Derman. 4759 Washington Boulevard, St. Louis, zone 8. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what your 
formal educational training has been. 

Mr. Derman. I attended elementary school and high school in 
New York City, and also the College of the City of New York. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wlien did you come to St. Louis? 

Mr, Derman. About 10 years ago. 

Mr, Tavenner. WTiat is your occupation or profession? 

Mr. Derman. Well, I consider myself somewhat of a salesman. I 
am not too successful at it. Right now I am working for a clothing 
store, trying to get more accounts for the store. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with Dr. John F. Rutledge? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Derman. I refuse to answer that question on the basis of the 
fifth amendment, which states that no one is required, compelled to 
be a witness against himself. 

Mr, Tavenner. Did you attend a meeting m January 1948 — or 
at any time in 1948, because I may not have the month exactly 
correct — attended by Ralph Shaw, Douglas MacLeod, Dr. Rutledge, 
and others regarding the activities of Katherine Shiyver in the 
Progressive Party? 

Air. Der:\ian. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds of 
the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at 
any time during the year 1948? 

Mr. Derman. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of an organization formed 
here in St. Louis after the Smith Act defendants had been mdicted, 
entitled "The St. Louis Defense Committee"? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Derman. I refuse to answer that question on the basis of the 
fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliat connection have you had with the Daily 
Worker since 1953? 

Mr. Derman. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds, 

Mr. Tavenner. Testimony has been received that funds were 
being raised in the area of St. Louis by this defense committee organ- 
ized for the defense of the Smith Act defendants, the funds to be 



5072 COMIVIUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

used for the purpose of defraying the expenses of the trial and for 
propaganda purposes. 

Will you tell the committee, please, what you know about the 
propaganda activities of this group and the use of funds for that 
purpose? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Derman. Mr. Tavenner, I will have to decline on the same 
grounds as before. 

Mr. Tavfnner. Did you prepare any material to be used for 
propaganda by the Smith Act defendants? 

Mr. Derman. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you prepare any propaganda to be used by 
the Communist Party in defense of the Smith Act defendants? 

Mr. Derman. I believe the same question. It is the same question. 

Mr. Tavenner. No, sir, it is a different question. 

Mr. Derman. I refuse to answer that on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you the representative of the DaUy Worker 
at the Smith Act trials? 

Mr. Derman. I refuse to answer that on the same grounds and the 
additional grounds of invasion of the first amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. In 1953 were you the executive secretary of the 
Progressive Part}^ in St. Louis? 

Mr. Derman. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds of 
the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. I said in St. Louis. I meant for the State of 
Missouri. 

W^ould that change your answer? 

Mr. Derman. No, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Derman. I refuse to answer that on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been a member of the Communist Party 
at any time that I have not specificall}' inquired about? 

Mr. Derman. I decline to answer on the grounds of the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Moulder. Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. No questions. 

Mr. Moulder. No further questions. 

You are excused as a witness. 

Call the next witness, please. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Douglas MacLeod. 

Mr. Moulder. Please be sworn, Mr. MacLeod. 

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

Mr. MacLeod. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF DOUGLAS MacLEOD, ACCOMPAWIED BY COUNSEL, 
CLIFFORD A. FALZONE 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your name, please, sir. 
Mr. MacLeod. My name is Douglas MacLeod. 
Mr. Tavenner. Will counsel accompanying the witness please 
identify himself for the record. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5073 

Mr. Falzone. Clifl'ord A. Falzone of the St. Louis County bar. 

Mr. Tavenner. When and where were you born, Mr. MacLeod? 

Mr. MacLeod. July 4, 1908, KaoHn, Russell County, Ala. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you now reside? 

Mr. MacLeod. I reside in University City, 7446 Melrose Avenue, 
Missouri. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you lived in Missoiu-i? 

Mr. MacLeod. I have lived in Missouri since 1945, late October, 
when I was discharged from tlie United States Army Air Force. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long did you serve in the Armed Forces of the 
United States? 

Mr. MacLeod. Just under 4 years, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Tavenner. Prior to your service in the Armed Forces where 
did you live? 

Mr. MacLeod. I lived in New York City. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long did you live in New York City? 

Mr. MacLeod. Continuously for a period of about Bji years, I 
believe, prior to my induction into the Army. 

Mr. Tavenner. That would take you back approximately to 1936? 

Mr. MacLeod. I believe that is correct; yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. What service did you have in the United States 
Army? What branch of the service? 

Mr. MacLeod. I was in the Air Corps. 

Mr. Tavenner. Stationed in this country or in foreign countries? 

Mr. MacLeod. 23 months in the European Theater of Operations; 
the rest of the time domestic. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you acquu-e the rank of an oflScer? 

Mr. MacLeod. The lowest rank of noncommissioned officer — 
corporal. 

Mr. Tavenner. First let me ask 3'ou what is your profession. 

Mr. MacLeod. I am an attorney, a lawyer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Practicing in St. Louis? 

Mr. MacLeod. Practicing here in St. Louis. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you practiced law in St. Louis? 

Mr. ^L\cLeod. Since 1948. I was admitted to the bar in Missouri 
in 1947, but I have been practicing law here since 1948. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, what j^our 
formal educational training has been. 

Mr. MacLeod. Public schools in Alabama, in a number of com- 
munities, tlu'ough the high-school level; University of Alabama — 
academic and law. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wlien did jou complete your law at the University 
of Alabama? 

Mr. MacLeod. 1934. 

Mr. Tavenner. How were you employed ia New York City? 

Mr. MacLeod. In New York City I was employed in a number of 
different capacities, Mr. Tavenner. The fij-st employment, I believe, 
was as a clerk in a lawyer's office. 

From 1936 on — You are referring to that particular period? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. MacLeod. I was employed as a clerk in a lawyer's office for a 
very brief period, and I was employed as an editor of textbooks called 
Corpus Jm'is Secundum, published by the American Law Book Co. 



5074 COMMUNIST ACTH'ITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

I subsequently was employed as an attorney in a law office on a 
salary, and subsequently in the liquor department of R. H. Alacy & 
Co., and thereafter 

I may overlook some of these because during the depression I had 
a number of very brief jobs that lasted only a short while. 

The next employment that I had that I can recall specifically: I 
was employed as a teacher on the WPA in New York City. 

]Mr. Tavexner. During what period of time were you so employed? 

Mr. MacLeod. That was about 1938 or 1939. I am not sure 
when that employment began. And it ended either in 1940 or 1941. 
I believe 1941. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you familiar with the unemployed councils 
in New York City at that time? 

Mr. MacLeod. I don't have anj^ independent recollection of any 
miemployed councils. 

Air. Tavenner. The Workers Alliance? 

Air. MacLeod. I know that there was such an organization. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were 3^ou a member of it? 

Mr. MacLeod. I am strongly tempted to answer tliat question 
posit ivel}", but I would be a little afraid to, Mr. Tavenner. I am 
afraid I would have to raise some legal objections at that point simply 
in order to be certain to protect my interests. 

Mr. Tavenner. You are uncertain about it. That is really the 
substance of what you are saving here? 

Air. AIacLeod. Yes; I might say that. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your employment between 1934 and 
1936? 

Air. AIacLeod. I was employed for a brief period as a relief in- 
vestigator in Tuscaloosa County, Ala., and I was employed for a 
brief period as an abstractor of titles in an oil boom community in 
Texas — Crockett, Tex. ; and similarlj^ sporadically employed in Texas 
in the Rio Grande Valley for a ver}^ brief period, also in connection 
with oil work. And I was emplo^^ed for a brief period as a copy 
reader for the Chicago Herald and Examiner at the end of 1934. 
And I went to work for a manufacturing establishment called O. D. 
Jennings & Co. in Chicago, 111., in, I believe it was, January or 
February of 1935. 

I returned to Alabama and practiced law in 1935 and 1936 until I 
departed for New York. 

Air. Tavenner. Air. AIacLeod, is there an organization in St. 
Louis at this time known as the National Lawyers Guild? 

Air. MacLeod. In St. Louis there is no such organization. 

Air. Tavenner. Is there any chapter of that organization in the 
State of Alissouri as far as you know? 

Air. AIacLeod. Not to my iaiowledge. As a matter of fact, I 
think I can sa}^ positively that there is not. 

Air. Tavenner. Has there been a chapter of the National Lawyers 
Guild at any recent time in St. Louis? 

Air. MacLeod. I have heard of such a chapter, but I am not 
personally acquainted with it. Only 

I am not, or any of its functions. 

Air. Tavenner. Air. MacLeod, are you aware of the existence of 
an organized group of the Communist Party at this time in St. Louis 
composed chiefly of memh-ers of tlie professions? 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5075 

Mr. AIacLeod. As to that question, Mr. Counsel, I will Lave to 
invoke some objections and some of tbe legal reasons why I object. 
And, in order to clarify my objections, I think it would serve to clarify 
the record and to save the time of the com.mittee if the cl! airman would 
care to state a little more specifically than hitherto has been done the 
legislative purpose which underlies this present inquiry and, in par- 
ticular, my testimony in relation to it. 

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

Mr. ]MouLDER. The witness is directed to answer it. 

Mr. MacLeod. Mr. Chairman, I am simply planning to raise some 
objections to tJ e question on the basis of pertinence. And, in order 
to know just what the area of pertinence is, I think I sliould know what 
the legislative purpose is. 

Mr. ScHERER. You are a member of the bar, and this is not the 
forum in which you can raise any objections to the question. Nor 
can you ask the committee any questions. If eventually the matter 
gets to court that is the place where you can raise objections as to the 
jurisdiction of the committee or the purpose and the law and so forth. 

Mr. MacLeod. Very well, Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. You can either answer the question or refuse to 
answer, invoking your constitutional privilege. 

Mr. MacLeod. At this time I wish to entertain the following objec- 
tions to the committee. 

First 

Mr. Scherer. May I point out respectfully that you have no right 
to object to any ciuestion. You have a right either to answer or to 
refuse to answer. 

If you think that the questions asked are improper or beyond the 
jiu'isdiction of the committee you as a law^^er know that you can raise 
tliat in a court if this matter eventually gets to court. 

Mr. MacLeod. I was simply attempting to draw what I think is an 
important legal distinction in connection with any record whicJ) any 
court may subsequently be required to pass upon. 

There is a distinction between o])jections to the Ciuestion and reasons 
for not answering it, and I would like to keep those matters separate. 

However, I will confuse them if it is necessary, if I have to do it. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, I ask that j^ou direct the witness to 
answer the cpiestion. 

Mr. Moulder. The witness is directed to ansvv'er the question. 

Mr. MacLeod. All right, Mr. Chairman, I will have to decline to 
answer the question, the reason being that it is not pertinent to au}^ 
proper legislative function of this committee — one. 

Second, that th.e ciuestion is beyond the scope of the Constitution — ■ 
the congressional Resolution 601, under which this connnittee is em- 
poweretl to act; 

Thu'd, that the inquiry is beyond the power of Congress in that it 
invades an area which Congress is forbidden by the Constitution to 
legislate in. I refer to article 3, section 3 of the Constitution, which 
concerns itself with the offense of treason. 

I insist that this committee is going into the area of treason, and 
that, under the Constitution, Congress is forbidden from doing any- 
thing about that area. 

81594—56 — pt. 4 7 



5076 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Further, that the question does not requu-e an answer because it 
violates the first amendment to the Constitution, both in the respect 
that if it has to do with legislation such legislation would be violative 
of the first amendment, and, secondly, in that it violates my individual 
right under the first amendment to remain silent as well as a corollary 
to the right to speak. 

Also, as an additional reason, to which I attach no special legal 
significance other than the significance normally to be accorded the 
exercise of that right, the fifth amendment in that I apprehend that 
the answer which I might give to that question or any answer that I 
might give to that question might conceivably be a link in a chain 
M^hich would result in some type of prosecution involving me. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I interrupt you there. 

You say you give no significance to the fifth amendment which you 
asserted as a legal grounds for your refusal to answer. I am not 
certain I understand what you mean. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. You mean you are just saying it without relying 
on it? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. MacLeod. I didn't mean to convey that impression, Mr. 
Tavenner. 

I think you misunderstood me. 

I in no way take away from the fifth amendment as a part of the 
fundamental law. I am proud of the fact that we have it. 

I think that some of the emphasis that has been made in regard to 
the fifth amendment has a tendency to lower the prestige of that 
amendment. I certainly wouldn't want to be a party to anything 
of that character. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do 3^ou rely on it? That is the point I make. 

Mr. MacLeod. I rely on it, but I do not rely on it to any greater 
extent than I rely on each of the other constitutional gromids which 
I have specified. 

And, m particular, I want to emphasize the first which I specified. 

Mr. ScHERER. Regular order. 

He has answered. He has relied on the fifth amendment, I think, 
sufficiently and properly. 

Mr. MacLeod. You mean, Mr. Scherer, you recognize only the 
fifth amendment? 

Mr. ScHERER. Only the fifth amendment. 

Mr. MacLeod. But I recognize the entire Constitution, Mr. 
Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. Regular order. 

Mr. Moulder. Proceed w^ith the next question, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. MacLeod, it has been our understanding from 
testimony that we have from time to time received that one of the 
functions of the professional group of the Communist Party is to 
assist other groups and sections of the Communist Party in the various 
problems with which they are confronted. For instance, we have 
heard, particularly in Albany, N. Y., that at that place the particular 
function of the professional cell of the Communist Party was to go 
out into the railroad shops and assist in the organizing of a railroad 
section of the Communist Party. 



COIVIMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5077 

We are anxious to know just what function or functions the pro- 
fessional cell of the Communist Party in St. Louis performed. 

Do you have any knowledge on the subject? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. MacLeod. I will decline to answer that question for all of 
the reasons previously stated, and, in addition, I would like to add 
two other reasons since the question particularly concerns itself with 
professional activities and the fact that my profession is that of a 
lawyer. 

In that this question invades the judiciary, it is an attempt by the 
legislative branch to undertake to police the bar, which is a judicial 
function, the bar being a branch of the court. 

As far as the Federal Government is concerned, it is a violation of 
the separation of powers. 

As far as the State of Missouri is concerned, it is a violation of the 
10th amendment of the Constitution of the United States in that it 
is a wholly unwarranted attempt on the part of the committee to go 
into matters relating to the legal professions, which are the proper 
concern of the courts of Missouri. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you, as a member of the professional group 
of the Communist Party, assist other Communist Party groups in 
any services of any type? 

Mr. MacLeod. I will decline to answer that for all of the reasons 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you, as a member of the professional group 
of the Communist Party, serve the Communist Party as a teacher 
on any occasion? 

Mr. MacLeod. Now, Mr. Tavenner, of course, you realize that 
that is a loaded question. It carries a number of assumptions. I 
don't think in that form that I should even be required to answer 
the question. 

Mr. Tavenner. I will very gladly change the question so that it 
will meet your objection. 

Did you teach or instruct in any Communist Party group? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. MacLeod. There again, Mr. Tavenner, it is with extreme 
reluctance that I feel required to invoke my rights in connection 
with this question. 

Mr. ScHERER. Do you invoke those rights? 

Mr. MacLeod. I do as is perfectly clear from my answer, Mr. 
Scherer. i*® " 

Mr. Scherer. Does that include a refusal to answer on the basis 
that if you did answer you feel that in good faith to do so might tend 
to, in some way, incriminate you? 

Mr. MacLeod. I believe the Supreme Court has said, Mr. Scherer, 
that it is sufficient if injurious disclosure could result. I prefer that 
language, their language. 

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

Mr. Moulder. The v/itness is so directed. 

Mr. MacLeod. I believe the question is answered, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Scherer. I think we should say, as we are required to do by a 
decision of the Supreme Court, that we do not accept your answer, 
and we do not feel that it is an answer to the question. 



5078 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. MacLeod. I asserted as clearl,y as I could, Mr. Scherer, all of 
the constitutional grounds I had previously asserted. 

Mr. Scherer. And when it is not clear the Court enjoins us to ask 
you specifically whether or not you in good faith feel that to ansv/er 
the question pro])ounded might tend to lead to a criminal prosecution. 
We are directed by the Court to do that, and I am complying with that 
decision of the Court. 

Mr. MacLeod. I thuik that 

Mr. Scherer. And you must either answer "Yes" or "No" to that 
question. 

Mr. MacLeod. I will answer that I think it might be a link m a 
chain which might result in criminal prosecution. 

Manj^ such prosecutions have resulted in this particular period that 
we live in. 

Air. vScherer. You have proper!}^ answered my question. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you acquainted with Thomas Younglove? 

Mr. MacLeod. I certainly would have to decline to answer that 
question on all of the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Again I don't want to quibble, but I think for your 
own protection you must say that you do decline for the reasons 
stated. 

Mr. MacLeod. I do decline. 

Mr. Scherer. That is right. 

Mr. MacLeod. I do. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Younglove testified before this committee 
that was a school conducted by the Communist Party in 1945 or the 
early part of 1946. He named the instructors in the group, and 
named some of those wdio attended the group as students. All of the 
mstructors, he said, were members of the Communist Party, and only 
members of the Communist Party were permitted to attend the school. 
He described you as one of the teachers at that school. 

Was his testimony true or false insofar as it related to you? 

Mr. AIacLeod. Well, again, Mr. Tavenner, I can't allow myself 
to be provoked by my feelings into makmg an injudicious answer 
which might lead to institution of proceedings against me. So I 
particularly uivoke the fifth amendment in respect to that question. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Younglove further testified that while attend- 
ing the party school, from October 1945, to February 1946, at 2851 
Gravois, Douglas MacLeod was an mstructor at the school and stated 
in the course of a lecture that socialism would never come about by 
the use of the ballot box. We would have to use violent force 
and action. 

Did you make any such statement as tliat in the com-se of yom* 
lecture, or did you say that in substance to the gi'oup? 

Air. MacLeod. Well, I would like to ask you, Mr. Tavenner, if 3^ou 
think it is conceivable that I could have said something like that. 

Air. Tavenner. I haven't known you as long as Air. Younglove has. 

Air. AIouLDER. That is not responsive to the question. 

Air. Scherer. I ask j'ou direct the witness to answer. 

Air. AIouLDER. The witness is directed to answer. 

Air. Scherer. You have an opportunity now to den}^ it. 

Air. AIacLeod. A trap, Air. Sclierer, a trap. 

I assert all of the constitutional grounds I have previouslj- asserted. 

Air. Scherer. Tlial would lead me to believe then that Younglove 
was telling the truth. 



C0:MMUXIST activities est ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5079 

Mr. MacLeod. It might lead j'ou to believe anything you like, 
Mr. Schcrcr. 

Mr. Tavenner. Arc 3"ou acquainted with Mr, Joseph John 
Schoemehl? 

Mr. IMacLeod. I believe he was one of the friendly witnesses, was 
he not, Mr. Tavenner? 

Mr. Tavenner. He was a witness before this committee. 

Mr. MacLeod. Who named names and told about people. 

Mr. Tavexner. I think he told us honestly what lie could recall 
about the activities he observed while a mxcmber of the Communist 
Party. 

Mr. MacLeod. I might draw a different inference, but I would have 
to, in view of the fact that he is one of yoiu- informers, specifically 
reassert each constitutional ground previously asserted. 

Mr. Scherer. Do you know Joseph Schoemehl? 

Mr. MacLeod. I will reassert all of the grounds previously as- 
serted. 

Mr. Scherer. You attempt to stigmatize him by calling him an 
informer. He was and is a loyal American who did a good job for his 
Government. 

Mr. MacLeod. That is your view, Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. Yes. And he sacrificed a great deal to give to his 
Government information about the operation of the Communist con- 
spu'acy. 

Now you have an opportunity, after stigmatizing him in that way, 
to say whether or not he lied in any respect. He was under oath be- 
fore this committee. You have the opportunity now to say whether 
he lied in any respect insofar as the testimony concerns you. 

Mr. MacLeod. I am not grateful for the opportunity, Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. I understand. 

Mr. MacLeod. You offered it so solicitously I thought j^ou might 
expect me to be grateful. 

Mr. Scherer. No, I didn't expect it. Frankly, I expected you to 
invoke the fifth amendment. That is what I expected you to do. 

Mr. MacLeod. Why emphasize the fifth, Mr. Scherer? 

Is that a particularly smelly part of the Constitution to you? 

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

Mr. MacLeod. Is there a question? 

Mr. Scherer. So there is no question as to the status of the 
record, is there anything Mr. Schoemehl said about you in his testi- 
mony before this committee that was untrue? 

Mr. MacLeod. I haven't the faintest idea what Mr. Schoemehl said 
in the first place. But, regardless of what he said, I wouldn't dignify 
it by an answer. And I certainly would assert all constitutional 
privileges. 

Mr. Scherer. Without knowing what Mr. Schoemelil said, you are 
telling us you would refuse to answer any questions with reference to 
his testimony? Without knowing what he said? 

Mr. MacLeod. Apparently you didn't think it was necessary that 
I know, Air. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. Was Mr. Schoemehl lying to this committee when he 
said that you were a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. MacLeod. I don't know what Mr. Schoemehl said. 



5080 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. ScHERER. I am telling you then if you don't know, that he 

Mr. MacLeod. With respect to any such testimony I reassert all 
of the constitutional objections previously advanced. 

Mr. ScHERER. Would you let me finish my question? Because I 
didn't finish it. And then you can answer. 

Was Mr. Schoemehl lying when he told this committee under oath 
that you were a member of the Communist Party? 

Air. MacLeod. In reply to that question I reassert all of the con- 
stitutional considerations wdiich I think are involved in that question 
and which privilege me from answering the question, entitle me to 
refuse to answer it. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Schoemehl testified that he attended what 
was laiown as the Basic Training Institute of the Communist Party, 
which is a different school from that which Mr. Younglove was speak- 
ing of, and that, according to his recollection, you made one lectiu"e 
at that school. Do 3'ou recall having done so? 

Mr. MacLeod. Well, there again it is one of tliose situations where, 
strong as the temptation may be, I will have to invoke my constitu- 
tional privileges. 

Mr. Tavenner. And refuse to answer? 

Mr. JNIacLeod. And refuse to answer for all of the reasons previously 
specified. 

Mr. Tavenner. And you do so refuse? 

Mr. MacLeod. And I do. 

Mr. Tavenner. I deshe to read to you a short portion of the testi- 
mony which followed his description of the school: 

Mr. Tavenner. Did j'ou have occasion, after the conduct of this school, to 
attend Communist Party meetings with Douglas MacLeod? 

Mr. Schoemehl. I can't remember any certain specific time, because I met 
them — it was just the usual thing, you know. There was nothing unusual about 
meeting them. And at this time it wouldn't register with me when I saw them 
after that because I met them from time to time, on the streets and otherwise. 
It would be hard for me to say because it has been over 5 j'ears since I was in 
much of the activities there. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did Douglas MacLeod attend any meetings of the Communist 
Party at which you were present? 

Mr. Schoemehl. At general mero.bership meetings, yes. 

Mr. Scherer. Were those general membership meetings closed Communist 
Party rreetings? 

Mr. Schoemehl. They were closed meetings, Communist Party meetings. 
Only Communist Party members were supposed to be there. 

I would like to ask 3^ou whether or not Air. Schoemehl is correct in 
stating that you attended the general membership meetings of the 
Communist Party after the date of this school wdiich was in 1946. 

Mr. MacLeod. And wlien you read that lengthy excerpt from the 
testimony of your informer, sir, did you expect me to answer that 
question any other way than previously I answered them? 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I ask a dhection of the witness. 

Mr. AlouLDER. The witness is directed to answer the question. 

Mr. MacLeod. And the reply is identical to the previous replies, 
in that I invoke all of the constitutional rights previously recited. 

Air. Tavenner. Air. AlacLeod, this committee has at various 
places in the country made special inquiry and investigation regarding 
the practice of signing non-Communist affidavits by employees of 
various labor unions required under the Taft-Hartley Act to sign such 
affidavits. 



COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5081 

I desii-e to make it plain I am not asking you to give tliis committee 
information regarding anj^ client that you have represented in any 
such proceeding involving one of those affidavits, but I do want to ask 
you whether or not you have any kno\vdedge of the practice of the 
Communist Party in advising its members how to use this non-Com- 
munist affidavit as required by law. 

Mr. MacLeod. Mr. Tavenner, I think that is an insinuation framed 
as a question. I think it is an insult to me as a lawyer. 

Mr. ScHERER. Just a minute. 

You said that is an insinuation. Is the insinuation of Mr. Tavenner 
correct? 

Mr. MacIjEod. Ai-e you accusing me, Congi-essman Scherer, of 
conniving at perjury? 

Mr. Scherer. No. 

Mr. MacLeod. It sounds like it. 

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

Mr. Moulder. The witness is directed to answer. 

As I understand the question, it is whether or not you have any 
knowledge 

Mr. Scherer. No. 

The question was whether the insinuation he referred to, he alleges 
to have been made by Mr. Tavenner in the question, was correct. 

Is there anything wrong with that insinuation? 

Mr. MacLeod. There is lots wrong with that insinuation. 

Mr. Scherer. Tell us what is wrong. 

Mr. MacLeod. It is an insmuation that a member of the bar might 
conceivably connive at perjury, which is such a fantastically remote 
thing from any proper legislative function of this committee that I 
don't see how he has the colossal nerve to ask the question. 

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

Mr. Moulder. The witness is so directed. 

Mr. MacLeod. The answer to the question is the same as all the 
other grounds, the full, the whole load. 

Mr, Moulder. What is your question, Mr. Tavemier? 

Mr. Tavenner. My question was whether or not he has any 
knowledge of a Communist Partly plan as to how non-Connnunist 
affidavits were to be prepared by persons who are members of the 
Commimist Party and who are required by law, by virtue of their 
employment, to sign the non-Comimunist affidavit. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. MacLeod. The answer is that the question is objectionable 
for all the reasons previously stated, and I decline to answer for all 
the reasons previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are 3^ou now a member of the Communist Party, 
Mr. MacLeod? 

Mr. MacLeod. Same answer; same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party in 
New York City prior to your entering the Armed Forces of the 
United States? 

Mr. MacLeod. Same answer; same reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been a member of the Communist 
Party at any time about which I have not made specific inquiry'"? 

Mr. MacLeod. Same answer; same reasons. 



5082 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Moulder. Mr. Tavenner, may I inquire? 

As I recall the testimony of Mr. Schoemehl there was some testi- 
mony on his part concerning the meetings held at headquarters on 
Grand Avenue in St. Louis where lectm-es and speeches were made 
and advice given by Mr. MacLeod as to the conduct of members of 
the Commmiist Party. 

Do you recall such testimony? 

Mr. Tavenner. I believe Mr. Younglove is the person who gave 
the testimony to which you are referring. 

Mr. Schoemehl testified that Mr. MacLeod lectm-ed on one occasion. 
He did not state anything about the content of his lectiu-e. 

Mr. Moulder. That was Jones. 

Mr. Tavenner. No, su\ That is my recollection of it. 

I could be in error. 

Mr. Moulder. Do you have any questions, Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. No questions. 

Mr. Moulder. I have no questioiis. 

The witness is excused. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now, Mr. Chahman, may I make several observa- 
tions? 

Mr. Moulder. Yes, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. I want to say that during the absence yesterday 
of the committee in Washington, tlie staff endeavored to continue 
with its investigation here, and found that certain labor unions have 
been very active in attempting to solve problems relating to com- 
munism. And the staff felt quite reassured because of representations 
made by representatives from Local 25, United Auto Workers, CIO, 
of then alertness to this whole subject we have been discussing, and 
hearing evidence at this hearing. 

I would like also to say to the committee at this time that because 
of the shortness of time, the interruptions the committee has had, we 
have not been able to present to you all of the witnesses. I think I 
should say that two witnesses were excused because of a death in the 
family, at least two because of serious illness according to doctors' 
certificates, and that there have been som.e witnesses we just haven't 
had an opportunity to call, haven't had time to reach. 

I do not Iviiow what decision the committee may want to make after 
returning to Washington and studying these matters, as to whether or 
not any of those not called will be called. But I thought the record 
should show that at this point. 

Mr. Moulder. At future hearings here in St. Louis? 

Mr. Tavenner. Or any other place. I am not sure. I am not 
ready to make any recommendations to you about it. 

Mr. Moulder. Do you have a statement to make, Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Tavenner's statement to the effect that the 
labor unions liere in St. Louis are alerted to the problem makes me say 
that I think that one of the most significant and important develop- 
ments resulting in the hearings here in St. Louis was the testimony 
relatmg to the Communist Partj^ attempts to colonize industry. 

While this committee has been in existence for many years, it was 
not until a year and a half ago or possibly 2 j^ears ago that the com- 



COMMUisriST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 5083 

mittee learned for the first time of one of the activities of the Com- 
munist Party, namely, the colonization of industry. 

Many people do not understand what is meant by the colonization 
of industry. 

Wliat we have heard during these 5 days in St. Louis shows that 
such attempts were made in this area. I refer to the testimony taken 
in Michigan 2 years ago that showed conclusively that the Commimist 
Party was taking persons highly educated and higldy ti-ained from the 
East Coast and sending them into the automobile and other industries 
in tlie State of Alichigan to work at menial jobs. 

It showed that these intellectuals who went to Michigan at the 
du-ection of the Commimist Party m making application for positions 
in those industries falsely represented their educational background. 

We found Connnunists who had master's degrees who, in their 
applications, stated that their education consisted oidy of high school 
or elementary training. 

\Mien they finally obtained a position through making such false 
allegations, a position either on the assembly line or som_e other 
menial task, they did not disclose to then- fellow workmen that they 
had been sent there by the Communist Party. They did not disclose 
their educational background, and did not disclose the fact that they 
v/ere there on the assembly line m an effort to indoctrinate their 
fellow worlonen into some of the philosophy of the Communist 
conspiracy. 

There v/ere at least 5 witnesses, as I recall, who appeared before us 
here in St. Louis, 3 of whom, I believe, had master's degrees, 2 of 
them from Washington University, who followed the same pattern 
as was followed by Communists in Michigan, as I have just described. 

These individuals who appeared before us here and, who were 
higjdy trained, m.ade similar applications to industries in this area, 
failing to disclose their educational background in the manner that 
I have described was done in the State of Michigan. 

So I tl'ink it is a fine tiding if the unions here in this community 
are alerted as a result of that testimony. To that extent at least I 
feel these hearings were worth while. 

Mr. Moulder. I am sure the unions will take diligent and effec- 
tive notice of such influence in their organizations. 

Now that we have come to tlie close of this hearing I want the 
record to show that the Committee on Un-American Activities is 
deeply appreciative of the action taken hy the Honorable Koy W. 
Harper, judge of the United States District Coui't for the Eastern 
District of Missouri, in making this splendid courtroom available to 
the Congress for the conduct of these hearings. 

We are not unmindfid of the fact that this action on his part was 
accompanied by considerable sacrifice and inconvenience, necessitat- 
ing, as it did, the holding of court and trial of cases in quarters not 
well adapted for those purposes. Pie has contributed materially to 
the success of the hearmgs and the comfort and convenience of the 
committee and its staff. 

I desire also to take this opportunity to thank Omar L. Schnatmeier, 
United States marshal, and the competent members of his staff; the 
superintendent who is m charge of the Federal Building, Edwin R. 



5084 COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN ST. LOUIS, MO., AREA 

Hoelsher; and the chief of police, Col. Jeremiah O'Connell, and the 
capable members of his staff for the invaluable service they have 
rendered the committee in connection with this hearing. 

The evidence produced during the hearmgs in St. Ijouis and in 
other industrial cities shows the need for legislation to compel and 
assure stricter and more extensive measures and regulations by all 
industries against possible Communist sabotage and work stoppages, 
especially in those industries engaged in vital defense production 
under contracts with our Government, 

Other valuable information has been submitted before the committee 
during this week which shows the methods used by Communists in 
their efforts to infiltrate and influence certain organizations and 
occupational segments of our population. 

We believe the testimony presented here corroborates similar 
testimony secured in other cities showing that the Communist Party 
of the United States is a part of an international conspiracy to promote 
the policy of a foreign power which seeks to control and dominate the 
world. 

All of the evidence presented here Avill be printed and carefully 
studied by the committee, and our report and recommendation will 
be made by the committee as soon as possible. 

Last, but by no means least, we sincerely emiphasize our congratu- 
lations to the press for the valuable and excellent and objective 
reporting coverage which they have provided durmg the hearings 
this week in St. Louis. 

Thank you very much. 

The committee \vill be adjourned. 

(Whereupon, at 6: 20 p. m., Friday, June 8, 1956, the subcommittee 
w^as recessed subject to the call of the Chah; there being present at 
the time of the recess Representatives Moulder and Scherer.) 



INDEX 



Individuals 

Aukamp, Helen, also known as DorothJ^ (See Sage, Helen.) Page 

Baldwin, Beaney C 5038 

Baris, Irl B 4825, 4864, 5069 

Barker, Dave 4734 

Becker, Jack 5041, 5042 

Benjamin, Herbert 5031, 5034, 5046 

Benj amin, Lillian 5046 

Bentley, Elizabeth 5068 

Berger, Sadelle (Mrs. Sidney Berger) 4861, 4878, 48S0, 4882 

Berger, Sid ley 48 U 

Browder, Earl 4835, 4836, 4843 

Buckich, Andrew 4S39, 4858 

Budenz, Louis 5032 

Bush (father of Margaret Bush Wilson) 5044 

Carpenter, ZoUie C 4734, 4850, 4869-4876 (testimony), 4926, 4'^61 

Chaunt, Peter 4735 

Chinnici, Sam 4840 

Cohn, Joseph 5004, 5017. 5026 

Cohn, Roy 5061 

Cook, Rudolph B 5019 

Cooper, James 4 39 

Cortor, William W_ 4724-4757 (testimonv), 4758-4760 (testimony), 4779, 4795, 
4796, 4816, 4826, 4830, 4878, 4884, 4899, 5003, 5067, 50C8, :070 

Cuttier, Marie 4859 

Davis, William E 4739, 4748, 4756, 4895-4898 (testimony) 

Davison, Leslie S 4793-4794 (testimony) 

Day, Harvey John 4750, 

4751, 4753, 4818-4824 (testimony), 4961, 4962, 5049, 5050 

Decavitch. Victor 4742 

Derman, Isaac 5071 

Derman, Sol 4751, 4984, 4985, 5070-5072 (testimony) 

Dolan, Graham 5019 

Douglas, Leonard 5043 

Duclos, Jacques 4836 

Drew, Carolyn (Mrs. Alfred Wagenknecht) 4726, 4735, 4749 

Eckert, Kenneth 5018, 5019 

Edsell, Harold 4839, 4858 

Eisler, Gerhart 4766, 4974 

England, Louis K 4839, 4962 

Evans, Shepard R 5058, 5065 

Falzone. Clifford A 5072 

Field, Ralph 5030, 5031 

Fiering, Clara Wernick (Mrs. Henry Fiering) 4726, 4735, 4743 

Fiering, Henry l.._ 4725, 4726, 4734, 4735, 4739, 4740, 4743 

Fischer, Louis 5030 

Fite, Anna 4859 

Fite, Joe 4859 

Forrest, Dorothy (Mrs. James Forrest) 4751, 4954, 4959, 4998 

Forrest, James 4782, 4946, 4954, 4958, 4959, 4990, 4997, 4998, 5046, 5047 

Forrester, Paul 4844, 4845, 4846 

Foster, William Z 4848 

Friedman, Al 4859, 4860, 4893, 5037 

Glazer, Sidney M 5070 

Gold, Ben 4999 

i 



li INDEX 

Page 

Gowgiel, Florence 4756, 4757 

Granich, Grace 4922 

Grimm, Tom 4856 

Hall, Annabelle (Mrs. Gilbert Harold Hall) 4840 

Hall, Gilbert Harold . 4751, 

4840, 4855, 4856, 4924, 4962, 4986, 4940-4943 (testimony) 

Hammack, Loval 4966-4971 (testimony), 5013 

Harap, Louis 5062, 5063 

Hardy, George V. L 4769, 4775, 4770, 4971-4977 (testimony) 

Hardvman, Hugh 5053, 5054 

Hauber, Elsie 4759, 4779, 5003 

Haug, Fred 4743 

Haug, Marie (Mrs. Fred Haug) 4743 

Hecht, Julius 4746, 5069-5079 (testimony) 

Hecht, Thelma (Mrs. Julius Hecht) . _ __ 4745, 

4746, 4750, 4751, 4754, 4780, 4825-4828 (testimony), 5070 

Heflfner, Olive (Mrs. Roger Heffner) 4837, 4839, 4893 

Heffner, Roger 4837, 4839, 4962, 4963 

Hennelly, Mark M 4889 

Hogan, Bob 4856, 4857 

Holland, Ida (Mrs. William Holland) 4755, 4780, 4899-4902 (testimony) 

Holland, William Henry 4753, 

4778, 4779, 4808-4818 (testimony), 4833, 4899 

Hudson, Romey 4748, 4751, 4779, 

4844, 4859, 4945-4946 (testimony), 4958, 4997, 5014, 5015, 5054 

Jans, Paul 5032. 5037 

Jones, Obadiah 4981-4991 (testimony) 

Kendle (or Tendle), Simon 4751 

Kern, Joe __ 4744 

Khokhlov, Nikolai 4738, 4862, 4863, 4937 

Kimmcl, George 4726, 4967-4970, 

5004-5013 (testimony), 5017, 5019, 5024, 5026-5027 (testimony) 

Kimmel, Louis 4726, 4734, 4757, 4830, 4963 

Kirkendall, Kermit M 4740,4741 

Klein, Joseph 4852 

Kling, Ann Yasgur 4844, 

4845, 4912-4940 (testimony), 4953, 4954, 4994, 5046, 5047 
Koch, Ray 4731, 4732, 4781, 4930, 4946, 

4953, 4957, 4958, 4959, 4967, 4969, 4979, 4997, 4998, 5013, 5046 

Koritz, PhDip 5006, 5007, 5062 

Kozak, Joseph 4839,4857, 5033, 5037 

Krooks, Paul 4839 

Larson, Whirlwind 4852, 4853 

Leach , Ory ille 4734, 4746, 4779, 4864-4869 (testimony) 

Logsdon, Bob 5045 

Londe, Dr. Sol 4749, 

4889-4894 (testimony), 4933-4936, 4960, 4961, 4985 

Londe, Mrs. Sol 4933,4934,4960 

MacLeod, Carolj'n (Mrs. Douglas MacLeod) 4835,4837,4838 

MacLeod, Douglas 4818, 

4837, 4838, 4842, 4954, 4955. 4957, 4986, 4987, 5043, 5044, 5060, 

5061, 5071, 5072-5082 (testimony). 

Manewitz, Esther 4856 

Manewitz, Fann}' (Mrs. Sam Manewitz) 4856 

Manewitz, Irma 5046, 5049, 5050 

Manewitz, Robert 4727, 4731, 4733, 4745, 

4746, 4747, 4843, 4856, 4953, 4954, 4959, 4998, 5046, 5049, 5050 

Manewitz, Sam 4856 

Mariz, Frank (Maritz) 4751 

Maschoff, Otto 4734, 4780 

Massiugale, William 4760, 4780, 4844, 4850, 4963, 4964, 4983, 5039 

McKenzie, Howard 1 4738 

Medina, Harold R., Judge 4847 

Mertz, Harry 4850 

Metcalf, Robert M 4742 

Miller, Bruce 4752, 4839, 4964 



INDEX m 

Page 

Miller, Laura (Mrs. Bruce Miller) 4752, 4839, 4841, 4964 

Miller, Otto 4726, 4727 

Montoya, Alfredo 5019 

Moore, James 4964 

Moore, James Ted 4835, 4839, 4859, 4964 

Moore, Agnes (Mrs. James Ted Moore) 4839 

Morris, George, 4789 

Morgan 4845 

Morton, Anthony 50 19 

Murphy, Al Marcus 4731, 

4732, 4823, 4843, 4954, 4959, 4979, 4984, 4998, 5044, 5045 
Murphv, Marcus. {See Murphy, Al Marcus.) 

Musiel," Helen 4734, 

4837, 4843, 4850, 4927-4929, 4946, 4954, 4958, 4959, 4964, 4984, 
4993-5000 (testimony), 4997, 5031, 5033, 5036, 5049. 

M j^ers, Frederick 4738 

Nearing, Scott 4907 

Nissen, Sol S 4749, 4753, 4769, 4780, 4794-4798 (testimony) 

Nordman, John 4734, 4746 

Ober, Bebe 4741 

Oberfeld, Viola 4772, 4976 

Oser, Marcella (Mrs. Nathan Oser, nee Sexauer)._. 4842, 4843, 4847, 4954, 5047 

Oser, Nathan 4842, 4954, 4959, 4998, 5047 

Paige, Ruth 4837, 4838 

Pappaderaos, Ella Mae (nee Posey) 4 755, 

4983, 4984, 4987, 5014, 5015, 5051-5058 (testimony) 

PaschG, Victor 4859, 4882 

Pavlic-h, John 4840 

Payne, Forrest 4741 

Payne, James 4734, 4876-4883 (testimony) 

Pearson, Eula Mae (Mrs. Herman Pearson) 4839, 4965 

Pearson, Herman 4965 

Perez, Anton 4858 

Perkins, Clara (Mrs. Haven Perkins) 4843, 4954, 4955, 

4983, 5058-5064 (testimony), 5061 

Perkins, Haven 4843, 4954, 4955, 4983, 4983, 5061, 5065-5068 (testimony). 

Philbrick, Herbert A 4773, 4906 

Phillips, A. E 4738 

Posey, Ella Mae. {See Pappademos, Ella Mae.) 

Reed. Herbert 4741 

Richardson, Edwin Leslie 4778, 4902-4912 (testimony), 4982 

Ring, Melvin 4837, 4839 

Ring, Naomi (Mrs. Melvin Ring) 4837, 4842, 5047, 5048 

Robinson, Reid 5019 

Rossen, Johnny 4844 

Rossen, Louise (Mrs. Johnny Rossen) 4844 

Roudebush, G. S 4912 

Rutledge, Dr. John F 5028-5051 (testimony) 5071 

Sage, Helen (Mrs. James H. Sage, also known as Dorothy, nee Aukamp). 4735, 
4758, 4845, 484 J, 4870, 4883-4888 (testimony), 4926, 4984 

Sage, James H 4758, 

4761-4784 (testimony), 4793, 4797, 4809, 4815, 4816, 4826, 4830, 
4831, 4845, 4868, 4888, 4904, 4971-4976, 4984, 4985, 5037, 5049, 
5057, 5063, 5064, 5069. 

Sanderson, Harold C 5019 

Schechter, Amy 4942 

Schmidt, Marie 4835, 4841 

Schmidt, Tom 4759, 4964 

Schoemehl, Joseph John 4731, 

4732, 4782, 4843,-4845, 4890, 4891, 4931-4934, 4944, 4945, 4946, 
4949-4966 (testimony), 4979 (testimony), 4995, 4996-4999, 5079, 
5080, 5082. 

Schumacher, Brockman 4747, 4748, 4756, 4829-4834 (testimony) 

Scrotto, Roy 4840 

Scrotto, Russell 4840 

Scrotto, Vera (Mrs. Russell Scrotto) 4840 

Sentner, Antonia 4726 



iV INDEX 

Pas* 

Sentner, William Jr 4726, 4731, 4733, 4735, 4768, 4772, 4775, 4780, 

4782, 4793, 4861, 4886, 4963, 4972, 4975, 5037, 5041, 5043. 5044 

Shaw, Ralph 4726, 

4782, 4853, 4854, 4913-4916, 4943, 4953-4955, 4990, 5020, 5021, 
5033-5038, 5040, 5041, 5043, 5044, 5046, 5071. 

Shaw, Sarah (Mrs. Ralph Shaw, nee KUng) 4726, 4953, 4958, 4997, 5033 

Shryver, Katherine 5041, 5042, 5045, 5071 

Sig-rist, Dr. H-nry 5030 

Simpson (John) 4975 

Simpson, John William 4753, 4798-4801 (testimony), 4803-4808 (testimony) 

Sir^n, Frlix 4738 

Smith, Ferdinand C 4738 

Smith, Marcelle 4857 

Sob 11, Morton 5061, 5066 

Stager, Waldo 4739, 4740 

Stanford, Edna (Mrs. Richard Stanford) 4959 

Stanford, Richard 4758, 4844, 4944-4945 (testimony) 4957, 4959, 4965 

Starks, John 4739 

Starks, Pearl Bernstein 4739, 4759, 4760, 4780 

Steinberg, Bill 5038, 5040 

Stern, Bernard W 5019 

Strom, Barney 5032 

Strom, Mrs. Barney 5033 

Taylor, Garnet W 4761, 4883 

Tendle, Simon. {See Kendle, Simon.) 

Umstead, James 4858 

Uphaus, Dr. Willard 4766,4767,5053 

Wagenknecht, Alfred 4726, 4735 

Walker, Hershel James 4756,- 4859, 

4991, 5000-5004 (testimony) 5014-5017 (testimony), 5045, 5054 

Walsh, Patrick 4738, 4739 

Wampler, I inus E 4969, 5017-5026 (testimony^ 5044 

Wnngerin, Otto 4854, 4923, 4924, 4942 

Wa.xman, Elliott__- 4753, 

4754, 4755, 4779, 4784-4793 (testimony), 4795, 4817, 4965, 4986 

Waxman, I.oretta 4779 

Waxman, Marilyn 4779 

Webb, Herman 4854 

Wernick, Clara. (See Fiering, Clara Wernick.) 

Whitaker, Cleo 4856 

Whitfield, Rev. Olin 5045 

Wilburn, James 4748 

Wilson, Charhe 5039, 5040 

Wilson, Margaret Bush 5044, 5045 

Witherspoon, Robert L 4829, 4945, 4993, 5000, 5014, 5051 

Wolf 5043 

Wolff, Frank 4902 

Wolvorson, Ray 4850, 4926, 5003 

Wriglit, Morris 5019 

Yasgur, Ann. (See Kling, Ann Yasgur.) 

Younglove, Thomas A *__. 4834-4863 

(testimony), 4882, 4884, 4885, 5002, 5003, 5067, 5068, 5078, 5080, 5082 

Organizations 

Abraham Lincoln Brigade 4749, 4820, 4821 

American Federation of Labor 4939 

American Peace Crusade 4778, 4780, 4904, 5053 

Antioch College 4741 

Asian Pacific Conference. (See Peace Conference of the Asian and Pacific 
Regions.) 

Auto Workers, United CIO, Local 25 5082 

Basic Training Institute 4843, 4845, 4847, 4952, 4954, 4959, 4960, 5060 

Batonj, steamship 4766, 4776, 4974 

Civil Rights Congress, St. Louis 4758, 4759, 4982, 4983, 4991 



INDEX V 

Communist Party, U. S. A.: 

Districts: ' Paw 

District 21 (Missouri and Arkansas) 4729, 4!)53 

District committee 4820 

Missouri 4726, 4847, 4848, 4967, 5031 

Convention, 1945 5034 

Kansas City, railroad group 4924 

St. Louis 4728, 4730, 5033 

Automotive branch 4752, 4753, 4759 

Club within Century Electric Co 4729 

Club within Emerson Electric Co 4729, 4731, 4733, 4736 

Club within St. Louis Car Co 4729 

Club within Wagner Electric Co 4729 

Construction workers group 4750, 4751 

Douglass Club 4851 

Haldane (student) Club 4732 

Harriet Tubman Club 4850 

Machinist unit 4859 

Negro Commission 4732 

North Side section 4732, 4956 

Out-State Committee 4732, 4781 

Packinghouse group 4850 

Professional section (group) 4732, 

4862, 4932, 4933, 4944, 4980, 4985, 5032, 5033, 5047, 5048 

Railroad group 4986 

Review Commission 4732, 4946, 4950, 4957-4959, 4997 

Roosevelt Chib 4851, 4952 

Sacco-Vanzetti Club 4857 

South Side group 4751, 475?, 4925 

South Side section, shoe group 4850, 4856, 4857 

Tom Paine Club 4758, 4851, 4856, 5035 

West End Club 4861, 4862, 5056, 5058 

West Side group 4728, 4732, 4746, 4925 

Youth Commission 4732 

State Board 4731, 4851, 4962, 5003, 5035, 5037 

State Committee. {See Communist Party, Missouri, State 
boarc.) 

National Committee 4848 

Waterfront section 4736, 4737 

Communist Political Association, Missouri: 

Convention, 1944 __ 5034 

St. Louis 4835 

South Side Club 4835, 4841, 4846 

Congress of Industrial Organizations 4939 

St. Louis Council 4860, 4861 

Congress of the Peoples for Peace, Vienna, December 1952 50-3 

Electi'ical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, United 4727, 

4734, 4737, 4743, 4871, 4872, 5042, 5043 

Dayton. Ohio 4725 

District 7 (Ohio) 4739, 4740, 4742 

District 8 4879, 4R86 

Amalgamated Local (828). St. Louis 4729, 4733, 4737 

Local 813 4877 

Local 1102 4729, 4737 

Local 1104 4729, 5059, 5060 

Local 1108 4729, 4737 

Emerson Electric Co 4884-48S7 

Ford Motor Co., St. Louis, Lincoln- Mercury Division 4752 

Freedom of the Press Committee of St. Louis. (See National Committee 
for Freedom of the Press.) 

Gas, Coke, and Chemical Workers of America, United, CIO, St. Louis 4851 

General Electric Co., Schenectady, N. Y 4852 

General Motors Corp.: 

St. Louis 4752 

Chevrolet division 4752, 4753 

Chevrolet Shell 4752, 4753 

Fisher Body division 4752-4754 

Independent Progressive Part}^ 5028, 5029 



Vi INDEX 

Page 

International Labor Defense 4951 

International Workers Order 4728 

Joseph Weydemeyer School of Social Science 4959, 4960 

Labor Youth League 4908 

Laclede Gas Light Co 4852 

League of Struggle for Negro Rights 4951 

Machinists, International Association of, Local 2040 4877, 4880 

Maritime Union of America, National 4737, 4738, 4744 

St. Louis 4737, 4738 

Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers, International Union of 5005, 5017, 5019 

Executive board 5017 

Local 883 5006, 5027 

St. Genevieve, Mo 4968-4970 

Mississippi Lime Co 4967, 4968 

Missouri Citizens for Wallace (Committee) 5029, 504 1 -5043 

National Citizens Political Action Committee 5029, 5037, 5038, 5040 

Missouri 5037, 5038 

National Committee for Freedom of the Press 4791 

Freedom of the Press Committee of St. Louis 4788, 4790, 4791 

Philadelphia 4791 

National Committee To Secure Justice for Morton Sobell in the Rosenberg 

Case 5063 

National Committee To Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case 4760, 

4982, 5007, 5061, 5062 

St. Louis Committee To Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case 4983 

Natiotial Council of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions 4892 

St. Louis 4891 

National Lawyers Guild 4933. 5074 

National Negro Labor Covmcil, St. Louis 4747, 4755. 4756, 5001 

Peace Conference of the Asian and Pacific Regions 5053 

Philadelphia Freedom of the Press Committee. {See National Committee 
for Freedom of the Press, Philadelphia.) 

Progressive Citizens of America 5029, 5040, 5041 

Progressive Party 5046 

Missouri 5029, 5042, 5043, 5045, 5072 

Kansas Citv 5047 

St. Louis 4985 

State Comm ittee 5003 

Railroad Terminal Association 4855 

Robins & Mvers Electric Co 4741, 4743 

Save Our Sons Committee 4756, 4757 

St. Loi!is Emergency Defense Committee 4747-4751, 4755, 4757, 4759, 4790 

St. Louis Freedom of the Press Committee. {See National Committee for 

Freedo'ii of the Press; Freedom of the Press Committee of St. Louis.) 
Stockholm Appeal. {See World Peace Appeal.) 

Trade Union Unity League 4939, 5019 

U nemployed Councils 4951 

Universitv of Colorado 4773 

Vanguard Book Shop 4728, 4731 

Washington University, St. Louis 4783, 4815, 4832, 4976, 4985 

Communist Club 4781 

Workers Ex-Servicemen's League 4951 

World Federation of Trade Unions 4939, 4941 

World Peace Appeal (also referred to as Stockholm Appeal) 4941 

World Peace Congress, Second Congress 4765, 4776, 4974 

World Peace Council 5053 

Young Communist League: 

Missouri: 

St. Louis 4724-4726, 4735, 4920 

University of Missouri Branch 4917, 4918 

Ohio, Antioch College Branch 4741 

Young Progressives of America 4908 

Publications 

Daily Worker 4789, 4790, 4791 

"Don't Try To Lose Us. Let's Talk Some About Civil Rights" . _. 5014, 5054 

Jewish Life 5063 

St. Louis Defender, The 4750, 4790 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 9999 05706 3230 



l^yf 






k r j k 



32^ » 

mi 






f- '>