(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 infiltration of Government. Hearing"

HARVARD COLLEGE 
LIBRARY 




GIFT OF THE 

GOVERNMENT 
OF THE UNITED STATES 



INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF 
GOVERNMENT— PART 4 

DEPOSITED By THE 
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 

MAV 18 1956 

HEARINGS 



BEFORE THE 



COMMITTEE 0J( UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 
HOUSE OE REPRESENTATIVES 

EIGHTY-FOUETH CONGEESS 



SECOND SESSION 



FEBRUARY 21, 23, AND 24, 1956 



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

(Index in Part 5 of this series) 




•70811 



UNITED STATES 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

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 

Thomas W. Beale, Sr., Chief Clerk 



CONTENTS 



PART 3 
February 14, 1956: 

Testimony of — Page. 

James Edgar Gorham 3111 

Arthur Stein 3136 

Myer Harry Naigles 3152 

February 15, 1956; 
Testimony of — 

Irving Richter 3165 

Morris Levine 3181 

Bertha Blair 3197 

February 16, 1956: 
Testimony of — 

Henry Rhine 3205 

Marcel S. Kistin 3222 

Sylvia Soloff Steinberg 3231 



PART 4 
February 21, 1956: 
Testimony of — 

Joseph B. Robison 3245 

Martin Kurasch 3261 

David Rein 3281 

Allan R. Rosenberg 3300 

February 23, 1956: 
Testimony of — 

Ruth Wevand (Perry) 3309 

Victor Perlo 3331 

February 24, 1956: 
Testimony of — 

Lillian Kurasch (Mrs. Martin Kurasch) 3337 

Jacob H. Krug 3356 



PART 5 
February 28, 1956: 
Testimony of — 

Selma Rein (Mrs. David Rein) .__ 3377 

Helen Roark Hill 3385 

February 29, 1956: 
Testimony of — 

Lawrence Elkind 3395 

Sidnev Katz 3400 

Julia Katz (Mrs. Sidney Katz) 3416 

Robert N. Greenberg 3420 

Robert R. Ehrlich 3428 

March 1, 1956: 

Testimony of — 

Lawrence Ravmond LaVallee 3439 

Nathan Witt- 3448 

Edwin S. Smith 3456 

Samuel M, Koenigsberg 3485 

Marie Prince 3496 

Morton Friedman 3498 

Index {see pt. 5 of this series). 

m 



Public Law 601, 79th Congress 

The legislation under whicli the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities operates is Public Law 601, 79th Congress (1946), chapter 
753, 2d session, which provides : 

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

PART 2— RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Rule X 

SEC. 121. STANDING COMMITTEES 

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

Rule XI 

POWEES AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 



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

(A) Un-American Activities. 

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

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

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



RULES ADOPTED BY THE 84TH CONGRESS 

House Resolution 5, January 5, 1955 

:|; 4: ^ 4: :): :): 4e 

Rule X 

STANDING COMMITTEES 

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

******* 
(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 subcommit- 
tee, is authorized to malje from time to time investigations of (1) the extent, 
character, 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 Constitution, and 
(3) all other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress in any 
necessary remedial legislation. 

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

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



I 



INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF 
GOVERNMENT— Part 4 



TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1956 

United States House or Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 

COMMII'TEE ON Un-AmERICAN ACTIVITIES, 

Washington^ D. G. 
Public Hearing 

A subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities met 
at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in the caucus room, Old House Office 
Building, Hon. Francis E. Walter (chairman) presiding. 

Committee members present: Representatives Francis E. Walter, 
Pennsylvania (presiding), Morgan M. Moulder of Missouri, Clyde 
Doyle of California, James B. Frazier Jr. of Tennessee, Edwin E. 
Willis of Louisiana, Bernard W. Kearney of New York, and Gordon 
H. Scherer of Ohio. 

Staff members present : Richard Arens, acting counsel, and Court- 
ney E. Owens, investigator. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

A quorum of the subcommittee appointed for the continuation of 
these hearings is present. 

Call your first witness. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Joseph Robison, kindly remain standing and raise 
your right hand to be sworn. 

The Chairman. Do you swear the testimony you are about to give 
shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help 
you God? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I do. 

The Chairman. Sit down. 

TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH B. ROBISON, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
JOSEPH L. RAUH, JR. 

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

Mr. Robison. Joseph B. Robison, 142 Rockland Avenue, Lynbrook, 
New York, attorney. 

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

Mr. Robison. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. You are represented by counsel? 

Mr. Robison. That is correct. 

3245 



3246 coMMxnsriST infiltration of governivient 

Mr. Aeens. Will counsel kindly identify himself. 
Mr. Rauh. Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., 1631 K Street, Washington, D. C. 
Mr. Arens. Mr. Robison, have 3^011 ever been identified by any name 
other than the name which apj)eared on your subpena, Joseph B. 
Robison, R-o-b-i-s-o-n ? 
Mr. Robison. No. 

Mr. Arens. Will you kindly give us a word as to your present occu- 
pation for the purpose of identification ? 

Mr. Robison. I am on the staff of the American Jewish Congress. 
Mr. Arens. In what capacity do you serve ? 
Mr. Robison. As attorney. 
Mr. Arens. Who is your immediate superior ? 
Mr. Robison. Mr. Will Maslow. 

Mr. Arens. Kindly tell us in a word what your duties are? 
Mr. Robison. Generally carrying out the policies of the American 
Jewish Congress, specifically with respect to combating anti-Semitism 
and other forms of discrimination. 

Mr. Arens. Do you work with Mr. Maslow in comiection with any 
of his duties to submit to congressional committees, testimony on 
various issues ? 
Mr. Robison. Yes; I do. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Maslow not long ago appeared before a committee 
of the United States Senate testifying with reference to security mat- 
ters. Did you assist him in that project ? 
Mr. Robison. No ; I did not. 

Mr. Arens. Would you tell us without detail, the projects in which 
you do assist or have assisted Mr. Maslow ? 

Mr. Robison. I can, for example, mention the testimony he gave 
before the House Judiciary Committee on the pending civil rights bill. 
Mr. Arens. How long ago was that ? 
Mr. Robison. It was some time during the last year. 
Mr. Arens. Did you assist him in tho preparation of his state- 
ment ? 

Mr. Robison. Yes; I did. 

Mr. Arens. Can you tell us of other statements or projects in 
which you assisted Mr. Maslow in connection with his appearance 
before a committee of the Congress ? 

Mr. Robison. I would not think in the last few years. If there have 
been any it has been on the subject of civil rights matters. 

Mr. Arens. We may return to this later, but I would like now 
to get a thumbnail sketch of your early life, where you were born and 
your education, in chronological form, please. 

Mr. Robison. I was born in Crestwood, N. Y, in 1912. I was edu- 
cated in public school No. 15 of the Yonkers school system. I 
went to Townsend Harris Hall, a public high school in New York City. 
I received my B. A. from Columbia College in 1932 and my LL.D. 
from Columbia Law School in 1934. 

Mr. Arexs. Give us, please, a comparable sketch chronologically 
of the employment you have had since you completed your educa- 
tion at Columbia. 

Mr. Robison. Following my graduation from Columbia I had one or 
two jobs with attorneys. I don't even remember their names. Each 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3247 

•one of those employments was quite brief. In April 1935 I started 
working for Professor Powell of Columbia Law School, on the Ee- 
statement of the Law of Property. 

In July 1937 I started working for the National Labor Relations 
Board, where I worked until the end of 1946. 

Mr. Aeens. I wonder if I could interrupt you, please, sir. When 
did you commence your employment with the NLRB ? 

Mr. RoBisON. In July 1937. 

Mr. Aeens. And you were employed there until when? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Until the end of 1946, December 26, 1946. 

Mr. Arens. We will revert in detail to this series of employments 
later, but at the moment we want to get the pattern and chronology. 

Where were you engaged after 1946 ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I then started to work for the American Jewish Con- 
gress and have worked for them ever since. 

Mr. Arens. If we may revert to July of 1937, kindly tell us what 
occasioned your employment with the National Labor Relations 
Board? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I was aware of employment opportunities in Wash- 
ington and I went to Washington and applied to several agencies. I 
applied among other places at the National Labor Relations Board. 

Mr. Arens. What job did you procure? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I procured a job as a review attorney. 

Mr. Aeens. Give us just a word of the duties of a review attorney. 

Mr. RoBisoN. Analyzing the records in cases before the Board. 

Mr. Aeens. Wlio was your superior? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Nathan Witt. 

Mr. Aeens. Could you further identify Nathan Witt for us ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. He was the Assistant General Counsel in charge of 
the Review Section at that time. 

Mr. Aeens. Did he have anything to do with procuring that em- 
ployment for you ? 

Mr. Robison. I don't know who made the decision. I was inter- 
viewed by Mr. Witt and subsequently was informed that I had been 
employed. 

Mr. Aeens. Did joii know Mr. Witt prior to the time that he became 
your superior in the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Robison. No; I did not. 

Mr. Aeens. "Wliat were your duties in connection with your rela- 
tionship with Mr. Witt? 

Mr. Robison, My duties were to analyze the cases before the Board 
and report on them to the Board, and then subsequently to prepare 
drafts of decisions in accordance with instructions from the Board. 

Mr. Arens. "\'\nien you applied for your position with the National 
Labor Relations Board, did you fill out a Government form for em- 
ployment ? 

Mr. Robison. I suppose I must have. 

Mr. Aeens. I lay before you now, Mr. Robison, a photostatic copy 
of a document on which a signature appears at the bottom, and ask 
you if you can identify that signature. 

(The members of the committee present at this point were: Repre- 
sentatives Walter, Willis, Kearney, and Scherer.) 

(Witness and his counsel examined a document.) 



3248 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that the out- 
standing question pertains just to a particular signature and has not 
yet encompassed the entire document. I only asked the witness 
whether or not he recognizes a particular signature on the dociunent. 

Mr. KoBisoN. The answer is "Yes," that is my signature. 

Mr. Arens. Do you recognize the document ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No, I do not. 

The Chairman. What does that document purport to be? 

Mr. Arens. The document is a photostatic copy of a personal his- 
tory statement bearing the signature of Joseph B. Robison, R-o-b-i- 
s-o-n, and the witness has now identified his signature. In the docu- 
ment, on which appears the signature you have identified as your 
own signature, is a question : No. 26 : 

Are you a member of any Communist or German Bund organization or any 
political party or organization which advocates the overthrow of our consti- 
tutional form of government in the United States, or do you have membership 
in, or any affiliation with any group, association, or organization which advo- 
cates, or lends support to any organization or movement advocating, the over- 
throw of our constitutional form of government in the United States? 

Did you affix the "No" in answer to that question ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Arens. Was that a truthful answer ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. To that question I must plead my privilege under the 
fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. In other words, you tell this Committee on Un-Ameri- 
can Activities of the Congress of the United States that if you gave a 
truthful answer as to whether or not you lied when you signed a "No" 
after the principal question respecting Communist Party affiliation, 
you would be supplying information which could be used against 
you in a criminal proceeding ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisON. As to that question, also, I must plead the fifth amend- 
ment. 

The Chairman. Just a minute. You are not under any compul- 
sion. You say "I must." By that you mean "I do" ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I do. 

The Chairman. I direct you to answer. 

Mr. RoBisoN. I do adhere to my position. 

Mr. Arens. What is the date affixed next to your signature which 
you have identified on this document? Would you kindly read that 
date into the record ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. May 19, 1944. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the date on which you signed this document, a 
photostatic copy of which you have just examined ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I would presume so. 

Mr. Arens. As of that date. May 19, 1944, were you a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. In answer to that I would like to state that I am not 
now a member of the Communist Party 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that the witness 
be ordered and directed to answer the specific question : Were you as 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3249 

of the date on which you signed this document a member of the Com- 
munist Party ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. As to that I plead the fifth amendment. 

The Chaikman. You invoke the fifth amendment. This isn't a 
trial or a cause. You do not plead. You invoke the fifth amendment. 

Mr. EoBisoN. May I also add that I am not now a member of the 
Communist Party and have not been a member at any time since I 
joined the staff of the American Jewish Congress in 1946. 

The Chairman. I am sure of that. It is indeed unfortunate, if that 
is the fact, that you are not willing to cooperate with us in our attempts 
to devise legislation to protect our Government from those who would 
overthrow it. We know that you could be of great help to us, and 
I was hoping that you would assist us. We are preparing a very 
broad legislative program, and only from the lips of witnesses such 
as you can we get the information that we need in order to devise 
this program. 

Proceed, JNIr. Counsel. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the Commmiist Party in 1946 ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I joined the staff of the American Jewish Congi'ess at 
the end of 1946. Prior to that time I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens, "V^^iat date, specifically, did you join the staff of the 
American Jewish Congress ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. December 26, 1946. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the Communist Party 1 day 
prior to the time that you joined the staff of the American Jewish 
Congress ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. I plead the fifth amendment as to that question. 

Mr. Arens. Were you under Communist discipline 1 day prior to 
the time that you joined the staff of the American Jewish Congress? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I plead the fifth amendment as to that. 

Mr. Arens. Were you under Communist discipline the day you 
joined the staff of the American Jewish Congress? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No. 

Mr. Arens. What steps, if any, did you take to disassociate yourself 
from the Communist conspiracy prior to the time that you joined the 
staff of the American Jewish Congress ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. As to that I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever resigned from the Communist Party ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. "Who were some of your fellow lawyers on the staff 
of the National Labor Relations Board while you were employed 
there ? You have given us the name of one, Nathan Witt. Tell us the 
names of other lawyei^ who were on that staff — your fellow employees. 

Mr. RoBisoN. There was a very large number. 

Mr. Arens. AYlio were j^our personal acquaintances in the National 
Labor Relations Board in the course of your employment in a legal 
capacity at that Board ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I can mention some of the persons who were the heads 
of the departments I worked in. There was Thomas Emerson, the 
head of the Review Section for most of the time. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Conununist Party ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. No. He was not, not to my knowledge. 



3250 COREMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Aeens, Did you know a man by the name of Martin Km'asch ? 

Mr. EoBisoN. I did. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Commmiist Party? 

Mr. EoBisoisr. As to that I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arexs, Do you feel if you told this committee the truth as to 
whether or not Martin Kurasch was a member of the Communist 
Party you would be supplying information which could be used against 
you in a criminal proceeding? 

Mr. EoBisoN As to that 1 plead the fifth amendment. 

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

The Chairmax. You are directed to answer the question. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Allan R. Eosenberg? 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Lester Asher? 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. David Eein? 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Woodrow Sandler? 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know these men whose names I am mentioning? 

Mr. EoBisoN. Do I know them presently ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. 

Mr. EoBisoN. Yes, I do. 

Mr. Arens. Did you work with them? 

Mr. EoBisoN. As to most of them, I would say no. 

Mr. Arens. But you knew that they were fellow employees in a 
legal capacity in the National Labor Eelations Board; is that correct? 

Mr. EoBisoN. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. May I call off some more names, perhaps to refresh 
your recollection. 

Jacob H. Krug? 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Mortimer Eiemer, E-i-e-m-e-r. 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. John W. Porter. 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Margaret Bennett Porter. 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Allen Heald, H-e-a-1-d. 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Harry Cooper. 

INIr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Edward Scheunemann, S-c-h-e-u-n-e-m-a-n-n. 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Bertram Diamond. 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Herbert Fuchs. 

Mr. EoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know each and every one of the persons whose 
names I have just called off? 

Mr. EoBisoN. Personally ? I Imew each of them to some extent, yes. 



I 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3251 

Mr. Arens. And each of those persons was employed in a legal 
capacity in the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr, RoBisox. To the best of my recollection, that is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Was each of those persons under the supervision of 
Nathan Witt? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Oh, no. 

Mr. Arens. Were all of those persons enumerated under the super- 
vision of Nathan Witt ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I would imagine very few of them. I would have to 
look at the list to see. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have any association with the persons enu- 
merated other than the association which fellow employees would 
have within any given agency ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. The fact is, that each and every one of these persons 
whose names I have called off, including yours, was a member of a 
Communist cell within the National Labor Relations Board? Is 
that not the truth ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. As to that question also I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affrm or deny 
the fact, that each and eveiy one of those persons whose names I have 
called off was a member of a Communist cell within the National 
Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. RoBisoN. As to that I ])lead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. What is, or what was a company union during the 
course of your experience ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. That term could be used in either of two ways. It 
could mean either a union confined to the employees of a particular 
company or it could mean a union so confined wliich was dominated by 
the employer. 

Mr. Arens. If a union was dominated by the employer under the 
policy of the National Labor Relations Board, that union could not 
have bargaining rights, could it? 

Mr. RoBisON. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Why could it not have bargaining rights ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. The theory is, as I recall the Board decision now — 
this was some time ago — the theory was that a union that was domi- 
nated by the employer was in effect an agent of the employer and 
that therefore bargaining would be a mockery because the employer 
would be sitting on both sides of the table. Something like that. 

Mr. Arens. That was the policy enmiciated at the Board by Nathan 
Witt, was it not? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No ; that policy was enunciated by the Board. 

Mr. Arens. That policy was the policy Nathan Witt laid down 
within the National Labor Relations Board, within the purview of 
his jurisdiction, is that not the truth? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Robinson. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Did you adhere to that policy ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I adhered — I prepared decisions in accordance with 
the instructions of the Board. That is, while I was in the Review 
Section. Most of the time I was in the Litigation Section where I 
merely briefed cases in court. 



3252 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Did you personally concur in that policy ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Yes; I did. 

Mr. Arens. Was that policy personally concurred in by the per- 
sons whose names I read off to you beginning with Allan Rosenberg 
and ending with Herbert Fuchs ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. As to that I could not say, 

Mr. Arens. Did you observe any dissent among your fellow lawyer 
friends at the National Labor Relations Board whose names I have 
called off with reference to this policy — that a union dominated or 
controlled by an employer was not a bona fide labor union and there- 
fore did not have the right to bargain as such ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I am sure there was a good deal of discussion of it. 
I know there was some dissent. I am not quite sure whom the dissent 
came from. I do not recall specifically any dissent by any of these 
persons. 

Mr. Arens. What was the policy of the National Labor Relations 
Board and of these colleagues of yours in the Board with reference to 
a labor organization which was controlled lock, stock and barrel by 
the Communist Partj? Was it entitled to representation and was 
it entitled to bargaining rights? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I don't recall in my work having to deal with that 
question, and I don't recall that the issue was ever squarely raised in 
the time that I was with the Board. 

Mr. Arens. Was the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers 
of America ever denied bargaining rights because it was not deemed 
to be a bona fide labor organization, but in truth and in fact an agent 
of a foreign-controlled conspiracy? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I don't recall that that issue ever was raised by any 
employer or union at the Board while I was there. 

Mr. Arens. Answer the question as specifically as you can. To 
your knowledge was the United Electrical Workers ever denied bar- 
gaining rights on the ground or theory that it was not a bona fide labor 
organization, but that it was in truth and in fact in the same status 
as a company-controlled union, namely, that it was controlled by a 
foreign entity? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Was the International Union of ]Mine, Mill and Smelter 
Workers, to your knowledge, ever denied bargaining rights because 
in truth and in fact it was controlled not by the workers but on an 
analogous basis to the company-controlled union; controlled by an 
entity not responsible to the workers ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Was the American Communications Association ever 
to your knowledge denied bargaining rights under the policy of the 
National Labor Relations Board on the theory that the American 
Communications Association because of its Comnuuiist control was 
not a bona fide labor organization ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. The truth is, is it not, Mr. Robison, that of the numer- 
ous Communist controlled organizations mascjuerading as labor 
unions, every one of them was granted bargaining rights notwith- 
standing the policy of the National Labor Relations Board that a 
company-dominated union would not be granted bargaining rights 



COMMUTSTIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3253 

because it was not a true and accurate representative of the workers ? 
Isn't that the fact? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I really can't say. All I can say is^that I don't know 
of any cases where a union was denied representation on that ground. 

Mr. Arens. Let this record be clear. Do you know of any case in 
which a Communist organization masquerading as a labor union was 
ever denied bargaining rights ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No ; I do not ; but I do want to make it clear that I 
would not necessarily know of such cases. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know, however, of cases in which an organiza- 
tion controlled by an employer was denied bargaining rights because 
it was the policy not to recognize an entity which was controlled by 
an alien influence ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I will have to get that question again. I am sorry. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know of instances in which a company-con- 
trolled union was denied bargaining rights because a company-con- 
trolled union did not represent the rank and file of the membership? 
You have told us that was the policy. 

Mr. RoBisoN. I do know tliere were cases in which a union was 
denied representation because there was evidence that it did not have 
the clear support of a majority of the members, yes. 

Mr. Arens. That was the policy, was it not? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Can you help us to reconcile what appears here to be 
an inconsistency? Why would the policy be that a company-con- 
trolled union would not be recognized for bargaining purposes but 
that a Communist-controlled entity would be recognized for bargain- 
ing purposes ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I can only say what I said before, that the question 
was never raised. The Board did not pass on it because the charges 
were not made and consequently the charges were not before the Board. 

Mr. Arens. Who would bring the charges? 

Mr. RoBisoN. An}^ employer or union involved. 

Mr. Arens. The truth is that charges were brouglit before tlie Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board in numerous instances that given 
entities were not bona fide labor organizations but were the tools 
of the Communist conspiracy, and that those charges were not 
entertained by the National Labor Relations Board? Is that not the 
truth? 

Mr. RoBisoN. That is not the truth so far as my recollection of my 
time in the Review Section, sir, and I don't recall the issue ever 
being raised while I was at the Board. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not Nathan Witt, who has 
been repeatedly identified as a Communist agent, and who was Sec- 
retary to the Board, liad anything to do with this policy which we 
have been discussing? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No, I am not familiar with what his role was in the 
Secretary's office. 

Mr. Arens. Did you and any of the other lawj-ers in the National 
Labor Relations Board whose names we have repeated ever discuss 
policy matters in connection with any extracurricular association 
which you ma}^ have had ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. I am not sure I understand the question. 



3254 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. We will try it again. Did you and any of these indi- 
viduals whose names I called off to you ever have any discussions, 
meetings or sessions respecting a policy which would be pursued 
within the National Labor Relations Board to accomplish certain 
objectives? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No, we did not. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever meet in any session with any of these 
persons whose names I have called off to you other than a session 
strictly in connection with your work ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. May I have tlie question once again? I am sorry. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever meet in a session with any of these persons 
whose names I called off to you other than a session strictly in con- 
nection with your work as an employee of the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board? 

Mr. RoBisoN. As to that I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr Arens. In other words, you are telling this committee, are you 
not, that if you give a truthful answer to that question you would be 
supplying information which could be used against you in a criminal 
proceeding ? 

]Mr. RoBisoN. I give the same answer to that. 

The Chairman. May I perhaps give to the witness a little idea of 
what we are driving at. Some time ago a witness testified that he was 
instructed by a leader of the Communist Party not to be conspicuous 
by work he was doing in the party because on the Board he was render- 
ing a greater service to the Communist conspiracy. 

This committee has under consideration a bill which would make it 
illegal for a Communist to work for the Federal Government. What 
Mr. Arens is leading up to is whether or not anyone ever instructed 
you as to the decisions you handed down in order to keep the workers 
confused, upset, and disturbed. Did any outside influence ever 
attempt to direct you to what your your decisions should contain ? 
(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. The answer is "No." 

Mr. Arens. I should like to read to you, Mr. Robison, a quotation 
and then I will ask you a question about that quotation. [Reading:] 

The conquest of political power by the proletariat is a gigantic step forward for 
the proletariat as a class, and the party must more and more than ever, and in 
a new way, not merely in the old way, educate and guide the trade unions ; at 
the same time it must not forget that they are, and will long remain, a necessary 
"school of communism," a preparatory school for training the proletariat to 
exercise its dictatorship * * *. it is necessary to be able to withstand all this, 
to agree to any and every sacrifice, and even- — if need be — to resort to all sorts 
of devices, maneuvers, and illegal methods, to evasion, and subterfuge, in order 
to penetrate into the trade unions, to remain in them, and to carry on Communist 
work in them at aU costs. 

Have you ever heard that quotation before ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No ; I have not. 

Mr. Arens. That is a quotation from V. I. Lenin. Have you ever 
belonged to an organization dedicated to this program which is 
announced in that quotation I have just read to you ? 

Mr. Robison. I plead the fifth amendment as to that question. 

Mr. Arens. In other words, if you told this committee the truth as 
to whether or not you ever belonged to an organization or actively 
participated in an organization which had the accomplishment of these 
objectives I have just read to you as its program, you would be supply- 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3255 

ing information wliicli could be used against you in a criminal pro- 
ceeding, is that correct ? 

Mr. KoBisoN. I take the same position, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Did your colleagues whose names I read to you and who 
were employed in a legal capacity in the National Labor Relations 
Board, argue cases before the Supreme Court of the United States? 

]Mr. RoBisoN. The only one on that list I believe would be Miss 
Weyand. 

Mr. Arens. Miss Weyand prepared a number of cases and argued 
them before tlie Supreme Court of the United States, did she not? 

Mr. RoBisoN. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Was she at any time under the supervision of Nathan 
Witt? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No ; she was not. 

Mr. Arens. Who was the top lawyer of these names that I have 
called off while you were at the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. You mean who achieved the highest position among 
that group ? 

Mr. xIrens. Yes. Who among this group had the highest status; 
within the National Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I would assume Mr. Fuchs. 

Mr. Arens. What was your relationship with Mr. Fuchs within 
the echelons of the Board? 

Mr. RoBisoN. We were briefly in the Review Section together the 
first year or so that I was there. After that I had no relationship 
with him. 

Mr. Arens. Was he your superior or were you superior to him or 
were you on the same level ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. At first we were on the same level. Subsequently 
he became a supervisor. But it is my impression that I never worked 
on a case with him, but I am not sure of that. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Fuchs testified under oath before this committee 
some weeks ago that you w^ere one of the original group from the 
National Labor Relations Board which met as a Communist cell. Was 
he lying or was he telling the truth ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I plead the fifth amendment as to that question. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have or have you had relatives who were em- 
ployed in the Federal Government ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. I had a cousin named Jesse who was in the Federal 
Government at one time. I may have had 1 or 2 others. I do not 
believe I have had any close relatives. 

Mr. Arens. Who is Helen F. Robison ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I am sorry. Helen F. Robison is my wife. 

Mr. Arens. Was she to your knowledge ever a member of the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Robison. No, she was not. 

Mr. Arens. Was she ever under Communist discipline? 

Mr. Robison No, she was not. 

Mr. Arens. She worked in the Office of Defense Transportation,, 
did she not? 

Mr. Robison. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Wlio is Gerson Robison? 

TOSll— 5fi— pt. 4 2 



3256 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. RoBisoN. I have a brother named Gerson Robison. I have a 
cousin named Gerson Robison. 

Mr. Arens. You have a brother by the name of Gerson Robison? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Yes. Is that Gerson B. Robison ? 

Mr. Arens. Is that your brother? 

Mr. Robison. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether he was ever employed in the 
Federal Government? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I don't recall that he was ever employed by the Fed- 
eral Government. 

Mr. Arens. Was he ever in the Military Establishment? Was he 
in the United States Army Air Force, Eastern Procurement Division, 
at one time? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I am trying to remember. Yes, that is right, I think 
he was in the — was it a school ? 

Mr. Arens. I am asking you. 

Mr. RoBisoN. I know he was in Washington in the public-school 
system and then he left 

Mr. Arens. To your Imowledge was he ever a member of the Com- 
munist Party? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. As to that question, I take the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. In other words, if you told this committee a truthful 
answer to the question whether or not your brother, Gerson B. Robison, 
was a member of the Communist Party, you would be giving informa- 
tion which could be used against you in a criminal proceeding ; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Is he now a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Robison. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Where is he employed at the present time? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I am sorry. I would like to withdraw the last answer 
and say to the best of my knowledge he is not. 

Mr. Arens. To the best of your knowledge, he is not now a member 
of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Robison. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Communist Party at this time 
last year? 

Mr. Robison. To the best of my knowledge, he was not. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Communist Party in 1946 when 
you assumed your position with the American Jewish Congress ? 

Mr. Robison. I plead the privilege as to that. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Communist Party in 1953 ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Robison. I will plead the privilege as to that. 

Mr. Arens. After what date was he definitely to your knowledge 
not a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Robison. I will plead the privilege as to that question. 

Mr. Moulder. Do you have any knowledge or information con- 
cerning his Communist Party affiliation at any time ? 

Mr. Robison. I will plead the privilege as to that. 

Mr. Arens. Could you tell us, please, sir, what his address is, where 
lie may be located? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3257 

Mr. RoBisoN. In Mansfield Center, Conn. 

Mr, Arens. In what occupation is he engaged? 

Mr. RoBisoN". He is on the staff of the University of Connecticut. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity? 

Mr, RoBisoN. As a teacher. 

Mr. Arens. What does he teach? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Mathematics. 

Mr. Arens. Who is Jesse Robison? 

Mr. RoBisoN. He is my cousin. 

Mr. Arens. Where is he employed? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I do not know. 

Mr. Arens. Was he at one time employed in the Small War Plants 
Corporation ? 

Mr. Robison. I know he was employed by the Government. I don't 
know in what capacity. 

Mr. Arens. To your knowledge was Jesse Robison ever a member 
of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Robison. Not to my knowledge. I was not well acquainted 
with him. 

Mr. Arens. I should say for the purpose of the record that the staff 
has no information which would lead us to the conclusion as of the 
present time that Jesse Robison has ever been in the Communist 
Party and I don't want that question to carry with it any implica- 
tion that we feel he has been. 

Who is Captain Gerson D. Lublin ? 

Mr. Robison. I guess he is a cousin of mine, too, whom I have 
not seen in at least 30 years. 

Mr. Arens. You have had some contact with him since 30 years 
ago ; have you not ? 

Mr. Robison. No, I don't think I have. 

Mr. Arens. You have used his name since 30 years ago; have you 
not? 

Mr. Robison. I certainly don't recall using his name. 

Mr. Arens. You used his name on tliis application form when you 
applied for employment with the United States Government, did you 
not? That was in 1943 or 1944. 

Mr. Robison. "What was the question, sir ? 

Mr. Arens. You were having a little difficulty recollecting any con- 
tact, association, or reference to your cousin, Gerson D. Lublin, and 
I was only inviting your attention, for the purpose of refreshing your 
recollection, to the fact that you had used his name as a person whom 
you identified as one of your relatives in Government service in 1944. 

Mr. Robison. Excuse me just a moment. I did not use his name. 
I was asked what relatives I had in the Government service and I listed 
his name because I knew he worked for the Government, but I had 
not seen him in a very long time. 

Mr. Arens. That is precisely what I said. You listed his name. 
To your knowledge was he ever a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Robison. No ; he was not. 

Mr. Moulder, How would you know whether or not he was ? 

Mr. Robison. The question was to my knowledge. 
Mr. Moulder, That is the reason I asked whether you had any 
knowledge concerning his Communist Party affiliation. You say you 
Inn eii't had any contact with him for 30 years. 



3258 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. RoBisoisr. The question was to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. I do not want any implication or conclusion drawn from 
the question with reference to Capt. Gerson D. Lublin, because the 
staff as of the moment has no information which would lead us to 
conclude that he may or may not have been a member of the Com- 
munist Party. 

Have you ever been connected with the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. ^ es ; I have. 

Mr. Arens. When were you a member of the National Lawyers 
Guild? 

Mr. RoBisoN. From 1936 to the present. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever disassociated yourself from the National 
Lawyers Guild? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No ; I have not. 

Mr. Arens. You know of course that the National Lawyers Guild 
has been cited by the House Committee on Un-American Activities 
as an arm of the Communist conspiracy ; do you not ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I know that it has been cited ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. Since you have been in it such a long time, could you 
help this committee by telling us who are some of the Communists 
in the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Mr. KoBisoN. I have had practically no activity in the National 
Lawyers Guild except maintaining my membership during the last 9 
years, and I am not aware of Communist activity in it at the present 
time. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever observed any instance in which the line 
of the National Lawyers Guild has deviated from the Communist 
Party line? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. R.OBISON. I certainly recall some instances in which it did, yes. 

Mr. Arens. With what chapter of the National Lawj^ers Guild were 
you associated? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I am now associated with the New York chapter and 
I was associated with the Washington chapter. 

Mr. Arens. Wlien were you associated with the Washington 
chapter ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. During my stay in Washington, 1937 to 1946. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a man by the name of Harry N. Rosen- 
field while you were a member of the National Lawyers Guild? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I don't recall that Harry Rosenfield was a member of 
the National Lawyers Guild in Washington, not to my recollection. 

I know who Harry N. Rosenfield is. I do not recall his being a 
member of the National Lawyers Guild. 

Mr. Arens. Can you identify him? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I don't know what you mean by identify him. 

Mr. Arens. You say you know who he is. Who is he ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. He is an attorney. No. I am not sure he is an at- 
torney. I know for one thing it happens that he was in my class in 
high school. I know that he is interested in the subject of immigra- 
tion. I believe he is an attorney, yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was he not a member of the Displaced Persons 
Commission ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. That may well be, sir. 



I 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3259 

Mr. Arens. Was he not also a member or executive director of the 
so-called Perlman Commission which made a study of the immigration 
system ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. That may well be. 

Mr. Arens. You have no recollection of an association with him 
in the National Lawyers Guild in Washington ? 

Mr. RoBisoisr. None at all. 

Mr. Arens. Of the persons whose names I have called off to you as 
your colleagues at the National Labor Relations Board, who were 
members of the National Lawyers Guild ? Do you have a recollection ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I can't be sure but I would suspect most of them were. 

Mr. Arens. Were most of them identified with the National Lawyers 
Guild at the same time that they were in the National Labor Relations 
Board ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. They were members of it at that time, yes. 

Mr. AriEns. Can you tell this committee why it is that you cannot 
talk about any alleged affiliations with the Communist conspiracy 
prior to the time that you assumed your station with the American 
Jewish Congress? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. I will plead the fifth amendment to that question. 

Mr. Arens. Now that you have disassociated yourself from that 
situation, can you tell us on the basis of your present knowledge and 
present associations, the names of any persons who, to your certain 
knowledge, are members of the Communist conspiracy ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. I would like to have that question stated more fully. 

Mr. Arens. Would you read that question back to him, please, Mr. 
Reporter ? 

(Question read.) 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. I do not know of anyone. 

Mr. Arens. Can you at the present time tell us the names of persons 
who, to your certain knowledge, were at any time members of the Com- 
munist conspiracy ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. As to that I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. To your knowledge, did any of the persons whose names 
I called off to you as colleagues of yours in the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board ever disassociate themselves from the Communist Party ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. Did you make known to your present employers when 
you assumed your position that you had at one time been a member 
of the Communist Party? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. Did you give a complete, full, and accurate account of 
your past affiliations and associations to your present employer when 
you assumed that job? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I plead the fifth amendment. 

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

The Chairman. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. RoBisoN. The same answer. 



3260 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Do you know of anyone associated with you in your 
present work who, to your knowledge, is or has been a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No; I do not. 

Mr. Arens. Are you now under Communist discipline ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No ; I am not, and as I have already pointed out, I 
have not been for 9 years. 

The Chairman. For how many years ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. Since I joined the staff of the American Jewish Con- 
gress in 1946. 

Mr. Arens. While you were with the National Labor Relations 
Board did you in the course of your employment have access to in- 
dustrial establishments in the country for any purpose whatsoever ? 

Mr. RoBisON. No, I was in the Washington office. Near the very 
end of my employment there I did appear at two hearings, but even 
then I would not have had access to any industrial establishments. 

Mr. Arens. Did any of your colleagues whose names I have called 
off to you, who were your associates in the National Labor Relations 
Board, have access in the course of their employment to the industrial 
establishments of this Nation ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. I would say to the best of my knowledge, no, they 
were all in the Washington office. 

Mr. Arens. Did you, during the course of your employment in the 
National Labor Relations Board, have access to "classified" or "re- 
stricted" information? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No, I did not. 

Mr. Arens. Did you at any time during the course of your employ- 
ment, transmit to a person not authorized by law to receive the same, 
information which you procured in the course of your employment ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No ; I did not. 

Mr. Arens. Was the transmission of information to persons, not 
authorized to receive the same, ever discussed in your presence in any 
group or organization during the period of time while you were em- 
ployed by the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have knowledge or information respecting the 
transmission to a person, not authorized by law to receive the same^ 
of information of a restricted or classified nature? 

Mr. RoBisoN. No. 

Mr. Arens. Were you ever the subject of a loyalty investigation ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. RoBisoN. I will plead the fifth amendment as to that. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that the witness 
be ordered and directed to answer that question. It is highly essen- 
tial that he be compelled to answer that question for the reason that 
repeatedly we have had witnesses before this committee who have 
had on their Form 57 a categorical denial of any Communist affilia- 
tion. The fact that he may or may not have had a loyalty investiga- 
tion is very pertinent to the interests of this committee. 

The Chairman. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. RoBisoN. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. That will conclude, if you please, Mr. Chairman, the' 
interrogation by the staff of this witness. 

The Chairman. Any questions ? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3261 

The witness is excused. 

We will take a 5-minute break. 

(Brief recess.) 

The Chairman. Call your next witness. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, if you please, the next witness is Mr. 
Martin Kurasch, K-u-r-a-s-c-h. 

The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand, Mr. Kurasch, 
please. Do you swear the testimony you are about to give shall be 
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MARTIN KURASCH, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

BERNARD JAFFE 

Mr. Arens. Will you identify yourself by name, residence, and 
occupation. 

Mr. Kurasch. I thought pictures were not to be taken during the 
course of the hearing. 

The Chairman. They will not be taken during the course of the 
hearing. The hearing hasn't started. 

Mr. Kurasch. Can they get the pictures and get done with it? 

The Chairman. Proceed please. 

Mr. Kurasch. I am Martin Kurasch, 1628 228th Street, New York 
City. This is Bernard Jaffe, my counsel. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Jaffe, would you identify yourself a little more 
fully as to residence ? 

Mr. Jaffe. Bernard Jaffe, 135 Broadway, New York, N. Y. 

Mr. Arens. With whom are you associated in practice, please? 

Mr. Jaffe. I am associated with other lawyers. I am here indi- 
vidually. 

Mr. Arens. Just for the purpose of identification. Are you with 
a law firm ? 

Mr. Jaffe. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. The name of the firm, please ? 

Mr. Jaffe. Axelrod & Jaffe. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Kurasch, would you kindly give us your present 
occupation ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I am a lawyer. 

Mr. Arens. Are you identified with any firm ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I am employed as counsel to the American Financial 
and Development Corporation for Israel. 

Mr. Arens. How long have you been so employed ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Since 1951. 

Mr. Moulder. For what corporation? 

Mr. Kurasch. The American Financial and Development Cor- 
poration for Israel, Mr. Moulder. 

Mr. ScHERER. I still didn't hear it. 

Mr. Kurasch. The American Financial and Development Cor- 
poration for Israel. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly give us a brief description of the 
corporations? I do not believe the committee is quite sure of the 
identification. 

Mr. Kurasch. It is a bond selling organization engaged in selling 
bonds of the State of Israel. I am employed as counsel. 



3262 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. How long have you been so employed ? 

Mr. KuRAScH. As I told you just now, since 1951. 

Mr. Arens. Where and when were you born ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. I was born in Auo^ust 1913 in New York. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly give us a thumbnail sketch of your 
early life prior to the time that you became self-sustaining, a word 
about your education ? 

Mr. Ktjrasch. I was graduated from Rutgers University in 1933 
and was graduated from Columbia Law School in 1936. 

Mr. Arens. Are you a member of the bar of New York State ? 

Mr. Ktjrasch. Yes; I am. 

Mr. Arens. Kindly trace in skeleton fonn for us, Mr. Kurasch, 
your personal employment history from the time that you became 
an adult or self-sustaining? 

Mr. Kurasch. I had several positions after I left law school. I 
went with the National Labor Relations Board in August of 1937, 
I believe. I was with the National Labor Relations Board until 1941. 
I then went with the Rural Electrification Administration. 

Mr. Arens. Was that in 1941 ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes; I left in 1943, early 1943 and went with the 
National War Labor Board. I was with them during the period 
that it became the National Wage Stabilization Board. That was a 
change in the name of the agency. I believe that was in the beginning 
of 1946. Then I think toward the end of 1946 — I am not sure of 
that — I went with the Office of the Housing Expediter. I left some- 
time in the spring of 1948. 

Thereafter I was in the practice of law and then I went with the 
company I am with now. 

Mr. Arens. Let's revert, if you please, sir, to 1937 when you were 
first employed by the Federal Government. Could you tell us first of 
all how you happened to procure your employment with the Federal 
Government in 1937, with the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Mr. Chairman, I would like to interpose an objection 
to that question if I may, to the committee. The period of time we 
are talking about is approximately 20 years ago. It is a different 
period of history. It is a time before the present loyalty program 
of the Government was instituted. 

The Chairman. This has nothing to do with the loyalty program. 
This committee is charged with the responsibility of inquiring into 
attempts which were made to infiltrate this Government, and in order 
to try to prevent a repetition of that we are making this inquiry with 
the hope that we can draw legislation which will make it very diffi- 
cult for Coromies to get into the Government. That is our respon- 
sibility. 

Mr. Kurasch. Mr. Chairman, I understand 

The Chairman. I don't care about your objections. This is not a 
court. 

Mr, Kurasch. May I state it because I think I have a point. I would 
like the chairman to listen to me. 

The Chairman. What is the question before the witness ? 

(The reporter read from his notes as requested.) 

The Chairman. That is very important. We want to know how 
many people got into the Government whom we have every reason to 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNTMBNT 3263 

believe were Communists when they were employed. I think it is a 
very important question. Answer it. 

Mr. KuRASCH. I will be glad to answer it. I applied for employment 
at various Government agencies. At that time there were many jobs 
opening. One of the agencies to which I applied was the National 
Labor Relations Board. I went there and was interviewed by several 
people. Then I think it was on April 12, 1937, the Supreme Court of 
the United States upheld the constitutionality of the Wagner Act. At 
that time the National Labor Relations Board expanded very greatly. 
A lot of jobs opened. I was one of those employed. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know an^^one in the National Labor Relations 
Board prior to the time that you became employed there ? 

Mr. KuEASCH. I don't recall as of the present moment. I think that 
Joseph Robison, who just testified, was employed prior to the time I 
was, and he was a schoolmate of mine. I don't know if there was any- 
one else that I knew. 

Mr. Arens. Were you and Robison colleagues in the National Labor 
Relations Board ? Did you work there at the same time? 

Mr. KuRASCH. We were fellow employees, yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know him prior to the time you were employed 
there? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I said he was a schoolmate of mine. 

Mr. Arens, Was he instrumental in any way in the process of your 
procuring employment in the National Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. KuRASCH. No ; I don't think he was. 

Mr. Arens. Was Nathan Witt with the National Labor Relations 
Board during the period of time that you were with the Board? 

Mr. KuRAscH. Yes, I believe he was. He was at one time an Assist- 
ant General Counsel and then I believe he became Secretary. 

Mr. Arens. Who was your immediate superior during the course 
of the time you were with the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. I had a great number of immediate superiors. When 
I first came in there was a very small staff. I am not sure of this, but 
I think that Nathan Witt was an Assistant General Counsel. Then 
Thomas Emerson became Assistant General Counsel. He was my im- 
mediate supervisor. Then the National Labor Relations Board insti- 
tuted a number of supervisors. There was one named Rawlings Rag- 
land under whom I worked. I worked under someone named Mortimer 
Kollender, as I remember. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever work in the Secretary's oflSice? 

Mr. KuRAscH. Yes. I went over to what was known as the Order 
Section some time in 1939. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever work under Nathan Witt? 

Mr. Ktjrasch. Just let me finish. I went over to the Secretary's 
office in 1939. At that time I was in the Order Section. Nathan Witt 
was the Secretarv and he was the supervisor at that time. 

Mr. Arens. Were you at one time an Associate General Counsel 
in the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. No ; I was not. 

Mr. Arens. Were you at one time Associate General Counsel of the 
Wage Stabilization Board? 

Mr. Ktjrasch. Yes, I was. That was many years later. 

(The following members of the committee were present : Represent- 
atives Walter, Moulder, and Scherer. ) 



3264 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. For the next few moments, if yon please, sir, let us 
confine ourselves to your activities in the National Labor Relations 
Board. Did you at any time have the assignment of formulating 
recommendations to the Board and preparing the Board's decisions? 

Mr. KuRAscH. Mr. Chairman, if I may again say, this has nothing 
to do with getting employment with the National Labor Relations 
Board. 

Mr. Arens. We have covered that. 

The Chairman. We are moving into something else now. 

Mr. KuRASCH. I know, but we are in a stage now 20 years ago and 
the functioning and work that I did 20 years ago seems to me hardly 
relevant to any present legislative inquiry. 

The Chairman. It may not seem to be relevant to you, but it is 
relevant and you are directed to answer the question. 

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

Mr. Arens. Did you during the course of your employment with 
the National Labor Relations Board have as part of vour duties the 
formulation of recommendations to the Board and t'he preparation 
of Board decisions? 

Mr. Kurasch. INIr. Chairman, I don't want to interpose another 
objection, but I find it distracting for counsel to walk up and down 
beside me speaking in a loud voice. We are sitting at a small table. I 
can hear him. 

Mr. Arens. I apologize if I have been at all discourteovis or offen- 
sive. May I repeat the question : Did you at any time while you were 
with the National Labor Relations Board have as part of your duties 
the preparation of Board decisions and the formulation of recommen- 
dations to the Board ? 

Mr. Kurasch. The only way, which you may have in mind, is my 
work as review attorney which I did in 1937-39, 19 to 17 years ago. 
At that time the function of a review attorney, as I recall it, was to 
analyze records, to prepare material on the analysis of the records, to 
go over it with the supervisor, and then to report the material to the 
National Labor Relations Board, which consisted of a board of three. 
The Board discussed it and made a decision and first drafts of the 
decision were written by the review attorneys. I was one of the review 
attorneys. 

Mr. Arens. Did you formulate recommendations to the Board ? 

Mr. Kurasch. No; I don't think the review attorneys formulated 
recommendations as such. The rejDorts were supposed to be factual 
reports on the record. 

Mr. Arens. I lay before you now, Mr. Kurasch, a photostatic copy 
of a document entitled "Application for Federal Employment," and 
invite your attention to the last page thereof where a signature ap- 
pears and ask you if you can identify that signature. 

Mr. Kurasch. May I read the document, please? 

(Witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Arens. Would you be disposed to see whether or not you 
can identify the signature first, and later we will talk about the 
document. 

Mr. Kurasch. Mr. Chairman, the document has been inaccurately 
described. It has nothing to do with the National Labor Relations 
Board. I have no objection to looking at my signature but it is not 
the document described by counsel. 



cojnimijnist infiltration of government 3265 

Mr. Arens. May I perhaps redescribe it. It is a document entitled 
"Application for Federal Employment" form approved by the Bureau 
of tlie Budget, No. 50-R046, on which a signature appears at the end 
of the document. I am asking you if 3'ou can identify that signature. 

Mr. KuRASCH. I thought it referred to the National Labor Relations 
Board. It doesn't. That looks like my signature. 

Mr. Arens. In this document on which a signature appears which 
you have stated looks like your signature, there is language respecting 
duties of a review attorney, in which it is stated as a description of 
the work — 

Review an analysis of records of hearing of cases before National Labor Rela- 
tions Board, formulation of recommendations to Board, and preparation of 
Board decisions. 

May I invite your attention to that language and ask you if that is 
language which you inserted in a form in applying for employment 
with the Federal Government? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kurasch. I suppose I did insert it. I don't recall it. 

Mr. Arens. Is the language which I have read a truthful and ac- 
curate representation of the cluties which you had while you were with 
the National Labor Relations Board in the capacity of a review 
attorney ? 

Mr. Kurasch. When a review attorney reported the case, he re- 
ported the case to a supervisor. The supervisor would go over the 
record with the review attorney. They would analyze the facts and 
prepare it for presentation to the Board. The review attorney and 
the supervisor went in to the Board, which consisted of 3 people — 
the Chairman at that time was J. "Warren Madden, and I think there 
were the 2 Smiths, Donald Wakefield Smith and Edwin S. Smith, 
as Board members. Reports were made to them and the case was dis- 
cussed amongJ;lie five that I mentioned. The Board would make the 
decision on the basis of the discussion which was held. 

Mr. Arens. Is this language which I have read to you a truth- 
ful and accurate sunnnary of the facts, that you did formulate recom- 
mendations to the Board and prepare Board decisions ? Is that truth- 
ful? 

Mr. Kurasch. If the review attorney was respected by the Board 
his opinion was asked just as was the opinion of the supervisor. He 
was a part of the discussion. So in that sense it was accurate. 

Mr. Arexs. Did you thereafter have the position of legal assistant 
to the Secretary of the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Kurasch. That was a position which I described before in the 
Order Section. 

Mr. Arens. Just answer whether or not you had that position. 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes ; I had that position. 

Mr. Arens. Who was the Secretary to whom you were legal assistant 
in the National Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. Kurasch. The Secretary was Nathan Witt. Let me explain 
something, though, because of the reference which has been made to 
me before in the Chicago hearings. There was an assistant secretary 
to the Board whose name I believe was Beatrice Stern. There was an 
administrative assistant to the secretary whose name I believe was 
Estelle Frankfurter. There was a gi'oup of professional employees 



3266 COIVIMITNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

working in the secretary's office. Of that group of professional em- 
ployees working in the Secretary's office I believe I was the youngest,, 
being about 25 at the time. I also believe that I was the lowest 
paid. So the references to me as a sinister aid to the Secretary 
which appeared at the Chicago hearings I think are hardly accurate. 

Mr. Arexs. Were there any other references to you which were in- 
accurate in the Chicago hearings which you would like to protest at 
this time? 

Mr. Kttrasch. I prefer not to answer that question, sir. 

The Chaiemax. Do you answer the question ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. What is that ? 

The Chairman. Aren't you listening? You said "I prefer not to 
answer the question," and I said "Do you answer the question?" 

Mr. KuRAscH. No ; I do not answer the question. 

Mr. Arens. On what gi'ounds ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. KuRASCH. On that question I claim my privilege, sir. 

Mr. Arexs. In other words, if jou told this committee the truth 

The Chairman. Just a moment. I direct you to answer the 
question. 

Mr. KuRAscH. The question as I understand it was a general ques- 
tion, were there any references to me or about me at the Chicago hear- 
ing which were inaccurate? My answer to that question is that I 
claim my privilege not to answer because of the privilege given to 
people not to testify against themselves. 

Mr, Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest this record may 
be cleared by reference to what actually transpired. The witness said 
in effect that sinister references were made to him by Mr. Fuchs in 
Chicago. 

Mr. KuRASCH. No. 

Mr. Arens. And he protested those. 

Mr. KuRAscH. I did not make such reference. One of the 

The Chairman. Just a moment. Ask him some direct questions, 
Maybe you can refresh his recollection. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Kurasch, you protested a few moments ago to "sin- 
ister" references which were made to you in Chicago, is that correct ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Let me clarify that. I believe that at the Chicago 
hearing one of the committee members, I don't recall which one, re- 
ferred to me as the Assistant Secretary of the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board. 

The Chairman. Wliat is sinister about that ? 

Mr. KtiRAscH. The reference was made in a way which I considered 
sinister. 

The Chairman. What is sinister about being an Assistant Secretary 
of the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Kurasch. There is nothing sinister about that, sir. 

The Chairman. That is just what you are telling us. Was there 
anything sinister about your actions while you were connected with 
the National Labor Relations Board ; for example, were you a member 
of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Kurasch. On that question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. While you were with the National Labor Relations 
Board did you have occasion to supervise as a regional attorney some 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNIVIENT 3267 

seven attorneys in enforcement work and participate in the trial 
of cases under the National Labor Relations xlct? 

Mr. KuRASCH. No ; but I think you are mixed up on employment. 
1 think what you are trying to describe is my employment as regional 
attorney with the War Labor Board. 

Mr. Arens. Let's get the date accurate here, please, sir. When did 
jou disassociate yourself from the National Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. KuRAScH. 1941. 

Mr. Ahrens. We will stay within that date, then. 

While you were with the National Labor Relations Board did you 
have as one of your associates or colleagues a man by the name of 
Allan R. Rosenberg? 

Mr. KuRASCH. He was one of the employees of the Board ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity did he work ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. As best I recall, he was in the review division, but 
I am not sure. Then I think he was one of the professional assistants 
to the Secretary. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Joseph B. Robison there ? 

Mr. KuRAScH. Yes; I did. 

Mr. Arens. Was he one of your colleagues in the work ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. He was one of my colleagues and friends ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. I should like to read you the names of a number of 
people, please, Mr. Kurasch, and then I will ask you the general 
question as to whether or not each and every one of those persons were 
associated with you in the National Labor Relations Board. 

Lester Asher. 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. David Rein. 

Mr. Kurasch. He was one of my associates ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. Woodrow Sandler. 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Jacob H. Krug. 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Mortimer Riemer. 

Mr. Kurasch. He was a trial examiner, yes. 

Mr. Arens. John W. Porter. 

Mr. Kurasch. I believe he was with the National Labor Relations 
Board, but whether he was there at the time that I was, I don't 
remember. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a lawyer ? 

Mr. Kurasch. He was a lawyer, yes. 

Mr. Arens. Margaret B. Porter. 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. RuthWeyand. 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Allen Heald. 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Harry Cooper. 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes ; I believe he was a review attorney. 

Mr. Arens. Edward Scheunemann. 

Mr. Kurasch. I know he was with the National Labor Relations 
Board. Wliether he was there at the time I was there, I don't know. 

Mr. Arens. Bertram Diamond. 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes. 



3268 COIVIMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Aeens. Herbert Fiichs. 

Mr. KuRASCH. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Each one of those persons concerning; whom you have 
given affirmative response was connected in a legal capacity at the 
National Labor Kelations Board while you were there ; is that correct ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Yes. I don't know whether you call a trial examiner 
legal capacity. 

Mr. Arens. They were all lawyers; is that correct? 

Mr. KuR-\scH. I think we understand each other. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your employment with the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board did you try cases in court ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. No. 

Mr. AiiENS. Did you work on any briefs for presentation in court? 

Mr. KuRAscH. Sometimes when you were a review attorney you 
helped the briefing attorney on particular cases. I recall specific in- 
stances where I did that also. 

Mr. Arens. Did you, as an attorney in the National Labor Relations 
Board, get around over the country or was your work largely confined 
to Washington ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. With the National Labor Relations Board my work 
was largely confined to Washington, 

Mr. iVREXS. The policy of the National Labor Relations Board as 
enunciated and developed in the legal department precluded a certi- 
fication by the National Labor Relations Board of a company union^ 
did it not? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Yes. There was a section of the National Labor 
Relations Act which dealt with that, section 8 (2) of the Wagner 
Act. 

Mr. Arens. Section 8 (2) of the Wagner Act precluded the cer- 
tification of a company union as a bargaining agent for the reason 
that the company union would not be a free representative of the 
employees; isn't that correct? That was the theory underlying the 
policy ; was it not ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Well, yes; I suppose so. It is a loose statement of 
it. The theory was that the employer should not interfere with the 
collective bargaining efforts of the employees. Labor organizations 
within the meaning of section 8 (2) would be one in which there was 
such employer interference. 

jNIr. Akens. In other words, if the employer took over or controlled 
a labor organization, that labor organization would not be certified 
for bargaining purposes by the National Labor Relations Board be- 
cause it was not an agency of the workers. It was controlled by a 
foreign entity, isn't that correct ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. I don't understand the dift'erence between that and 
the previous question. Perhaps we had better have it read. 

(Question read by the reporter.) 

Mr. Arens. That is the essence or theory of the law, is it not? 

Mr. KiJRASCH, It had nothing to do with certification as such. An 
employee or labor organization could bring an unfair-labor-practice 
case. That was on the unfair-labor-practice side of the Board's work. 
If there was an unfair-labor-practice charge brought and sustained 
under section 8(2) as I recall it — it was a good many years ago — the 
Board ordered that orijanization to disestablish itself. I don't remem- 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3269 

ber exactly how the wording of the order was. But that was the 
sense of it. 

Mr. Arens. The theory underlying that was that the agency which 
represented itself as a bona fide labor union was not in truth and in 
fact a labor union, but was an employer-controlled entity; isn't that 
correct ? 

Mr. KuRAscii. Substantially I would say that that was correct, 
although that was a part of the law and I can't speak for the theory 
of the law. 

Mr. Arens. That was the policy enunciated by the National Labor 
Relations Board in interpreting what is a labor organization; isn't 
that correct? 

Mr. KuRAscH. That was the law as set out in the Wagner Act. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your associations, activities, and 
work with the National Labor Relations Board, what was the policy 
with respect to the certification or decertification of an organization 
which masqueraded as a bona fide labor organization but which in 
truth and in fact was controlled by the Communist Party ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. That is a very compound question. Can I have it 
read again, please? 

(Question read by the reporter.) 

Mr. KuRASCH. I remember nothing in the Wagner Act which would 
cover that point. 

JNIr. Arens. To your knowledge was any organization which was 
controlled by the Communist Party ever decertified by the National 
Labor Relations Board on the same legal theory which they decertified 
the company-controlled unions ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. No ; but there was no law affecting that. There was 
a law affecting company-dominated unions. 

Mr. Kearney. But there wasn't any law affecting Communist con- 
trol of unions? 

Mr. KuRAscH. No. The Wagner Act had no mention of that and 
it did not become an issue in the Board cases as I recall them. 

Mr. Arens. While you were with the National Labor Relations 
Board did you at any time become associated with the people whose 
names I have called off to you as fellow members in any organization, 
group or association other than the work which you were assigned to 
do? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kurasch. Can you specify more clearly? 

Mr. Arens. We will try it again. 

Did you at any time while in the National Labor Relations Board 
in concert with the individuals I have mentioned, ever engage in any 
activity other than the activity to which you were assigned in the 
coiu'se of your employment ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I engaged in social activity. I don't know what the 
question means. 

Mr. Arens. Were you engaged in social activities with the individ- 
uals we have been discussing? 

Mr. Kurasch. They were my friends, sure. 

Mr. Arens. That is fine. Did you ever belong to any clubs with 
any of them ? 

Mr. KuRxVSCH. I don't see how that is germane, Mr. Chairman. 



3270 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. I think you know whether or not it is germane. Did 
you ever belong to the Communist Party with any of them ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. Now you are asking a question which is specific. 
On that question I claim my privilege under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affirm or deny 
the fact that you were engaged with them in a foreign-controlled 
conspiracy. 

Mr. KuRASCH. That is the same question as the previous question, 
I suppose. I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Do you make any distinction between the Communist 
Party and the foreign-controlled conspiracy ? 

Mr. KiTRAscH. I claim the same privilege, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the National Lawyers Guild? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Yes ; I was. 

Mr. Arens. Over what period of time ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I don't remember when I became a member. I as- 
sume it was 1937 and I have remained a member up to the present 
time. 

Mr. Arens. You are now a member of the National Lawyers Guild? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Yes; I am. 

Mr. Arens. What offices have you held in the National Lawyers 
Guild? 

Mr. Kurasch. Offices? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't recall any offices. I have been on commit- 
tees on occasion. 

Mr. Arens. Were most of the persons, whose names I called off to 
you, also identified with the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes ; when I was in Washington. 

Mr. Arens. Didn't you at one time occupy the post of executive 
secretary of the National Lawyers Guild in Washington ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Executive secretary? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't recall any such thing. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your employment with the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board if an employer refused to bargam with 
a Communist-controlled entity on the ground that it was not a bona 
fide labor organization, would he be subjected to discipline because 
he would be alleged to be engaged in an unfair labor practice? 

Mr. Kurasch. I am sorry. I don't understand it. 

Mr. Arens. Let's start again. 

Wliile you were with the National Labor Relations Board, did you 
know of any instance in which an employer refused to bargain with 
an organization, ostensibly a labor organization, but in truth and in 
fact a Communist-controlled organization? 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't recall any such incident. 

Mr. Arens. Do you recall any instance in which an organization 
was decertified because it was found to be a Communist-controlled 
organization ? 

Mr. Kurasch. During my period of service with the National 
Labor Relations Board tliere was no process of decertification. I 
think that was a much later innovation. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3271 

Mr. Abens. No process of decertification against any organization 
on the ground that it was not in truth and in fact a hibor organiza- 
tion, but was in truth and in fact a Communist-controlled entity ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. There was no process of decertification whatsoever. 

Mr. Arens. Against any labor organization ? 

Mr. KuEASCH. No process of decertification. 

Mr. Arens. Were there processes of decertification against com- 
pany controlled labor organizations? 

Mr. KuRASCH. There was no certification of any company-con- 
trolled organizations. I don't know any process of decertification. 

Mr. Arens. Were there certifications of organizations which were 
Communist controlled? 

Mr. KuRASCii. Say that over. Were there certifications? 

Mr. Arens. Were there certifications of organizations which were 
Communist controlled ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. That was never an issue before the National Labor 
Relations Board. 

Mr. Arens. Was it ever discussed by you with any of the persons 
I named on the list of your colleagues ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. KuRASCH. I don't recall any discussions. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your employment with the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board did you at any time transmit to a 
person, not authorized by law to receive the same, information which 
you acquired in the course of your employment ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. If you would sit down and speak in a quieter 
voice I would really be able to understand you much better. It is 
^ery distracting. We are very close together. 

Mr. Arens. Did you at any time during the course of your em- 
ployment with the National Labor Relations Board transmit to 
any person, not authorized by law to receive the same, information 
which you acquired during the course of your employment? 

Mr. KuRASCH. No. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know of the transmission of any such infor- 
mation ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. No. 

(The following members of the committee were present: Repre- 
sentatives Walter, Moulder, Kearney, and Scherer.) 

Mr. Arens. I lay before you again, please, Mr. Kurasch, the docu- 
ment containing the signature on which you have heretofore identified 
in this record as your own signature. I invite your attention spe- 
cifically, if I may, please, to question No. 26, which I shall read to you : 

Do you advocate or have yon ever advocated, or are you now or have you ever 
been a member of any organization that advocates the overthrow of the Govern- 
I ment of the United States by force and violence? 

If your answer is "Yes," give complete details in item 38. 

Opposite Question No. 26 on this form to which your signature 
is appended, is "X" under the column "No." Did you affix that "X" 
in that column ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. KuRiVSCH. On that question I claim my privilege not to answer, 
Mr. Chairman. 

70811— 56— pt. 4 3 



3272 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Were you as of the date on wliich your signature 
appears on this form, October 24, 1946, a member of the Communist 
conspiracy ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. On that question I claim my privilege. 

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

Mr. KuRASCH. On that question I claim my privilege and I remind 
the chairman and the members of the committee that inferences are 
not to be drawn from claims of privilege. 

The Chairman. I will draw any inference I please from that. 

Mr. KuRASCH. I mean no discourtesy, sir. 

The Chairman. You just told me not to draw any inferences from 
the fact that you would not answer a question because you invoked 
the fifth amendment, so I say to you that I will draw whatever 
inferences I please. 

Mr. KuRASCH. I said I meant no discourtesy. 

Mr. Arens. May we proceed to your employment with the Rural 
Electrification Administration beginning in 1941. 

The Chairman. Before you go into that — it seems to me that 
around 1941 there was an investigation of the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board as the result of a resolution introduced by Judge Smith. 
Do you remember that investigation ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. There was a Smith committee investigation, I re- 
member vaguely, yes. 

The Chairman. Yes. Do you remember who testified before that 
committee ? 

Mr. Kurasch. No. 

The Chairman. Did you? 

Mr. Kurasch. No. 

The Chahiman. At the time of that investigation were you a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Kurasch. On that question I claim my privilege, sir. 

The Chairman. Ask him about those other employees of the Board. 

Mr. Arens. At the time of the investigation by the Smith commit- 
tee, were the persons whose names I called off to you, employed in the 
National Labor Relations Board, namely, Rosenberg, Robison, Asher^ 
Rein, Sandler, Krug, Riemer, Porter, Weyand, Heald, Cooper, 
Scheunemann, Diamond, and Fuchs, and whose names I have previ- 
ously read into this record ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I think I have answered already that they were 
employed, as I remember the list, but I don't know whether they were 
employed at the specific time of the investigation. 

The Chairman. Isn't it a fact that every one of those individuals 
was a member of the Communist Party, the Communist conspiracy? 

Mr. Kurasch. I think that assumes knowledge on my part as to 
which I ckaim my privilege. I claim my privilege to that question. 

Mr. Arens. What caused your disassociation from tlie National 
Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. Kurasch. I went over to the Rural Electrification Administra- 
tion. 

Mr. Arens. Did you do so under directions, orders, or suggestions by 
any person known by you to be in the Communist Party? 

Mr. KuiiAscH. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know any person in the REA prior to the time 
that you assumed your position over there ? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3273 

Mr. KuRAscH. I may have. I probably did. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know any person in the REA at that time who 
was, to your certain knowledge, a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. On questions relating to my knowledge of people in 
the Communist Party, I claim my privilege. I claim my privilege to 
that question. 

Mr. Arens. Was your employment in the Department of Agricul- 
ture precipitated or facilitated by any person known by you to be a 
member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Can you tell us the names of any persons who to your 
certain knowledge were members of the Communist Party while you 
were in the Department of Agriculture? 

Mr. Kurasch. What was the verb there ? Can I tell you the names? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. 

Mr. Kurasch. On that I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. While you were in the Department of Agriculture were 
you for a while an Assistant Chief of the Operations Unit, in the Office 
of the Solicitor ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of that assignment were you in charge 
of a number of people in labor relations operations ? 

Mr. Kurasch. 1 believe that that was one of the fimctions of the 
Operations Unit at that time. 

Mr. Arens. Who was your immediate superior ? 

Mr. Kurasch. As I recall, it was Lawrence Potamkin. 

Mr. Arens. Was he to your knowledge affiliated in any way with the 
Communist conspiracy ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I claim my privilege with respect to persons. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your work in the Department of 
Agriculture, did you transmit to any person imauthorized by law to 
receive the same, information which you acquired in the course of your 
employment? 

Mr. Kurasch. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you in the course of your employment in the De- 
partment of Agriculture meet with your fellow employees in any 
organization or association outside of your employment? 

Mr. Kurasch. To these broad questions the only thing I can do is 
claim my privilege, sir. 

Mr. Arens, Did you meet with them in any clubs, groups or social 
organizations ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I met with them socially. I don't know about social 
organizations. 

Mr. Arens. Will you tell us of any other way in which you may 
have met with them ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I claim my privilege on that question. 

Mr. Arens. With how many people were you engaged in social 
activities who were your fellow employees in the Department of 
Agriculture ? 

Mr. Kurasch. "\Yliat was that question ? 

Mr. Arens. How many of them did you meet in social organizations 
or social clubs? 

Mr. Kurasch. I didn't say anything about social organizations or 
social clubs. 



3274 COMMUNIST rNTFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Social activities, socially. 

Mr. KuRASCH. I know many people ; I have many friends. I have 
developed many friends over a good number of years. I am a social 
kind of person. I have met many people as friends. Is that what 
you mean? 

Mr. Arens. No. I mean with how many of them did you engage 
in Communist Party activities? 

Mr. KuRASCH. You didn't say that is what you meant. On that 
question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Kearney. I didn't get the witness' answer on that. 

Mr. Arens. I claim my privilege to the last question. 

Mr. Kearney. You understood the question? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I think I did. 

Mr. Kearney. I understood your answer. 

Mr. Arens. Let us move on, if you please, to your activities i)n. 
the National War Labor Board and in the Wage Stabilization Board. 
Was your transfer to these agencies of the Federal Government oc- 
casioned directly or indirectly to your knowledge by any person known 
by you to have been a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. No, not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Give us a brief description of your duties when you' 
were Associate General Counsel in the Wage Stabilization Board. 

Mr. Kurasch. My duties were primarily related to enforcement of 
the wage controls. I also assisted the Associate General Counsel and i 
at times the General Counsel. 

Mr. Arens. Did you participate in the formulation of the policies j 
and procedures to be followed by the enforcement officials in the re- 
gional offices of the Board ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Arens. How many regional offices were there ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I think there were 12. 

Mr. Arens. In the course of your work did you travel over the] 
United States? 

Mr. Kurasch. I traveled to several of the offices, yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have access to the industrial establishments' 
of this Nation ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't think I visited any in the course of my work, j 

Mr. Arens. Did you go to Denver ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes, I worked in Denver. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a man by the name of Fuchs while you , 
were in Denver? 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Arens. Wliat was the nature of your acquaintanceship with 
Mr. Fuchs? 

Mr. Kurasch. He was my friend at the time. 

Mr. Arens. Was that Herbert Fuchs ? 

Mr. Kurasch. That was Herbert Fuchs. 

Mr. Arens. Have you and he parted company since then? You 
said that he was your friend at the time ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I haven't seen him for a good number of years. 

Mr. Arens. Can you tell us any activities in which you and Fuchs 
may have been engaged other than any activities strictly in conformity 
with your work in Denver ? 

Mr. ScHERER. May I interrupt, Mr. Chairman. 



COIVIMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3275 

The Chairman. Let him answer the question and then proceed. 
Answer the question. 

Mr. KuRAscH. I claim my privilege on that question. 

The Chairman. Go ahead, Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. You said that Herbert Fuchs was your friend while 
you were in Denver. Earlier in your testimony you referred to the 
testimony given at the hearing in Chicago in December of last year. 
Did you read that testimony, Witness ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Some of it, yes. 

Mr. Scherer. Did you read the testimony of Herbert Fuchs? 

Mr. KuRAscH. Some of it. 

Mr. Scherer. Was anything that Herbert Fuchs said about you in 
that testimony true? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I believe that question was asked me, Mr. Scherer, 
and I claim my privilege to that question. 

Mr. Scherer. Wlien it was testified to in Chicago that you were one 
of the organizers of Commmiist cells within the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board, was that testimony true or false ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. On that question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Scherer. You indicated earlier in your testimony that some 
statement or some testimony given at the Chicago hearing was inac- 
curate, did you not? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I didn't, sir. I didn't say whether it was accurate 
or inaccurate. 

Mr. Scherer. What did you say ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I said the reference made by one of the committee 
members to me as an Assistant Secretary of the National Labor Re- 
lations Board was not precise. 

Mr. Scherer. Not precise. Was any of the testimony about you 
given at the Chicago hearing which you read untrue ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I claim my privilege on that question. 

Mr. Arens. When you were with the National War Labor Board, 
Denver regional office, did you laiow a person by the name of Philip 
Reno? 

Mr. KuRAscH. Yes. He was an employee of the Board. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not he was a member of the 
Communist conspiracy ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. On that question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of John W. Porter ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Mr. Arens, if you go through the list, I have told you 
that with respect to my knowledge of Communist affiliations — 

Mr. Arens. Let us find whether or not you knew they were in Den- 
ver. That might at least corroborate testimony on this record by 
other witnesses. Do you know a person by the name of John W. 
Porter? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Yes, I knew him. I knew a person by the name of 
John W. Porter. 

Mr. Arens. Was he employed in the National War Labor Board 
Denver regional offices ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. He was an employee of the Board, yes. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. As an attorney. 

Mr. Arens. Margaret Bennett Porter? 



3276 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. KuRASCH. No. I don't believe she was employed at the time. 

Mr. Arens. Was she employed at any time by the National Labor 
Relationa Board ? 

Mr. KtTRAscH. Yes, but we were talking about the regional War 
Labor Board. She was the wife of John W. Porter. She was not 
employed in Denver to my recollection. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Gerald J. 
Matchett at the Denver regional office? 

Mr. Kurasch. I believe he was an employee of the Board, yes. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not he was a member of the 
Commiuiist conspiracy? 

Mr. Kurasch. On that question I claim my privilege, 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Edward 
Scheunemami at the Denver office ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I knew a person by the name of Edward Scheune- 
mann. To my recollection he was not an employee of the Denver 
office of the War Labor Board. 

Mr. Arens. Wliere was he employed? 

Mr. Kurasch. In town, but I don't know whether he was with the 
War Labor Board. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity was he employed ? 

Mr. Kurasch. He was a lawyer. 

Mr. Arens. Did he at any time have anything to do with the Na- 
tional War Labor Board? 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't recall his employment. He may have been. 

Mr. Arens. You knew him in the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Kurasch. As I said, I knew him in Washington. I don't 
know whether he was with the National Labor Relations Board at the 
time that I was there. 

Mr. Arens. How did you happen to know him ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't remember. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Communist conspiracy ? 

Mr. Kurasch. On that question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Raymond LaVallee, L-a-V-a-1-l-e-e. 

Mr. Kurasch. He was an employee of the War Labor Board to the 
best of my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. In Denver? 

Mr. Kurasch. In Denver. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Communist conspiracy? 

Mr. Kurasch. On that question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Dwight Spencer, S-p-e-n-c-e-r. 

Mr. Kurasch. He was an employee of the War Labor Board. 

Mr. Arens. At Denver? 

Mr. Kurasch. At Denver. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Communist conspiracy? 

Mr. Kurasch. On that question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Don Plumb, P-1-u-m-b. 

Mr. Kurasch. I knew Don Plumb ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was he in the War Labor Board in Denver? 

Mr. Kurasch. No. 

Mr. Arens. Was he in the National Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. Kurasch. No. 

Mr. Arens. How did you know him ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I met him socially. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3277 

Mr. Arens. Is that the only way in which you knew him ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. On that question I chiim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Arlyne Plumb — was she the wife of Don Plumb? 

Mr. Kurasch. She was his wife. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know her in the same manner that you knew 
Don Plumb? 

Mr. Kurasch. No. I think she was an employee of the War Labor 
Board. 

Mr. Arens. At Denver ? 

Mr. Kurasch. At Denver. 

Mr. Arens. Was she a member of the Communist conspiracy ? 

Mr. Kurasch. On that question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Herbert Fuchs you have already identified. 

What caused your transfer to the Office of the Housing Expediter ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I applied for the change. 

Mr. Arens. Was this transfer or new status caused directly or in- 
directly to your knowledge by any person known by you to have been 
in the Communist conspiracy ? 

Mr. Kurasch, No. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us the name of your immediate supervisor in the 
Office of the Housing Expediter ? 

Mr. Kurasch. When I first went there there was a man whose name 
I don't recall. Later there was a man named Richard Alger. If 
you could refresh my recollection on the first name I might be able 
to help. 

Mr. Arens. No. I am going to have to depend on your recollection 
on that, Mr. Kurasch. 

Mr. Kurasch. Then at one time I w^as supervised by a man named 
Glen Beyer. I am not sure of the spelling but I think it is B-e-y-e-r. 

Mr. Arens. Just a thumbnail sketch of your duties in the Office of 
the Ilousing Expediter, please. 

Mr. Kurasch. This was the Industrial Housing Division. These 
are not legal duties. The title of the position I think was financial 
assistant specialist. The duties were largely those of expediter, of 
trying to help industrialized housing firms get started and of trying 
to help firms which had new products in the housing field to get 
started. They were guaranteed contracts which the Government 
program called for at that time. 

Mr. Arens. Pardon the interruption. "Wliat discretion did you 
have in the course of your employment to determine which of several 
applicants would be the recipient of a contract — a Federal grant? 

Mr. Kurasch. We were assigned to specific applicants. We went 
around to try to help them as much as we could. 

Mr. Arens. To your knowledge have you ever been the subject of a 
loyalty investigation while you were in the employ of the Federal 
Government. 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't recall any loyalty investigation as such. I 
suppose there were checks made at various times. There was no 
loyalty hearing as such that I remember. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever receive what they call interrogatories with 
reference to your loyalty ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't recall that. I may have because I know 
there were a lot of papers. 



3278 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Were you ever interrogated orally in any formal pro- 
ceeding respecting your loyalty? 

Mr. KuRASCH. No, not in any formal proceeding. I believe at one 
time in the Department of Agriculture someone came around from 
the Department and asked questions. 

Mr. Arens. From what department did he come, the Department 
of Aginculture ? 

Mr. KuRAscH. I think so, but I am not sure. 

Mr. Arens. Did you at any time know a man by the name of 
Dombrowski while you were in the Agriculture Department? 

Mr. Kurasch. Who ? 

Mr. Arens. Dombrowski. 

Mr. Kurasch. No, not that I recall. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever engage in any activities in connection with 
the Southern Conference for Human Welfare? 

Mr. Kurasch. Not that I recall. 

Mr. Arens. Southern Conference Educational Fund? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't recall. 

Mr. Arens. What caused your disassociation from the Federal Gov- 
ernment, which I understand from your testimony occurred in 1948? 

Mr. Kurasch. The industrialized housing program was coming to 
an end. 

Mr. Arens. Were you discharged or did you resign ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I resigned, but the industrialized housing section 
announced its intended demise. 

Mr. Arens. You all had permanent civil-service status, didn't you? 

Mr. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. What caused you to seek your livelihood elsewhere if 
you had permanent civil-service status ? 

Mr. Kurasch. Mr. Chairman, isn't this inquiring into my private 
affairs which really is of no help to your legislative purpose ? I don't 
mind answering the question, but I think we are really going into an 
entire fishing expedition. 

Mr. Arens. The purpose of the question, Mr. Chairman 

Mr. Kurasch. Let me finish. 

Mr. Arens. Excuse me. 

Mr. Kurasch. I think the reason 

The Chahiman. This is not a fishing expedition. We are very 
curious to know a lot about you. We believe that there are four agen- 
cies of Government which have not been mentioned in which there 
were Communist cells and about which you know much. Do you 
know anything about any Communist Party cells in agencies of the 
Government which have not been divulged thus far? 

Mr. Kurasch. That question I claim my privilege on, Mr. Chair- 
man. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us again, to revert to the question which is out- 
standing, what caused your disassociation from the Federal Govern- 
ment? 

Mr. KuRACHi. The agency I was with was coming to an end and I 
didn't see any better job in sight. 

Mr. Arens. What was your salary at the time that you resigned or 
disassociated yourself ? 

Mr. Kurasch. I don't recall exactly. Do you have it there ? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3279 

Mr. Arens. Wliat is your best recollection as to approximately 
how much you were making? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Somewhere in the $8,000 bracket. 

The Chairman. You were classified as an expert? What was it? 

Mr. KuRAScH. At the Industrial Housing Division? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. KuRAscii. I think the title was financial assistant specialist. I 
don't remember. 

The Chairman. Financial assistant specialist. Wliat financial ex- 
perience had you had ? You were a lawyer. 

Mr. KuRASCH. Yes, I was a lawyer. 

The Chairman. Or a member of the bar. How did you happen to 
qualify for this position as a financial expert at $8,000 a year? 

Mr.KuRASCH. It wasn't really financial. That was the title of the 
position. The position was really one of expediter, the idea being 
that you knew your way to help these people get started. That was 
the purpose. 

Mr. Arens. You had the right or the privilege in your civil-service 
status, making about $8,000 a year in 1946, to seek some spot in the 
Federal Government in some other agency, did you not ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I had the privilege, yes. 

Mr. Arens. But you did not pursue that privilege; is that correct? 

Mr. KuRAscH. I don't recall exactly whether I tried to get another 
job or not at the time. 

Mr. Arens. Did the loyalty program or the loyalty investgation 
in 1946 have anything to do with your decision not to continue your 
career in the Federal Government? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I just wanted to finish my previous answer. 

Mr. Arens. And bear in mind this question and answer it, too, 
please, sir. 

Mr. KuRASCH. At that time jobs were not as easy to get as they were 
at other times in the Federal Government. The situation was tight- 
ening up. There wasn't as much employment. 

Mr. Arens. Did the loyalty program have anything to do with 
your decision not to continue your career in the Federal Government ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. On that question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. They were breathing hot on your neck, weren't they, 
in the loyalty program and that is why you decided to leave the 
Federal Government? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Mr. Chairman, is that question proper ? 

Mr. ScHERER. Yes. 

The Chairman. Yes. It is rather colorful but we all know what 
it means. Yes, I think you ought to answer this question. 

Mr. KuRASCH. I don't know of anyone who was breathing hot on 
my neck. 

Mr. Arens. Did your decision depend, in part at least, upon the 
apprehension on your part that you might be the subject of a loyalty 
investigation ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. On that question I claim my privilege. I should 
point out, however, that in that period of time there were very, very 
many Government employees leaving the Government service and 
making their fortunes elsewhere. 

Mr. Arens. Did you go immediately from the Federal Government 
to the corporation which sells the Israel bonds ? 



3280 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. KuRASCH. No. I went into private practice in Washington. 

Mr. Arens. With whom were you associated in the private practice? 

Mr. KuRAscH. I was by myself. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have any clients lined up prior to the time 
you went into private practice ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Mr. Chairman, is this inquiry proper? I don't 
know why this is relevant. I don't know why we should go into 
tliis aspect of my life. I don't know why this is relevant. 

Mr. Arens. I shall be glad to point out why the question is relevant; 
namely, here is a man who has been identified as a member of several 
Communist Party cells, who has taken the fifth amendment, who 
at a particular time resigned an $8,000 a year job and opened an office 
for the practice of law. The committee has peculiar concern respect- 
ing the loyalty program and its administration, whether or not it 
is effective, and how it operates in individual cases. Bearing on that 
issue the committee is certainly interested in the motive of the witness 
in resigning to open a law office. 

The Chairman. This is no place to argue these questions. I direct 
you to answer the question. 

Mr. KuRASCH. I don't know that I had any clients lined up, no. 

Mr. Arens. Who procured your job for you with the Development 
Corporation for Israel ? 

Mr. KuRASCH. I was employed by the firm of Gross & Blumberg, 
which had the account, and the corporation asked that I come over 
and work for it on a permanent basis. 

Mr. Arens. Did your employment 

Mr. KuRiVSCH, Mr. Chairman. I wonder whether this is intended 
to harass me or whether it has to do with the loyalty program? 

The Chairman. Whether what? 

Mr. KuRASCH. Whether its is intended to harass me. 

The Chairman. No, I am sure it is not. I hope that no one will 
draw any inferences from the fact that such financial-aiding organiza- 
tions have been mentioned. It is indeed unfortunate that they are 
handicapped by associations such as some of them seem to have. I 
trust that no inference will be drawn about these organizations be- 
cause they are good organizations and the members of them for the 
most part are fine American citizens. 

Mr. Arens. Was your emplo^^ment with the American Financial & 
Development Corporation for Israel caused or brought about directly 
or indirectly by any person known by you to have been a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Kurasch. On all questions relating to my associations with 
members of the Communist Party, Mr. Chairman, I claim my privi- 
lege. I claim my privilege on this one for the same set of reasons. 

Mr. Arens. To your knowledge is any associate of yours in the work 
in which you are presently engaged a member of the Communist 
Party ? 

Mr, Kurasch. I claim my privilege. I think it unfortunate that 
such questions are being asked. 

Mr. Arens. You are leveling a very serious indictment against your 
colleagues in the Development Corporation for Israel. 

Mr. Kurasch. No, I am not leveling any indictment and I don't 
think that inference is warranted in any way. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3281 

Have you any evidence of any such thing? Mr. Arens, have you 
any evidence of such thing or are you just asking questions to em- 
barrass me ? 

Mr. Arens. If people who are associated with you are all non- 
Communist and not connected with the Communist Party in any 
way, you certainly would not be disposed to assert the privilege of the 
fifth amendment with reference to them ; would you ? 

KuRASCH. That is your judgment, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Arens. Are you a member or have you ever been a member of 
the Washington Committee for Democratic Action? 

Mr. KuRAscH. On that question, I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens, Are you or have you ever been a member of the Ameri- 
can League for Peace and Democracy? 

Mr. KuRASCH. On that question I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, that concludes the staff inquiry of this 
witness. 

The Chairman. The witness is excused. 

The committee will stand in recess until 2 : 15. 

(Whereupon, at 12: 10 p. m., the committee was recessed, to recon- 
vene at 2 : 15 p. m., the same day.) 

afternoon session, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 19 56 

(The following members of the committee were present: Repre- 
sentatives Walter (presiding), Doyle, Frazier, Kearney, and Scherer.) 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

Call your next witness, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. David Rein. 

The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand, Mr. Rein. Do you 
sw^ear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Rein. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF DAVID REIN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
JOSEPH FORER 

Mr. Arens. Kindly identify yourself by name, residence, and oc- 
cupation. 

Mr. Rein. My name is David Rein. I live at 5066 MacArthur 
Boulevard, Washington, D. C, and I am an attorney. 

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

Mr. Rein. That is correct. 

I have a very brief statement that I would like to submit at this 
time, if I may. 

The Chairman. You have appeared before this committee so often 
representing clients that you know the rules. We don't permit state- 
ments to be read. You may submit your statement and we will con- 
sider it. If we think it relevant to the matter in hearing we will have 
it made a part of your testimony. 

Mr. Rein. I think it certainly is relevant, Mr. Chairman, and I 
would like to submit it. 

Mr. Arens. Are you represented by counsel today, Mr. Rein ? 



3282 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Will counsel kindly identify himself for the record. 

Mr. FoRER. Joseph Forer, 711 14th Street WW., Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Rein, kindly give us just a brief word, the essential 
elements, of your background, where you were born, when, and your 
early educational life. 

Mr. Rein. Born in New York City April 12, 1914. I went to ele- 
mentary school in public schools and high school in New York City. 
1 went to Columbia College and Columbia Law School. 

Mr. Arens. When did you finish your formal education ? 

Mr. Rein. 1935. 

Mr. Arens. Trace for us in similar sketch form in chronological 
order the employments which you had after you completed your 
formal education. 

Mr. Rein. My first job out of law school was working for an organi- 
zation in New York City engaged in revising the charter of New York 
City. I don't recall the exact name of it. I think it was called the 
New York City Charter Commission. I was there only a very brief 
period. 

Mr. Arens. That was in what year ? 

Mr. Rein. It would be right after getting out of law school in 1935. 
I graduated in June of 1935, and I think I went to work on this job in 
July, approximately. 

Mr. Arens. If you will pardon reversion to a prior question, are you 
licensed to practice law in the District of Columbia ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. And where else ? 

Mr. Rein. And New York. My job after that was working for the 
Puerto Rico Reconstruction Administration. 

Mr. Arens. That was beginning in 1935, also; was it not? 

Mr. Rein. Late in 1935. I don't recall exactly when. I remained 
employed there until some time in 1937. 

Mr. Arens. Was that employment in Washington ? 

Mr. Rein. No ; that was — part of the time was in Washington, but 
most of the time was Puerto Rico. 

Mr. Arens. San Juan? 

Mr. Rein. San Juan, yes ; San Juan or Santurce. I think the actual 
office was located in Santurce. 

Mr. Arens. Kindly continue to trace your employment in like 
pattern, Mr. Rein. 

Mr. Rein. My next employment was working — again I don't know 
the exact name of the outfit, but it was a special committee which was 
set up having the function of making reports and recommendations 
looking toward revision of the constitution of the State of New York. 

Mr. Arens. That employment was in what year ? 

Mr. Rein. That would have been some time in 1937. I don't know 
exactly when. 

Mr. Arens. Just to your best recollection. 

Mr. Rein. Some time in 1937 until some time in 1938. 

Mr. Arens. Was that a committee to revise the constitution of 
New York ? 

Mr. Rein. That was the purpose and function. I don't recall the 
exact title. 

Mr. Arens. Will you kindly proceed with the next employment? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3283 

Mr. Rein, Yes. I went to work for tlie National Labor Relations 
Board in I believe March of 1938. That is my best recollection. I 
remained employed there until some time in early 1942. Again I don't 
know whether it was January or thereabouts, or late in 1941. I would 
not be sure. I then left the National Labor Relations Board and went 
to work for the Office of Price Administration where I remained 
during most of 1942, and toward the end of the year 1942 I enlisted in 
the Marine Corps and remained in the Marine Corps until October of 
1945. In October of 1945 I returned to employment in the National 
Labor Relations Board and remained there I believe until June of 
1946, 1 think. May or June of 1946, at which time I left and since then 
I have been in private practice. 

Mr. Arens. Are you associated in practice with any person? 

Mr. Rein. Yes; with my partner, Mr. Joseph Forer, who is here 
representing me as counsel. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have relatives who have been employed in the 
Federal Government ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes ; I have a — yes ; I do. 

Mr. Arens. Name those, please. 

Mr. Rein. I have a brother who is employed and I have a cousin. 

Mr. Arens. Wliat is your brother's name ? 

Mr. Rein. Louis. 

Mr. Arens. And where is he employed, or where was he employed ? 

Mr. Rein. He is employed in the Post Office. 

Mr. Arens. I believe you said you had a cousin. 

Mr. Rein. Yes. ■ 

Mr. Arens. What is his or her name ? 

Mr. Rein. Melvin. 

Mr. Arens. Where is he employed? 

Mr. Rein. In the Patent Office. 

Mr. Arens. In Washington? 

Mr. Rein. In Washington ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. What is your wife's name, please ? 

Mr. Rein. Selma. 

Mr. Arens. Is she employed in the Federal Government? 

Mr. Rein. No, she is not. 

Mr. Arens. Was she at any time employed in the Federal Govern- 
ment ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes; she was. 

Mr. Arens. In what agency was she employed ? 

Mr. Rein. She was employed in several agencies. 

As I understand the rules of this committee, Mr. Chairman, no 
questions are to be addressed to witnesses concerning their husband 
or wife. 

The Chairman. That is true. This is certainlv not of any signifi- 
cance. I am sure that Mr. Arens is asking merely for purpose of 
identification. 

Mr. Arens. Not only for purposes of identification, Mr. Chairman, 
and that is a sufficient purpose, but also the committee will recognize 
the fact that a subpena has been served on this lady, so she is a sub- 
ject of interest by the committee. 

The Chairman. Very well. 

Would you kindly respond then to the principal qtiestion which is 
outstanding ? 



3284 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Rein. Do I understand, then, Mr. Chairman, that you are 
therefore changing the rules ? 

The Chairman. No ; I am not changing any rules at all. You know 
the rules just as well as I do. 

Mr. Rein. As I understand the rules, Mr. Chairman, questions 
are not 

The Chairman. This question is entirely relevant and material and 
there is nothinpr improper about it, and I direct you to answer it. 

Mr. Rein. I didn't say the question was irrelevant and immaterial. 
I was asking about the rules of the committee saying that questions 
would not be addressed concerning wives. 

The Chairman. Will you show me that rule ? 

Mr. Rein. If you have a copy of the rules. 

The Chairman. There is no such rule. Answer the question. 

Mr. Rein. Do you have a copy of the rules ? 

The Chairman. You answer the question, Mr. Rein. 

Mr. Rein. Yes ; my wife is employed by the Government. 

Mr. Forer. May we have a copy of the rules? They must have 
been changed since I last saw them, because, I thought I had a work- 
ing familiarity with them. 

The Chairman. You received a copy of the rules when you were 
served, Mr. Rein. 

Mr. Rein. No ; I did not. 

Mr. Arens. We have alluded here in questions to three of your rel- 
atives. Do you know whether or not your cousin Melvin Rein is or 
has been a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. To the best of my knowledge, he is not and never has 
been. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, the staff has no information respecting 
Melvin Rein. I say that for the reason that we do not want any 
unwarranted implications to be drawn from this question. 

Do you know whether or not Louis Rein is or has been a member 
of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. To the best of my Imowledge he is not and never has been. 

Mr. Arens. I repeat the same observation, Mr. Chairman, with ref- 
erence to Louis Rein. 

Do you know whether or not your wife, Selma Rein, is or has been 
a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Forer. May we see the rule before there is an answer to that 
question ? 

The Chairman. No. You have been served with at least a dozen 
copies of the rules. 

Mr. Forer. I know I am familiar with the rules. 

The Chairman. Answer the question. 

Mr. Forer. I don't know why you have rules if you are not going 
to follow them. 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the basis of my hus- 
band-wife privilege. 

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

The Chairman. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the basis of the rea- 
sons set out in the statement which I submitted to the committee, which 
I would like to incorporate here as part of the record of this hearing. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3285 

The Chairman. It will be incorporated when the committee exam- 
ines it and determines whether or not it is worthy of being made a 
part of this or any other record. That is when we will pass on it. 

Mr. Rein. It contains a statement of my reasons for refusing to 
answer the question, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Arens. When did your wife leave the employ of the Federal 
Government ? 

Mr. Rein. I am not sure. I think either late 1946 or early 1947. 
I am not certain. 

Mr. Arens. May I invite your attention to the skeleton outline of 
your employment which we have already covered, Mr. Rein, and ask 
you who was your immediate superior in your labors developing the 
New York Charter. We are a little vague on that. 

Mr. Rein. I don't remember, to tell you the truth. I think his name 
was Lazarus, but I am not really sure. 

Mr. Arens. Was your employment in this project to develop factual 
material on the New York City Charter occasioned directly or indi- 
rectly by any person known by you to have been a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Was your employment with the Puerto Rican Recon- 
struction organization occasioned by any person known by you to 
have been a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have any associates in that enterprise or activity 
who were known by you to have been members of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Rein. I don't understand the question. Do you mean did any- 
body else work there at the same time that I did ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, a coemployee who was a member of the Communist 
Party to your knowledge. 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the basis given in 
my statement. 

Mr. Arens. In the course of your employment with the Puerto 
Rico Reconstruction Administration, did you have access to confi- 
dential or restricted information ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have knowledge respecting the transmission 
of confidential or restricted information which you acquired during 
the course of your employment ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did any person known by you to have been a member 
of the Communist Party, directly or indirectly, to your knowledge 
have anything to do with the acquisition of your job developing the 
constitution of New York ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Was anyone to your knowledge engaged in that work 
who was a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds which I 
have previously stated. 

Mr. Arens. What were your duties in working on the constitution 
of New York ? 

Mr. Rein. Doing research work on the various provisions of the 
New York State constitution. 



3286 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Aeens. Was that in anticipation of a constitutional conven- 
tion? 

Mr. Rein. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. How long did you work on that ? 

Mr. Rein. My best recollection would be 6 to 7 months. 

Mr. Arens. What particular provisions of the constitution did you 
work on ? 

Mr. Rein. Specifically the bill of rights, the first amendment, and 
its analogue in the constitution. I think I did a research job on the 
provision of habeas corpus and some others in that field. 

Mr. Arens. Are your labors reflected in any way in the specific 
provisions which were subsequently part of the constitution of New 
York? 

Mr. Rein. I really couldn't say. I submitted a research memo- 
randum. I couldn't say what attention the delegates paid to it or 
didn't. 

Mr. Arens. Did you in the course of your labors looking toward 
the adoption of certain provisions for the constitution of New York 
State have contact with any person known by you to be a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I am sorry, but I don't understand the question. 

Mr. Arens. Did you in the course of your work on the constitution 
of New York or in the preparation of material for the constitution 
of the State of New York have contact or association in that work 
with any person known by you to be a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Rein. I did my work in the library. 

Mr. Arens. Did you counsel with, contact, or associate with any 
person in connection with that work who was known by you to be 
a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds I have 
previously stated. 

Mr. Arens. Are you telling this committee that if you should give 
a truthful answer to that question you would be supplying informa- 
tion which could be used against you in a criminal proceeding? 

Mr. Rein. I set forth the grounds on which I am refusing to answer 
the question in the statement which I submitted. 

The Chairman, Do you decline to answer the question because you 
are invoking the fifth amendment ? 

Mr, Rein. Among other grounds. 

Mr. Arens, Do you truly apprehend, Mr. Rein, that if you would 
tell this committee truthfully whether or not you were associated with 
Communists in your work in preparing this constitutional revision for 
the State of New York, you would be supplying information which 
could be used against you in a criminal proceeding ? 

Mr, Rein. I refuse to answer that question. 

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

The Chairman, You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Rein. It is not my understanding that I have to answer that 
question in order to claim the privilege. 

Mr, Arens, To your laiowledge, was any person known by you to 
be or to have been a member of the Communist Party responsible 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3287 

directly for the procurement of your employment with the National 
Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Who was your immediate supervisor during the course 
of your employment with the National Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. Rein. I had a number of them. 

Mr. Abens. Who were some of them ? 

Mr. Rein. There was Tom Emerson, George Pratt. I believe for 
a period — I am not certain — Malcolm Halliday. Mr. Somers was 
my supervisor for a period. I guess during my last period it would 
be Frank Bloom. 

Mr. Akens. Did you at any time have official association with Mr. 
Nathan Witt? 

Mr. Rein. No, 

Mr. Arens. Did you in the course of your employment have as 
part of your duties the drafting of decisions for the National Labor 
Relations Board ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes, during the early part of my employment with the 
Board. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have an opportunity or was it part of your 
duty to consult with the Board on policy matters and to issue your 
recommendations to the Board ? 

Mr. Rein. My recollection of my experience with the Board was 
that all matters of policy were decided by the members of the Board. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have occasion to express your recommendations 
to the Board ? 

Mr. Rein. Surely, when the Board inquired of me, I would. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your employment with the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board did you have occasion to observe the 
practices which were followed in the legal sections of the National 
Labor Relations Board respecting company controlled unions ? 

Mr. Rein. That would be part of my fimctions to keep up with the 
work of the Board ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. A company controlled union would be decertified; 
would it not ? 

Mr. Rein. I think the previous witness indicated that during the 
period I was with the Board there was no procedure for decertifica- 
tion. 

Mr. Arens. They would not be certified in the first place; would 
they? 

Mr. Rein. I don't loiow that the problem ever came up. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know of any company union that was certified? 

Mr. Rein. I just don't know that the problem ever came up one way 
or the other in my experience. 

Mr. Arens. You have expressed your familiarity with the problem 
of company-controlled unions. The policy was, was it not, that a 
company-controlled union would not be certified because it would not 
be a bona fide representative of the workers within a given plant or 
area ; isn't that the fact ? 

Mr. Rein. That was the provision of the National Labor Relations 
Act, as enacted by Congress ; yes. 

70811— 5G — pt. 4 4 



328 S COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Did the policy of the National Labor Relations Board 
and of the legal division of the National Labor Relations Board en- 
compass a certification of Communist-controlled labor organizations ? 

Mr. Rein. They had no policy on the subject one way or the other. 
The question never arose during the period I was with the Board. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of the time that you were with the 
National Labor Relations Board did the Board certify for bargaining 
purposes the American Communications Association ? 

Mr. Rein. I have no knowledge on that subject. 

Mr. Arens. Did it certify the International Fur & Leather Workers ? 

Mr. Rein. I have no knowledge on that subject. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not the Board certified as al- 
most a matter of course the Communist-controlled labor organiza- 
tions ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't know whether any labor organizations are Com- 
munist controlled ; Mr. Arens, does, but I have no information on that 
subject. 

Mr. Scherer. Have you information as to whether the UE is Com- 
munist controlled ? 

Mr. Rein. I have no information. 

Mr. Scherer. You never heard of it ? 

Mr. Rein. I have heard of it. I have heard the accusation. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know a man by the name of Abram Flaxer? 

Mr. Rein. Yes; I know Mr. Flaxer. 

Mr. Arens. He was head of what organization ? 

Mr. Rein. The United Public Workers. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a Communist ? 

Mr. Rein. I claim my lawyer-client privilege on that. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know a man named Joseph Selly ? 

Mr. Rein. No ; I don't believe I ever met him. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know a man named Ben Gold ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes ; I have met Mr. Gold. 

Mr. Arens. With what organization was he identified? 

Mr. Rein. International Fur & Leather Workers. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a Communist ? 

Mr. Rein. I claim my lawyer-client privilege on that. 

Mr. Arens. You know, as a matter of fact, do you not, that Com- 
munist-controlled labor organizations were certified and the certifica- 
tion went through the National Labor Relations Board like water 
through a sieve ; isn't that correct ? 

Mr. Rein. I have no information on that subject. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have any information that any Communist-con- 
trolled labor organization was ever decertified ? 

Mr. Rein. I have no information that any union was ever decertified 
while I was working with the Labor Board. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your employment at the National 
Labor Relations Board did you know a person by the name of Allan 
Rosenberg ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Martin Kurasch ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Joseph B. 
Robison ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of I^ester Asher? 






COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3289 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Akens. Were all of these persons I have just named fellow 
employees of yours at the Board ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Were they all lawyers ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Can you tell us whether or not any of them were not 
Communists ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't understand that question. 

Mr. Arens. To your certain knowledge were any of these 5 people 
whom I have just named not Communists ? 

Mr. Rein. I am sorry. I just don't follow the question, Mr. Arens. 

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

The Chairman. Do you understand the question ? 

Mr. Rein. No ; I don't. 

The Chairman. Read it again. 

Mr. Arens. Were Allan Rosenberg, Martin Kurasch, Joseph Robi- 
son, Lester Asher, or any of them to your knowledge not Communists? 

Mr. Rein. I just don't understand the question. 

Mr. Arens. We will take them one by one. Was Allan Rosenberg 
not a Communist ? 

Mr. Forer. Why don't you ask the question whether he was ? 

Mr. Arens. We are asking the questions. 

Was Allan Rosenberg not a Communist ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't understand the question. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not Allan Rosenberg was 
not a Communist ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Kearney. You understood that question ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was Woodrow Sandler a Communist ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds pre- 
viously stated. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know him ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes ; 1 knew him. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Lester Asher ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was he employed by the Board ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a Communist ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer this question. 

Mr. Arens. Jacob H. Krug ? 

Mr. Rein. Jacob H. Krug? You ask whether I know him? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, let's start that way. 

Mr. Rein. Yes, I know him. 

Mr. Arens. Wliowashe? 

Mr. Rein. He was an attorney at the National Labor Relations 
Board. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have any affiliation or association with him 
other than the fellow employee relationship ? 

Mr. Rein. If the question is directed to whether or not I knew him 
to be a member of the Communist Party, I have already indicated that 
I refuse to answer it. 



3290 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Mortimer Riemer ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Akens. Was he a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Arens. Was he employed by the National Labor Relations 
Board in a legal capacity ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know John W. Porter ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was he employed by the National Labor Relations 
Board ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't believe so, but he may have been. 

Mr. Arens. What was the nature of your acquaintance with 
him? 

Mr. Rein. I really can't place him, to tell you the truth. 

Mr. Arens. I was under the impression you said you did know Mm. 

Mr. Rein. Yes, I just can't place where or when I knew him. I 
don't recall his working at the National Labor Relations Board while 
I was there. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not he was a member of the 
Commimist conspiracy ? 

Mr. Rein. The Communist conspiracy to do what? 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not he was a member of the 
Communist conspiracy ? 

Mr. Rein. To do what, Mr. Arens ? 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not he was ever a member of 
the Communist conspiracy ? 

Mr. Rein. I am sorry, imless you tell me conspiracy to do what, I 
am afraid I can't answer. 

Mr. Arens. Are you a member of the Commimist conspiracy ? 

Mr. Rein. To do what? 

Mr. ScHERER. Just a moment, Counsel. 

Mr. Rein. I am sorry, I can't answer a question which has 

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

Mr. Rein. I can't answer the question unless it is defined. Con- 
spiracy to do what ? 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not the Communist Party is 
and has been a conspiracy ? 

Mr. Rein. To do what? 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not it is or has been a con- 
spiracy ? 

Mr. Rein. I am sorry. I am at a loss. I just don't understand the 
statement of a conspiracy imless you define it as a conspiracy to do 
what. 

Mr. Arens. Do you want to decline to answer that question ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't understand the question. I don't think it is a 
complete question. I think it is unintelligible in its present form. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know a person by the name of Margaret B. 
Porter ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was she a Communist ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3291 

The Chairman. What grounds are they ? 

Mr. Rein. All of the grounds set forth in my statement. 

The Chairman. But your statement isn't a matter of record. As a 
matter of fact, it wasn't submitted in accordance with the rules. The 
committee has not passed on it. 

Mr. Rein. I am sorry, but those are the grounds. And I will have 
to rest on that. If you want me to read them I will be glad to read 
them, Mr. Chairman. 

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

The Chairman. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Rein. What question ? 

(The reporter read from his notes as requested.) 

Mr. Rein. I refuse. The chairman says this statement is not a 
matter of record. I would like to state my grounds at the present time. 
I have examined the transcript 

The Chairman. Never mind reading the statement. You know that 
is in violation of the rules. 

Mr. Rein. Mr. Chairman, I have indicated that I wish to refer 
to the statement 

The Chairman. Just a moment. You have appeared before this 
committee on dozens of occasions. Why anybody retained you I do not 
know, because a moment ago you didn't know what conspiracy was. 
I do not know how you ever would advise anybody if you clo not know 
what this is all about. Nevertheless, you know what the rules are. 
You know that we consider statements which are submitted in advance. 
The rules of this committee provide for that, and you have not sub- 
mitted this statement in advance. No one has seen it. I glanced at it, 
but no one else has seen it. 

Mr. Rein. Mr. Chairman, I have indicated that I would like to 
state the grounds of refusing to answer the question. 

The Chairman. You are not going to make a stump speech. 

Mr. Rein. There is no intention to make a stump speech. 

The Chairman. You are not going to read a statement here. You 
are setting forth the case just overruled on yesterday. Proceed, Mr. 
Arens. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Ruth Weyand, 
W-e-y-a-n-d? 

Mr. Rein. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Arens. Was she a fellow employee in the legal sections of the 
National Labor Relations Board when you were there? 

Mr. Rein. Yes, she was. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of any organization of which she 
was a member ? 

Mr. Rein. If the question refers to the Communist Party, I refuse 
to answer on the grounds set forth in my statement. 

Mr. Scherer. I ask you to direct the witness to answer the question. 
He has to give his constitutional grounds. 

The Chairman. Are you invoking the fifth amendment ? 

Mr. Rein. It is one of the grounds included. I have other grounds. 

Mr. Arens. Let's clear up this point which is unresolved. Do you 
know whether or not the Communist Party is a conspiracy to over- 
throw the Government of the United States by force and violence? 

Mr. Rein. Not to my knowledge. 



3292 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

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

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. You have read the testimony of the witnesses at the 
hearino; in Chicago in December, have you not, Mr. Rein? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. You mean Fuchs ? 

Mr. Scherer. Yes. 

Mr. Rein. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Scherer. Is his testimony about you true or untrue ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Scherer. You don't deny that in his testimony he claims you 
were a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I said I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Mr. Fuchs? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Where did you know him and when ? 

Mr. Rein. I knew him at the National Labor Relations Board. 

Mr. Arens. Was he employed there as an attorney ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Bertram Diamond ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was he employed there as an attorney ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Edward Scheunemann ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Was he engaged there as a lawyer ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr Arens. Was he a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Reins. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a gentleman by the name of Harry 
Cooper ? 

Mr. Rein. My recollection of him is pretty vague, but I sort of 
vaguely remember that he was there when I was there. 

Mr. Arens. Was he a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know a lady by the name of Helen Hill ? 

Mr. Rein. Helen Hill, yes, I knew her. 

Mr. Arens. Where did you know her ? 

Mr. Rein. She was an employee of the Labor Board. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity was she employed ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't really recall. She was a clerk, a statistical clerk. 

Mr. Arens. Were you ever in any organization or associated with 
her other than your office relationship ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Arens. You were a member of two Communist Party cells 
in the National Labor Relations Board; were you not? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your employment at the National 
Labor Relations Board did you have access at any time to confidential 
or restricted information ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3293 

Mr. Arens. Do you have knowledge respecting the transmission 
of confidential or restricted information by any person to a person 
who was not authorized to receive the same ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Have you identified Mortimer Riemer, R-i-e-m-e-r? 

Mr. Rein. You asked me whether I knew him and I said I did, yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever undertake to enlist his membership in any 
organization ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. The truth is that you tried to reenlist him in the Com- 
munist Party when he broke away, isn't that so ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that. 

Mr. Arens. Mortimer Riemer testified before this committee under 
oath to the effect that you, David Rein, had tried to reenlist him in 
the Communist Party. Was he lying or was he telling the truth ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Arens. You left the National Labor Relations Board in the 
latter part of 1941 or early 1942. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did your disassociation from the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board and your employment in the OPA come about as a result 
of the participation, directly or indirectly, of any Commmiist? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. T\nio was your immediate superior in the OPA ? 

Mr. Rein. I believe it was either Tom Harris or Ellsworth Clark. 
I am not entirely sure. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know of any persons in the OPA at the time 
you were there who to your certain knowledge were members of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds pre- 
viously stated. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your employment with the OPA 
did you travel out of Washington ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't believe so. 

Mr. Arens. Your work was principally centered here ? 

Mr. Rein. I think so. I have no recollection of ever leaving Wash- 
ington. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your employment in the Federal 
Government did you ever sign a loyalty oath ? 

Mr. Rein. I have no clear recollection, but I imagine I signed ■ 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever sign any document to the effect that you 
were not and never had been a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Rein. I have no recollection of ever having done so. 

Mr. Arens. To your knowledge were you ever the subject of a 
loyalty investigation ? 

Mr, Rein. Not so far as I can recall. 

Mv. Arens. During the course of your employment in the OPA did 
you have access to any confidential or restricted information? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. What caused your disassociation from the OPA? 

Mr. Rein. I enlisted in the Marine Corps. 

Mr. Arens. Where were vou sent when vou enlisted in the Marine 
Corps? 

Mr. Rein. At first? 



3294 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Akens. Yes. Give us a brief sketch of the places you went. 

Mr. Rein. Surely. I went first down to boot camp at Parris Island, 
S. C. From there I went up to officers' candidate school at Quantico, 
and then I went to Reserve officers' class at Quantico. From there I 
went to naval intelligence school up at Quonset Point, R. I., for 
training as an intelligence officer in air combat intelligence. 

Mr. ScHEEER. Were you a member of the Communist Party at that 
time? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that on the gromids previously stated. 

Mr. Kearney. Do I understand you to say you were an officer of 
the United States Marine Corps ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Proceed on your chronology. 

Mr. Rein. After I completed my schooling as an air combat intel- 
ligence officer at Quonset Point, I was assigned to a Marine squadron 
which I think then was stationed at Edenton, N. C. 

Mr. Arens. Were you as of that time trained in intelligence work 
as an intelligence officer ? 

Mr. Rein. That had been my training that I got at Quonset Point 
and Quantico. 

Mr. Arens. We will return to that later. I want to get the chron- 
ology first. 

Mr. Rein. The squadron to which I was assigned then moved to the 
west coast, to El Centro, Calif. From El Centro the squadron went 
overseas. We stopped at a great number of islands. I am not sure 
if I c^n keep the islands quite correct. 

Mr. Arens. Wliere was that ? 

Mr. Rein. In the Pacific. They included Esperitu Santo. I think 
we were briefly at Guadalcanal. We spent quite a bit of time at 
Sterling Island and then Green Island in the Solomons. Then I trans- 
ferred to another squadron which was in the Philippines. I think 
that about completes the tour of duty. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Rein, when did you say you joined the Marines? 

Mr. Rein. Either late 1942 or January of 1943. I am not exactly 
sure. I think I enlisted in December of 1942 and reported down at 
Parris Island in January 1943. 

Mr. ScHERER. ^Ylien did you leave the service ? 

Mr. Rein. I went off active duty in October 1945. 

Mr. ScHERER. During those 3 years were you a member of the Com- 
munist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds pre- 
viously stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. During the same 3-year period we were cobelligerents 
with Russia, were we not ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't recall ever being in war when we were not co- 
belligerents, Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. Will you answer my question ? 

Mr. Rein. I think I have answered your question. 

Mr. Scherer. At that time we were cobelligerents with Russia, 
were we not ? 

Mr, Rein. We were cobelligerents with Russia during the entire 
period of the war, to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Did you during the course of your duties as intelligence 
officer have access to confidential or restricted information? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3295 

Mr. Rein. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you in the course of your service in the Marines 
transmit to any person not authorized by law to receive the same any 
information which came to you in the course of your service? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. While you were in the Marines as an intelligence officer ^ 
were you under discipline of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. You will have to explain your terms to me. 

Mr. Arens. Were you in contact with persons known by you to be 
members of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. While you were in the United States Marines or as a 
prerequisite to your admission to the United States Marines, did you 
take an oath of allegiance to defend the Constitution of the United 
States ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been a member of an organization dedi- 
cated to the violent overthrow of the Government of the United States? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your service in the Marines did 
you have an association on a preconceived or concerted plan basis with 
any persons known by you to be members of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Kearney. Mr. Counsel, do you mean while he was wearing the 
uniform of a United States Marine officer ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir ; and after he had taken an oath of allegiance. 

Were you at any time subject to a loyalty investigation while in 
the United States Marines ? 

Mr. Rein. I really don't know what procedure they went through. 

Mr. Kearney. I would like to ask this question, Counsel : Are you 
now a member of the United States Marine Corps Reserve? 

Mr. Rein. No, I am not. 

Mr. Kearney. Either as an officer or enlisted man ? 

Mr. Rein. No, I am not. 

Mr. Arens. Was your disassociation from the Marines in any way 
caused by any loyalty proceeding ? Were you forcibly discharged from 
the Marines ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. I understood you to say that you had resumed activity 
at the National Labor Relations Board after your discharge from the 
Marines, is that correct ? 

Mr. Rein. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Was that reemployment occasioned directly or indi- 
rectly by any person known by you to have been a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Whx) was your superior in the National Labor Relations 
Board when you resumed your employment ? 

Mr. Rein. Frank Bloom. 

Mr. Arens. While you were on the staff of the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board did you also belong to the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 



3296 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. How long have you belonged to the National Lawyers 
Guild ? 

Mr. Eein. I don't really recall when I joined. 

Mr. Arens. What is your best recollection ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't really remember. 

Mr. Arens. Have you been a member 10 years ? Since 1938 or some- 
thing like that ? 

Mr. Rein. Something like that. 

Mr. Arens. Have you been a continuous member ? 

Mr. Rein. Since I first joined, yes. 

Mr. Arens. Have you held any offices in the National Lawyers 
Guild ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. I held a position in the Washington chapter. 

Mr. Arens. Wliat posts did you hold ? 

Mr. Rein. Secretary . 

Mr. Arens. What year were you secretary? 

Mr. Rein. I will try to state my best recollection. I don't know 
whether it would be 1946 or 1947 or thereabouts. 

Mr. Arens. Do you hold any office now ? 

Mr. Rein. I am a member of the National Executive Board of the 
National Lawyers Guild. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been employed by the American Com- 
mittee for Protection of Foreign Born ? 

Mr. Rein. I don't understand the question. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been employed by the American Com- 
mittee for Protection of Foreign Born ? 

Mr. Rein. Do you mean retained to handle a case for them? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. 

Mr. Rein. Or to be an employee. I have never been an employee of 
the organization. Do you mean have they ever retained me as counsel 
in a case ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. 

Mr. Rein. I think so, yes. 

Mr. Arens. You represented the American Committee for Protec- 
tion of Foreign Born before the Subversive Activities Control Board, 
did you not ? 

Mr. Rein. No. My partner, Mr. Forer, did. And does now, as a 
matter of fact. The hearing has just begun on that. 

Mr. Arens. "VVlio actually did the retaining for the American Com- 
mittee for Protection of Foreign Born? Who actually negotiated 
the arrangement ? 

Mr. Rein. I am sorry, I was not actually retained by the American 
Committee. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know Abner Green ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes, I know Abner Green. 

Mr. Arens. TVliat is the nature of your association with him ? 

Mr. Rein. I know him as Secretary of the American Committee for 
Protection of Foreign Born. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not he is a hard-core Com- 
munist ? 

Mr. Rein. I will have to rely on my lawyer-client privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the only ground on which you refuse to answer 
that question ? 

Mr. Rein. My lawyer-client privilege. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3297 

Mr. Arens. Is that the only one? Mr. Chairman, I respectfully 
suggest that the witness be ordered and directed to answer that ques- 
tion. 

The Chairman. You are ordered to answer the question. 

Mr. Kein. You mean you don't respect lawyer-client privilege, 
Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. This is not a case of divulging information received 
in that relationship. Answer the question. 

Mr. Rein. He didn't ask me who retained me. He said was Mr. 
Green a Communist. That is the question. 

The Chairman. But you said you didn't represent him. 

Mr. FoRER. No, he didn't say that. He said he didn't represent the 
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born. 

The Chairman. Do you represent Mr. Green ? 

Mr. Rein. In any capacity ? 

The Chairman. In any capacity. 

Mr. Rein. Our law firm represents him. 

The Chairman. In what capacity ? 

Mr. Rein. It represented him both in his capacity as executive sec- 
retary when they represented the committee, and they have repre- 
sented him before congressional committees. 

Mr. Arens. Did you on the basis of any association within an or- 
ganization acquire knowldege as to whether or not Abner Green was 
a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I told you I claim my lawyer-client privilege. I have 
no information about Mr. Green's affiliation which I might have 
learned other than I might have learned as a lawyer. I have no in- 
formation. 

The Chairman. You are not being asked what you learned about 
your client in the relationship of lawyer-client. You are asked what 
you learned about him as a result of your association with him at 
meetings. 

Mr. Rein. I think I have answered the question that I have no 
knowledge other than what I might have learned as a lawyer. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever represented the National Council of 
American-Soviet Friendship or been employed by it ? 

Mr. Rein. Mr. Chairman, I must enter a protest at being questioned 
about clients that I have represented in proceedings. I don't see how 
that can possibly be a proper fimction of this committee under any 
theory. 

The Chairman. We do not know. This, of course, is a preliminary 
question. As we sit here we often wonder how people from all over 
the United States should happen to retain you. That is the sort of 
thing that runs through our minds. 

Mr. Rein. I will be glad to discuss it with you any time you are 
interested. 

The Chairman. I think I know why, of course. This is a prelimi- 
nary question. You answer the question. 

Mr. Rein. Preliminary to what ? 

The Chairman. We will determine. Proceed, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Arens. The question is still outstanding, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Rein. I don't recall it. 



3298 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. With reference to who made the contact, who would 
cause your association or representation of the National Council of 
American-Soviet Friendship ? 

Mr. Rein. I really don't recollect who it was. 

Mr. Arens. Was it a person known by you to be a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. I would have to claim my lawyer-client privilege on 
that. 

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

The Chairman. Let's defer taking action on that for the moment,.; 
and I will reserve a ruling. 

Mr. Arens. All right, sir. , 

Did you represent Gerhart Eisler in any proceeding ? 

Mr. Rein. Yes. 

Mr. Chairman, again I would like to indicate my objection to ques- 
tions concerning people I have represented. I don't see how it is a 
proper part of this committee to run an investigation as to whom 
I may have represented in legal proceedings. 

Mr. Kearney. Counsel, does the witness object to any questions per- 
taining to his representation of any well-known Communist? Is that 
the fact? 

Mr. Rein. I object to questions about my representation of anybody. 
I don't see how it is the proper business of this committee. It is a 
matter of public record. I don't see any reason. It can't be that the 
committee is looking for any information on the subject because all 
you have to do is look at the reports. You can find that I argued a caSe 
representing Gerhart Eisler in which I argued before the Supreme 
Court that this whole committee was unconstitutional. That is a mat- 
ter of public record. I can't really believe the committee is interested 
in acquiring information on the subject. 

Mr. Kearney. What was the Court's answer to your argument ? 

Mr. Rein. The Court never decided the case. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Witness, this isn't a matter of public record : How 
often have you been requested by the Communist Party to represent 
witnesses before this committee? That has nothing to do with your 
attorney-client relationship. 

Mr. Rein. I don't recall ever being requested by the Communist 
Party to represent any witness before this committee. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been requested by any person known to 
you to be a Communist to represent some other person before this com- 
mittee ? 

Mr. Forer. I think again he is going into an improper area, Mr. 
Chairman. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Nathan Gregory Silvermaster while you 
were employed in the Federal Government ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever have any contact or association with him 
outside of the Federal Government? 

Mr. Rein. I represented him. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have any other contact or association with 
him other than your professional representation of him ? 

Mr. Rein. Since I have represented him I have visited his home. 



CO]\IMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3299 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been in any Communist Party sessions 
with him ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Rein. Mr. Silvermaster is a client of mine and I will say aside 
from my function of representing^ him as counsel I have no information 
with regard to any Communist activities on his part, other than I 
might have learned as his counsel, and I claim my lawyer-client 
privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have any activities or associations with Ger- 
hart Eisler other than your lawyer-client relationship which bore 
on the Communist issue ? 

Mr. Rein. None. 

Mr. Arens. Do you represent the Civil Rights Congress ? 

Mr. Rein. No. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever represented them ? 

Mr. Rein. To the best of my recollection I would say no. 

Mr. Arens. I don't believe the record is clear as to whether or not 
you represent or have represented the National Council of American- 
Soviet Friendship, 

Mr. Rein. I thought the record was clear on that. I represented 
them in a case against the Attorney General and I represented them 
before the Subversive Activities Control Board. I think we mentioned 
that. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever traveled abroad other than in the service ? 

Mr. Rein. Canada and Mexico is about all. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever apply for a passport? 

Mr. Rein. Yes ; 1 did. 

Mr. Arens. Did you receive it ? 

Mr. Rein. Once I did ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. When was that ? 

Mr. Rein. In connection with some proceedings arising out of the 
Eisler case I applied for a passport to go to England in that connection, 
but I never had occasion to use it. 

Mr. ScHERER. Did Eisler know you were a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Rein. I am sorry. I don't understand the question. You will 
have to ask Mr. Eisler. 

Mr. ScHERER. Did Mr. Gerhart Eisler know you were a member 
of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rein. Would you mind putting the question. Did Gerhart 
Eisler know whether or not I was ? I might answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have any contact, association or concerted 
actions with a man by the name of William Ludwig Ullmann other 
than in lawyer-client relationship ? 

Mr. Rein. I have seen him socially. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not he is a member of the 
Communist conspiracy ? 

Mr. Rein. I would have 18 objections to that question, but I will 
rest on my lawyer-client privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Are you presently under discipline of the Communist 
conspiracy ? 

Mi\ Rein. I am sorry, you will have to tell me what it is, a Com- 
munist conspiracy to do what. 



3300 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 



Mr. Arens, Do you mean to tell this committee you have represented 
scores of hard-core Communists before this committee, and you don't 
know wliat the Communist conspiracy is ? 

Mr. Rein, I haven't said that I represented any Communist. 

The Chairman. You don't have to, Mr. Rein. 

Mr. Rein. My I ask, Mr. Chairman, that my statement be made 
part of the record ? 

The Chairman. As soon as I submit it to the subcommittee. No 
one has seen it. 

Mr, Forer. Have you finished ? 

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

The Chairman, There are no further questions and the witness is 
excused. 

The committee will be in recess for 5 minutes. 

(Brief recess,) 

(The following members of the committee were present: Repre- 
sentatives Walter, Doyle, Frazier, Willis, Kearney, and Scherer,) 

The Chairman, The committee will be in order. 

Call your next witness, 

Mr. Arens. Mr, Allan Rosenberg, 

The Chairman, Will you raise your right hand, Mr, Rosenberg. 
Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the 
truth, the whole triitli, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr, Rosenberg, I do, 

TESTIMONY OF ALLAN R. ROSENBERG, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, BENJAMIN LORING YOUNG 

Mr. Arens, Kindly identify yourself by name, residence, and oc- 
cupation, 

Mr, Rosenberg, My name is Allan R, Rosenberg. I live at 44 
Russell Road, Newton, Mass. I am an attorney. 

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

Mr, Rosenberg, Yes, 

Mr, Arens, You are represented by counsel ? 

Mr, Rosenberg, I am. 

Mr, Arens, AVill counsel kindly identify himself, 

Mr. Young, Benjamin Loring Young, 10 Tremont Street, Boston. 

Mr, Arens. Mr, Chairman, I think the record should reflect that this 
witness, Mr, Rosenberg, appeared before the Committee on Un-Ameri- 
can Activities in June of 1952, was interrogated extensively at that 
time with reference to his background and activities and affiliations in 
certain Government agencies. That was in response to testimony 
which was given to this committee by Miss Elizabeth T. Bentley, In 
view of the testimony by additional witnesses during tliis series of hear- 
ings, the staff proposes to interro<rate ]\Ir. Rosenberg only with refer- 
ence to certain of his activities. For that reason the interrogation on 
his entire background will not be extensive. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Rosenberg, in view of the statement which I just 
made for the record with reference to prior interrogation of yourself, 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3301 

may I ask you if you will just kindly give us the dates and the employ- 
ment which you have had in various agencies of the Federal 
Government. 

Mr. Rosenberg. I will do it, sir, to the best of my recollection, since 
it started in 1936. My first employment with the Federal Government 
was on an unpaid volunteer basis with the subcommittee of the Com- 
mittee on Education and Labor of the United States Senate, which was 
then headed by Senator La Follette, the La Follette Civil Liberties 
Committee. 

Mr. Arens. That was in what year, please ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. 1936. In April of 1937 1 transferred — I should say,^ 
as I said in my previous testimony, in June of 1952, that I was on the 
payroll of another agency, the Railroad Retirement Board, but I never 
worked for that agency. It was an arrangement effected whereby un- 
der the resolution S. R. 266, as I recall the number of the resolution, the 
subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor was author- 
ized to use both voluntary unpaid assistants and employees on loan 
from other agencies. 

In April of 1937 shortly after April 12, when the Supreme Court de- 
clared the National Labor Relations Act to be constitutional, I trans- 
ferred to the National Labor Relations Board. 

My recollection is that it was in the latter part of April or some ^ 
weeks after April 12, 1937. I remained at the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board until December of 1941 when I transferred to an organiza- 
tion which had a number of names, and I can't be sure what the name 
was when I first transferred to it. I believe it was either the Board of 
Economic Warfare or the Office of Economic Warfare. At any rate, 
it shortly became known as the Board of Economic Warfare, and then 
a couple of years later the Foreign Economic Administration. I re- 
signed from the Foreign Economic Administration in the latter part 
of 1945 to enter private practice, and I have been in private practice 
since that time. 

Mr. Arens. I repeat again, Mr. Chairman, it is my impression from 
information I have from other members of the staff that this witness 
has not been interrogated extensively with reference to the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board, so if it meets with the pleasure of the 
committee we will confine our interrogation at this time to that 
agency to avoid duplication. 

Was your employment with the National Labor Relations Board 
caused directly or indirectly by any person known by you to have been 
a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. It is difficult for me to say because I don't know 
exactly what caused my employment with the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board. I applied for that position there. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know of any person in the National Labor 
Relations Board prior to your employment there who to your knowl- 
edge was a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. No. 

Mr. Arens. During your employment in the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board from 1937 to 1941, did you know a person by the nama 
of Martin Kurasch ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I will decline to answer that question, as I will 
with respect to other questions of association, on a number of grounds, 
and perhaps it will save the committee's time if J^ state them now. 



3302 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

with your permission. I decline on the basis of the first amendment. 
I also decline on the basis of the fifth amendment with particular re- 
spect to the due-process clause of it in view of the nature of these 
proceedings, and also on the ground that I am not required under 
that section of the fifth amendment which permits me not to be a 
witness against myself. I also decline on the ground that the com- 
mittee is violating in this proceeding the separation of powers doc- 
trine and that it is not engaged in a legitimate legislative purpose. 
I don't wish to waive other grounds by not claiming them, but those 
I state now as reason for refusing to answer this and perhaps other 
questions as they may arise on the same subject. 

The Chairman. You are directed to answer, the question. 

Mr. Rosenberg. I decline on all the grounds. 

Mr. Aeens. Please tell us the names of the persons with whom you 
worked at the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I am going to refer, if I may, to my previous testi- 
mony when I testified about that so I can refresh my recollection, 
which was a lot better in 1952 than it is now. My recollection is 
that starting at the last part of my employment there, I was assistant 
to the General Counsel who was at that time Mr. Robert Watts. 

Mr. Arens. Let's pause a moment. Was Mr. Robert Watts a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I have no loiowledge of that. 

Mr. Arens. I think, Mr. Chairman, unless other witnesses indicated, 
it is clear that this question and like questions do not imply that the 
staff has information that Mr. Watts or other persons concerning 
whom I may ask questions were members of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Rosenberg. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that reference to Mr. 
Watts. I think it is a proper reference. But I would be, as I will be, 
consistent, and I would like to claim for my same reasons that I 
enunciated a few minutes ago, all the reasons for refusing to answer. 
I know very well that I have answered so I can't very well withdraw 
the answer from the record, but I will claim that on such questions 
in the future. 

As the chairman knows, no inference of guilt is legally to be re- 
sumed from such a refusal on my part. I think it is likely so in the 
case of the people whom you are asking me to mention. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Joseph B. 
Robison ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I decline for all the reasons previously given. 

Mr. Arens. Did you loiow a person by the name of Lester Asher ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. David Rein ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Woodrow Sandler ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Jacob H. Krug 'i 

Mr. Rosenberg. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Margaret B. Porter ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Ruth Weyand. 

Mr. Rosenberg. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Allen Heald. 

Mr. Rosenberg. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Harry Cooper ? 



CaMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3303 

Mr. KosENBERG. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Edward Sclieunemann, S-c-h-e-u-n-e-m-a-n-n ? 
Mr. Rosenberg. Same answer. 
Mr. Arens. Bertram Diamond ? 
Mr. Rosenberg. Same answer. 
Mr. Arens. Herbert Fiichs ? 
Mr. Rosenberg. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Herbert Fuchs testified under oath before this commit- 
tee a few weeks ago that you and Martin Kurasch and Joseph Robison 
organized a Communist Party cell within the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board. "Was Mr. Fuchs lying or was he telling the truth ? 
Mr. Rosenberg. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Are you a member of the National Lawyers Guild? 
Mr. Rosenberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. How long have you been a member ? 
Mr. Rosenberg. I joined somewhere in 1936 or 1937. I have no 
recollection as to the date. I still am a member and have been a mem- 
ber continuously. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever held any office or post in the National 
Lawyers Guild ? 

Mr. Rosenberg, I was the treasurer, I believe, of the District of 
Columbia Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild some time in the late 
thirties or the early forties for one term, and I was recently elected 
in absentia last week or 2 weeks ago to the national executive board of 
the guild. 

Mr. Arens. My. Fuchs testified that you assisted him in securing 
em])loyment in the Board of Economic Warfare. Is that correct? 
Mr. Rosenberg. The same answer. 
Mr. Arens. Mr. Rosenberg, what is your wife's name ? 
Mr. Rosenberg. My wife's name is Erna. 

Mr. Arens. Has she ever been employed by the Federal Govern- 
ment? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Yes, she has. 
Mr. Arens. Wliere was she employed ? 
Mr. Rosenberg. Rural Electrification Administration. 
Mr. Arens. Over what period of time was she employed by that 
agency ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Some time in 1935 or 1936 to 1040, I believe. 
Mr. Arens. Is that the only employment in the Federal Govern- 
ment she has had ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. As far as I know\ 

Mr. Arens. IVlio was your immediate predecessor in your position 
at the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I think you give me too much credit, Mr. Arens. 
I don't know that I had a position or office wliich was one which would 

be filled by 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever occupy the position that Mr. Fuchs had at 
one time ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I will tell you what I did there. I don't '\^■ish to 
answer, for the reasons stated, anytliing about Mr. Fuchs. I was 
in the Review Division for a very short time. Whether it was 3 or 4 
or 5 months I don't know. I was also in other divisions of the Board, 
and if you are going to ask me about them, I w^ould be glad to tell you. 

I 70811 — 56— pt. 4 5 



3304 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever sign a loyalty oath while you were em- 
ployed by the Federal Government ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I have no recollection of it. 

Mr. Arens. Were you ever the subject of a loyalty investigation? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I suppose there were various checks that were made, 
but I have no recollection of the kind of thing which mvolved inter- 
rogatories, about which you asked other witnesses. 

Mr. Arens. Wliat were your duties at the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. In the Review Division the duties you have already 
heard recounted by other witnesses. I was an assistant to the secretary, 
and in tjiat capacity 

Mr. Arens. Who was he, please, sir? 

Mr. Rosenberg. The first secretary to whom I was an assistant 
was named Benedict Wolf . 

Mr. Arens. Who was the next one ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. The next one, sir, I will decline to name for all the 
reasons I have previously mentioned. 

Mr. Arens. Do you mean to tell this connnittee if you told the 
truth as to wlio was the secretary of tlie National Labor Relations 
Board when you were employed there you would be giving information 
which could be used against you in a criminal proceeding ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I mean to tell this committee and you, sir, that I 
am entitled to refuse to answer that question, not because I am guilty 
of anything or not because I would not be acquitted in any kind of 
prosecution that might be brought against me, but because the Con- 
stitution gives me that right and I assei't it. 

Mr. Arens. Were you ever guilty of membership in a criminal con- 
spiracy to overthrow the Government of the United States by force 
and violence ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I decline to answer that, sir, for all the grounds I 
have previously stated. 

Mr. Arens. Will you kindly state to this committee whether or not 
you honestly apprehend that if you told this committee who was the 
secretary of the National Labor Relations Board you would be sup- 
plying information which would be used against you in a criminal 
proceeding ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I apprehend, sir, that there is a reasonable ground 
in view of the fact that the secretary's name has been mentioned in 
many connections and by you earlier, as a Communist agent, that if 
you require me or if I am required by this committee to testify any- 
thing about my knowledge or acquaintance with the secretary, I 
would be compelled in violation of my claim of rights under the fifth 
amendment to testify against myself and possibly subject myself to 
an injust prosecution, and for that reason and for all the others pre- 
viously stated, I decline. 

Mr. Arens. I observe your use of the word "unjust prosecution." If 
you would be prosecuted for membership in a criminal conspiracy 
under the Smith Act or under the Internal Security Act or under the 
Communist Control Act of 1953, would that be an unjust prosecution? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I refer you to one sentence in a case which this 
committee initiated and which eventuated in a decision of the Supreme 
Court. 

Mr. Kearney. I ask that the witness be directed to answer. 



COMIMTHSriST INFILTRATTOX OF GOVERNMENT 3305 

Mr. Rosenberg. I am answering. "If an answer to a question may 
tend to be incriminatory a witnes.s is not deprived of the protection 
of the privileo:e and, if subsequently prosecuted, could perhaps refute 
any inference of .i>uilt arisinjr from the answer.'' 

That is in the case of Julius Emspak, petitioner, against the United 
States, October Term, 1954, decided May 23, 1955, in which I was 
counsel. 

Mr. Arens. The truth is you were the right-hand man to Nathan 
AA^itt while he was secretary' of the National Labor Relations Board, 
were you not ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. You may state ^hat you think the truth is, but I 
am not required to answer. 

Mr. Arens. 1 put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affirm or deny 
the fact, that you were the right-hand man to Nathan Witt while he 
Avas secretary of the National Labor Relations Board. 

Mr. Rosenberg. I don't accept your statement of fact, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Is that untrue ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I decline to answer for all the reasons previously 
given. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever applied for a passport ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever receive a passport ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. In your pass})ort application did you allege that you 
were not a member of the Connnunist Party or any organization 
dedicated to the overthrow of the Government of the United States by 
force and violence? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Sir, I applied for the passport in 1930 and obtained 
one. I applied for a passport, I presume — I don't remember how the 
matter was raised — when I was employed by the Government. I have 
no recollection of what is on the passport application. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever taken an oath of allegiance to the United 
States? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Yes, sir ; and I would take it again. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been a member of an organization dedi- 
cated to the destruction of the Constitution of the United States and 
the overthrow of the Government of the United States by force and 
violence ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I have already stated that I will decline to an- 
swer that question — I think I have already refused to answer it — on 
all the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Arens. You went overseas for the Foreign Economic Adminis- 
tration, did you not? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have access to confidential or restricted infor- 
mation ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. When I went overseas ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rosenberg. I will decline to answer that for aU the reasons 
previously stated. 

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

The Chairman. What is the question ? 



3306 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. The question is whether or not he had access to confiden- 
tial, restricted information while he was employed by the Federal 
Government in the Foreign Economic Administration. 

The Chairman. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Rosenberg. I decline, the same answer, for all the reasons previ- 
ously stated. 

Mr. Arens. Did you in the course of your employment at the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board have access to confidential or restricted 
information ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. Well, sir, it is difficult to answer that question. I 
don't know of any official classification of secret, confidential, or clas- 
sified information at the National Labor Relations Board. I presume 
that, like the proceedings of all judicial boards, there were confidential 
matters there to which I had access, but by and large it was the straight 
administrative process of administering the National Labor Relations 
Act in public hearings. 

Mr. Arens. Did you in the course of your employment in the Federal 
Government ever transmit to a person not entitled by law to receive 
the same, information which you acquired in the course of your employ- 
ment? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I decline for all the reasons previously stated. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been guilty of espionage ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I testified in 1952 and I restate now that I am not 
guilty of any crime. I have not violated the Espionage Act. I assert 
my innocence. 

Mr. Arens. Have you been innocent of membership in a criminal 
conspiracy to overthrow the Government of the United States by force 
and violence? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I am not required to answer that question and the 
fact that I claim the privilege does not rebut the presumption of inno- 
cence. It goes with me. You know it. 

Mr. Arens. Do you honestly apprehend if you gave a truthful 
answer as to whether or not you have been engaged in transmitting 
information which you procured in the course of your employment 
to persons not authorized by law to receive the same, that you would 
be giving information which could be used against you in a criminal 
proceeding ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I have answered that question with respect to Mr. 
Witt. 

Mr. Arens. I ask it again. 

Mr. Rosenberg. I adopt and repeat that answer to the question you 
asked me about Mr. Witt. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding, although I have 
not studied the record, that this witness has been extensively inter- 
rogated with reference to his employment in all the agencies of the 
Government except the NLRB, which we have now concluded. 
Therefore, I would respectfully suggest unless there is some area 
in which the committee, on the basis of its recollection, feels he should 
be interrogated, the witness might well be excused. 

The Chairman. When you went to Eui'ope as a member of the 
Foreign Economic Administration were you then a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Rosenberg. I decline, sir, for all the reasons previously stated. 

The Chairman. All right. The witness is excused. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3307 

The^committee is adjourned, and we will meet on Thursday morning 

(Wl 
mittee 
1956.) 



at IV o ciocK. ° 

(Whereupon, at 3:40 p. m., Tuesday, February 21, 1956, the com- 

195n ^""^ ^'^""^^^^"^^ *o reconvene at 10 a. m., Thursday, February 23, 



INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF 
GOVERNMENT— Part 4 



THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1956 

United States House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Washington^ D. C. 

PUBLIC HEARING 

A subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities met 
at 10 : 05 a. m., pursuant to recess, in the caucus room, Old House 
Office Building, Hon. Francis E. Walter (chairman) presiding. 

Committee members present: Representatives Francis E. Walter, 
of Pennsylvania (presiding) ; Clyde Doyle, of California; James B. 
Frazier, Jr., of Tennessee; Edwin E. Willis, of Louisiana; Bernard 
W. Kearney, of New York; and Gordon H. Scherer, of Ohio. 

Staff members present : Richard Arens, acting counsel, and Courtney 
E. Owens, investigator. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

Call your first witness, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Arens. The first witness, if you please, Mr. Chairman, will be 
Ruth Weyand Perry. Will she kindly come forward? 

Please remain standing. 

The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand, please. Do you 
swear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Miss Weyand. I do. 

The Chairman. Sit down, please. 

TESTIMONY OF RUTH WEYAND (PERRY), ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, CLIFFORD D. O'BRIEN 

Mr. Arens. Will you please identify yourself by name, residence, 
and occupation ? 

Miss Weyand. I am Ruth Weyand Perry. I am usually known in 
the profession by my maiden name, as Miss Ruth Weyand. I live at 
1309 22d Street NIV., Washington, D. C. I am a lawyer by profession. 

Mr. Arens. And you are currently practicing law here in Wash- 
ington ? 

Miss Weyand. My main office is in Chicago, 111. I have a branch 
office here in Washington. 

Mr. Arens. Would you prefer that we call you Mrs. Perry ? 

Miss Weyand. I prefer Miss Weyand, if you please. 

3309 



3310 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

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

Miss Weyand. That is correct. 
Mr. Arens. That is a subpena duces tecum ? 
Miss Weyand. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Miss Weyand, did you bring with you the documents 
required or requested or commanded in the subpena ? 

Miss Weyand. I have a statement to make in regard to that, if you 
please. 

Mr. Arens. May we hold that in abeyance, then, for a moment 
until we let the record reveal the appearance of coimsel. You are 
represented by counsel ? 

Miss Weyand. I am. Mr. Clifford O'Brien, my law partner is 
representing me. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. O'Brien, would you please identify yourself for the 
purpose of the record ? 
^ Mr. O'Brien. My name is Clifford O'Brien. I am a lawyer, prac- 
ticing m Chicago, ill. I maintain my offices at 343 South Dearborn in 
that city, and I also have a small office here in Washington, D. C, in 
the Dupont Circle Building. 

Mr. Arens. Would you just please, for purpose of identification, 
give us t]ie name of the firm ? 

Mr. O'Brien. We practice under the name of Law Offices of Clifford 
D. O'Brien. 

Mr. Arens. Miss Weyand, would you kindly respond to the query 
respecting the production of the documents which were called for. 
The subpena called for you to supply the following documents received 
by you from the Federal Government, or any agency thereof, or com- 
piled by you as a result of receiving such documents: (a) The letters 
of — 

Excuse me just a moment. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if we could 
have a little quiet. There is a conversation back there that makes it 
difficult for us to hear. May we suspend for just a moment. 

(a) Letters of charges issued under then current Government em- 
ployees loyalty program or any appropriate act of Congress ; (b) your 
reply or replies to such charges; (c) transcripts of testimony and /or 
hearings resulting from such charges; and (d) decisions resulting 
from such testimonv or hearings. 

]May T ask you, do you now have in your possession for production 
before the committee the documents called for in this subpena duces 
tecum ? 

Miss Weyand. I would like to make the following statement 

The Chairman. We don't want a statement. Answer the question. 
Have you brought these papers or have you not ? 

Miss Weyand. I would like to make a statement and introduce some 
correspondence with Dwight Eisenhower, President of the ITnited 
Sta'^es, before I answer your question. 

The Chairman. We are not o:oing to hear that statement. Is this 
the statement that vou sent to the members of the committee ? 

Miss Weyand. No. This is not the statement I sent to the members. 

The Chairman. Then answer the ques^^ioii whe^^her or not you pro- 
duced the papers that you were subpenaed to produce. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3311 

Miss Weyand. I wrote Dwight Eisenhower 



The Chairman. Did you or did you not produce these papers ? 

Miss Weyand. I would like to make a statement and explain. 

The Chairman. We won't hear the statement. We want a response 
to the question. 

Miss Weyand. I am declining to produce them for the reasons which 
I will state. 

The Chairman. In other words, you have not produced the docu- 
ments? You did not produce them in compliance with the terms of 
the subpena duces tecum ? 

Miss Weyand. I am obeying an order of the President of the United 
States which directs me not to produce these documents, which I 
would like to read into the record. 

The Chairman. Never mind. We know about that. The answer 
is that you did not produce these papers ? 

Miss Weyand. The answer is that I, upon receiving this, consulted 
counsel and I am acting on the advice of counsel in respect to my posi- 
tion here. 

The Chairman. Do you produce them or do you not ? Have you got 
them there ? 

Miss Weyand. I would like to explain. 

The Chairman. No; never mind the explanation. The question is 
very simple: Did you produce the papers or did you not? 

Miss Weyand. I have not produced those papers. 

The Chairman. All right. Go ahead. 

Mr. Arens. Miss Weyand, please give us a thumbnail sketch of your 
educational background. By thumbnail sketch I mean where you were 
educated and the approximate dates. 

Miss Weyand. I started in public school at the University of Puerto 
Eico, the school maintained for the children of Puerto Rico at Rio 
Piedras, P. R., in 1918. I then attended public schools at Liberty, 
Mo., from 1920 to 1926. I then attended William Jewell College from 
1926 to 1927. I then attended the Universiay of Minnesota for one 
term in the summer of 1927. I then attended Louisiana Polytechnic 
Institute, where my father was head of the department of social sci- 
ence, in 1927-28. I then went to the University of Chicago from which 
I took my Ph. D. in 1930, and my J. D. as doctor juris in 1932. 

Mr. Arens. May I interpose at this place, if you please. You grad- 
uated cum laude, with high honors, from the University of Chicago; 
did vounot? 

Miss Weyand. Yes ; I did. 

Mr. Arens. You were a member of Phi Kappa Delta ; is that correct ? 

Miss Weyand. The Order of Coif was the honorary society for law 
students. I was a member of a Kap])a Beta Pi which was a legal 
sorority. I don't keep the names of all these Greek letter sororities 
and fraternities in mind. 

Mr. Arens. The Order of Coif was the order at the University of 
Chicago which consisted of the students in the higher echelon of the 
class ? 

Miss Weyand. In the law school, that is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Did that complete your formal education when you 
received vour degree at tlie University of Chicago ? 

Miss Weyand. That did. 



3312 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. ApvENS. Tell us, if you please, the bar associations or the States 
or jurisdictions to which you are admitted to practice law. 

Miss Weyand. I was admitted in Illinois in 1933, Supreme Court of 
the United States in 1936, Disrtict Court for the Northern District 
of Illinois, 1937, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Cir- 
cuit 1937, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 
in 1939, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 1939, 
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in 1941, the 
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1941, 
the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in 1953, 
the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio 
in 1952, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of 
Pennsylvania in 1951, I believe. 

There may be a couple other courts of appeals. There are 11 in 
all. They are not all there. 

Mr. Arens. Kindly recite the bar associations of which you are a 
member or have been a member. 

Miss Weyand. I joined the Chicago Bar Association in 1933 and 
I have continued an active resident membership in the Chicgo Bar 
Association to date. 

I joined the National Association of Women Lawyers in the 1930's 
and I have maintained a continuous membership to date. 

I joined the Federal Bar Association in 1939 and dropped that after 
I left the Government in 1950. 

I joined the American Bar Association and am a member of that at 
the present time, the American Bar Association. 

I joined the National Lawyers Guild in 1936 and my membership 
lapsed through lack of payment of dues as a result of dissolution or 
failure to maintain a local chapter here after 1950. 

Mr. Arens. Would you pause there just a moment, please, Miss 
Weyand, to tell us what posts or offices you have held in the National 
Lawyers Guild. 

Miss Weyand. Yes. I was elected as the representative for women 
in the bar to the post of membership in the national executive board 
at the first convention of the guild held in February 1937. I was re- 
elected to membership on the national board in 1938. I was elected 
treasurer in either 1939 or 1940. I forget the year. After that 

Mr. Arens. May I interpose this comment or question. 

Miss Weyand. I can check the year if it is important to you. 

Mr. Arens. Was the treasurer post which you held of the local 
Washington chapter or of the national organization ? 

Miss Weyand. It w^as the National Guild for 1 year and in a sub- 
sequent year, the succeeding year, of the local. I was treasurer 1 year, 
either 1939-40 or 1940-41. I could check it but I don't know right at 
the moment which year. 

After that I ceased to be a member of the board or to hold any office 
in the National Guild for a period of time. I was thereafter elected to 
the National Board in — I am not certain of the year. I was reelected 
in 1946 when I became president of the District of Columbia chapter 
of the guild and continued on the board for a couple of years. 

If it is important to you I have the files here and can check the 
exact year. 

Mr. Arens. Were you also identified in the course of your legal 
career with the International Juridical Association ? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3313 

Miss Weyand. I was a subscriber to its bulletin. I also allowed 
my name to be used as a member of a committee which consisted solely 
of persons of prominence who were sponsors in the sense that they 
advocated to young lawyers and other people that they subscribed to 
the bulletin. 

Mr. Arens. Were you active in any of the organizational work of 
the International Juridical Association ? 

Miss Weyand. I never took part in any organizational activity and 
never attended a committee or any meeting of the International Juri- 
dical Association in my life. 

Mr. Arens. In your career in the practice of the law and in the 
work of various lawyers' associations, have you ever identified yourself 
with the Lawyers Committee on American Relations with Spain ? 

Miss Weyand. I allowed my name to be used with a list of several 
hundred very prominent people, including Congressmen, Senators, 
and judges, as one of the signers of a petition dealing with the sending 
back of the Ambassador to Spain at the time we sent our Ambassador 
back to China and insisted that he stay there although Japan was 
attacking them. I thought the same position should apply to our 
Ambassador to Spain. I signed a legal brief along with several hun- 
dred other prominent lawyers. That is the only connection I ever 
had with any committee on Spain. The name of the organization you 
gave me — I am not certain. Would you give that name again ? 

Mr. Akens. The Lawyers Committee on American Relations with 
Spain. 

Miss Weyand. Would you mind if I check ? 

Mr. Arens. You go right ahead. I wish you would, if you would 
please, give us the best date that comes to your mind on the time at 
which you were identified in the capacity which you have described 
with this organization. 

Miss Weyand. If you will give me a minute. I have here the only 
thing I ever signed. 

(The following members of the committe were present : Representa- 
tives Walter, Doyle, Frazier, Willis, Kearney, and Scherer.) 

Miss Weyand. The Lawyers Committee on American Relations with 
Spain. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly repeat that? 

Miss Weyand. The Lawyers Committee on American Relations with 
Spain. 

Mr. Arens. Yes. If you please, will you kindly give us the date on 
which you were identified with that organization ? 

Miss Weyand. It was in November 1938. 

Mr. Arens. Thank you. 

In the course of your association with professional organizations 
did you have occasion to associate yourself with the Washington Book- 
shop? 

Miss Weyand. I did not consider that that was an association based 
on any professional relationship. I would like to explain, if I may, 
how I happened to take out a subscription in the Bookshop and the 
only use which I ever made of it. I never attended a meeting of the 
bookshop of any sort. 

The Chairman. You were merely asked whether or not you were 
a member, not whether you attended any meetings. 



3314 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Miss Weyand. I was asked whether in my professional association 
I joined it, and I did not think it had anything to do with my being 
a lawyer that I happened to maintain a membership for the purpose 
of getting a discount on books which I bought every Christmas and my 
memberships will show that you got a 20-percent discount on books if 
you were a member. I bought children's books 

Mr. Arens. Will you kindly tell us whether or not you were a mem- 
ber of the Washington Bookshop ? 

Miss Weyand. I was a member of the Washington Bookshop. 

Mr. Arens. Will you kindly tell us the date ? 

Miss. Weyand. I am not certain of the exact date on which I joined. 
My first membership card which I have expired in 1941, and it is 
signed by the man who solicited me to join, one Dave McCalmont, 
M-c C-a-1-m-o-n-t. I can get out the card and give you the exact date 
if you would like to have it. He at that time was very active in the 
consumers' cooperative movement in Washington. He was much of- 
fended that he did not believe the bookshop was being lun according to 
cooperative lines. I had solicited Mr. McCalmont to join the National 
Association for the Advancement of Colored People. He turned 
around and said : 

Now you join an organization I am active in. I want to get the Communists 
out of the boolishop. I think you should join the booksliop. 

He was sharing an office with me at the Labor Board at that time. 
I gave him a dollar for a membership card. I got their literature. 
Their literature was book lists and the amount of discount you got for 
having those books, and thereafter my cards were dated in December, 
and I have sizable canceled checks which show the list of the books 
which I got for my friends' children — Little Women, Arabian Nights. 
They had lovely copies which you could get at 20 percent discount. 
If you included your membership in there you saved money because 
you could get a 20-percent discount if you were a member, and you 
didn't get a 20-percent discount if you weren't a member. 

If I went and bought $20 worth of books I would have to pay $20, 
if I wasn't a member, and $19 if I was a member by paying a dollar 
membership. 

The Chairman. What question are you answering ? 

Miss Weyand. My relationship with the bookshop, if you please. 

Mr. Arens. Ma'am, were you ever identified with the Chicago Civil 
Liberties Committee ? 

Miss Weyand. I was a member of the Chicago Civil Liberties Com- 
mittee. 

Mr. Arens. Could you tell us, if you please, what years you were 
identified with the Chicago Civil Liberties Committee? 

Miss Weyand. To the best of my recollection it was not certainly 
before 1935. It might not have been until 1936 or 1937. I continued 
membership in the Civil Liberties Committee up through the fifties. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever hold an office or post in the Chicago Civil 
Liberties Committee ? 

Miss Weyand. I was never an officer in the Civil Liberties Com- 
mittee. I did once serve on its committee on censorship. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity did you serve on the committee on 
censorship ? 

Miss Weyand. Just as a member of the committee ; nothing else. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3315 

Mr. Arens. Wlio was to be censored ? 

Miss Weyand. It was a matter of protesting the censorship of 
moving pictures. 

Mr. Arens. Now would you kindly trace in chronological form, 
again just in thumbnail-sketch pattern, the employments which you 
have had since you completed your formal education in 1932 at Chicago 
University School of Law ? 

Miss Weyand. If you would like it exact, I can refer to my file. 

Mr. Arens. No; not by the month, but just the approximate time. 
Say that in 1932 you became associated, and so on. 

Miss Weyand. Very well. In 1932, at the time I graduated from the 
University of Chicago Law School, I was then employed by the Uni- 
versity of Chicago and had been employed throughout my 3 years at 
law school as an assistant to one of the professors. I was too young to 
get admitted ot the bar. I petitioned the Supreme Court of Illinois to 
allow me to take the examination, but I was unable to get my license 
until I turned 21. Professor Bogert, B-o-g-e-r-t, kept me on as a 
research assistant and I wrote several of his volumes on Bogert on 
Trusts with him. I stayed on in that capacity until I was able to get 
my license by reaching the appropriate age. At that point I applied 
for a job and was hired by the firm of Gardner & Carton at that time 
and was in the firm of (ilardner & Carton, and Gardner, Carton & 
Douglas very shortly thereafter. 

Mr. Arens. May I interpose this observation. Was that in 1933 ? 

Miss Weyand. That was in 1 933. 

Mr. Arens. 1933, then, you became an employee of the law firm 
of Gardner & Carton, is that correct ? 

Miss Weyand. (xardner & Carton was the then name of it. Under 
Secretary of the Treasury Douglas, who was a Republican Under 
Secretary of the Treasury, resigned that summer, the New Deal hav- 
ing come in, and the name was changed to Gardner, Carton & Douglas. 
I wouldn't know the exact date of the change of names. 

Mr. Arens. Then would you give us the next employment or occu- 
pation. 

Miss Weyand. "WTiite & Hawxhurst. 

Mr. Arens. That was when, Ma'am ? About 1935 ? 

Miss Weyand. That was 1933-35. Toward the end of 1933 Dean 
Bigelow, of the University of Chicago, was trustee of the Insull 
Utilities Investment and winding up the utilities thing and he wanted 
me to work with him in $55 million in suits on debentures 

Mr. Arens. May I interpose this comment: I don't mean to be 
at all discourteous. Would you just confine, at least for the moment, 
your recitation to the chronolog}^ of your various employments and 
let us eliminate any extraneous references to various lawsuits that may 
have been handled by the firm. 

We are in 1935 and you were engaged by the law firm of Wliite & 
Hawxhurst. 

Miss Weyand. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly give us the next employment you had 
and the approximate date. 

Miss Weyand. 1935-1938, Moses, Kennedy, Stein & Bachrach. 

Mr. Arens. Where was that ? 

Miss Weyand. That was Chicago, 111. 



3316 COMMTJNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. AiiENs. Will you kindly give us the next employment tliat you 
had? 

Miss.WEYAND. Tlien I obtained a position with the National Labor 
Relations Board in 1938. 

Mr. Arens. For the instant not covering the various assignments 
which you had in the National Labor Relations Board, your associa- 
tion there, tell us liow long you were identified as an employee of the 
National Labor Relations Board. 

Miss Weyand. My active service continued through March 30, 1950, 
without interruption. 

]Mr. Arens. Could you tell us then what employment or occupation 
you had after March of 1950? Did you immediately become engaged 
in the practice of the law again ? 

Miss Weyand. Yes, immediately. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the same practice association which you have 
at the present time ? 

ISIiss Weyand. I started in on part-time basis with Mr. O'Brien, 
who got in touch with me as soon as he read in the newspaper.^ that I 
was leaving the Government and went to Chicago immediately, and 
I did some part-time work and then fuller work and then an employee 
of the firm, and then a partner in the firm. 

Mr. x\rens. Now will you give us, if you please, without any ex- 
traneous details at the moment, the various assignments which you 
held within the National Labor Relations Board after you became 
an employee there in 1938 — just the various positions which you held. 

Miss Weyand. I couldn't give vou the exact titles. 

JNIr. Arens. Your best recollection, certainly. 

Miss Weyand. I went there as an attorney in the Enforcement Sec- 
tion. I remained in the Enforcement Section without assignment to 
any other section for the full 12 years that I was with the Govern- 
ment. Shortly after I Avent there I was detailed on a special detail to 
the Associate General Counsel for the purpose of arguing only cases 
in the United States courts of appeals. That special detail remained 
in effect 

Mr. Arens. Go ahead. I am listening. I want to make a little 
comment to my associate. 

ISIiss Weyand. That special detail to argue cases in the United 
States courts of appeals remained in effect until 1941, around July of 
1941. In July of 1941 I was detailed to the supervision of the prepara- 
tion of briefs and training other attorneys in the presentation of court 
arguments and supervising their presentation of arguments in the 
courts. I was formally made a supervisor in the Enforcement Section 
about in September of 1941. In 1942 1 was made Chief of the Supreme 
Court Section. In 1947, after Taft-Hartley was passed, I was put in 
charge of the whole Enforcement Section, the assignment of cases 
and the direction of all briefing, as well as carrying the Supreme Court 
Section. 

In 1948 I was made Assistant General Counsel in charge of Supreme 
Court matters. 

Mr. Arens. How many cases would you say you personally super- 
vised or argued, as the case may be, for presentation before the 
Supreme Court of the ITnited States while you were identified with 
the National Labor Relations Board ? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3317 

Miss Weyand. Approximately 40 cases on the merits, some 100 
cases on petitions for certiorari and opposition wliicli were not heard 
on the merits. 

Mr. Arens. How many cases did you actually physically appear be- 
fore the Court ? 

Miss Weyand. I argued nine cases personally in front of the wliole 
bench, not counting the cases on which I appeared in chambers before 
individual justices. 

Mr. Arens. Please tell us who was Secretary of the National Labor 
Relations Board when you assumed your first station there in 1938. 
Do you recall ? 

Miss Weyand. I think B. Stern was. If I look at my documents, 
the appointment is signed by B. Stern as Secretary. 

Mr. Arens. Do you recall who B. Stern's successor was as Secretary ? 

Miss Weyand. I never had anything to do with the Secretary's 
Office and I would not be able to give you a chronology on the Secre- 
tary's Office. 

Mr, Arens. During the course of your employment in the National 
Labor Relations Board from 1938 until 1950 you maintained at all 
times your association and activity in the National Lawyers Guild ; is 
that correct ? 

Miss Weyand. That is correct. It was varied activity. At times 
I didn't hold office. There were some years I was not vei-y active. But 
I was a member throughout the period and in some parts of it I was 
extremely active. 

Mr. Arens. Was there any period during your association with the 
National Lawyers Guild when certain prominent people resigned from 
the National Lawyers Guild and condemned certain actions and courses 
which were taken by the National Lawyers Guild ? 

]\Iiss Weyand. There was a resignation by Ferdinand Pecora, who 
had been president of the Lawyers Guild 1 year. If you Avill let me 
check my files, I will give you the exact date and the names of the 
people. If I may, if you don't mind. 

Mr. Arens. That will be very fine. 

Miss Weyand, In February of 1939 Ferdinand Pecora, known to 
j^ou as Judge Pecora of the United States district court at that time, 
m New York, had been president of the Lawyers Guild during the year 
of 1938-39. During 1938-39 the Spanish issue had been a very hot 
issue in which the membership 

Mr. Arens. Ma'am, would you kindly answer the question as to 
whether or not you were associated with the National Lawyers Guild 
at the time that there were several resignations by prominent peo])lo 
in protest to the actions and courses taken by the National Lawyers 
Guild? 

]Miss Weyand. I have here a press release signed by Judge John 
Gutknecht which denies the stories. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly answer the question. You are not 
afraid to answer that question ; are 3^ou ? 

Miss Weyand. I want to explain who resigned. There is a lot of 
misunderstanding about who and what. 

The Chairman. You haven't been asked for an explanation. 

Miss Weyand. I remained a member of the guild after one prom- 
inent member, a prominent Catholic, very annoyed at the position 
on Spain, resigned. 



3318 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Did you also continue your membership and activity 
in the National Lawyers Guild when there were resignations by other 
prominent people in protest of the courses of action taken by the 
National Lawyers Guild ? 

Miss Weyand. I know of no other resignations by prominent 
people in protest over actions taken by the Law^yers Guild and at the 
time I was a member there were prominent Federal judges continu- 
ously members at all times. 

Mr. Arens. Ma'am, did you continue your affiliation with the Law- 
years Guild after it had been cited by the House Committee on Un- 
American Activities as a legal arm of the Communist Party? 

Miss Weyand. I never paid any attention. The Attorney General 
never cited it and the courts even say Attorney Generals' citations have 
no probative value. 

JSIr. Arens. Would you kindly answer the question ? Did you con- 
tinue your affiliation, activities and associations in the National Law- 
yers Guild after that organization, the National Lawyers Guild, had 
been cited by the House Committee on Un-American Activities as 
the legal arm of the Communist Party ? 

Miss Weyand. If you will tell me what date it was. I knew noth- 
ing about its being cited. I don't know whether I did or not. I don't 
know what date it was. 

The Chairman. Just a moment. What was the date of the citation ? 

Mr. Arens. It was in 1950. How long did you maintain your iden- 
tity with the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Miss Weyand. I never paid dues after 1949. 

Mr. Arens. That was the answer to the question. 

Miss Weyand. I didn't know when it was cited. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of this work which you performed 
with the argument of cases in the Supreme Court, while you were 
with the National Labor Relations Board, did you associate your- 
self in the w^ork or were you associated with Joseph B. Robison, 
R-o-b-i-s-o-n ? 

Miss Weyand. I worked with whomever the Board assigned to work 
with me on the cases. 

]SIr. Arens. Now, would you kindly answer the question. Were you 
associated with Joseph Robison ? 

Miss Weyand. The Board assigned Joseph B. Robison to work on 
certain cases which I was assigned to work on. 

The Chairman. Then the answer is "Yes?" 

Miss Weyand. Yes. It was not a voluntary association, although I 
had nothing to do with who I associated with. 

^Ir. Arens. What w^as your appraisal of Joseph B. Robison? 

Miss Weyand. I thought he was one of the most able and honest 
men I had ever worked with. 

Mr. Arens. And you regarded him as a good associate in the work; 
is that correct ? 

Miss Weyand. I did. I certainly did. 

Mr. Arens. Have you become in the course of your work associated 
with Allan Rosenberg ? 

Miss Weyand. Through assignments of the Board I worked on cases 
that Allan Rosenberg worked on. 

Mr. Arens. Now would you give us your appraisal of Allan Rosen- 
bere:? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3319 

Miss Weyand. He was an exceptionally able, tine, and capable 
lawyer. 

Mr. Arens, And how would yon appraise, if you had occasion to 
reach a conclusion in your own mind, his honesty and patriotism ? 

Miss Weyand. He was honest and patriotic, as far as everything I 
ever saw about him. 

Mr. Arens. Is that patriotic appraisal applicable with equal force 
and effect to Joseph B, Robison ? 

Miss Weyand. It is indeed. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have occasion in the course of your work to 
become associated with Martin Kurasch, K-u-r-a-s-c-h ? 

Miss Weyand. I did. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly give us your appraisal of Martin 
Kurasch ? 

Miss Weyand. Everything I saw of him was absolutely fine and 
high-class. I never found any basis to criticize any 1 of these 3 people. 
I rated their work on occasion and always gave them excellent ratings 
and that w^as my honest judgment at that time. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly give us your estimate of Martin 
Kurasch as to his patriotism ? 

Miss Weyand. From everything I have ever seen he was an entirely 
loyal citizen of the United States and I never found any basis to make 
any notation of anything wrong with him on the records that I sent 
through to the Board on my rating of the work and my associations 
with them. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly give us a comparable appraisal, if 
you have one, of a person by the name of David Rein ? 

Miss Weyand. David Rein I did not personally work with except 
that he was a trial attorney in one case, the Weirton case in which 
there was 39,000 or 40,000 page record, in connection with getting 
ready for some hasty court appearances I had on occasion to associate 
with him. He was never anybody I had to rate. In my associations 
with him working on that case I saw nothing to suggest that he 
wasn't a fine, capable, loyal Government employee. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have occasion to visit David Rein in his home? 

Miss Weyand. I believe I have been in David Rein's home on social 
occasions. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have occasion to be at any sessions with David 
Rein and — his wife's name, please ? 

Miss Weyand. His wife's name is Selma. 

Mr. Arens. And his wife, Selma — other than their home or at work ? 

Miss Weyand. David Rein and my brother were in the same officers' 
candidate school at Quantico. They w^ere training as officers in the 
Marine Corps. My brother lost his life at Iwo Jima. Selma and I 
used to go down there to see our brother and husband who were down 
at Quantico training that summer. That is where I got acquainted 
with Selma, and my association with Selma grew entirely out of my 
visits to Quantico, my only brother being there in training. 

Mr. Arens. Is it safe to conclude from what you say that you were 
close to the Reins, David Rein and his family ? 

Miss Weyand. I was closer to some 100 other Government employees 
than I was to David Rein and his family. I knew a lot of them socially 
and I was not particularly close to David Rein and his family. 

70811— 56— pt. 4 6 



3320 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens, Did you have occasion to become associated in the course 
of your work there with a person by the name of John Porter ? 

Miss Weyand. I knew John Porter. He was an associate with 
David Eein as a trial attorney in the Weirton case and my association 
and work wnth John Porter was the same as with David Rein. He 
was one of the attorneys who helped try the "VVeirton case. 

Mr. Arens. Would 3"ou kindly give us your appraisal of John Porter 
on tlie basis of your association with him there ? 

Miss Weyand. At the time I knew Jolm Porter he was with the 
Department of Justice, a very highly regarded attorney at the De- 
partment of Justice. I had to consult him about some things I didn't 
undeistand in the Weirton record. As far as I saw him and knew 
from his associates in the Department of Justice, he was very highly 
regarded as a fine attorney. 1 never had to rate his w^ork. I never had 
to make a judgment of him because my association at the Board was 
through the Weirton case. PTe left the Board verj' early and I had 
very little to do with him. 

Mr. Arens. Then you do n.ot feel, I take it, that your association 
with John Porter was sufficient to give you a basis upon which to 
exercise a sound judgment as to his loyalty and efficiency; is that 
correct ? 

Miss Weyand. In dealing with him, in all dealings I found him an 
intelligent, capable, lawyer. I never had any basis — everything I saw 
was all right. I never discussed anything that would raise any ques- 
tions with him about loyalty or anything of that sort. 

Mr. Arens. Ma'am, would you kindly tell us who of these persons 
whom we have just been discussing — your associates there in the 
capacities which you have recited — were likewise your colleagues or 
associates in the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Miss AVeyand. Joe Robison was treasurer of the Lawyers Guild and 
David Rein was secretary the year that I was president of the District 
chapter. We had a very active District chapter, with some 400 Gov- 
ernment employees, including local judges and the general counsels of 
almost every Federal agency. I was very proud of my work the year 
I was president. 

Mr. AiJENs. Would you kindly just answer the question with refer- 
ence to these people who were likewise associated with you in the 
National Lawyers Guild ? 

Miss Weyand. The 400 prominent lawyers who were the members, 
at the time they elected me as president, elected Robison and Rein. 

Mr. Arens. I take it. Ma'am, your little detour there indicates a 
degree of pride on your part because of the association witli the 
National Lawyers Guild, is that correct ? 

INIiss Weyand. I was very proud of the job I did as president of the 
District chapter that year. 

Mr. Arens. Were you proud of the National Lawyers Guild ? 

]\Iiss Weyand. I was proud of it. 

Mr. Arens. Are you proud of your associations with these persons 
whom you have just been describing who were your colleagues and 
also your associates in the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Miss Weyand. I certainly was, and I still am. 

Mr. Arens. Now, Ma'am, if you please, have you learned since your 
disassociation from the National Labor Relations Board that each of 
these persons — Joseph Robison, Allan Rosenberg, Martin Kurasch, 



COIVOIITNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3321 

David Rein, and John Porter — amon<^ others, has been before the Com- 
mittee on Un-American Activities of the United States Con^i^ress and, 
notwithstanding the fact that sworn testimony has identified them as 
members of the Communist Party, each has declined to answer ques- 
tions respecting such alleged affiliation ? 

Miss Weyand. I understand that they followed Dean Griswold's 
theory that the fifth amendment was a haven for people who believe 
in freedom of speech and freedom of the press. I am not following 
the same course but I see nothing wrong with their having followed tlie 
dean of Harvard's idea that you can take the constitutional right. 
Today the fifth amendment is the protector of people who still believe 
in the democracy and freedom of speech and freedom of the press, and 
I see nothing wrong with their having followed the dean of Harvard's 
notion. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly tell us whether or not you have revised 
your opinion or estimate of your former colleagues in the National 
Lawyers Guild and on the National Labor Relations Board in view of 
what has transpired in the public revelations of their affiliations and 
activities? 

Miss Weyand. I know nothing in their public revelations that I 
give any credence to that reflects in the slightest upon my respect for 
them as lawyers and loyal American citizens. 

Mr. Arens. Now would you kindly tell this committee what precipi- 
tated or caused your disassociation from the National Labor Relations 
Board? 

Miss Weyand. I was terminated for reasons completely unrelated to 
any subject which is the inquiry of this committee. 

Mr. Arens. Were you at any time to your knowledge the object or 
subject of loyalty investigations? 

Miss Weyand. I was. 

Mr. Arens. Can you tell us when to your knowledge such loyalty in- 
vestigation transpired ? 

Miss Weyand. I was told three times that I was cleared. The first 
time 

Mr. Arens, Just tell us when. 

Miss Weyand. Well, the first as far as T can recall was 1941 or 1942. 
I must say I never had a hearing. Nobody ever took any evidence or 
anything of that sort. 

Mr. Arens. Would you just please answer the question as to when 
to your best recollection and knowledge you were the subject of loyalty 
investigations ? 

Miss Weyand. I want to say in 1941 I was called in by a committee 
of assistant and associate general counsels, who apologized very highly 
for it, thinking that they should ask me some questions about some 
things that went on at the guild and this committee on Spain which I 
have told you about. I don't Icnow whether that was really a loyalty 
investigation or not. They told me that they were quite satisfied with 
my explanations and I took them the letterhead which I have here 
which showed the prominent Congressmen, Federal judges, Senators, 
and so on, who were active in the guild at that time and were continu- 
ing to be even after the so-called Pecora resignation. They were com- 
pletely satisfied with my answers on the matter. 



3322 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

It happened that when I joined the board the chairman of the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board was a member, and one of the associate 
general counsels was president of the chapter. 

Mr. Arens. May I suggest for the purpose of being responsive — 
you are a lawyer and know what it means to be responsive to a ques- 
tion ; do you not ? 

MissWEYAND. I do. 

Mr. Arens. You know what it means to ramble, do you not ? Would 
you kindly answer the question. The question is only — and I appeal 
to you as a lawyer of considerable competence as is evidenced by your 
background — please give this committee the times, the dates, the ap- 
proximate dates, on which to your laiowledge you were the subject of 
a loyalty investigation. 

Miss Weyand. I don't know the exact dates. I know there is one 
incident when I was called in to discuss, 1941 or 1942 

Mr. Arens. Just a moment. How many times have you been the 
subject of a loyalty investigation to your laiowledge? 

Miss Wetand. I don't know that any of these could be called loyal- 
ty investigations, really. I received a letter from Chairman Mill is in 
1943 which said I had been cleared of any charges of disloyalty. I had 
no interrogatories. I had no hearing. The FBI had called me over 
and asked me about two organizations I never heard or had anything 
to do with and had never been on the mailing list of any of these, a 
very pro forma interview. 

Mr. Arens. When was that ? Could you please be responsive to the 
question ? 

Miss Weyand, That was in 1943 to the best of my recollection. 

Mr. Arens. You have tried a number of cases, I take it, have you 
not, Miss Weyand ? 

Miss Weyand. Certainly. 

Mr. Arens. You know that the law requires a witness to be respon- 
sive to a question. 

Miss Weyand. On the ground that his own counsel can later bring 
out his side of the story, which is not the rule followed by this com- 
mittee. 

Mr. Arens. Are you going to be responsive to these questions ? 

Miss Weyand. I am with an explanation that I think gives a fair 
presentation to the committee. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly tell us, please, whether or not you 
were associated in your work there at the National Labor Relations 
Board with a person by the name of Helen Hill ? 

Miss Weyand. I never knew there was a Helen Hill on the staff of 
the Labor Board. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us whether or not you ever had an association or 
acquaintanceship with Helen Hill anyplace. 

Miss Weyand. I never. I never heard of her until the FBI came 
to call on me in September and showed me pictures and asked me if 
I knew her. That is the first time I ever heard the name to my recol- 
lection. That was September of 1955. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever have any contact with Victor Perlo? 

Miss Weyand. I heard Victor Perlo make the same speech 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly answer the question? You know 
what it means to be responsive. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3323 

Miss Weyand. Your word "contact" is not the kind of word they 
allow court lawyers to ask. 

Mr. Arens. What has been your association with Victor Perlo ? 

Miss Weyand. I heard Victor Perlo make a speech at the Lawyers 
Guild convention. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the only association or contact that you have 
had with Victor Perlo ? 

Miss Weyand. That is the only association or contact I had with 
Victor Perlo. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever know him as Mike ? 

Miss Weyand. I never knew him as Mike. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever loiow him as a person identified to your 
knowledge as a Communist Party agent ? 

Miss Weyand. I read in the newspapers the stories about Victor 
Perlo. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever know from any other source ? 

Miss Weyand. I never knew from any other source. 

Mr. Arens. Ma'am, during the course of your activities as an em- 
ployee of the National Labor Kelations Board did you know a person 
by the name of Bertram Diamond ? 

Miss Weyand. I never laiew there was anyone on the staff by the 
name of Bertram Diamond. 

Mr. Arens. Did you at any time during the course of your activities 
at the National Labor Relations Board know a person by the name of 
Lester Asher ? 

Miss Weyand. I knew Lester Asher at the University of Chicago. 
We entered the same class in 1929 and we have been close friends for 
years. 

Mr. Arens. Did you Imow him at the National Labor Relations 
Board? 

Miss Weyand. I helped him get his job at NLRB. I talked to Tom 
Emerson about it. 

Mr. Arens. Could you be responsive to the question? You Imow 
what it means. You have practiced law. Did you laiow Lester Asher 
at the National Labor Bel ations Board ? 

Miss Weyand. I knew Lester Asher at the National Labor Relations 
Board. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity was he employed there ? 

Miss Weyand. He had various capacities during the period I was 
with the Board. 

Mr. Arens. Just give us an idea of some of the jobs he held. 

Miss Weyand. He was on the secretary's staff, I believe. He was 
assistant to the director of the division around 1945. He was regional 
attorney in Chicago for a period. He was regional attorney or on 
the staff of the Minneapolis office for a period. He was review attor- 
ney for a period. 

Mr. Arens. Did you liave any contact or association with Lester 
Asher other than your contact or association as fellow employees of 
the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Miss Weyand. We certainly did. We had been close friends in 
Chicago. We continued to be close friends. Very close friends of 
Corinne Asher and Lester Asher. 

Mr. Arens. Corinne, I take it, is his wife 'i 

Miss Weyand. She is his wife. 



3324 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Did you have occasion or did you at any time meet in 

his home ? 

Miss Weyand. I was in his home for dinner and I was by to his home 
on a couple of other occasions. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever had Lester Asher and his wife at your 
home? 

Miss Weyand. I have had them there on social occasions. 

Mr. Arens. Are those the only occasions on which you have had 
Lester Asher and his wife at your home ? 

Miss Weyand. The only occasions I ever had Lester Asher and his 
wife were social occasions. Lester Asher may have attended union or 
guild meetings at my home, but the only time I had Corinne with him 
was on social occasions ; the two together. 

Mr. Arens. Would you tell us what you mean by union or guild 
meetings at your home '( 

Miss Weyand. There were occasions of committee meetings when we 
were drafting the amalgamation of the clerical union and the lawyers 
union, that we worked on drafting constitutions and proposing the 
form of collective bargaining which we thought it would be appro- 
priate for a lawyers union in Government service to have. I served 
on various of those committees. Some of those committees came to my 
home. This is 16, almost 20 years ago that this took place. 

Mr. Arens. I understand. Could you tell us what this lawyers 
union was ? Just identify it. 

Miss Weyand. The lawyers union was a union composed of the 
lawyers at the National Labor Relations Board who banded together 
for the purpose of improving their working conditions and establish- 
ing a pay rate based upon the respective abilities and jobs of the 
lawyers and worked out a system Avhereby any job that opened up 
would be posted so any applicant could file and say, "I would like to 
have" 

Mr, Arens. That is sufficient explanation. 

Now tell us the name of the union. 

Miss Weyand, If you want the exact name — NLRB Lawyers Union, 
I think — I have the card here, 

Mr, Arens, That is sufficient. Who wei-e the officers of the union ? 
Do you have a recollection ? 

Miss Weyand, When I came to the National Labor Relations Board 
this union was already functioning, in March of 1938, I joined the 
union at that time and my first membership card, which I have here 
in my briefcase, was signed by Julius Schlezinger as president, 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever hold an office in this lawyers union ? 

Miss Weyand. No ; 1 never held an office in it, 

Mr, Arens, Is that lawyers union still in existence ? 

Miss Weyand, No; the union amalgamated around 1039 with the 
nonlawyers to form an NLRB union. 

Mr, Arens, Is that union still in existence ? 

Miss Weyand, I wouldn't know. As far as I know, it is still in 
existence. I became a supervisor very shortly after that and super- 
visors were ineligible for membership in the union and I never paid 
any attention to it. The last I heard, it was still in existence. I just 
couldn't tell you anything about whether it is now or not. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3325 

Mr. Arens. Was each of these persons whom we have been talking 
about — and I will name them now — Joseph Kobison, Allan Kosen- 
berg, Martin Kurasch, David Kein, John Porter — all to your know- 
ledge members of this lawyers union ? 

Miss Weyand. It was. As a matter of fact, the Smith committee 
reported after investigating that it contained almost 90 percent of 
the lawyers. You can't single things out and give a fair picture. 
Ninety percent of the lawyers were members of- it. So these were 
among those other 90 percent who were in it. 

Mr. Arens. How fi-equently did this lawyers union meet in your 
home ? 

Miss Weyand. Oh, not very frequently. The union itself never met 
in my home, but there were committees that I worked on, a couple or 
3 or 4 times which met in my home. 

Mr. Arens. Could you tell us the names of the committees of this 
lawyers union which met in your home ? 

Miss Weyand. No ; this is many .years after. I know I served on 
these four committees. There were committees on interunion relations. 
There were a number of committees which were busy working with this 
amalgamation. They set up one, an interunion committee who were 
supposed to be the people sent from the lawyers union to the non- 
lawyers union and talked about getting together to consolidate. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly tell us the years in which you were 
active in this lawyers union ? 

Miss Weyand. I think the lawyers union ceased existence in 1939, 
1938 or 1939, but it became the NLRB Union which I was active in 
until I became a supervisor in 1941. 

Mr, Arens. Did David Rein serve with you on these committees ? 

Miss Weyand. He was on one committee, at least one, that I was on. 

Mr. Arens. Did Allan Rosenberg sen^'e with you on any of these 
committees ? 

Miss Weyand. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did Martin Kurasch serve with you on any of these 
committees ? 

Miss Weyand. He was either president and ex officio member. He 
was president. I don't know if he was on the committee because he 
was ex officio there or whether he was a member of the committee, but 
he was on the committee. 

Mr. Arens. Did Joseph B. Robison serve with you on any of these 
committees ? 

Miss Weyand. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person at the National Labor Relations 
Board by the name of Jacob H. Krug, K-r-u-g ? 

Miss Weyand. There was a review attorney by that name. 

Mr. Arens. What was your contact or association with him ? 

Miss Weyand. He is one of these quiet people you just never can 
remember, I just know there was somebody thereby that name. That 
is about all. I still know him when I see him and smile at him on 
the streets of Washington, and at the law library of the Library of 
Congress, but I have no other recollection of him. 

Mr. Arens. Did Jacob H. Krug belong to this lawyers union? 

Miss Weyand, I have no recollection, I assume he did, but I 
wouldn't remember one way or the other, 

Mr. Arens, Did he ever meet at your house ? 



3326 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Miss Weyand. I wouldn't know whether he did or not. I had a 
home, a pretty apartment. I suppose there were a thousand people 
who came to that home during those 12 years. After guild meetings 
they would come there and have drinks and hors d'oeuvres. I couldn't 
keep track. There would be 30 people drop in after almost every 
big meeting or 50 people coming in for conferences. I don't know 
who was there or not. 

Mr. Arens. What was your appraisal of Jacob H. Krug, if you had 
an opportunity to observe him and reach a conclusion in your own 
mind as to his patriotism ? 

Miss Weyand. I never worked on any cases with him. 

Mr. Arens. You just do not have a judgment on him, is that 
correct ? 

Miss Weyand. I don't remember him particularly. He was just a 
nice, quiet guy. I never saw anything wrong with him but he never 
made any impression one way or the other. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us about Mortimer Riemer, R-i-e-m-e-r. Did you 
laiow him ? 

INIiss Weyand. He was the secretary of the National Lawyers Guild 
when I joined it. 

Mr. Arens. Was he also with the National Labor Relations Board? 

Miss Weyand. Yes. He became a trial examiner there in 1940. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have occasion during the course of your labors 
there at the National Labor Relations Board to reach an appraisal 
in your own mind as to his patriotism and efficiency ? 

IVIiss Weyand. I never worked on anything with him at the Labor 
Board. I would say in the guild he always seemed to be a perfectly 
respectable secretary of the guild as far as I saw. I never dealt with 
him on any professional matters in my life, except as you deal in a 
lawyer's organization. 

Mr. Arens. What about Edward Scheunemann, S-c-h-e-u-n-e- 
m-a-n-n ? Did you know a person by that name ? 

INIiss Weyand. I never knew a person by that name. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Margaret Ben- 
nett Porter? 

]\Iiss Weyand. Yes ; I knew Margaret Porter. 

Mr. Arens. Wliat was the nature of your acquaintanceship with 
her? 

Miss Weyand. She was the only other woman attorney who had an 
office on the sixth floor at the time I went to the Labor Board. Women 
lawyers always have a little bond of friendship. She dropped in and 
said "I am Peggy Bennett." That was her name at that time. "I 
am over in room 633." I was in 615. "If I can give you any help 
around here, if there is anvfhing I can do to introduce you around, 
and so on, I will be glad to do it," 

She was also secretary of the District of Columbia chapter of the 
Lawyers Guild !>t tliat time and she told me at various times she 
would drop in "Wouldn't you like to come along to an executive board 
meeting or a meeting of the guild?" I went to a few with her. 

Mr. Apens. Did you have occasion to reach a judgment in your own 
mind with reference to the patriotism, loyalty, efficiency, honesty, 
general virtues of Margaret B. Porter ? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3327 

Miss Weyand. I never knew Margaret B. Porter well. I never 
worked with her. It was j ust one of those things. The first few weeks 
that I was at the Board she wanted to show me around. 

Mr. Arens. Then I take it yon didn't have sufficient opportunity to 
reach a conclusion in your mind. 

Miss Weyand. It has been 16 years ago. I don't remember ever 
seeing anything wrong but I had no close friendship. 

Mr. AiJENs. Would you kindly give us a word as to Allen Heald, 
H-e-a-1-d ? Did you know him ? 

Miss Weyand. Pie was on the enforcement staff when I was and 
he was a supervisor on the enforcement staff at the time I was there. 
He was secretary of the lawyers union at the time I went to the Board 
and became a member of the lawyers union. 

Mr. Arens. Was he also active in the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Miss Weyand. He was quite active in the National Lawyers Guild. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have occasion to reach a conclusion in your own 
mind respecting his loyalty, patriotism, efficiency, and honesty? 

Miss Weyand. We never discussed anything that would cause me 
to have any doubt as to his loyalty. I never worked with him as a 
supervisor. He seemed like a quiet, competent lawyer. I never had 
to rate his work. I was never in that position with reference to him. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have occasion in the course of your associations 
and activities and labors at the National Labor Relations Board to 
make the acquaintanceship of a person by the name of Herbert Fuchs? 

Miss Weyand. Yes, I knew Herbert Fuchs, 

Mr. Arens. How long did you know him? 

Miss Weyand. He was sharing an office with Peggy Bennett. He 
also had been a delegate to the Lawyers (jruild (.Convention which was 
held in Washington in IDoS, which I attended as a delegate from the 
Chicago chapter. It is not clear in my recollection whether I met him 
at that convention or wliether I went to work for the Board a few 
weeks later and met him in Peggy Bennett's office. I remember he was 
Peggy Bennett's roommate when she said "Drop in and let me help 
you if I can give you any assistance,'" and she introduced me to Herbert 
Fuchs. My work association at the Board did not during that first 
period bring me in contact with him. 

Mr. Arens. Did it during the second period bring you in contact 
with Herbert Fuchs? 

Miss Weyand. It did. When he came back from Denver he be- 
came Assistant General Counsel. lie was with Van Arkel. During 
the period that Van Arkel was General Counsel, Herbert Fuchs was 
Assistant General Counsel. He was assigned to working on the 
Board's work in opposing the Taft-Hartley Act, as I recall. He was 
drafting the material. I was 

Mr. Arens. Did you and Herbert Fuchs work together profes- 
sionally at tlie National Labor Rehitions Board? 

Miss Weyand. No, I don't think I could ever say we worked 
together. We were purely at staff' conferences at which he repre- 
sented the Board or represented the General Counsel. 

Mr. Arens. Was Herbert Fuchs identified likewise with the 
National Lawyers Guild ? 

Miss Weyand. He was with the Lawyers Guild like some 400 other 
prominent attorneys in Washington at that time. 



3328 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Aeens. Did he work with you in any of the activities of the 
National Lawyers Guild? 

Miss Weyand, Yes, he did. He was very active on the Govern- 
ment Service Committee in 1946 and 1947. 

Mr. Arens. Did Herbert Fuchs work with you in these lawyers 
union committees which from time to time met in your home? 

Miss Weyand. He did. There were not a lot of meetings in my 
home. There were a few. 

Mr. Arens. Would you tell us whether or not Herbert Fuchs met 
there at your home? 

Miss Weyand. I know he has been in my home on occasion. 

Mr. Arens. Over what period of time was Herbert Fuchs in your 
home ? 

Miss Weyand. I have no definite recollection of his ever having 
been there except in the early lawyers union and Lawyers Guild period 
in 1938 and 1939. 

Mr. Arens. About how many times in the course of these 2 years, 
1938 and 1939, did meetings of these committees of the lawyers union 
with which you were identified have sessions any place ? 

Miss Weyand. Any place? Oh. We met almost every week, 
usually, during that period. Sometimes it was 2 or 3 times a week 
during that period. It was a very, very active union. Somebody 
would have a grievance and tlie grievance committee would get to- 
gether in a hurry. 

Mr. Arens. Where would these meetings be held ? 

Miss Weyand. Most of them were around the Board, in the hearing 
room or someone's office or at lunch or at dinner, and sometimes we 
had a dinner meeting and would go to someone's home after dinner. 

Mr. Arens. How many of these meetings were held in your home? 

Miss Weyand. Not very many. 

Mr. Arens. How many meetings in the course of 1938 and 1939 of 
some committee of this lawyers group would you say were held in your 
home or apartment? 

Miss Weyand. It would be absolutely impossible for me to fix that. 
It was so informal. We would go out to dinner and sometimes if we 
didn't get done discussing a grievance at dinner, we would come over 
and continue discussing at my apartment or somebody else's apart- 
ment. 

Mr. Arens. Would you say these little get-togethers at your house 
during the course of 1938 or 1939 of your associates in the committees 
of the lawyers union took place, say, as much as an average of once a 
month ? 

Miss Weyand. I am certain much oftener than once a month. 
There were large groups of guild meetings. 

Mr. Arens. Just answer the question. Would you say that they 
met as much as twice a month? 

Miss Weyand. There were not regular formal meetings of any sort 
in my home as scheduled meetings. 

Mr. Arens. We are just trying to get your best judgment as to the 
number of times that these sessions were held in the course of these 
2 years. 

Miss WeyxVnd. That is hardly a week during that period 

Mr. Arens. I beg your pardon? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3329 

Miss Wetand. There was liardly a week during that period that 
there weren't groups of people from the Lawyers Guild, some guild 
meeting or union meeting or just people working together or some- 
thing like that. 

The CHAiRiNrAN. The committee will stand in recess for 5 minutes. 

(Brief recess.) 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

Go ahead, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Arens. Miss Weyand, I don't believe I asked you your appraisal 
of Allan Rosenberg. 

Miss Weyand. 1 believe you did. It was extremely high, my ap- 
praisal of him. It certainly was. 

Mr. Arens. Did Allan Rosenberg participate in these sessions at 
your home or in these committee meetings of the lawyers union? 

Miss Weyand. Yes. He was very active on the amalgamation com- 
mittee of the union and he had been in my home on occasion. The 
details I don't remember, whether it was on this committee or guild 
matters, but I remember he was in my home. After all, it was 16 
years ago. I know xVllan has been in my home, and I know I was 
in his home on occasion. 

Mr. Arens. Have you been in contact or association with liim since 
that time? 

Miss Weyand. I have liad no contact with him since I left the 
National Labor Relations Board. 

Mr. Arens. Did he know you well? 

Miss Weyand. He wasn't in my close personal social circle. I knew 
a hundred lawyers better than I knew him. 

Mr. Arens. Over the course of these 2 years how many times would 
you say you had sessions of the lawyers union at which Allan Rosen- 
berg was present ? 

Miss Weyand. I couldn't place whether there were any. 

Mr. Arens. You worked with him in the NLRB, is that correct ? 

Miss Weyand. At the NLRB he had been the review attorney on the 
Republic Steel case, the great big case growing out of the Memorial 
Day massacre and the Little Steel strike. It was a tremendous record. 
He had written the Board's decision. 

Mr. Arens. Tuesday we asked him if he knew you and he invoked 
the fifth amendment. Do you have any recollection of seeing him 
in the course of the recent past or being in association with him in 
the course of the recent past? 

Miss Weyand. In the past 5 years I have not seen Allan Rosenberg. 
I do know he wrote me a letter congratulating me at the time I was 
appointed assistant general counsel. I believe at the time of my 
marriage I had a letter from him, just a formal letter. He never sent 
me Christmas cards. I think those are the last two times I had any 
contact with him. 

Mr. Arens. Where was your apartment located? 

Miss Weyand. The first apartment I had in Washington and the 
one which apparently was described as luxurious, et cetera, in your 
previous record 

Mr. Arens. Just tell us where it was located. 

Miss Weyand. 3601 Connecticut Avenue, the Broadmoor. I moved 
from the Broadmoor November 1, 1939. I remember because I was 
out on the west coast 



3330 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OP GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Just tell us the address. 

Miss Weyand. 4801 Connecticut Avenue. 

Mr. Arens. In Washington, 

Miss Weyand. And I was there until I got married. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of Mr. Fuchs' service with the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board, did he leave the Washington office and 
then return subsequently? 

Miss Weyand. That is my impression ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. Wliere was he assigned, do you recall ? 

Miss Weyand. I have read his testimony. I don't know that I 
would have any independent recollection, but his testimony says he was 
in Denver. 

The Chairman. Your own testimony. 

Miss Weyand. I have no independent recollection. 

Mr. Arens. In these little sessions which were held at your apart- 
ment was Marxism discussed? 

Miss Weyand. I have no recollection of Marxism ever having been 
discussed. I don't plead guilty of being an illiterate woman here. 
Those were days when we discussed everything. 

Mr. Arens. I just asked if Marxism was discussed. 

Miss Weyand. It was never a prominent subject, not enough for me 
to recall. I do know we discussed everything in those days. 

The Chairman. You have answered the question. 

Mr. Arens. Did the little group that you met with have any plan 
or program it was undertaking to develop within the National Law- 
yers Guild or within the lawyers union of the NLRB ? 

Miss Weyand. I never met with any preconceived group at all. 
These were just casual contacts. Every time I met with any of these 
people it was either social or a lawyers union or guild committee at 
which there were other people who have never been named. 

Mr. Arens. You have given us your appraisal. Miss Weyand, of 
each of several peisons with whom you were associated at the National 
Lawyers Guild and at the National Labor Relations Board. I have 
not yet asked you your appraisal of Mr. Fuchs. Did you have occa- 
sion in the course of your work with Mr. Fuchs to arrive at a con- 
clusion in your own mind as to his ability and honesty and patriotism? 

Miss Weyand. Mr. Fuchs was always in a superior position to me 
at the Board, and I deliberately refrained from forming judgments 
about my superiors. Those whom I had to rate, I had to form opin- 
ions and then mark it down, X, Y, Z, loyal, efficient, and so on. 

The Chairman. You have answered the question. You have no 
opinion. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Fuchs testified before the House Committee on Un- 
American Activities, Miss Weyand, as you know, and in that testi- 
mony identified you as a person known by him to have been a member 
of the Communist Party. I ask you now, are you now or have you 
ever been a member of the Communist Party ? 

Miss Weyand. I am not now and never have been a member of the 
Communist Party. 

Mr. Arens. Did you, during the course of your association with 
these people, these lawyers at the National Lawyers Guild, the same 
group with the lawyers union and with the NLRB, know any person 
who during the coui-se of your acquaintanceship with them was known 
by you to have been a member of the Conununist Party ? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3331 

Miss Weyani). I did not during- my association with any person 
in the Labor Board, Labor Board union, the hiwyers union, or the 
lawyers g-uihl — 1 never knowingly associated with any one I knew 
to be or even had reason to believe was a member of the Communist 
Party. 

Does that cover tlie groups^ I don't remember the question. It 
was a pretty inclusive question. 

Mr. Arens. It covers it. 

Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that this witness be continued 
under subpena for a day certain and that Mr. Fuchs be requested to 
appear before the committee in public session and confront the witness. 

The Chairman. I don't know what the condition of the calendar is. 

Mr. Arens. May we stand in recess for just a moment, Mr. Chair- 
man, while we discuss that? 

(Brief recess.) 

(The following members of the committee were present: Repre- 
sentatives Walter, Doyle, Frazier, Willis, Kearney, and Scherer.) 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

The subpena M'ill be in effect, the witness to appear at a date agreed 
upon between your counsel and counsel for the committee, with reason- 
4ible notice to be given to everybody. 

Mr. O'Brien. That is agreeable, Mr. Chairman. 

Miss Wetand. Thank you. 

The Chairman. The witness is excused. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Arens. If you please, Mr. Chairman and members of the 
■committee, the next witness will be Mr. Victor Perlo. 

The Chairman. Mr. Perlo ? 

Mr. Arens. Kindly remain standing and raise your right hand 
and be sworn, sir. 

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

Mr. Perlo. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF VICTOR PERLO, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

IRA GOLLOBIN 

Mr. Perlo. I have a statement for the committee. 

Mr. Arens. Will you kindly identify yourself by name, residence, 
and occupation. 

Mr. Perlo. My name is Victor Perlo. I reside in New York, and 
I am an economic consultant. 

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

Mr. Perlo. Yes. 

Mr. xVrens. Are you represented by counsel ? 

Mr. Perlo. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. Will counsel kindly identify himself. 

Mr. GoLLOBiN. Ira Gollobin, G-o-l-l-o-b-i-n. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Gollobin, please tell us the address of your law 
Jirm and with whom you are associated. 

Mr. Gollobin. I am in practice for myself in New York City. 



3332 COMMUNIST ESTFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. And the address? 

Mr. GoLLOBiN. 1441 Broadway. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Perlo, have you ever been known by any name 
other than the name which appears on your subpena, Victor Perlo? 

Mr. Perlo. I stand on my rights under tlie fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. Do you feel if you would tell this committee truthfully 
whether or not you have been known by any name other than the 
name of Victor Perlo you would be supplying information wliich 
could be used against you in a criminal proceeding? 

Mr. Perlo. I don't want to discuss my reasons for using the fifth 
amendment, which is a well-known right of the people 

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

The Chairman. Yes. Answer the question. 

Mr. Perlo. I decline to answer it for the same reason. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, we have a situation here which is com- 
parable to the situation which prevailed a day or so ago. This witness 
previously was the subject of testimony by another witness before the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities. Thereafter this wit- 
ness, Mr. Perlo, appeared before the committee and 1 think it is fair 
to summarize the hearing at that time by saying that he invoked the 
fifth amendment with reference to any questions pertaining directly 
or indirectly to the Communist conspiracy. The reason for his ap- 
pearance today, as the chairman I am sure knows, is because lie was 
likewise the subject of testimony by Mr. Herbert Fuchs before this 
committee with reference to a new agency with which he had not pre- 
viously been identified. Therefore, if it meets with the pleasure of 
the committee, I propose to confine this interrogation only to the new 
material so there wdll not be an unnecessary duplication. 

The Chairman. Try not to be repetitious. 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. 

Have you ever been known bv the name of "Mike" or "Chief," Mr. 
Perlo? 

Mr. Perlo. I decline to answer that, standing on my privilege under 
the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever know a person by the name of Herbert 
Fuchs? 

Mr. Perlo. I stand on my privilege under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens, Did you ever have contact with a Communist Party cell 
in the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Perlo. I stand on my privilege under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever laiow any employees of the National Labor 
Relations Board? 

Mr. Perlo. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. An employee of the Board? I beg your pardon? 

Mr, Perlo. I haven't answered yet. The same answer. 

Mr, Arens, I put it to you as a fact, Mr. Perlo, and ask you to affirm 
or deny the fact that you were the contact between a Communist 
Party cell in the National Labor Relations Board in the 1940's and 
the high echelon of the international Communist conspiracy. 

Mr. Perlo, I decline to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Arens, Did you ever receive from employees of the National 
Labor Relations Board information which you were not entitled by 
law to receive? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3333 

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

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affirm or deny 
the fact that you did receive such information and did transmit it 
to international Communist agents or cause it to be transmitted to 
international Connnunist agents. 

Mr. Perlo. Was there a question in that? 

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact and ask you to affirm or deny 
the fact. 

Mr. Perlo. Oh. I decline to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Arens. Who was Arthur Stein ? 

Mr. Perlo. Artliur Stein was, I believe, a Government employee in 
Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Arens. When did you first know him ? 

Mr. Perlo. I decline to answer without any— without my answer 
implying that I did know him, I decline to answer that question for 
the same reason. 

Mr. Arens. How did you acquire information that Arthur Stein 
was a Government employee, which you stated a few moments ago 
in response to a question ? 

Mr. Perlo. I don't remember how I first learned that he was a 
Government employee, but among other things I read about Arthur 
Stein in recent testimony held before this committee. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the only information or knowledge you have 
acquired respecting the existence of a person laiown by the name of 
Arthur Stein? 

Mr. Perlo. I think it unlikely that it is the only information I have 
about him. I probably have heard about him previously. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever met Arthur Stein ? 

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

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that the witness 
be ordered and directed to answer that question for this reason : He 
has opened the door to this inquiry by responding to the question 
that he does know there is such a person as Arthur Stein. 

The Chairman. Yes, you are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Perlo. Mr. Arens, I have been accused in testimony of — I don't 
want to go into the thing, but would you mind repeating the question? 

Mr. Arens. We will start over. 

Do you know Arthur Stein ? 

Mr. Perlo. All right. I stand on my rights under the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Arens. Is there a person to your knowledge by the name of 
Arthur Stein ? 

Mr. Perlo. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. How did you acquire that knowledge? 

Mr. Perlo. I read about it in testimony before this committee. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the only source of your information or knowl- 
edge respecting Arthur Stein ? 

Mr. Perlo, It is probably not. 

Mr. Arens. What other information or knowledge have you ac- 
quired which leads you to believe that there is such a person as Arthur 
Stein? 

Mr. Perlo. I decline to answer, standing on my rights under the 
fifth amendment. 



3334 COMJVIUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that he be or- 
dered and directed to answer that question. 

The Chairman. You are directed to answer the question. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Perlo. I regard my answer as responsive. I decline to answer 
under the fifth amendment and on the grounds that I can't be com- 
pelled to be a witness against myself, and that it might incriminate 
me. 

(The following members of the committee were present: Repre- 
sentatives Walter, Doyle, Frazier, Willis, Kearney, and Scherer.) 

Mr. Arens. Do you know a person by the name of Martin Stribling, 
S-t-r-i-b-1-i-n-g? 

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

Mr. Arens. Martin Stribling is right here in this room, is he not? 

Mr. Perlo. Are you asking me? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. 

Mr, Perlo. I decline to answer for the same reason. 

Mr. Arens. In fact, Martin Stribling is sitting right at this table, 
is he not? 

Mr. Perlo. I decline to answer that question for the same reason. 

Mr. Arens. As a matter of fact, you are Martin Stribling, are 
you not? 

Mr. Perlo. I decline to answer that question for the same reason. 

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affirm or deny 
the fact, that one of your undercover names in the international Com- 
munist conspiracy is "Martin Stribling." 

Mr. Perlo. I decline to answer that question for the same reason. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been to the headquarters of the National 
Labor Relations Board in Washington, D. C. ? 

Mr. Perlo. I don't have the least recollection. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever had contact or association with people 
known by you to be employees of the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Perlo. I decline to answer that question for the same reason. 

Mr, Arens. Do you feel if you would tell this committee truthfully 
whether or not you have hacl contact or association with employees 
of the National Labor Relations Board you would be supplying in- 
formation which could be used against you in a criminal proceeding? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

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

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Perlo, where were you born ? 

Mr, Perlo. I was born in New York. 

Mr. Arens. Did you in the early forties have occasion in the pursuit 
of your regular activities to commute between New York City and 
Washington, D. C. ? 

Mr. Perlo. Not that I can remember. I am not saying I never went 
between New York and Washington, but I didn't have occasion to 
.commute between New York and Washington. 

Mr, Arens. Where did you live in the early forties ? 

Mr, Perlo. I honestly don't remember. It is in the record some- 
where, but I don't remember what my address was at that time, 

Mr. Scherer. You mean you can't tell us any place where you lived 
during the forties? 

Mr. Perlo. I lived in Washington, in the Washington area. I just 
.don't remember the street addresses. 



COMJVIUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3335 

Mr. Akens. You have been interrogated by this committee exten- 
sively with reference to the testimony given before this committee 
about Jacob Golos b}^ Elizabeth Bentley. 

Mr. Perlo. I was interrogated previously by this committee ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. When did you appear before this committee ? 

Mr. Perlo. In 1948. 

Mr. Arens. Did you at that time prepare a press release or cause 
to be prepared a press release about your testimony ? 

Mr. Perlo. I prepared a statement to read to the committee. 

Mr. Arens. I lay before you a document and ask you if that is a 
true and correct reproduction of the statement which you prepared 
for submission at that time to the committee. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Perlo. It looks accurate to me ; yes. 

Mr. Arens. In this statement which you prepared for submission 
to the committee in 1948 appears this sentence : 

I vigorously deny the charges which have been leveled against me. 

Is that correct? 

Mr. Perlo. That is not — that sentence was not included in the 
statement submitted to the committee. 

Mr. Arens. Did you delete that sentence or cause it to be deleted 
before you actually made your presentation to the committee? 

Mr. Perlo. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. Why did you delete that sentence that you vigorously 
deny the charges which were leveled against you as an espionage agent 
and as a conduit for the transmission of security information of this 
Government to the international Soviet conspiracy ? 

Mr. Perlo. I don't remember the exact circumstances which led up 
to it. There was quite a squabble, I think, between myself and certain 
members of the conniiittee. I don't remember the details. You prob- 
ably have it in the record yourself, but I haven't refreshed my memory. 

Mr. Arens. Do you now vigorously deny the charges, the testimony 
of Elizabeth Bentley and of Herbert Fuchs against you ? 

Mr. Perix3. I decline to answer under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest to the committee 
that in view of the extensive interrogation of this witness heretofore 
the area in which we wanted to pose questions has been covered. I 
have no further questions to submit. 

The Chairman. Any questions by members of the committee? 

There is evidence in some of the hearings, Mr. Perlo, that you in- 
structed an examiner for the National Labor Relations Board as to his 
decision in order to cause more confusion, that you instructed this man 
to decide this case against the workers in order to increase the dissatis- 
faction the workers had with their employers. Is that correct? 

Mr. Perlo. I would never conceivably engage in urging anybody 
to make a decision against the interests of labor. 

The Chairman. Did you request any one connected with the 
National Labor Relations Board to make a decision of any sort what- 
soever ? 

Mr. Perlo. I never had anything to do with any decisions of the 
National Labor Relations Board. 

70811— 56— pt. 4 7 



3336 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT ^ 

The Chairman. Did you evoo: discuss any decisions of the Board 
with any of its employees? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr, Perlo. I decline to answer under the fifth amendment. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Is that all ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. 

The Chairman. The witness is excused. 

The committee will adjourn, to meet tomorrow morning at 10 
o'clock. 

(Whereupon, at 11:40 a. m., Thursday, February 23, the com- 
mittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a. m., Friday, February 24, 
1956.) 



INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF 
GOVERNMENT— PART 4 



FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1956 

United States House of Eepresentatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Washington^ D. G, 
Public Hearing 

A subcomniittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities met 
at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in tlie caucus room, Old House Office 
Building, Hon. Clyde Doyle (chairman of the subcommittee) pre- 
sidino-. 

Committee members present : Representatives Clyde Doyle, of Cal- 
ifornia (presiding), Edwin E. "Willis, of Louisiana, and Bernard W. 
Kearney, of New York. 

Staff members present : Richard Arens, acting counsel, and Court- 
ney E. Owens, investigator. 

Mr. Doyle. May the record show that by virtue of authority vested 
in the chairman, Francis E. Walter, of Pennsylvania, he has ap- 
pointed a subcommittee for this morning's hearing, consisting of Mr. 
Willis, of Louisiana, Mr. Kearney, of New York, and Mr. Doyle, of 
California, as subcommittee chairman for the purpose of this hearing. 

Are you ready, Counsel ? Let the record show that all three mem- 
bers of the subcommittee are present. 

Mr. Arens. The first witness if you please, Mr. Chairman, will be 
Mrs. Lillian Kurasch. Will you kindly come forward. 

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

Mrs. Kurasch. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MRS. LILLIAN KURASCH, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, BERNARD JAITE 

Mr. Arens. Will you please identify yourself by name, residence, 
and occupation? 

Mrs. Kurasch. My name is Lillian Kurasch, 6128 228th Street, 
New York City. I am a housewife. 

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

Mrs. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Are you represented by counsel ? 

3337 



3338 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mrs. KtjRASCH. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Will counsel kindly identify himself. 

Mr. Jaffe. Bernard Jaffe, 135 Broadway, New York, N. Y. 

Mr. Arens. And your firm please? 

Mr. Jaffe. Axelrod & Jaffe. 

Mr. Arens. What is your husband's name, please ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH, Martin Kiirascli. 

Mr. Arens. Will you kindly give us, Mrs. Kurasch, a brief resume 
of your early life, where you were born, and a word about your edu- 
cational background, up until the time you became self-sufficient or 
an adult ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I was born in London, England. I graduated from 
high school in Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Mr. Arens. May I interrupt you there ? Since you were born in 
London, England, it will become necessary for us to interpose a few 
more questions. When did you come to the United States ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I believe my family came to this country in 1913, 
and I am not too clear about the date, but that is probably correct. 

Mr. Arens. It is embarrassing to ask a lady about age matters, but 
how old were you when you came to the United States ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. About 2i/^ or 3 years old. 

Mr. Arens. What is the background of your parents? Were they 
natives of the British Isles ? 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. Kurasch. Is that pertinent to this investigation ? 

Mr. Akens. Yes; will you kindly answer the question? 

(Witness consulted lier counsel.) 

Mrs. Kurasch. Is the nativity of my parents pertinent to this in- 
vestigation? 

Mr. Doyle. Of course, the United States is interested in knowing 
whether or not the people who come from other countries are citizens 
of this country, and if they claim to be citizens of this country, the 
source of their claim, and I presume counsel's question goes to the 
point of how you acquired citizenship in the United States, if you did. 

Mrs. Kurasch. I would be happy to answer that question. I be- 
came a citizen by virtue of my father's citizenship. 

Mr. Doyle. And where was your father born, please? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I believe I did ask, is that pertinent to this 
investigation. 

Mr. Arens. Yes, it is, will you kindly answer the question? 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. Kurasch. Will the chairman please rule on this question ? 

Mr. Doyle. I w411 instruct you to answer, it is clearly pertinent. 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. Kurasch. Well, I believe they were born in Lithuania. 

Mr. Doyle. Both your mother and father ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I believe so. 

Mr. Doyle. How long did they live in England prior to the time 
they emigrated to the United States ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. Oh, I do not know, maybe 14 or 16 years. 

Mr. Arens. You came to the United States in 1913 ; is that correct? 

Mrs. Kurasch. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us where you first lived in the United States ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. In Pittsburgh, Pa. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3339 

Mr. Arens. Were you educated in Pittsburgh ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Please trace chronologically, as I requested you to do 
so a little while ago, the education you have had. 

Mrs. KuRAscH. As I said, I graduated from high school in Pitts- 
burgh, Pa. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the extent of your formal education ? 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs, KuRASCH. Well, I had some formal education at night for a 
little while, but not credited courses. 

Mr. Arens. Business-school courses? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Some. 

Mr. Arens. What was the nature of that educational training? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. It was quite a long time ago ; English literature, and 
French literature, and psychology. 

Mr. Arens. When did you complete your formal education? 

Mrs. KuRAsCH. Well, I do not know if you call that formal educa- 
tion. 

Mr. Arens. When did you graduate from high school? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. In 1928. 

Mr. Arens. That was in Pittsburgh, in 1928 ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. How soon after you graduated from high school did 
you begin courses at night school ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Probably immediately thereafter. 

Mr. Arens. How long did you pursue those courses ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I cannot say. 

Mr. Arens. Did you pursue them for as long as a year? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Perhaps a year or 2 years, perhaps a little more. 
I really do not recall. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly give us a word with respect to 
employment which you have had since completion of your educa- 
tion? 

Mrs. KtiRASCH. I worked in Pittsburgh as a stenographer, and as 
a matter of fact, most of my employment was as a stenographer for 
a sliort time with the Government, and I was a clerk. 

Mr. Arens. Let us proceed chronologically, if you please. When 
did you commence your actual employment ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I got out of school in the depression period, so I 
cannot say exactly when. Jobs were quite difficult to get. But 
roughly it was immediately after leaving high school. At least I 
tried to. 

Mr. Arens. Were your positions as stenographer just in regular 
commercial firms in Pittsburgh? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. In law offices. 

Mr. Arens. How long did you pursue your employment in law 
offices ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Well, you mean in Pittsburgh ? 

Mr. Arens. Wherever you did. What we are doing now is tracing 
your employment chronologically. You graduated from high school, 
and then you became engaged as a stenographer in law offices. I am 
just asking you the general question, for the purpose of fitting to- 
gether a skeleton outline of your background. How long did you 



3340 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

maintain employment in law offices in Pittsburgh or wherever you 
did work? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I worked roughly from the time I left high school 
in 1928 until about — I am quite hazy about dates, but it was about 
1941 or early 1942. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us then, just in resume form, where you were em- 
ployed from 1928 until about 1941 ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Well, my employment in Pittsburgh mostly was 
at one law firm. 

Mr. Arens. How long were you employed there? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. About 6 years. 

Mr. Arens. Wliere was your next employment? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I had a temporary appointment for a couple of 
months with the National Labor Relations Board in Los Angeles. 

Mr. Arens. How did you happen to go there ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I went for reasons of health. 

Mr. Arens. Did you make application for the employment with 
the National Labor Relations Board while you were in California? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I hardly think so. I think that I was on a regist(5r, 
a civil-service register, and I believe that is how I received my appoint- 
ment. It was a very short duration. 

Mr. Arens. That was an application you made while you were 
in Pittsburgh ; is that correct, or do you recall ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Well, I believe the procedure — I do not recall — is 
that you take an examination and you are placed on a register. 

Mr. Arens. What year did you have this temporary employment 
with the National Labor Relations Board in Los Angeles? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I think it was in 1936. 
, Mr. Arens. Could it have been as late as 1937 ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. As late as 1937 ? No, I do not think so. 

Mr. Arens. Give us your best recollection now as to the next em- 
ployment that you had? 

Mrs. KiTRASCH. Then, I am not too clear about it, but I did work 
for a law firm or a lawyer in Los Angeles. 

Mr. Arens. For about how long a period of time were you so 
engaged ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I was in Los Angeles from 1936 to about early in 
1939, and I was employed most of that time, but I cannot remember. 
I think I worked for a lawyer after that short appointment but I am 
not too clear about the details. 

Mr. Arens. Let us trace your next employment then. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I had another temporary appointment with civil 
service. 

Mr. Arens. In what agency? 

Mrs. KuRAscii. In the Senate Committee on Education and Labor. 

Mr. Arens. And where was that employment? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. That, too, was in Los Angeles. 

Mr. Arens. Wlien was that employment? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Toward the end of, I think, 1938. 

Mr. Arens. How long was that employment? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Two or three months or something like that. 

Mr. Arens. Would you tell us how you acquired that employment 
with the Senate Committee on Education and Labor? 



I 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3341 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I do not recall ; perhaps it was the same way as I 
got the other. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know anyone who was employed on the com- 
mittee prior to the time that you became employed ? 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRASCH. No, I did not. 

Mr. Arens. 'Wliat were your duties on this Senate Committee on 
Education and Labor ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I was a stenographer. 

Mr. Arens. Do you recall who your immediate superior was ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. No. You see, I do not think the committee was 
actually operating there. I just do not recall. I think the name of 
the secretary of the committee was a Mr. Wohlforth and I believe he 
is the one who hired me. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Mr. Wohlforth prior to the time that you 
worked for the committee? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. No, and I believe I only saw him once, and then he 
went back to San Francisco. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have a recollection of any of the details as to 
how you happened to become employed with this conxmittee? You 
had no application pending for employment with the committee, I 
am sure. 

Mrs. Kurasch. With the committee, oh, no. I think that I had 
a standing application with civil service. 

Mr. Arens. Do you recollect whether or not you were referred to 
the committee by civil service ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I cannot answer that precisely, because I really do 
not recall. 

Mr. Arens. Wlio was chairman of the committee ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. Was that not Senator La Follette ? 

Mr. Arens. I suggest the possibility it must have been Senator 
La Follette. 

Mrs. Kurasch. I think it was called the La Follette committee. 

Mr. Arens. Will you kindly tell us your next employment ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. My next employment was with the National Labor 
Eelations Board in Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Arens. ^^len did that commence? 

Mrs. Kurasch. Early in 1939, I believe. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I was a stenographer. 

Mr. Arens. Who was your superior? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I think when I first went into the Board, for a 
short time in the Docket Section, and I do not remember who was 
the superior. I have not worked for the Government or anyone for 
15 years, and in the meantime I have raised several children and run 
a house. 

Mr. Arens. I think that you are doing splendidly now. 

Mrs. Kurasch. It is very difficult to remember. 

Mr. iVRENs. Kefresh your recollection the best you can. We are 
not pressing you for any infonnation that you cannot supply on the 
basis of your best judgment and recollection. How long did you work 
with the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. Well, between 1939 and early in 1942 I worked for 
the National Labor Relations Board, and the Office of Price Adminis- 



3342 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

tration. I do not recall exactly how long I worked for each of those 
organizations. 

Mr. Abens. Did you shift from one agency's payroll to the other? 

Mrs. KuKASCH. I would not remember the technique of it. 

Mr. Aeens. Can you tell us how you happened to work for OPA, 
when you had initially started with the NLRB ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I understand your question now. Yes, I believe 
so; I applied for the second job while I was on the payroll of the 
Board. 

Mr. Arens. Then, is it not a fact, that you resigned from Govern- 
ment service in 1943 ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. In 1943? 

Mr. Arens. Yes ; March 17. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. 1943 ? Oh, I think I left considerably before that, 
but I believe I took a leave of absence on account of my health, so that 
the actual resig-nation must have taken place, and I do not recall the 
dates but if you say that, that is what my form says, that is probably 
when the official resignation took place. 

Mr. Arens. Did you at any time in the course of your employment 
with the National Labor Relations Board work in the office of the 
Secretary of the Board. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. No ; I did not. 

Mr. Arens. During your employment with the National Labor 
Relations Board, did you at any time work in the office of Nathan 
Witt? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. No ; I did not. 

Mr. Arens. During your employment with the National Labor 
Relations Board, did you at any time have an assignment which took 
you to Denver, Colo. ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you at any time live in Denver ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes; I did. 

Mr. Arens. Can you tell us the circumstances surrounding your 
residence in Denver ? 

Mrs. KtJRASCH. I do not understand your question. 

Mr. Arens. Wliy did you live in Denver ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Because my husband was working there, and so I 
went there. 

Mr. Arens. Where was your husband working at that time? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. At the War Labor Board. 

Mr. Arens. And what was his job? 
(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I believe he was the regional attorney. 

Mr. Arens. For the National War Labor Board ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. During what years was he regional attorney for that 
Board? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. We went there in 1943, 1 think. 

Mr. Arens. You went to Denver in 1943 ; did you not? 

Mrs. Ktjrasch. I think so. 

Mr. Arens. And you were there until 1945; were you not? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I believe that is probably correct. 

Mr. Arens. Did you engage in any employment while you were 
in Denver ? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3343 

Mrs. KuRASCH. No, I did not. 

Mr. Arens. During your residence at Denver, while your husband 
was employed at the National War Labor Board, did you have occa- 
sion to make the acquaintanceship of a person by the name of Herbert 
Fuchs? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Arens. Please tell us the circumstances surrounding your ac- 
quaintanceship with Herbert Fuchs. 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I am sorry, that is not correct. I did not. 

Mr. Arens. I do not understand. You did not what? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I did not during the time of my residence in Denver 
make the acquaintance of Herbert Fuchs. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know him while you were in Denver, from 1943 
until 1945? 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Arens. A^Hiat was the nature of your acquaintanceship with 
him? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. It was a social acquaintance. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the only basis upon which you had an acquaint- 
anceship with him? 

Mrs. KuRAscii. He worked in my husband's office, and he was an 
associate. 

Mr. Arens. Kindly answer the question. Is that the only basis upon 
which you had an acquaintnceship with Herbert Fuchs? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I do not know what you mean. What kind of re- 
lationship are you referring to? 

Mr. Arens. Are you certain you do not know what I mean? 

Mrs. Kurasgh. Yes, I am certain. 

Mr. Arens. Did you and your husband ever belong to any organiza- 
tion of which Mr. Fuchs was a member ? 

Mrs. KuRAscii. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Why do you ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Well, I believe the Constitution 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Says I need not testify against myself. 

Mr. Arens. Do you feel that if you told this committee whether or 
not you and your husband, while you were in Denver, between 1943 
and 1945, were in an organization of which Herbert Fuchs was a 
member, you would be supplying information which could be used 
against vou in a criminal proceeding? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Well, I did not say tliat. I believe that the Consti- 
tution simply says that a witness need not testify against himself. 

Mr. Arens. In what type of a proceeding? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I do not know if I need to interpret it. 

Mr. Arens. I am going to request the chairman of this committee 
to order you to answer that question. The reason I am going to do 
so is because before you are entitled to assert or invoke the privilege 
of the fifth amendment you must truly and honestly apprehend that 
an answer to the principal question would supply information which 
might be used against you in a criminal proceeding. Now, I am 
going to repeat the question. 



3344 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Do you honestly, Mrs, Kurasch, apprehend that if you gave a truth- 
ful answer as to whether or not you and your husband were members 
of an organization of which Herbert Fuchs was likewise a member, 
that you would be giving information which could be used against 
you in a criminal proceeding? Now, answer that question. 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. Kurasch. I still refuse to answer on the basis of the fifth 
amendment. 

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

Mr. DoYXiE. The committee is not satisfied with your answer, and 
I do instruct you to answer the question. 

(Witness consulted with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Kurasch. I refuse to answer on the basis of the fifth amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us all the organizations of which you and your hus- 
band wei"e members while you and he lived in Denver between 
1943 and 1945 ? 

(Witness consulted with her counsel.) 

]\Irs. Kurasch. I am sorry, but I am beginning to be upset about 
being asked questions about my husband. I am here to testify about 
myself, but I think in common decency I should not be asked any 
questions about my husband. I am very proud of my husband, if that 
is what you would like to know. 

Mr. Arens. Are you proud of his associations and activities of 
the past? 

Mrs. Kurasch. Mr. Chairman, do you think that is a proper 
question ? 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, the witness has made an assertion here 
on this record, under oath, that she is proud of her husband, and now 
I want to ask her whether or not she is proud of the associations and 
activities which her husband had, specifically when she and he were 
living in Denver. 

Mrs. Kurasch. Yes, I certainly am very proud of him, for every- 
thing he has ever done. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not your husband has been a 
member of the Communist conspiracy ? 

(Witness consulted with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Kurasch. Must I be asked questions about my husband? 

Mr. Doyle. It appears a pertinent question. We are investigating 
the extent to which the Communists have infiltrated the Federal Gov- 
ernment and you have testified that your husband was employed by 
the Federal Government in Denver. The purpose of this hearing is 
to investigate the extent to which the Communists have infiltrated 
Federal Government agencies with particular reference to the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board. 

Mrs. Kurasch. Well, I understand the rules of this committee and 
common decency would forbid you to ask me a question about my 
husband. 

Mr. Arens. Do you feel that you have a responsibility and a duty 
as a citizen of the United States to supply information to a duly con- 
stituted committee of the United States Congress inquiring with refer- 
ences to penetration of this Government by persons allied wath the 
international Communist conspiracy? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3345 

(Witness consulted lier counsel.) 

Mr. Doyle. Before the witness answers that question, Mr. Counsel, 
I might further state for her benefit that, the purpose of this hearing, 
so far as you are concerned, is bearing on the subject of not only the 
infiltration of the Communist Party in Government employment at 
the time you lived in Denver, but we are also interested in this matter 
with respect to the question of legislation. In other words, we want 
to see if we can devise ways and means of preventing Communist 
Party members from obtaining or infiltrating Federal Government 
employment. 

We know there was a Communist cell in Denver, at the very time 
you were there. We also know that there was a Communist cell in 
Denver among some of the Federal employees in Denver, at the very 
time you and your husband were there. I should think tliat you, 
being the mother of several fine children, as you have testified, would 
be interested in helping your Congress discover the extent and the 
ways and means by wliicli Communists operated to get into Federal 
employment of the National Labor Relations Board or any other 
agency. 

Does that make it clear as to why we are questioning you ? 

Mrs. IvuKAScH. Yes, I understand that, but I still do not see why 
I should be questioned about my husband. Do you not think that 
these questions should be asked of him ? I cannot testify against my 
husband. 

Mr. Doyle. We are not charging him with any crime. 

Mr. Jafte. May I just say, Mr. Dojde, that what the lady is refer- 
ing to is solely the question of your asking her about her husband. 
Your rules say that you would not do it, and she is simply suggesting 
that the rules should be applied in this case. 

The committee has already questioned her husband fully. Under 
the circumstances, I do not think that she should be asked about that. 

Mr. Doyle. We have a distinguished legal counsel, and he does not 
knowingly violate any of the rules of the committee. I want the 
record to show that. Mr. Arens is substituting as you know for 
our distinguished committee counsel, Mr. Tavenner, who is ill. Mr. 
Arens has done a handsome job, and we appreciate him being here, 
from the Senate committee to help us. 

I think it is a proper question, and not in violation of the intent 
and purpose of the committee rule. We have certain evidence that 
is being developed by counsel, and he knows the bounds of it. Proceed, 
please. 

Mr. Arexs. I have put it to you as a fact, Mrs. Kurasch, and ask 
you to affirm or deny the fact that while you were in Denver, Colo., 
you and your husband were members of a Communist Party cell ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I claim the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arexs. When you say you claim the fifth amendment, what 
do you mean i 

Mrs. Kurasch. I mean that I am refusing to answer because the 
Constitution of the United States says that a witness need not testify 
against oneself. 

Mr. Arexs. In what type of proceeding ? 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mr. Jaffe. May I suggest, Mr. Doyle, that this witness should not 
be catechized on the Constitution. She is not a lawyer. ; 



3346 COMMUNIST ESrriLTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Doyle. Just a moment, counsel. I always hesitate to ask coun- 
sel to strictly obey the rules of the committee, but as you know we 
do not permit this. I am not criticizing you. 

Mr. Arens. Do you honestly apprehend that if you told this com- 
mittee a truthful answer as to wiiether or not you and your husband 
were members of a Communist Party cell, while you were residents 
of Denver, from 1943 to 1945, you would be supplying information 
which could be used against you in a criminal proceeding? 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mrs. KtJRASCH. I claim the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. I respectfully suggest the witness be ordered and di- 
rected to answer that question. 

Mr. Doyle. The committee is not satisfied with your reply as con- 
stituting a valid and sufficient answer. Therefore, I do instruct you 
to answer the question. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I respectfully claim the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affirm or deny 
the fact, that while you and your husband were in residence at Den- 
ver, from 1943 to 1945, you were both members of a Communist 
Party cell created of employees of the War Labor Board and their 
spouses? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Mr. Arens, that is the same question. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly answer the question ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I claim the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. During your residency in Denver, did you have occasion 
to make the acquaintanceship of a person by the name of Philip Reno? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Wliat were the circumstances surrounding that ac- 
quaintanceship ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. He was employed in the office where my husband 
was employed. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the only basis upon which you had an acquaint- 
anceship with Philip Reno? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I do not exactly understand but we may have had 
some social 

Mr. Arens. You recognize that you are here before this committee 
and you have taken an oath before almighty God to tell the whole 
truth, have you not ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Will you tell us the whole truth as to whether or not 
the acquaintanceship which you had with Philip Reno was confined 
exclusively to an office acquaintanceship and to a social acquaintance- 
ship? 

(Witness consulted with her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I claim the privilege of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. The truth is, is it not, that Philip Reno and you and 
your husband acted in concert in the Communist conspiracy which 
was set up at Denver, Colo. ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I claim the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of John W. Porter? 

Mrs. Ktjrasch. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us the nature of that acquaintanceship ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. He, too, was employed at the office where my hus- 
band worked, and I knew him socially. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3347 

Mr. Arens. Is that the extent of your acquaintanceship with John 
W. Porter? 

(Witness consulted with her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuiL\scH. I do not know what you mean. 

Mr. Arens. You know what I mean just as surely as you Imow 
you are sitting there. Will counsel let us handle this proceeding? 
Counsel is here to advise the witness and not to run the committee. 
Now, woulcl you kindly tell us whether or not you had any acquaint- 
anceship with John W. Porter, other than a social or business ac- 
quaintanceship? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Do I not have the right to consult with my counsel? 

Mr. Arens. You have the privilege of consulting with counsel. 

Mrs. KuRAscii. May I exercise that privilege? 

Mr. Arens. You may consult with counsel. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Yes, and I would appreciate it if you did not shout 
at me, you are making me nervous. 

Mr. Arens. You have no idea how our patience is tried here, at the 
counsel table, and among the members of this committee by witnesses 
such as yourself. 

Would you kindly tell us now in all fairness, whether or not you and 
your husband had an acquaintanceship or an association with John W. 
Porter other than the acquaintanceship in the office of the National 
Labor Relations Board, the National War Labor Board, or a social 
acquaintanceship ? 

Mrs. KuRAScii. I claim the privilege of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. And you knew all of the time, did you not, what I was 
driving at? 

Mrs. KuRASCTi. No, I think that is wrong to say that. 

Mr. Arens. Will you tell us every association that you had with 
John W. Porter ? 

Mrs. KuRAScii. You mean every time I had lunch with him? 

Mr. Arens. Start over again. You knew John W. Porter as a fel- 
low employee of your husband in the National War Labor Board, did 
you not? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. You knew John W. Porter socially, did you not? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Now, did you belong to any clubs in which John W. 
Porter was a member, bridge clubs, we will say ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I still claim the privilege on that question. 

Mr. Arens. Did you belong to any bridge clubs in which John W. 
Porter was a member? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I claim the privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest the witness be 
ordered and directed to answer that question, because membership in 
a bridge club could not possibly give or create facts which could be 
used against this witness in a criminal proceeding. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question, and of course I 
can conceive that there might have been a Communist Party bridge 
club, and in that case it might be embarrassing to the witness. How- 
ever, I instruct you to answer the question. 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I am sorry, but I must claim the privilege. 



3348 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Did you and your husband belong to any organiza- 
tions of which John W. Porter was a member which were non- 
Communist, nonsensiti ve, and nonconspiratorial in nature ? 

(Witness consulted with her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I claim the privilege. 

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

Mr. Doyle. We are not satisfied that your answer is legitimate 
and given in good faith, and I do instruct you to answer the question. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I still claim the priviledge. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know John W. Porter's wife, Margaret Ben- 
net Porter ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Yes, I did, in the same manner. 

Mr. Arens. What do you mean, in the same manner ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Well, she was a wife of an employee [witness con- 
sulted with her counsel] and, of course, I knew her husband socially 
and I knew her socially. 

Mr. Arens. And that, of course, is the extent of your acquaintance- 
ship with Margaret B. Porter? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. And you feel, of course, that if you told us a truthful 
answer to that question you would be supplying information which 
might be used against you in a criminal proceeding ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Since I have answered this kind of a question, I 
think that you are badgering me, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Arens. Will you answer the question again? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I claim the privilege of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. During your residency at Denver, did you have occa- 
sion to make the acquaintanceship of a person by the name of Edward 
Scheunemann ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us the nature of that acquaintanceship. 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I believe his wife was employed at the office where 
my husband was employed, and therefore we knew them socially. 

Mr. Arens. Is that the only way you knew him ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I plead the privilege of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. In other words, if you told this committee the truth, as 
to whether or not you and your husband knew Edward Scheunemann 
and his wife, Cecelia Scheunemann, in any way other than in a social 
capacity, you would be supplying information which could be used 
against you in a criminal proceeding; is that not true? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I claim the privilege of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. I respectfully suggest this witness be ordered and 
directed to answer that question. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question. 

Mrs. Kurasch. I will still have to claim the privilege. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Gerald J. Matchett, and his wife 
Margaret Matchett ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I did. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us the nature of that acquaintanceship ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. Mr. Matchett was employed at the office where my 
husband was employed. 

Mr. Arens. Where was INIrs, Matchett employed ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I do not recall. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3349 

Mr. Arens. How did you happen to know Mrs. Matcliett? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I knew Mr. Matcliett socially so of course I knew 
his wife socially. 

Mr. Arexs. And that is the only way by which you happened to 
have this acquaintanceship with Gerald and Margaret Matcliett; is 
that correct ? 

INIrs. KuRASCH. You asked me this question so many tunes, and I 
still 

(Witness consulted her counsel.) 

Mr. Arens. Every time you give me the same answer. 

Mrs. KuR.\scH. I feel that you are sort of building up statistics. 

Mr. Arens. We are just seeking information, on the international 
Communist conspiracy which is dedicated to the overthrow of this 
Government by force and violence, and if you have information on that 
I w^ould respectfully suggest that you either give it to us or invoke 
your privilege under the fifth amendment and give us the reason for 
the privilege. 

Now, tell us whether or not you and your husband knew Gerald and 
Margaret Matcliett in any capacity other than in a social capacity? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I claim the privilege. 

j\Ir. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Raymond 
LaA^allee? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes; I did. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know his wife, Corina LaVallee ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us the nature of your acquaintanceship with them. 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I believe Mr. LaVallee was employed at the office 
where my husband was employed and I knew them socially. 

Mr. Arens. How often did you see them ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I could not possibly recall that. 

Mr. Arens. Did you see them as much as, say, once a month? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I really do not know, because I might have walked 
into the office and seen Mr. LaVallee, but I really could not say. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever meet with them regularly ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Regularly? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, periodically ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. No, I would hardly describe it as that. 

Mr. Arens. Did you meet with them at any time in your home? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I would say socially — what do you mean, meet? 

Mr. Arens. Since Counsel asked you to have me explain that to you, 
I will. I mean have a session other than a social session with them ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Do you feel that if you told this committee the truth as 
to whether or not you did have meetings or sessions with the La- 
Vallees other than social sessions you would be supplying information 
which could be used against you in a criminal proceeding ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I must plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. Do I understand, Counsel, that this question related 
to meetings in her own home? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. Other than social meetings. 

Did you know a person by the name of Dwight Spencer, and his 
wife, Mary Spencer? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes, I did. 



3350 coMMinsriST infiltration of government 

Mr. Arens. Tell us the nature of the acquaintanceship you had 
with them. 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I believe Mr. Spencer was employed at the office 
where my husband was employed. 

Mr. Arens. Did he belong to any group or organization of which 
your husband was a member? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I plead my privilege under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. What was the nature of your acquaintanceship with 
Mary Spencer? 

(Witness consulted with her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRAscH. It is just the same as the others, I knew her socially. 

Mr. Arens. You knew Mary Spencer the same as you knew the 
others, in the same capacity, is that correct ? 

(Witness consulted with her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I do not understand. 

Mr. Jaffe. ^Vliat does that question mean ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes, what does that question mean? 

Mr. Arens. You are the one who used the language, and I am 
putting it back to you. You said you knew her the same as you knew 
the others, and I am asking you if that is correct. 

Mrs. KuRAscH. But you phrased your question differently, you said, 
in what capacity, and what do you mean in what capacity? 

Mr. Arens. What do you mean by it ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I did not use it. 

Mr. Arens. You said that you knew Mary Spencer the same as you 
knew the others. Tell us what you meant. This is not a game we are 
playing; we are undertaking to elicit information for the security of 
this Nation, under whose flag you claim protection. 

Kindly tell us the nature of the acquaintanceship which you have 
had with Mary Spencer. 

(Witness consulted with her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I have answered that question. 

Mr. Arens. Answer it again, please. 

Mr. Jaffe. Ask the chairman whether 

Mr. Arens. Counsel is here to advise the witness, and not to testify 
for his witness. 

Mr. Jaffe. I can't whisper to Mrs. Kurasch, because she would not 
be able to hear me, she has a little hearing defect. 

Mr. Arens. Counsel is here to advise the witness on her rights. 

Mr. Doyle. So that she can hear, take whatever time is necessary 
to advise your witness as to her constitutional privilege. But we do 
have to be rather strict in seeing that the witness does not look to 
counsel to put words in her mouth. I am not saying that you have, sir. 

Mr. Jaffe. I am sure that you would not say that. 

Mr. Doyle. I am not saying that, but I think this is the first time 
you have been here with us. 

Mr. Jaffe. I was here last week. 

Mr. Doyle. You take whatever time you need so that your client 
can hear you without being embarrassed. 

Mr. Jaffe. I want to tell you that I have no objection to your hear- 
ing me as well. 

Mr. Arens. The only objection I have, if the Chairman pleases, is 
for counsel to sit here and tell the witness specifically in high verbal 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3351 

tones what words to use in response to queries which we pose; he just 
did it, and I heard him. 

Mr. Jaffe. Please do not say that, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Doyle. Let us proceed. To be perfectly frank with you, 
madam, my impression is that we are asking your prompt cooperation. 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I am trying to give it. 

Mr. Doyle. My impression, and let me be frank with you, is that 
you are answering the question with as little information as you can. 
Mr. Arens is trying to get information, and at times my impression 
is that you are not cooperating in giving him the information that 
you could. 

I think it is perfectly clear. When you said that you knew this 
woman the same as you knew the others, what did you mean by that? 
That is what the counsel wants to know. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. It is just that the counsel phrased it in an odd way. 
Now, I cannot remember. 

Mr. Doyle. He asked you in what capacity you knew this woman, 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I knew them socially. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us whether or not you knew a person by the name 
of Don Plumb, when you and your husband resided in Denver, between 
1943 and 1945. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us the nature of that acquaintanceship. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Mrs. Plumb was employed at the office where my 
husband was employed and I knew them socially. 

Mr. Arens. Was that the extent of your acquaintanceship with 
them ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Do you understand the question ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I think you should be specific. 

Mr. Arens. I will be specific. Were you and your husband, Don 
Plumb and Arlyne Plumb, and the others we have mentioned, all 
members of a Communist Party cell in Denver ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I claim my privilege under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. If you told this committee whether or not you and these 
other persons named here in this session were members of a Com- 
munist Party cell in Denver, would you be supplying information 
which could be used against you in a criminal proceeding? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Kearney. I would like to ask the witness if you were not a 
member of the Communist Party in Denver, would you so state to this 
committee ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. I plead the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Arens. During your residency in Denver, did you acquire 
knowledge respecting the transmission of information acquired from 
Government files to a person not authorized by law to receive the 
same? 

(The witness conferred with her counsel.) 

Mrs. Kurasch. Certainly not. 

Mr. Arens. Did you acquire information respecting a concerted 
plan of action by a group which was dedicated to the overthrow of this 
Government by force and violence ? 

(The witness conferred with her counsel.) 

70811 — 56 — pt. 4^ — 8 



3352 COMMUNIST ESTFILTRATION OF GOVEKNTMENT 

Mrs. Kt'itASCii. No. 

Mr. Arexs. Did you and your husband engage in the promotion or 
dissemination of propaganda of a Connnunist variety? 

(The witness conferred with her counsel.) 

Mr. Jaffe. "WouUi you be good enough to read the question, please? 

(The reporter read from his notes as requested.) 

Mi-s. Ki-KASCH. I will claim the privilege on that question. 

Mr. Arexs. After you and your husband concluded your residency 
in Denver, where did you go i 

Mrs. KuK^vscH. We moved back to "Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Arexs. And your husband, as I recall from his testimony, re- 
sumed his employment in the Federal Government in Washington ? 

Mi-s. Ki RASCH. Well, it wasn't terminated. 

Mr. Arexs. Xow, he then came back to Washington to go to work, 
is that correct ? 

Mrs. KrR.vscH. That is right. 

Mr. Arex's. In what agency did he work? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. The same one, I believe. 

Mr. Arex'S. Hoav long did he work here in that agency, the National 
War I.<abor Board ? 

^Irs. Kfrasch. I don't recall. You will have to ask him. 

Mr. Arex'^s. Was it a matter of some few years or some few months ? 

^[rs. KtHASCTi. I don't recall. 

;Mr. Arexs. When you came back to Washington you know whether 
or not your husband worked either a matter of months or a matter 
of yeai-s ; do you not ? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I really don't recall. I just don't know how long 
it was. 

Mr. Arex's. How long did you live in Washington, after your re- 
turn from Denver? 

(The witness conferred with her coimsel.) 

Mrs. Kfrasch. Let's see. I think we came back in 1945. and prob- 
ably lived here about o or 4 yeai"s. 

^Ir. Arexs. During those 3 or 4 years, was your husband continu- 
ously employed in the Federal Government ? 

Mrs. Kfrasch. Xo. I believe sometime prior to our departure lie 
left. 

^Ir. Arex's. He left to go into the practice of law: is that correct? 

Mrs. Kfr-\sch. I believe so. 

^Ir. Arexs. After you and your husband returned to Washington 
in 1945, did you belong to any organization with him of a Communist 
variety ? 

Mrs. Kfrasch. I claim the privilege on that question. 

Mr. Arexs. Have you ever disassociated yourself from the Com- 
munist Party ? 

(The witness conferred with her counsel.) 

^Irs. Kfrasch. That is an outrageous question. I claim the privi- 
lege on that question. 

Mr. Doyle. Do you understand the question, madam ? 

Mrs. Kfrasch. Well, you are presuming or assuming that I was a 
member and, therefore, I disassociated myself, and I say that I will 
not answer questions with regard to my political thinking or activities. 
I plead the tifth amendment. Therefore, this question is what T 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3353 

think would be called a trick question, like "Have you stopped beating 
your wife?" 

]Mr. Arens. You said you would not answer questions respecting 
your political thinking. Would you kindly tell us whether or not, on 
the basis of your background and experience, the Communist Party is 
a political party or is it a conspiracy to overthrow the Government? 

(The witness conferred with her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuiL\scH. I will claim my privilege on that. 

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

Mrs. KuRASCH. I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Arexs. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest this concludes the 
staff inquiry of this witness. 

Mr. iJoYLE. Mr. "Willis, any questions? 

Mr. Willis. Xo questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Kearney? 

Mr. Kearney. Xo questions. 

Mr. Doyle. May I just ask the witness a couple of questions. I 
could not help but notice a couple of minutes ago in answer to coun- 
sel's question as to w^hether or not these persons he named to you had 
met in your home, you claimed the privilege. Do you remember that? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. Yes. I think I remember the question. 

Mr. Doyle. It is a fact, is it not, at the time your husband worked 
for the Xational War Labor Board in Denver, that you did have 
Communist cell meetings in your home? Is that not true? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I claim the privilege on that question. 

Mr. Doyle. How often were those meetings held in your home? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. You are assuming that Tneetings were held. I am 
just not answering that question on the basis of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. I do not think I am assuming anything. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. A"\Tien you say how often were they held, what else 
could you be assuming { 

Mr. Doyle. Of course, we think we have plenty of testimony as 
to what the facts are. We are hoping that you might help us to 
understand the extent to which attorneys for the War Labor Board 
and their wives participated in Communist cell meetings in your home 
or elsewhere. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. You say you have testimony. Do you have testi- 
mony that meetings of any nature were held in my home? 

Mr. Arens. Do you deny it ? 

(The witness conferred with her counsel.) 

Mr. Jaffe. She asked the question of the chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. Just a minute. 

Mr. Jaffe. You asked the question of the chairman, not of Mr. 
Arens. 

Mr. Doyle. You would not be here under subpena if we did not 
have plenty of sworn testimony that you were identified as a member 
of a Communist Party cell in Denver. Do you deny that you were ? 

Mrs. Kurasch. You said — I asked you if you have testimony that 
there were meetings held in my home. That was the question. 

Mr. Doyle. Wliat difference would it make to vou if I told you 
"Yes." 

Mrs. Kurasch. You asked the question. I am just asking you if 
you have testimony. 



3354 coMMUTsriST infiltration of government 

Mr. Doyle. Would you still claim the privilege if I said w6 did or 
would you tell the truth ? 

(The witness conferred with her counsel.) 

Mrs. KtJRAscH. If I claim the privilege, does that mean that I am 
not telling the truth ? The fifth amendment, as I understand, protects 
the innocent. 

Mr. Doyle. You are very well informed and show a familiarity with 
the problem that you face as a witness, in the use of the language 
used. I understand that. May I ask you this : Are you a mother of 
several children at this time? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes; 

Mr. Doyle. You worked for the Federal Government several years ; 
is that correct ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Over 15 years ago, yes. 

Mr. Doyle. And your husband did also ? 

Mrs. KuRAscH. Yes. 

Mr. Doyle. Let me put it straight to you, please. Here you are — 
the mother of American children — yet you come before this com- 
mittee and claim the privilege on the question of whether you are now 
a member of the Communist Party. May I state this: Quite fre- 
quently we have witnesses before us who say under oath that they are 
not now members of the Communist Party. I do not understand 
how any patriotic American citizen can stay so close to the Communist 
outfit yet when they come before this committee claim the privilege 
as to whether or not they are members of the Communist Party at 
the time they are in the witness chair. Do you understand what I 
am saying to you ? 

(The witness conferred with her counsel.) 

Mr. Doyle. I can understand how people may have been members 
of the Communist Party years ago, and, therefore, claim the privilege. 
But I do not understand how you, a mother of children, can be under 
the oath before this committee of your own Congress today, and 
yet not be in a position to say you are not now a member of the 
Communist Party. I do not understand how any patriotic American 
citizen can leave himself or herself in that position. 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I don't understand. Do you mean that a patriotic 
American citizen would not claim the privilege of the fifth amend- 
ment? 

Mr. Doyle. I mean that any patriotic American citizen, whether a 
mother of American children or not, would have so far divorced her- 
self from the Communist Party before she came into this room that 
she could then honestly testify that she was not now a member of 
the Communist Party. That is what I mean. 

But, apparently, you have not, because you still feel that it is 

Mrs. KuRAscH. You mustn't make such inferences. I didn't say 
that I did or did not. I merely claimed the privilege not to answer 
the question. That is my understanding of the privilege of the fifth 
amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. That is right, and you should thank God that you are 
an American citizen. 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I do, and I am a good American citizen and my hus- 
band is a good American citizen. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3355 

Mr. Doyle. We do not draw any inferences when you use the 
privilege. 

Mrs. KuRASCH. You are drawing an inference. You said so. 

Mr. Doyle. I am not. I did not say I was drawing the inference. 
I said I am putting you in the position that I am disappointed with 
you, that you as an American citizen have not divorced yourself from 
the Communist Party so far that you can say you are not now a 
member. 

Mrs. KuKASCH. Is that an inference, that you are disgusted with me? 

Mr. Doyle. I am being frank with you. I want to close with this 
statement, and I am glad you are a bit angry about it. I should think 
you would be angry at yourself as well as others. 

Mrs. Ktjrasch. I am angry, and I have been angry. I have been 
trying to control my temper. I think this is an outrageous proceeding. 

Mr. Doyle. I hope the time will come before long when you are 
so far divorced from any positions you have been in that you 
will not have to claim your privilege when you are before a com- 
mittee of the Congress of the United States as to your affiliation at 
that moment. I am not referring to yesterday or a year ago. I am 
referring to this time. No inferences are drawn against you. 

Thank you. 

Mr. Kearney? 

Mr. Kearney. In view of the witness' attitude, I would like to ask 
this one question: Do you believe that members of the Communist 
conspiracy should be employees of the United States Government? 

Mrs. KuRASCH. I am sorry, I didn't quite understand the question. 

Mr. Kearney. Do you believe that members of the Communist 
conspiracy should be employees of the United States Government and 
have their salaries paid for by the taxpayers of America? 

Mrs. KuEASCH. Well, I don't understand. Do you mean the Com- 
munist Party ? I don't know what the 

Mr. Kearney. I think you understand all right. It is a very simple 
question to answer. 

(The witness conferred with her counsel.) 

Mrs. KuRAscH. I will plead the fifth amendment on that question. 

Mr. Kearney. I thought so. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest we have a 5-min- 
ute recess. 

Mr. Doyle. The committee will stand in recess for 5 minutes. 

Mr. Jaffe. Is the witness excused ? 

Mr. Doyle. Are you finished with the witness, Mr. Arens ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. 

Mr. Doyle. The witness is excused. Thank you. 

(Brief recess.) 

Mr. Doyle. The committee will come to order. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the committee reconvenes after 
the 5-minute recess and all 3 members of the subcommittee are present. 

Mr. Arens. Mr. Jacob Krug. 

Please remain standing and raise your right hand and be sworn. 

Mr. Doyle. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you shall 
give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, 
so help you God ? 

Mr. Krug. I do. 



3356 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

TESTIMONY OF JACOB H. KEUG, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL 
JOSEPH A. FANELLI 

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

Mr. Krug. My name is Jacob H. Krug. I am an attorney with 
offices at 1822 Jefferson Place, Washington, D. C. I live in the Wash- 
ington, D. C, area. 

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

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Are you represented by counsel? 

Mr. Krug. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. Will counsel kindly identify himself? 

Mr. Fanelli. It is Joseph A. Fanelli. I maintain law offices at 
1701 K Street NW., and am a member of the District of Columbia 
Bar. 

Mr. Arens. Do you practice by yourself, Mr, Fanelli ? 

Mr. Fanelli. No; I am here as a close personal friend of the 
witness. I am not here as a partner of the firm of Fanelli & Freehill, 
I am here by courtesy and as a friend. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been known by any name other than the 
name which appears on your subj)ena ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Plave you ever gone by any nicknames or any aliases 
of any kind or character ? 

Mr. Krug. No aliases. 

Mr. Arens. Any nicknames ? 

Mr. Krug. People call me Jack. 

Mr. Ahrens. Kindly tell us where and when you were born. 

Mr. Krug. I was born in Connecticut, July 5, 1911. 

Mr. Arens. Give us a thumbnail sketch of your early life, please, 
Mr. Krug, where you were educated and the chronology of your 
education. 

Mr. Krug. I went to high school, I went to Yale College and Yale 
Law School, and graduated. 

Mr. Arens. Wlien did you graduate from Yale? 

Mr. Krug. I graduated from Yale Law School in 1935 and was 
admitted to the Connecticut bar that same year. 

Mr. Arens. In what States are you admitted to practice? 

Mr. Krug. Connecticut and the District of Columbia. 

Mr. Arens. Wlien were you admitted to practice in the District of 
Columbia? 

Mr Krug. 1948. 

Mr. Arens. Please, give us in like manner, the chronology of your 
employments since you completed your formal education. 

Mr. Krug. I was employed by the Federal Government in 1943 
by the National Recovery Administration. 

Mr. Arens. Where was that, please, sir? 

Mr. Krug. Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity? 

Mr. Krug. As an attorney. 

Mr. Arens. Proceed. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3357 

Mr. Krug. I was then employed by the Kesettlement Administra- 
tion. This was also in 1935. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity? 

Mr. Krug. All my employment with the Federal Government was 
as an attorney, in all the agencies I worked. 

Mr. Arens. Was yonr employment with the Resettlement Admin- 
istration in Washington? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Continue in like vein, if you please, sir. 

Mr. Krug. I was then employed by the Puerto Rico Reconstruction 
Administration, part of the time in Puerto Rico and the rest of the 
time here in Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Arens. Give us the dates on that. 

Mr. Krug. I believe it began in December 1935, and it ended in 
June of 1937. I then worked again in Washington, D. C, as an attor- 
ney for the Rural Electrification Administration. 

Mr. Arens. What year was that, please, sir? 

Mr. Krug. June 1937 to January 1938. 

Mr. Arens. Proceed. 

Mr. Krug. Then I worked for the National Labor Relations Board 
from January 1938 until the middle or latter part of 1940. I was 
then out of Government service for a few months and came back to 
Government service with the 

Mr. Arens. Excuse the interruption, please. You say, in 1940, 
you left the Government temporarily ? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. In what occupation were you engaged during that 
period ? 

Mr. Krug. The practice of law. 

Mr. Arens. For how long was that ? 

Mr. Krug. A few months. 

Mr. Arens. Proceed, please. 

Mr. Krug. I then resumed employment with the Federal Govern- 
ment at the Board of Immigration Appeals in the Department of 
Justice in January of 1941. 

Mr. Arens. How long did that employment continue? 

Mr. Krug. I stayed there until I entered the military service in 
October of 1942. I was in militaiy service for just over 3 years, until 
October 1945. 

Mr. Arens. Will you hesitate a moment, please, was it 1942 to 1945 
in the military ? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. In what branch of the service and where did you 
serve ? 

Mr. Krug. The Army Air Force. I served overseas about 21 
months, in Europe, England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany. 

Mr. Arens. In what unit of the Army Air Force were you? 

Mr. Krug. I was assigned to the 321st Fighter Control Squadron, 
and later on most of us were changed over, I think, to the 327tli 
Fighter Control Squadron, and then just before I came back to the 
United States in the summer of 1945 I was shifted, I think, to the 
386th Fighter Squadron and I came back to the United States. 

Mr. Ajrens. In what capacity did you serve? In an administra- 
tive capacity, did you fly the airplanes or what did you do ? 



3358 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Krug. The Army Air Force sent me to radio school and I 
became a radio operator, mostly operating with a little maintenance. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have a commission ? 

Mr. Krug. No. I was a sergeant. 

Mr. Arens. You were discharged in 1945 ? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Return to your employment, please, sir. 

Mr. Krug. I returned to my employment at the Board of Immi- 
gration Appeals, a few weeks after my discharge. 

Mr. Arens. As an attorney, I take it ? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. I stayed there until I resigned in the 
early part of 1948. I resigned from the Government and have not 
been connected with the Government since that time. 

Mr. Arens. Was that in April of 1948? 

Mr. Krug. I believe so. 

Mr. Arens. Does that complete your Government service? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Please give us a word about your occupation since the 
termination of your Government service. 

Mr. Krug. I have been engaged in the practice of law here in Wash- 
ington, D. C, since that time. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your Government career, were you 
a member of the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Mr. Krug. Because of the rights to which I am entitled under the 
first amendment of the Constitution and the fifth amendment of the 
Constitution, and any other constitutional privileges that may apply 
to me, I respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your Government career, were you 
a member of any professional groups ? 

Mr. Krug. I am afraid I will have to give you the same answer. 

Mr. Willis. You do not have to. 

You do invoke the privilege of the fifth amendment ? 

Mr. Krug. You understand correctly, Mr. Congressman. 

Mr. Willis. Let me ask you this: Do you invoke the privilege 
of the fifth amendment ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer, Mr. Congressman, for 
the same reason which I outlined. 

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affirm or deny 
the fact that while you were in the employ of the Federal Government 
you were likewise a member of the National Lawyers Guild. 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer, and I would like it 
understood that when I say that I mean for the reason that I have 
already given. 

Mr. Doyle. It is so understood. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been identified with the Washington 
Committee for Democratic Action ? 

Mr. Krug. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affirm or deny 
the fact that while you were in Washington you were a member of 
the Washington Committee for Democratic Action. 

Mr. Krug. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Were you ever a member of the Washington Bookshop ? 

Mr. Krug. Same answer. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3359 

Mr. Abens. I put it to you as a fact, and ask you aiRrm or deny the 
fact that you were, while in the employ of the Federal Government, 
a member of the Washington Bookshop ? 

Mr. Krug. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been identified with the Americam 
League for Peace and Democracy ? 

Mr. Krug. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. I put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affimi or deny 
the fact that while you were in the Federal Government you were 
identified as a member of the American League for Peace and 
Democracy. 

Mr. Krug. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. I lay before you, Mr. Krug, a photostatic copy of a clip- 
ping from the Washington Times Herald of June 3, 1949, entitled "1872 
Law Bans D. C. Race Bias," and I invite your attention specifically 
to that portion of this photostatic copy of this article alluding to activi- 
ties by certain members of the National Lawyers Guild, in which the 
name of J. H. Krug appears. I ask first of all, whether or not you 
have ever seen that article before ? 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Mr. Krug. I don't recall ever seeing this article. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly glance at the article and see if that 
article refreshes your recollection respecting any activity by yourself? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Krug. I make the same answer. I respectfully decline to answer 
that question. 

Mr. Arens. Do you feel that if you gave this committee a truthful 
answer as to whether or not this newspaper article refreshes your 
recollection respecting an activity by yourself you would be supplying 
information which could be used against you in a criminal proceeding ? 

Mr. Krug. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. I respectfully invite the attention of the committee to 
this excerpt from the article with reference to the National Lawyers 
Guild activities; it says: 

Members of the suild committee which wrote the opinion are Joseph Forer, 
James A. Cobb, Daniel Crystal, Margaret A. Haywood, Charles H. Houston, 
J. H. Krug, and Herbert S. Thatcher. 

There are other paragraphs in the article, but that is the pertinent 
excerpt of the article. 

Sir, I will ask you whether or not you know a person by the name 
of Ruth Weyand. 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us the nature of that acquaintanceship. 

Mr. Krug. I first met Ruth Weyand at the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board. I was an attorney there and she was an attorney. 

Mr. Arens. Is Ruth Weyand, concerning whom we are now speak- 
ing, also known as Ruth Weyand Perry ? 

Mr. Krug. That I don't know. I understand she got married since 
then. I don't know what her married name is. 

Mr. Arens. Wlien did you know her ? 

Mr. Krug. Wlien I was at the Labor Board, 1938 to 1940. 

Mr. Arens. In what capacity was she employed? 



3360 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Krug. As an attorney. Let me say that I was in the Review 
Section, the division of the Board where the attorneys witliout much 
experience were employed. Ruth Weyand, on the other hand, worked 
in litigation, where attorneys had to have more experience, and usu- 
ally were people, all people, of higher ability as attorneys. The ability 
of an attorney to handle litigation, of course, is a special sort of gift. 
I did not have that. I am just finishing now. I was one of the younger 
attorney in the Review Section and Ruth Weyand was in litigation. 

Mr. Arens. Did you belong to any organizations to which, to your 
certain knowledge, Ruth Weyand belonged? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did she not belong to the National Lawyers Guild ? 

Mr. Krug. You said to my certain know^ledge. Not to my certain 
knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. You do not know, then, whether or not Ruth Weyand 
was a member of the National Lawyers Guild? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been at the home or apartment of Ruth 
Weyand ? 

Mr. Krug. No, never. 

Mr. Arens. Have you ever been in any meetings in which Ruth 
Weyand was in attendance, other than just sessions at the office? 

Mr. Krug. I cannot recall any meetings ; no. 

Mr. Arens. Were you at any time a member of the lawyers' union 
of the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

]Mr. Arens. During what period of time were you a member of that 
lawyers' union? 

Mr. Krug. I probably joined it soon after I came to the Board. I 
-don't recall the exact time. 

Mr. Arens. That would be in what year ? 

Mr. Krug. In 1938. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us, if you please, whether or not you knew any- 
one in the NRA in 1935, prior to the time you obtained your position 
there. 

Mr. Krug. I can't recall. 

Mr. Arens. Did anyone who w^as known by you to be a member of 
the Communist Party have anything to do with your employment 
in the NRA? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you, during the time you were in the NRA, which 
apparently was just a matter of a few months, gain information 
respecting membership or activities of any person known by you to 
be in the Communist Party within that agency ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Let's proceed to the Resettlement Administration. Was 
your position in the Resettlement Administration procured for you 
directly or indirectly by any person known by you to be a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. During the time you were in the Resettlement Admin- 
istration, did you acquire information respecting the membership 
or activity of any person known by you to be a member of the Com- 
munist Party within the Resettlement Administration? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3361 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Was your position in the Puerto Kico Keconstruction 
Administration procured or facilitated by any person known by you 
to be a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know anyone in the Puerto Rico Reconstruc- 
tion Administration who was known by you to be a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. I^uG. No. 

Mr. Arens. Let us move on to the REA, beginning in 1937. Was 
your employment there obtained or facilitated by any person known 
by you to be a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know anyone in REA who was known by you 
to be a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Let us move on to the NLRB. Was that employment 
in the NLRB procured by you or facilitated on your behalf by any 
person known by you to be a member of the Communist Party '^ 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know anyone in the employ of the National 
Labor Relations Board during your employment there who, to your 
certain knowledge was a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Do you feel that if you gave this committee a truthful 
answer to that question you would be supplying information which 
could be used against you in a criminal proceeding? 

Mr. KJsuG. I do. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your employment in the National 
Labor Relations Board, who was your immediate superior ? 

Mr. Krug. There were several supervisors. There were about 10 
supervisors. I was shifted from one to the other. I must have had 
about 5 or 6. 

Mr. Arens. Name all five or as many of them whose names you can 
recall. 

Mr. Krug. Mr. Arens, I will see just which ones I can remember. 
I hesitate very much to drag into this proceeding names of peoole in 
whom the committee could conceivably have no interest whatsoever. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Krug. On advice of counsel, I wish to answer the question — 
I wish, perhaps, to have it read to me again. 

Mr. Arens. Would you kindly read it to him again. 

(The reporter read from his notes as requested.) 

Mr. Krug. Oh, yes, the supervisors: Joseph Friedman, he is now 
dead; Shad Polier; Rawdings Ragland. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Krug. The last one I can recall is Fuchs, Herbert Fuchs. 

Mr. Arens. Were any of the persons you are naming known by you 
to have been a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr, Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Was Herbert Fuchs known by you to have been a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. The same answer. 



3362 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. During your employment at the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board, did you participate in the preparation of any opinions 
of the Board? 

Mr. Krug. I think the answer to that question is that I did the rou- 
tine work that the attorneys in the Review Section performed. That is, 
a case was assigned after the transcript arrived in Washington, the 
transcript of hearings held in the field. I was assigned the case ; I went 
over the transcript, I consulted with the supervisor. Ultimately, we 
reported orally to the Board. That is, the review attorney and the 
supervisor. The Board reached the decision, instructed the attorneys 
on what the decision should be. I thereupon wrote a draft of the deci- 
sion, and conferred again with my supervisor, who sometimes altered 
it, or almost always altered it, but sometimes altered it very exten- 
sively, and the opinion was then sent up to the Board for its considera- 
tion and signature. 

Mr. Arens. During your employment as an attorney in the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board, did you at any time receive instruc- 
tions or orders from any person likewise employed by the Board, 
who was known by you to be a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. I am sorry, I didn't get that whole question. 

Mr. Arens. During your employment in the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board as an attorney, did you at any time receive instruc- 
tions or orders from any person likewise employed by the Board 
who was known by you to be a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Did you while with the National Labor Relations Board 
acquire information respecting the transmission of any information 
by any employee to a person not authorized by law to receive the same? 

Mr. Krug. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Did you, while employed there, have information 
respecting a concerted action by persons within the National Labor 
Relations Board pursuant to the discipline and order of the Commu- 
nist Party? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you, in the course of your employment in the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board, know a person by the name of Allan 
R. Rosenberg? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. "V^Hiy? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Krug. On the ground that has been stated already. 

Mr. Arens. Do you feel that if you told this committee a truthful 
answer as to whether or not you knew Allan Rosenberg while you were 
employed at the National Labor Relations Board, you would be sup- 
plying information that could be used against you in a criminal 
proceeding ? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Martin Kurasch ? 

Mr. Krug. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have the same apprehension with regard to him ? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Joseph B. 
Robison ? 

Mr. Krug. Same answer. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3363 

Mr, Arens. And do you have the same apprehension ? 

Mr. Krug. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Lester Asher? 

Mr. Krug. Same answer. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have the same apprehension with reference to 
him? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of David Rein ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have the same apprehension with respect to 
David Rein? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Woodrow 
Sandler? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have the same apprehension with respect to 
him? 

Mr. Krug. Of course not. I said I did know him. 

Mr. Arens. You do know him. I beg your pardon. What was 
the nature of your acquaintanceship with Woodrow Sandler. 

Mr. Krug. I knew him as an attorney at the Board. I sometimes 
had lunch with him casually. I knew him socially. Let's put it that 
way. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not Woodrow Sandler was 
ever a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr, Krug, I do not. 

Mr, Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Mortimer 
Riemer ? 

Mr. Krug. I may have met him at the Board. I can't be positive. 
I probably did meet him and did know him by sight or sometliing. I 
have a very vague recollection about it. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not Mortimer Riemer was a 
member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know or do you know a person by the name of 
John W.Porter? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Wliat was the nature of your acquaintanceship with 
him? 

Mr. Krug. I believe I met him through his wife. 

Mr. Arens. Is his wife Margaret B. Porter ? 

Mr. Krug. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. And you also knew Margaret B. Porter ? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not John W. Porter or Mar- 
garet B. Porter, or either of them, was a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr, Krug, Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. You have already given us your testimony with respect 
to Ruth Weyand. 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Allen Heald ? 

Mr. KJiuG. I will respectfully decline to answer. 



3364 COMMTINIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Do you apprehend that if you would give us a truth- 
ful answer to that principal question I have just posed you would be 
supplying information which could be used against you in a criminal 
proceeding ? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Harry Cooper ? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Wliat was the nature of your acquaintanceship with 
him? 

Mr. Krug. Socially. I was friendly with him. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not Harry Cooper was a 
member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Wlien you say "No," you mean you do not know ? 

Mr. Krug. I do not know. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Edward 
Scheunemann ? 

Mr. Krug. I would have to guess as to that. If I did know him, I 
don't remember his face. It is possible that I did. 

Mr. Arens. Do you know whether or not he was a member of the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Krug. No ; I do not. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know a person by the name of Bertram Dia- 
mond ? 

Mr. Krug. I will respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. Do you apprehend if you gave us a truthful answer to 
that principal question, you would be supplying information which 
could be used against you in a criminal proceeding? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. And you have already given us your answer with re- 
spect to the query on Herbert Fuchs ? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. Namely that you invoke the fifth amendment? 

Mr. Krug. The same answer. 

Mr. Arens. And you apprehend that in responding you would be- 
supplying information that could be used against you in a criminal 
proceeding ? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Willis. But you did state you knew Fuchs. 

Mr. Krug. I stated he was one of my supervisors. 

Mr. Arens. We better clear the record here. Do you know whether- 
or not Herbert Fuchs was a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that. 

Mr. Arens. And you have the same apprehension we have been talk- 
ing about with respect to Mr. Fuchs ? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr, Arens To your knowledge, did there exist in the National- 
Labor Relations Board more than one Communist cell or group? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Was all of your employment in the National Labor 
Relations Board confined exclusively in the Washington area^ 

Mr. Krug. Right in Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have occasion to be out on field trips repre- 
senting the board at any time ? 

Mr. Krug. No, never. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3365 

Mr. Arens. Did your disassociation from the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board come about as a result of the advice, counsel or direction 
of any person known by you to be a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Was your position in the Resettlement Administration 
procured for you by any person known by you to be a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arexs. At the Rural Electrification Administration? 

Mr. Krtjg. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know of any Communist cell in the RE A? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Or in the Puerto Rico Reconstruction Administration? 

Mr. ICrug. No. 

Mr. Arens. With respect to your association with the Board of 
Immigration Appeals, was your employment there caused directly 
or indirectly by any person known by you to be a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. While you were in the Board of Immigration Appeals, 
did you know any one there, or in the Immigration and Naturaliza- 
tion Service, who was a Communist? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your work in the Board of Im- 
migration Appeals, were you under Communist Party discipline ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the Communist Party while you 
were in the Board of Immigration Appeals ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. During your employment with the Board of Immigra- 
tion Appeals, did you have occasion to write the opinions of the BIA ? 

Mr. Krug. The arrangement there was somewhat similar to the ar- 
rangement at the National Labor Relations Board. That is, cases were' 
assigned to us. Sometimes on a reading of the case — we knew what 
the law was and what the Board policy was, and the result was pretty 
obvious, and the attorney, therefore, drafted a decision for the Board 
without express orders. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have any cases relating to Communists as- 
signed to you bearing on the 1917 Immigration and Naturalization 
Act? 

Mr. Krug. I can think of one. All I can think of is one. 

Mr. Arens. Wliat was the style of that case, do vou recall ? 

Mr. Krug. I can't remember the name. I can tell you a little bit 
about it. 

Mr. Arens. I do not want to know too much about it. I just want 
to know whether you handled it. 

Mr. Krug. I can tell you. This had to do with a young man who 
was charjred with having been a member of the Young Communist 
League, I believe. He was ordered deported. He was deported, so far 
as I know. 

Mr. Arens. Did you at any time during your empldyment at the 
Board of Immigration Appeals counsel with any person respecting 



3366 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

your work in the Board, who was known by you to be a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. I asked you the question about Communist Party dis- 
cipline. Did you during the course of your employment in the Board 
of Immigration Appeals have access to what is known as classified 
confidential, security, or restricted information ? 

Mr. Krug. I really can't answer that question. I can't think of any 
offhand. I don't want to 

Mr. Arens. The security files of the Immigration and Naturaliza- 
tion Service are restricted information, are they not ? 

Mr. Krug. The security files ? I can't recall handling a file that said 
"security file." 

Mr. Arens. Did you transmit to any person during your employ- 
ment in the Board of Immigration Appeals, information which you 
acquired in the course of that employment to a j^erson not authorized 
by law to receive the same ? 

Mr. Krug. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Do you have any information respecting activities 
within the immigration field of the American Committee for Protec- 
tion of Foreign Born ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel. ) 

Mr. Krug. After talking to my counsel, I wish to answer that ques- 
tion, but my memory plays tricks with me. Could I have the question 
read again ? 

(The reporter read from his notes as requested.) 

Mr. Krug. I knew something about the activities of that committee 
some years ago. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have anything to do with the committee ? 

Mr. Krug. That is a very broad question, sir. 

Mr. Arens. We will straighten it out. Tell us what you had to do 
with that committee. What did you do in connection with the com- 
mittee ? 

Mr. Krug. I was on the mailing list of the committee, and that is 
all I know about it. To my best recollection, that is my only contact. 

Mr. Arens. Did you have any contact with Abner Green, the execu- 
tive secretary of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign 
Born? 

Mr. Krug. When I was in New York, going around and talking to 
people, and seeing whether perhaps I could find some legal work 

Mr. Arens. When ? 

Mr. Krug. In 1948, early 1948, 1 met him. 

Mr. Arens. Excuse me, sir. Was that after you left the Board? 
You left the Board in 1948. 

Mr. Krug. Yes, it was just afterwards. 

Mr. Arens. Just after you had left the Government you had con- 
versations with Abner Green, is that correct ? 

Mr. Krug. That is correct. 

Mr. Arens. Tell us what caused that conversation to come about. 

Mr. Krug. That committee — my understanding was that that com- 
mittee sometimes had legal work having to do with immigration cases. 
Since my work had been with the Board of Immigration Appeals, I 
anticipated that perhaps I might find out something about some immi- 
gration cases. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 66b7 

Mr. Arens. You had been with the Board of Immigration Appeals 
for several years, had you not ? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. And you were conversant with the fact that the Ameri- 
can Committee for Protection of Foreign Born has been repeatedly 
cited by agencies of your Government as a Communist dominated and 
controlled agency ? 

Mr. Krug. I don't believe, even taking that question at its broadest, 
Mr. Arens, I don't believe at this time, in 1948, 1 was conversant with 
that fact. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Abner Green ? 

Mr. Willis. Pardon me. He stated as a preface to his conversa- 
tions with Abner Green that what led him to that gentleman was the 
fact that he knew that the Committee for Protection of Forei^ Born 
had legal work having to do with immigration cases. I wish you 
would develop that. How did he know ? 

Mr. Arens. Wliere did you acquire your information respecting the 
existence and activities of the American Committee for Protection 
of Foreign Born ? 

Mr. Krug. I don't remember that. 

Mr. Arens. How did you happen to meet Abner Green ? 

Mr. Krug. I think I was — there was a woman lawyer whom I had 
met, named Carol King. 

Mr. Arens. She was a Communist, was she not ? 

Mr. Krug. Not to my knowledge, -sir, not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Continue about Carol King. Was she previously asso- 
ciated with the American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born ? 

Mr. Krug. I suppose so, yes. 

Mr. Arens. She had a reputation of representing Communists in 
deportation proceedings, had she not ? 

Mr. EIrug. I believe at that time I had heard she did represent some. 

Mr. Arens. You knew she did, did you not? You knew, until she 
died a year or so ago, that she was the principal Communist lawyer in 
New York City, did you not ? 

Mr. Krug. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. You met Carol King. How did you meet Carol King? 

Mr. Krug. I am trying to remember. She had argued immigration 
cases down at the Board sometimes. 

Mr. Arens. Do you remember what cases she represented before the 
Board of Immigration Appeals ? 

Mr. Krug. I was just thinking about that, Mr. Arens. My impres- 
sion was that generally the cases that she argued down there were ordi- 
nary garden variety of immigration cases. 

Mr. Arens. Did you not acquire knowledge during the course of 
your service as an attorney at the Board of Immigration Appeals that 
Carol King was a Communist and represented the American Commit- 
tee for Protection of Foreign Born in numerous cases in which Com- 
munists were up for deportation or denaturalization ? 

Mr. Krug. I never acquired the knowledge from anyone that Carol 
King was a Communist. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know that Abner Green is and has been for 
many years, a hard, hard-core Communist? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir, I never knew that. 

70811— 56— pt. 4 9 



3368 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. Do you know it now ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 

Mr. Arens. What was the result of your conversation with Abner 
Green ? 

Mr. Krug. He put me on the mailing list. That is the only result. 

Mr. Arens. Did he ever give you any cases ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir, I can't recall any, no. 

Mr. Arens. Were you ever in a (communist Party cell or engage in 
Communist activity with Abner Green ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Have you kept in contact with Abner Green in the last 
few years ? 

Mr. Kjrug. No. 

Mr. Arens. Did you know Louise Pettibone Smith, of the American 
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born ? 

Mr. Krug. I never heard of her. 

Mr. Arens. When was the last time you had contact with Abner 
Green of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born? 

Mr. Krug. I don't know how long he was associated with that com- 
mittee. 

Mr. Arens. When was the last time you had any contact with him 
as a person ? 

Mr. Krug. I saw him a few weeks ago or a few months ago here in 
Washington. 

Mr. Arens. What occasions that observation ? 

Mr. Krug. The observation ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes. Did you see him walking down the street or how 
did you happen to see him ? 

Mr. Krug. No, I saw him in a lawyer's office. 

Mr. Arens. Whose office was that ? ^ 

Mr. Krug. The office of Forer & Kein. 

Mr. Arens. Did you say that was a few months ago ? 

Mr. Krug. Yes. 

Mr. Arens. What was the occasion for you being there ? 

Mr. Krug. I got some legal material from Mr. Rein. 

Mr. Arens. For what purpose ? 

Mr. Krug. For the purpose of my work, the work I was doing. 

Mr. Arens. Did you and Abner Green have conversations at that 
time ? 

Mr. Krug. I talked to him a little bit, yes. 

Mr. Arens. Did you learn from Abner Green that he recently re- 
ported to his board of directors that he and Louise Pettibone Smith 
had just concluded setting up in 15 key States of this Nation fronts- 
in-front-of-that-front, namely the American Connnittee for Pro- 
tection of Foreign Born, 100 organizations dedicated to the purpose of 
destruction of the McCarran- Walter Immigration and Nationality 
Act? 

Mr. Krug. My answer to that is this: My only contacts with Mr. 
Green I have repeated to you, I have told you about them. Mr. Green 
never told me anything about his activities, official or personal, or 
otherwise. I have no knowledge about them, except what I may have 
seen somewhere or heard somewhere, or rumors or something of that 
kind. I have no knowledge of them. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3369 

Mr. Arens. Wliat did you and Green talk about when you met him 
in Forer's law office here some few months ago ? 

( The witness conferred with his counsel. ) 

Mr. Krug. The only answer that I could make is that social things. 

Mr. Arens. Did you discuss any of the activities of the American 
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born ? 

Mr. Krug. It was not even mentioned ; no. So far as I know, that 
committee doesn't exist any more. 

Mr. Arens. The American Committee for Protection of Foreign 
Born does not exist any more ? 

Mr, Krug. I say to my knowledge. I haven't heard about it in a 
long, long time. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your military service, from 1942 
to 1945, were you a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

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

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the Communist Party in 1942, 
when you were with the Board of Immigration Appeals ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the Communist Party as of the 
time you joined the United States military service ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. When did you join our military forces ? 

Mr. Krug. In October 1942. 

Mr. Arens. When did you actually leave the Board of Immigra- 
tion Appeals to join the military ? 

Mr. Krug. I think I had a 2-week furlough, they called it. 

Mr. Arens. In that period, as of the instant you left the Board of 
Immigration Appeals, were you a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that. 

Mr. Doyle. May I ask, do you mean just for the short period of 2 
weeks ? 

Mr. Arens. Yes, sir. We are tracing the date here now. He has 
invoked the fifth amendment for any date prior to October 1942. 

That is correct, is it not, Mr. Witness ? 

Mr. Willis. I do not think you asked him before 1942. 

Mr. Arens. May I try it now, please, sir ? 

During the month of October 1942 were you a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No. 

Mr. Arens. During the month of September 1942 were you a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. And you left the Board of Immigration Appeals at 
the end of September, did you not ? 

Mr. Krug. The latter part of September. 

Mr. Doyle. How about October 1942 ? 

Mr. Arens. He invoked the fifth amendment on that, sir. 

Mr. Willis. I think he did. 

Mr. Arens. I will try it again. During the month of October 1942, 
were you a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 



3370 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Arens. The date is September and right on back; is that 
correct ? 
■ Mr. Krug. I think I understand you. 

Mr. Arens. Yes. During the course of your service in the military 
were you under Communist Party discipline ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Have you at any time since October 1942, been a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. I will respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. When you rejoined the Board of Immigration Appeals 
in 1945, were you a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of the time you were in our military 
service, from 1942 to 1945, were you in the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Is it safe for us to conclude that you were resigned from 
the Communist Party during the period of time that you were in 
our military service and rejoined the Communist Party in 1945? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Arens. Do you feel that if you gave a truthful answer to that 
question you would be supplying information which could be used 
against you in a criminal proceeding ? 

Mr. Krug. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. During the course of your service in our military, were 
you under Communist Party discipline ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. I believe you asked me. The answer is "No." 

Mr. Arens. Prior to the time that you joined our military service 
did you counsel or advise with any person in the Commmiist Party 
respecting a course of action which you should take ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. Do you feel that if you told this committee truthfully 
whether or not you counseled with any person who was in the Com- 
munist Party just prior to the time you went into the military, re- 
specting a course of action you should take, you would be supplying 
information which could be used against you in a criminal proceeding? 

Mr. Krug. That is right. 

Mr. Arens. During the period of your service in the military, did 
you have contact with any person kiiown by you to be a member of 
the Communist Party? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Were you under Communist Party instructions or 
orders in any respect while you were in the military ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Did you, after you concluded your service in the mili- 
tary, counsel with any person known by you to be a member of the 
Communist Party with respect to a course of action which you were 
to take? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Krug. I am sorry; could I have the question read, please? 

(The reporter read from his notes as requested.) 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Kearney. Then, is it a fair assumption that I, as an individual 
member of this committee, might take it that jou were on leave of 



coMMinsriST infiltration of government 3371 

absence from the Communist Party during the time you were in our 
military service ? 

Mr. Krug. Mr. Congressman, I really couldn't answer that question, 
whether or not it is a fair assumption. I really couldn't do that. I 
couldn't answer that question. 

Mr. IvEARNEY. Were you on leave of absence from the Communist 
Party while you were a member of the Armed Forces ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the Communist Party — I am 
going to pick up the chronology again — as of the time you reassumed 
your employment in the Board of Immigration Appeals in 1945 ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the Communist Party when you 
disassociated yourself or when there was a disassociation of yourself 
from the Board of Immigration Appeals in 1948 ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. What occasioned your disassociation from the Board 
of Immigration Appeals in 1948 ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Krug. I resigned from the Board to enter private practice. 

Mr. Arens. Was that resignation caused directly or indirectly by 
any apprehension on your part in connection with the loyalty pro- 
gram? 

Mr. Krug. I wouldn't say that in those words, Mr. Arens. 

Mr. Arens. Just say it as you would like to say it. 

Mr. Krug. I had been planning for some time to leave the Govern- 
ment to enter private practice as lawyers do, lawyers who have worked 
for the Government a few years. With regard to the loyalty program, 
the loyalty proceeding is, of course, a very distasteful thing. If there 
had been charges or interrogatories, something like that, it would 
have been extremely distasteful to me to go through that kind of a 
proceeding. There was not. 

Mr. Arens. I did not get that last statement. 

Mr. Krug. I say there was not. 

Mr. Arens. Did your disassociation from the Federal Government 
come about as a result of an apprehension on your part that you might 
be the subject of a loyalty proceeding ? 

Mr. Krug. The thought occurred to me, but, as I say, I had been 
thinking of leaving the Government for a long time, and I finally made 
up my mind. 

Mr. Arens. Was the disassociation of yourself from the Federal 
Government accelerated by an apprehension bearing on a possible 
loyalty iuA'^estigation ? 

Mr. Krug. I wouldn't say that. 

Mr. Arens. Were you the subject of a loyalty investigation ? 

Mr. Krug. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. Were you ever supplied with interrogatories ? 

Mr. Krug. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Arens. That is, bearing on your loyalty ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever fill out a loyalty form for the Federal 
Government bearing on the question of affiliation with the Communist 
Party? 



3372 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Krug. I can't recall that. If you have that here, I would like 
to see it. 

Mr. Arens. Unfortunately, we do not have it. 

Mr. Krug. I can't recall any such form. 

Mr. Arens. Did you ever take an oath to defend, protect and support 
the Constitution of the United States while you were an employee of 
the Federal Government ? 

Mr. Krug. I don't have a mental image of raising my hand and 
taking an oath, but I understand that that was my duty. 

Mr. Arens. Did you take an oath to defend and protect the Con- 
stitution of the United States as a prerequisite to your admission into 
the Armed Forces ? 

Mr. ICrug. Again, I can't recall that concretely, but I assume that 
I did. 

Mr. KEARNEY. Just a moment, Mr. Arens. 

That strikes me as highly improbable. Do you mean to tell 
this committee that when you entered the service of your country 
during World War II, that you did not raise your right hand and 
swear to defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, 
domestic and foreign ? 

Mr. ICrug. Mr. Congressman, let me explain. I have a memory 

Mr. Kearney. Just answer the question. 

Mr. Kjiug. I am saying that according to my recollection — I don't 
deny that I did that, I probably did do it. I am willing to concede 
that I did it. But all I was saying is that I don't have the mental image 
of repeating those words. I don't deny that I did. I will concede 
that I did. 

Mr. Kearney. Did you ever have the Articles of War read to you ? 

Mr. Krug. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kearney. You remember that all right ? 

Mr. Krug. I remember there was a reading of the Articles of War j 
yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. Let us have, please, the very last date of your em- 
ployment with the Federal Government. That was with the BIA, if 
I may refresh your recollection. 

Mr. Krug. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Arens. It was in the year 1948, and what month ? 

Mr. Krug. You named the month of April, and that seems to be 
correct. 

Mr. Arens. To make this record abundantly clear with the few 
remaining questions, may I ask you whether or not in April 1948, you 
were a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Krug. I respectfully decline to answer. 

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

Mr. I^UG. No. 

Mr. Arens. Were you a member of the Communist Party 1 year 
ago? 

Mr. Krug. I will have to respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. A year ago, would be February of 1955. Let us split 
the difference. Were you a member of the Communist Party in Au- 
gust of 1955? 

Mr. Krug. The same answer. 

Mr. Kearney. Were you a member of the Communist Party yester- 
day? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3373 

Mr. Kjiuq. The same answer, Mr. Congressman. 

Mr. Akens. That brings us up much closer than I anticipated. 
Do you truly apprehend that if you would tell this committee honestly 
whether or not you were a member of Communist Party yesterday, 
you would be supplying information which could be used against you 
m a criminal proceeding ? 

Mr. Kkug. Certainly. 

Mr. Abens. Are you now under Communist discipline ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 

Mr. Akens. Were you under Commmiist discipline yesterday ? 

Mr. Krug. The same answer I gave to the previous question. 

Mr. Arens. Have you, in the course of the last 24 hours, com- 
pletely, without revocation, disassociated yourself from the Commu- 
nist Party ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Ejrug. My answer to that question is as follows: I am not a 
member of the Communist Party. As to membership yesterday, I re- 
spectfully decline to answer. As to anything else which may be im- 
plied in your question, I also respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Arens. You do not realize it, Mr. Witness, but you have been 
exceedingly helpful to this committee in the course of your answers, 
for reasons which I think you as a lawyer and your counsel can prob- 
ably appreciate very keenly. Therefore, I should like to pose this 
question to you : If this committee should cause proceedings to be in- 
stituted, whereby you would be granted an immunity under the law, 
would you accept the tender of immunity and answer fully and com- 
pletely all questions which might be posed to you respecting informa- 
tion you may have with regard to the Communist Party? 

( The witness conferred with his counsel, ) 

Mr. Fanelli. I would like to consult here. This is a rather im- 
portant question and we got balled up once. 

Mr. Willis. We did not get balled up from my point of view. 

Mr. Fanelli. I did, sir. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel. ) 

Mr. Arens. Before you answer, may I ask if you would rather think 
about it a little while. 

Mr. Krug. No, I can answer now. My counsel advises me that he 
has serious doubts as to whether a grant of immunity would remove 
any possibilities of prosecution. I therefore 

Mr. Arens. Prosecution of whom ? 

Mr. Krug. Me. 

Mr. Fanelli. Certainly not me. 

Mr. Arens. I just want to be clear that he imderstands, and that the 
record reflects clearly what his apprehension is. 

Mr. Krug. I therefore must say that I would not answer, even if 
this committee offered immunity. 

Mr. Arens. May I inquire further on that point without pressing 
you, did your counsel advise you or did you apprehend there might be 
some question with respect to the constitutionality of the immunity 
statute ? Is this why you have that feeling ? 

Mr. IvRUG. All I can say is what I said. My counsel advised me and 
he didn't tell me why. He didn't go into that. I haven't made a study 
of this thing, I don't know whether he has or not. But he gave me 
advice, and I am following it. I didn't ask him any questions. 



3374 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Willis. You could be a great help to this committee, the Con- 
gress and the Government, if you could see your way clear to do that. 
Would you want to think about it some more and independently, or 
come to your own independent conclusion as a lawyer ? I really sin- 
cerely mean that you could be of great service to this country. 

Mr. Krucx. I understand, INIr. Congressman. 

Mr. Willis. I will say that 3- our answers have been forthright and 
you have been very helpful in ways that you probably do not realize. 

_Mr. Arens. You understand, of course,*^ that the mere fact that you 
might not decline to answer would not let you escape from the pains 
and penalties of the law. If immimity were granted to you and you 
declined to answer, you would then be subjected to criminal prosecu- 
tion for failure to answer. You understand that ? 

Mr. Krug. I think so. 

Mr. Arens. May I ask you this one question: Do you now know 
of any person employed in the Federal Government who was known 
to you at any time to have been a member of the Cormnunist Party? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 

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

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Willis, any questions? 

Mr. Willis. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Kearney ? 

Mr. Kearney. I would like to ask the witness a question I asked 
the previous witness. In view of your answers here today, and your 
attitude, and the view of my colleagues being that you have been 
very helpful, do you believe that anyone belonging to the Communist 
conspiracy should be employed in any capacity by the United States 
Government ? 

Mr. Krug. No, sir. 

Mr. Kearney. Thank you for that forthright answer. 

jMr. DoTLE. As you know, the CongTess under Public Law 601 has 
imposed upon this commitee the duty of investigating the extent and 
character of subversive propaganda and activities of the Communist 
Party or any other subversive outfit and to report back to the Congress 
in the field of remedial legislation. That is why we are here. 

You stated that you were not a member of the Communist Party 
yesterday, or, you claimed your privilege as of yesterday. As to today, 
you did not claim your privilege, but frankly stated you are not now 
a Communist. May I ask you this question, and I assure you I will 
not pursue it further along that line. 

We are interested in reporting to the Congress in the field of possible 
remedial legislation as to how the Communist Party operates with ref- 
erence to its members, and its program. We would like a frank answer 
as to what steps you took between yesterday and now to put yourself in 
the status, as far as the Communist Party is concerned, of claiming 
the privileges as of yesterday, but to honestly state under your oath 
that you are not today a Communist. In other words, what steps did 
you take to change your status ? Did you do it in writing, or did you 
do it by the telephone ? How does a person get out of the Communist 
Party? 

I am not going to ask you any other question. I am not trying to 
embarrass you or to put you in a jam or anything of that sort. But 
could you help us, as a congressional committee, to learn what st«ps 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 3375 

a person takes to ciiaiige his status from where he has to chiim the 
privilege out of fear of prosecution to where he does not fear that 
and can frankly say under his oath that he is not now a member of 
the Communist Party? Can you see what I am getting at? 

Mr. Fanelli. May we consult for a moment? I think I can get 
you an answ^er to that. 

JNIr. Doyle. My thought in asking is that you might help the Con- 
gress, if you will, be telling us what steps you took. I am pledging 
my colleagues to not ask any further questions. Is that fair? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Krug. Mr. Congressman, after consultation with my counsel, 
I have this to say : With respect to the question as to possible member- 
ship in the Communist Party yesterday, I wish to withdraw my claim 
of privilege and answer that question. The answer is "No." You 
understand, of course, that you can keep asking about the day before 
and so forth, and that a time is going to arrive 

Mr. Doyle. We can assure you 

Mr. Fanellt. On your assurance, he is answering the question. 

Mr. Krug. The answer is "No," I was not yesterday. 

Mr. Doyle. You are not answering my question which would help 
us as a congressional committee in tlie field of legislation by telling 
us the actual steps you took to disassociate yourself from the Com- 
munist Party. I am not trying to put you in the position where you 
are admitting at one time you were a member of the Communist 
Party. 

Mr. Krug. If I may interrupt, Mr. Congressman, it strikes me that 
an answer to that question would imply prior membership in the Com- 
munist Party. I am sure you understand that I am not implying any 
such thing. I am declining to answer any question on that subject. 

Mr, Doyle. I do not intend to imply that in my question. We are 
seeking information as to how the Communist Party operates with 
respect to its membership, how people get into it, and how they get out 
of it. That is the purpose of my question. 

Mr. Krug. I think you understand, Mr. Congressman, what my 
position is. 

Mr. Fanelli. That is the best we could do for you, sir. 

Mr. Kearney. I would like to suggest to the witness that either a 
subcommittee or the committee as a whole, would be willing to hear the 
witness at any time that he so desires. If there is a change in attitude 
in the future, all he has to do is contact the chairman of the committee 
or the counsel. 

Mr. Krug. Mr. Congressman, all I can say is that I have consulted 
counsel and have gone over this business very thoroughly with him. 
I have great admiration and respect for him. As I say, anything is 
conceivable. But I am pretty well convinced that what I have done is 
the proper thing for me to do. 

Mr. Doyle. May I say to you that we want you to rely on counsel. 
We know also that you are a lawyer. All of the members on this 
subcommittee are lawyers, of considerable practice before we first 
came here. So we think we understand your language. We are par- 
ticularly aware that members of the bar who are in any way connected 
with the Communist Party, whether or not they are members, and who 
may have any information about it, can be very helpful to the Congress, 



3376 COMMUNIST ENTILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

especially in the field of legislation. We hope the time will come 
when you can say it is your privileged duty to serve your Nation in 
the same way as now you feel it is your duty to plead your constitu- 
tional privilege. 

The witness is excused. Thank you, counsel. 

Mr. Fanelli. Thank you very much, sir. 

Mr. DoTLE. The cormnittee stands adjourned until February 28, 
at 10 a. m. 

(Present at the taking of the recess were Mr. Doyle, Mr. Kearney, _. 
and Mr. Willis.) ■ 

(Whereupon, at 12 : 28 p. m., Friday, February 24, the hearing re- 
cessed, to reconvene at 10 a. m., Tuesday, February 28, 1956.) 



I 



i 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 9999 05706 3206