(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 IN 

nnVFRNMFIMT — DADT a 

Since these hearings are consecutively 
paged they are arranged by page number 
instead of alphabetically by title. 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON UN-AMEEICAN ACTIVITIES 
HOUSE OE REPRESENTATIVES 

EIGHTY-FOURTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 



JUNE 20 AND 28, 1956 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Un-American Activities 
(INCLUDING INDEX) 




UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICIO 
70811 WASHINGTON : 1950 

HAriVAK'j COLLEGE LIBRARt 

DEPOSITED BY THE 
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENl' 



INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST INFILTRATION IN 
GOVERNMENT— PART 6 



HEARINGS 



BEFORE THE 



COMMITTEE ON UN-AMEEICAN ACTIVITIES 
HOUSE OF EEPRESENTATIYES 

EIGHTY-FOURTH CONGRESS 



SECOND SESSION 



JUNE 20 AND 28, 1956 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Un-American Activities 
(INCLUDING INDEX) 




UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
70811 WASHINGTON : 1950 

HAKVAkU UOLLEGE LIBRARY! 

DEPOSITED BY THE 
iiNiirn <;tatf<; nnvFRwiuiFNX 



COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 

United States House of Representatives 
FRANCIS E. WALTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman 
MORGAN M. MOULDER, Missouri HAROLD H. VELDE, Illinois 

CLYDE DOYLE, California BERNARD W. KEARNEY, New York 

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

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

Richard Arens, Director 
u 



V 



CONTENTS 



June 20, 1956 : Page 

Testimony of Ellis George Olim 5151 

June 28, 1956 : 

Testimony of Frank Donner 5161 

Index 

in 



Public Law 601, 79th Congress 

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

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

PART 2— RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Rule X 

SEC. 121, STANDING COMMITTEES 

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

Rule XI 

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 

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

(A) Un-American Activities. 

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

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

V 



RULES ADOPTED BY THE 84TH CONGRESS 

House Resolution 5, January 5, 1955 

******* 

Rule X 

STANDING COMMITTEES 

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

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

******* 

Rule XI 

POWEBS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 
******* 

17. Committee on Un-American Activities. 

(a) Un-American Activities. 

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

The 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 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. 

VI 



INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF 
GOVERNMENT— PART 6 



WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20, 1956 

United States House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Washington^ D. G. 

PUBLIC HEARING 

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

Committee members present: Representatives Francis E. Walter, 
of Pennsylvania ; Edwin E. Willis, of Louisiana ; Bernard W. Kear- 
ney, of New York ; and Gordon H. Scherer, of Ohio. 

Staff members present : Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., counsel, and Court- 
ney E. Owens, investigator. 

(Committee members present at the time of convening : Representa- 
tives Walter, Kearney, and Scherer.) 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

Call your first witness, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Ellis Olim, will you come forward, please? 

The Chairman. Has the witness been sworn ? 

Mr. Rabinowitz. I think he has, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. He was sworn in Chicago, but I believe it is neces- 
sary to swear him again. 

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

Mr. Olim. I do. 

Mr. Tavenner. This is another subcommittee. Would you mind an- 
nouncing for the record the constitution of the subcommittee ? 

(Representative Edwin E. Willis returned to the hearing room at 
this point.) 

The Chairman. The Chair announces that a subcommittee consist- 
ing of Messrs. Kearney, Scherer, Willis, and myself has been desig- 
nated to hear this witness. 

TESTIMONY OF ELLIS GEORGE OLIM, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
VICTOR RABINOWITZ 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you Mr. Ellis Olim ? 
Mr. Olim. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will counsel accompanying the witness please iden- 
tify himself for the record ? 

5151 



\ 



5152 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Rabinowitz. Victor Rabinowitz, of New York. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Olim, you appeared as a witness before a sub- 
committee of this committee in December of 1955 in Chicago ; did you 
not? 

Mr. Olim. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. At that time, Mr. Olim, the committee had inter- 
rogated you regarding various matters. Among them were these: 
Whether or not you had known a person by the name of James E. 
Gorman who has since testified before this committee. You were 
questioned regarding the testimony given this committee by Herbert 
Fuchs. You were questioned regarding membership in a Communist 
Party cell organized within the staff of the Wheeler subcommittee of 
the Senate. You were questioned regarding your Form 67 for Gov- 
ernment employment, wherein there was a provision relating to mem- 
bership in the Communist Party, which you answered on the form 
in tlie negative. 

Those were the principal matters about which you were interrogated. 
During the course of that interrogation a member of the subcommittee, 
Mr. Gordon H. Scherer, suggested to you inasmuch as you were rely- 
ing upon the fifth amendment in refusing to answer questions that 
this committee would take legal steps necessary to grant you immunity 
if you would testify. And I am going to read into the record at this 
point what was said in regard to that. 

Mr. ScHEREB. Mr. Olim, np to this point in your testimony you have refused 
to answer all significant questions asked you by Mr. Tavenner, on the ground 
that to answer those questions misht tend to incriminate you. 

I believe that you have properly invoked the fifth amendment in refusing to 
answer those questions. However, the committee feels that you do possess some 
valuable information which would be helpful to the committee, to the Govern- 
ment, and to your country, if you would answer those questions. 

The law provides that this committee, with the approval of the Federal court, 
can grant you immunity; that is, say to you that if you answer those questions 
you cannot suffer the incrimination or prosecution you now feel might result 
from answering those questions. 

Now, I, for one, am inclined to agree that we should invoke that provision 
of the law which gives us the right to grant immunity, and if such immunity is 
granted to you, would you then answer the questions asked in order that we might 
have the benefit of the information you possess? 

Mr. Ot.im. Mr. Scherer, may I consult with counsel for a minute? 

Mr. ScHEREK. Certainly. 

(Witness confers with counsel.) 

Mr. Olim. Mr. Scherer, and Mr. Chairman, I don't have any present thoughts 
on that matter. I will make up my mind on that question if and when the 
immunity is offered or granted. 

Mr. Scherer. You understand that we are not asking you at this point to 
answer the questions, but we merely want to know, without going through all 
of the procedure that is required to obtain that immunity, whether or not, if 
that immunity is offered to you by this committee, you will then answer the 
questions. 

You say your only reason, and that is the only reason that you have stated 
for not answering the questions, is because you feel that answering them might 
result in some criminal prosecution. Now if you are relieved of any possible 
criminal prosecution by the action of the committee — we will not ask you to 
answer those questions today — we merely want to know would you then answer 
those questions? Otherwise we will be compelled to go through unnecessary 
motions in getting to that point where we are able to offer you that immunity. 
If you tell us that you will answer the questions if that immunity is granted, 
then we can go forward and obtain that immunity, so that at some later date you 
can answer the questions without fear of criminal prosecution. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5153 

That is the only thing I want to know. We do not want you to answer the 
questions today ; we merely want to know, if you are granted Immunity, whether 
you will answer the questions. 

(Witness confers with counsel.) 

Mr. Oi.iM. Mr. Scherer, I have never discussed that with counsel, the question 
of immunity, and since I am not an attorney and don't know very much about 
this subject — in fact, I know practically nothing about the subject — I would 
have to seek advice on that question before I could give any answer. 

Mr. Scherer. Assuming after you sought that advice, and your counsel tells 
you what I have said is the law, and assuming this committee does grant you 
immunity so you cannot possibly suffer incrimination or prosecution, which you 
now say prevents you from answering these questions, I merely want to know 
whether you will then answer the questions? 

(Witness and counsel confer.) 

Mr. Scherer. I take it the record will show, Mr. Reporter, that the witness 
is consulting with his counsel before finally replying. 

Mr. Tavennek. Mr. Chairman, may I make a suggestion? 

Mr. Willis. Certainly. 

Mr. Tavenner. The witness has said he wanted the opportunity to confer 
fully with counsel on this, and I would suggest that he be given a little time 
in which to do so. I think it is a very important matter. 

Mr. Scherer. I suggest we have a 10-minute recess. 

Mr. Fanelli. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Willis. We will recess for 10 minutes. 

(Whereupon, a 10-minute recess was taken, after which the following pro- 
ceedings were held:) 

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

Mr. Tavenner. I understand that during this period of recess the witness 
would be given an opportunity to confer additionally with counsel regarding the 
matter of immunity. 

]Mr. Olim. Mr. Counsel, and Mr. Chairman, the answer to the last question 
that was asked me is '"Yes." 

Mr. Fanelli. Yes ; he would testify, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Tavenner. I think in light of that, Mr. Chairman, I should not ask any 
further questions at this time. 

In the belief that you would testify if granted immunity, Mr. Olim, 
this committee took action to begin proceedings to give you the ad- 
vantage of the protection of the immunity statute. But just before 
we were prepared to present the matter to court, advice was received 
from your attorney that you would not testify if granted immunity. 

First let me ask, did you confer with any person known to be or to 
have been a member of the Communist Party regarding the question 
of your testifying before this committee at any time between Decem- 
ber 15, 1955, and the time you advised this committee that you would 
not testify which was I think January 23, 1956 ? 

Mr. Olim. No, sir ; I did not. 

Mr. Tavenner. You did not ? 

Mr. Olim. No, sir. 

(Committee members present : Representatives Walter, Willis, Kear- 
ney, and Scherer. ) 

Mr. Scherer. Do you know whether your counsel discussed it with 
anyone who was a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Olim. I have no knowledge of that. 

Mr. Scherer. Your counsel then was different from your counsel 
who is liere this morning. 

Mr. Olim. Yes. 

The Chairman. When did you change counsel ? 

Mr. Olim. I don't remember exactly. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

70811 — 56 — pt. 6 2 



5154 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Rabinowitz. May the witness refer to records to refresh his 
recollection on that last question ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Rabinowitz. This is correspondence with counsel. 

The Chairman. I understand he was represented by a man by the 
name of Joseph A. Fanelli ? 

Mr. Rabinowitz. That is right. 

Mr. Olim. March 15. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Olim, you did agree at the time of that hearing, 
at the time the hearing was recessed, to testify if granted immunity ; 
did you not ? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Olim. Mr. Tavenner, that wasn't my understanding of what I 
agreed to or what I said. The question was very complicated and 
had a number of provisos in it, and all I can say is that I answered 
"Yes" to the question as I understood it, after consulting with counsel. 

Mr. ScHERER. It was certainly clear what proposition was made. 
You just heard the testimony reread by Mr. Tavenner. I do not see 
how any person, particularly with your background and especially 
since you were represented by able counsel, could have possibly mis- 
understood the question before you at that time. I do not believe that 
that is the reason for your changing your mind, namely, that you did 
not understand the nature of the proposition that was submitted. 

Mr. Tavenner. Isn't it a fact that on the very day on which you 
appeared before the committee the newspapers carried prominently, 
that is, the newspapers in Chicago carried prominently, a headline 
that you had agreed to testify if granted immunity, and that you 
would be the first who had agreed to do so ? Do you not recall that ? 

Mr. Olim. I do. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you get in touch with the committee or anyone 
and advise them that you had any different understanding about it 
than that which everyone else seemed to have ? 

Mr. Olim. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you advise this committee ? 

Mr. Olim. I got in touch with my counsel. 

Mr. Tavenner. You got in touch with your counsel ? 

Mr. Olim. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. But when ? 

Mr. Olim. I don't think I recall the exact date now. 

Mr. Ta\tenner. Is it a fact that you did not get in touch with counsel 
about that until after you learned through the press that the committee 
was about ready to present the petition to court ? 

Mr. Olim. No, sir ; that is not a fact. 

Mr. Tavenner. How soon was it after you testified in Chicago that 
you got in touch with your attorney about that matter, or that you 
had a different understanding from what was in the press? 

Mr. Olim. May I look at my correspondence on it ? 

Mr. Tavenner. Surely. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you ready to answer ? 

Mr. Olim. Well, Mr. Tavenner, when I saw the newspaper publicity 
I was somewhat surprised by the publicity and by the way in which 
it was presented. My first reaction was that it was a not uncommon 
newspaper exaggeration and a twist in order to make a good story. I 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5155 

can't remember the exact day now but it was, I am quite sure, within a 
week thereafter that I got in touch with counsel and discussed the 
matter with him. 

You recall that was around the Cliristmas period. 

The Chairman. That is, you got in touch with Mr. Fanelli ? 

Mr. Olim. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. This might be beside the point, but how did it 
happen that you, a resident of Chicago, retained Mr. Fanelli to rep- 
resent you in this hearing ? 

Mr. Olim. Because the first subpena directed me to appear in Wash- 
ington, D. C, and I thought a Washington counsel would be preferable. 

I had some discussions with Mr. Fanelli about the question that 
went on for a week or two thereafter, and then when I heard — not 
through the press, but through my office which I understand had 
been in contact with you, Mr. Tavenner — that the committee was 
going to take action, I again got in touch with my counsel on the 
matter, as I recall it now. And then I heard, again I believe through 
my office, that the committee had taken some formal action and again 
I got in touch with counsel. And I think thereafter Mr. Fanelli got 
in touch with you. 

Mr. ScHERER. Apart from what he said, that the newspaper stories 
were exaggerated or twisted, I was the one who suggested to this 
man the possible granting of inununity. I read the newspaper stories 
carefully and every newspaper reporter in that room clearly under- 
stood what had taken place and correctly reported what the committee 
had said to this man and what this man had said to the committee. 

There certainly was no exaggeration or distortion in the newspaper 
accounts of what took place in the hearing room in Chicago. And 
it just gives weight to what I said a few minutes ago; that I do not 
believe this man's statement that he has changed his mind because 
he did not clearly understand the import of the proposition made to 
him at that time. That is beyond belief because the record as you 
read it this morning was perfectly clear to any individual to under- 
stand, particularly with the educational background and position 
this man has, and particularly since he was represented by counsel who 
was familiar with this phase of the law. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Willis. I might say that I was presiding at the time of this 
occurrence and I can fully concur in what the gentleman from Ohio 
says. The papers very acurately reported what happened, and there 
is only one conclusion, that this witness is welshing on an agreement 
to testify. What prompted him to do it, is another question. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Olim, you were present, weren't you, when your 
employer called me by long distance? 

Mr. Olim. No, sir ; 1 was not. 

Mr. Tavenner. Didn't you give your employer to understand that 
if granted immunity you would testify ? 

Mr. Olim. No, sir, I did not. 

Mr. Willis. I think at the time he was testifying in Chicago he 
was then employed by the city of Chicago in some capacity in the 
management of land or public housing or something. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Olim. I was employed by a public agency, not the city of 
Chicago. 



5156 COMMUNIST INPILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. ScHERER. It was an agency of the government, was it not? 

Mr, Olim. Of the government. 

Mr. Willis. An agency of the government of the city of Chicago. 

Mr. Olim. Yes. 

Mr. ScHERER. What was your title ? 

Mr. Olim. I was cliief of the General Services Division. 

Mr. ScHERER. Of what agency ? 

Mr. Olim. Of the Land Clearance Commission. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Olim, regardless of the notice given to me 
through your counsel that you would not testify even if granted im- 
munity, will you change your mind at this time to conform with what 
the committee understood was your agreement in December of 1955 
and testify if this committee still proceeds with its plans to grant 
you immunity ? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Olim. No, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. You will not. 

The Chairman. Will you keep your voice up a little bit, please ? 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to ask you a few more questions at this time 
because your interrogation was interrupted by the sequence of events 
which I have described. 

I believe, according to your testimony, you were employed at the 
Interstate Commerce Commission in Washington. 

Mr. Olim. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at the 
time you were employed there ? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds of the first and fifth amendments and all of the constitutional 
privileges. 

Mr. Willis. Will you raise your voice, please ? 

Mr. Olim. Should I repeat the answer? 

Mr. Willis. Yes. I did not hear you. 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer the question, Mr. Chair- 
man, on the grounds of the first and fifth amendments of the Con- 
stitution and all other constitutional privileges available to me. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your next employment after leaving the 
Interstate Commerce Commission ? 

Mr. Olim. The United States Housing Authority. 

Mr. Tavenner. When did you become employed there ? 

Mr. Olim. June 1938. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell us the circumstances under which you 
obtained employment at the United States Housing Authority? 

Mr. Olim. I just applied for a job and was accepted. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was anyone known to you to be a member of the 
Communist Party responsilile in any way for your being recommended 
for that position or chosen for that position? 

Mr. Olim. No. 

Mr. Ta\t2Nner. Were you aware of the existence of an organized 
group of the Communist Party within the employees in the United 
States Housing Authority while you were a member of it? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the same 
grounds as previously stated. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5157 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you aware of the existence of an organized 

§roup of the Communist Party among the employees in the United 
tates Housing Autliority while you were employed there. 

Mr. Glim. I respectfully decline to answer the question, Mr. Chair- 
man, on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your next employment by the United 
States Government? 

Mr. Olim. In 1950 or 19'51, or thereabouts — I am not exactly sure 
that I recall — I transferred to the Division of Slum Clearance and 
Urban Redevelopment in the Housing and Home Finance Agency. 

Mr. Willis. Will you raise your voice, please? 

Mr. Olim. I transferred to the Division of Slum Clearance and 
Urban Redevelopment in the Housing and Home Finance Agency. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was that in 1951 ? 

Mr. Olim. 1950 or 1951. I am not sure now exactly when it was. 

Mr. Ta\tenner. How long were you employed there ? 

Mr. Olim. I believe until January 1952. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where did you serve in that employment, that is, 
in what area? Was that in Washington or Chicago? 

Mr. Olim. In Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was that agency for which you were working an 
affiliate of the Public Housing Administration? 

Mr. Olim. You mean the most recent organization ? 

Mr. Tavenner. At the time, between 1951 and 1952 ? 

Mr. Olim. No, sir. The Public Housing Administration was a 
constituent agency of the Housing and Home Finance Agency, and 
I transferred to another constituent of the Housing and Home Finance 
Agency, namely, the Division of Slum Clearance and Urban Re- 
development. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, I understand. 

Were you aware of the existence of an organized group of the 
Communist Party within that agency ? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at any 
time during the years 1951 and 1952 ? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
same grounds. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Our study of the record of your employment indi- 
cates that you resigned from Government employment in January 
of 1952. Is that correct? 

Mr. Olim. That is correct. 

Mr. Tavenner. What were your reasons for resigning? 

(The witness confers wtih his counsel.) 

(Members of the committee present : Representatives Walter, Willis, 
Kearney, and Scherer. ) 

Mr. Olim. I was tired of Government employment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you have or undergo a loyalty investigation 
prioi- to your resignation ? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
same grounds, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Wliat does the record show ? 



5158 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Ta\^nner. It shows that there was a loyalty investigation. 

The Chairman. In other words, you resigned because you felt the 
hot breath of the investigators on your neck, did you not? Is that 
not it? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer the question, Mr. Chair- 
man, on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you have a hearing under the loyalty program ? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you receive a clearance under the loyalty inves- 
tigation program ? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer the question, Mr. Chair- 
man, on the same grounds as previously stated. 

Mr. Scherer. What does the record show ? 

Mr. Tavenner. That he was given a clearance. 

I would like to ask the witness if he was asked at any time, while 
employed between 1951 and 1952, in the course of any loyalty investi- 
gation, whether or not he had been a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer the question, Mr. Chair- 
man, on the same grounds. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you deny to Government officials that you had 
ever been a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were identified by James E. Gorham and 
Herbert Fuchs in their testimony before this committee that you were 
a member of a Communist Party cell organized within the staff of the 
Senate Wlieeler subcommittee at the time you were employed by the 
Interstate Commerce Commission. 

Was their identification of you as a member of that group true or 
false? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Willis. As a matter of fact, you were in the courtroom in Chi- 
cago last December and heard Herbert Fuchs' testimony concerning 
yourself personally, did you not? You were there when he testi- 
fied? That is the question I am asking you. Is that true? 
(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Olim. Yes, sir. 

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

Mr. Olim. No, I am not. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at the 
time you resigned from Government employment in January of 1952 ? 
(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer on the same grounds. 
Mr. Tavenner. Have you been a member of the Communist Party at 
any time while employed by the Land Clearance Commission in* the 
city of Chicago ? 

(The witness confers with his counsel. ) 
Mr. Olim. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. When did your employment with that commission 
beffin ? 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5159 

Mf.Olim. June 1952. 

Mr. Ta\t.nnp:r. Therefore, there was a time between January 1952 
and June 1952 when your position changed with respect to the Com- 
munist Party. Is that true ^ 

(The witness confers with his counseh) 

Mr. Olim. Mr. Counsel, I think there is only a change in my answers 
with respect to that period. 

JMr. Tavenner. But no factual change ? 

Mr. Olim. I refuse to answer that on the same grounds as before. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now, in June 1952, you have said that you were not 
a member of the Communist Party. You refused to answer whether 
you were a member of the Communist Party in January 1952. What 
happened between those two dates which causes you now to answer 
as you have ? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you, during that period, withdraw from the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. Mr. Tavenner, I think that we will have a recess for 
5 minutes. I think we ought to go into a conference. 

(Whereupon, a short recess was taken, there being present at the 
time of taking the recess Representatives Walter, Willis, Kearney, and 
Scherer. ) 

(The subcommittee was reconvened at the expiration of the recess, 
there being present Representatives Walter, Willis, Kearney, and 
Scherer. ) 

Mr. Tavenner. I have just one other question: Mr. Olim, have you 
been a member of the Communist Party at any time that I have not 
specifically inquired about ? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Olim. I respectfully decline to answer on the same grounds. 

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

The Chairman. Any questions ? 

Mr. Willis. No questions, 

Mr. Kearney. No questions. 

The Chairman. The committee is adjourned. 

Mr. Rabinowitz. I assume the witness is excused ? 

The Chairman. The witness is excused from further attendance 
under the subpena. 

(Whereupon, at 10 : 50 a. m., Wednesday, June 20, 1956, the subcom- 
mittee was recessed subject to the call of the chair, there being present 
Representatives Walter, Willis, Kearney, and Scherer.) 



INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF 
GOVERNMENT— PART 6 



THURSDAY, JUNE 38, 1956 

United States House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Washington^ I). G. 

PUBLIC hearing 

A subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities met, 
pursuant to call, at 2 : 50 p. m., in the caucus room. Old House Office 
Building, Hon. Morgan M. Moulder (chairman), presiding. 

Coinmittee members present : Representatives Morgan M. Moulder 
and Harold H.Velde. 

Staff members present : Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., counsel ; and Court- 
ney E. Owens, investigated'. 

Mr. Moulder. The committee will be in order. 

The record should show that this subcommittee has been duly 
appointed by the chairman of the full committee, comprising Con- 
gressman Harold H. Velcle, of Illinois ; Congressman Edwin E. Willis, 
of Louisiana ; and myself, Morgan M. Moulder, of Missouri, as chair- 
man, to conduct these hearings pursuant to the provisions of Public 
Law 601. 

The record will show that Mr. Velde and myself are present, con- 
stituting a quorum for that purpose. 

Call your witness, please, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Donner, will you come forward, please? 

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

Mr, Donneu. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF FRANK DONNER, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
VICTOR RABINOWITZ 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you Mr. Frank Donner ? 
Mr. Donner. That is correct, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will counsel accompanying the witness please iden- 
tify himself for the record ? 

Mr. Rabinowitz. Victor Rabinowitz, New York. 

Can we get the pictures taken before the questioning starts ? 

Mr. Donner. Am I su])posed to say something ? 

Mr. Tavenner. You have satisfied the requirements. 

5161 



5162 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

This is a continuation, Mr. Chairman, of the hearings which began 
in Chicago in December of 1955, regarding the existence of a number 
of Communist Party cells organized within government. This witness, 
Mr. Donner, was subpenaed on September 20, 1955, to appear before 
the committee on January 24, 1956. Shortly after he was subpenaed, 
it was called to my attention either by Mr. Donner or counsel repre- 
senting him that Mr. Donner was engaged in the trial of a case under 
the Smith Act in New Plaven, I believe. 

Mr. Donner. That is correct. 

Mr. Tavenner. In light of that, his appearance has been postponed 
from time to time until the present time. 

Will you tell the conunittee please, Mr. Donner, when and where 
you were bom? 

Mr. Donner. I was born in Brooklyn, N. Y., February 25, 1911. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your occupation ? 

Mr. Donner. I am a lawyer. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you been engaged in the practice of 
law, and where ? 

Mr. Donner. I have been engaged in the practice of law about 17 
or 18 years, Mr. Tavenner ; in Washington and in New York City. 

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

Mr. Donner. Yes. I have a bachelor and master's degree from the 
University of Wisconsin ; and, after I left there, I went to Columbia 
Law School. I stayed on there after I got out for 3 years and did 
legal research, and came to work for the Government in around 1940. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where did you accept your first position with the 
Government ? 

Mr. Donner. I believe it was in the Litigation Section of the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you stationed in Washington, D. C. ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes; I was. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliat was the date of that employment ? 

Mr. Donner. I think it was early in 1940. I have an impression it 
was March, but I am not sure. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, the circum- 
stances under which you became employed at the National Labor 
Relations Board ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes. My work at Columbia was drawing to a close 
and I came to Washington to look for a job. I interviewed various 
people at the Board, and there were no jobs in the Review Section — 
that is the section that is devoted to the initial administration of the 
act — and there was some promise of an opening in the Appellate Re- 
view Section. I followed that up and subsequently was employed in 
the Appellate Review Section. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were any of the persons you interviewed in the 
National Labor Relations Board acquainted with you prior to your 
appearance for the interview ? 

Mr. Donner. It would be almost impossible for me to answer 
whether they were acquainted with me. My impression is no, as far 
as I know. I went there cold. 

Mr. Tavenner. Through whom did you obtain your appointment? 

Mr. Donner. Well, as I recall it, Mr. Tavenner, it is a good many 
years ago, but I saw a man named Laurence A. Knapp, who was then 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5163 

Assistant General Counsel in charge of litigation, and I had an ex- 
tended interview with him and ultimately I think he hired me. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Nathan Witt employed by the National Labor 
Relations Board at that time ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Yes, I believe he was. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did he have anything to do with your appoint- 
ment? 

Mr. Donner. No. 

Mr. Taa^nner. That is, Avith the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. Donner. Not as far as I know. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he one of the officials who interviewed you? 

Mr. Donner. I just don't recall. He may have been. I just don't 
remember. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were any of the persons responsible for your ap- 
pointment known to you to be members of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Donner. No. » 

Mr. Tavenner. How long were you employed by the National Labor 
Relations Board ? 

Mr. Donner. Three or four years, 

Mr. Tavenner. From 1940 up until 

Mr. Donner. 1943 or 1944. Your records probably are more ac- 
curate than my memory. 

Mr. Tavenner. IVliat positions did you hold during that period? 

Mr. Donner. I was what they call a briefwriter and appellate 
attorney, and then for a period of time, I believe, as an appellate 
supervisor. At least that is the way I recall it. 

Mr. Taa^nner. With regard to your employment there, our in- 
formation is that your employment terminated January 20, 1945. 

Mr. Donner. As late as that? Well, I accept your date. I just 
have no record of it and have no way of verifying it. 

Mr. Tavenner. According to your best recollection, is that substan- 
tially correct ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes ; that sounds right. 

Mr. Tavenner. During the period of your employment did you 
becom.e acquainted with another employee of the National Labor Re- 
lations Board by the name of Herbert Fuchs ? 

Mr. Donner. I decline to answer that question on the following 
groimds: First, I would like to give these grounds at once and then 
refer to them collectively subsequently if possible. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is satisfactory. 

Mr. Donner. First, that the resolution under which the committee 
functions interferes with free speech and imposes censorship ; second, 
on the ground that the resolution is vague; third, that the inquiry 
here is outside the scope of the resolution. It is not propaganda or 
propaganda activities. Fourth, on the grounds that the ad hoc ques- 
tion which you are asking me is a violation of the first amendment; 
fifth, on the ground that in response to it, fifth, I invoke the privilege 
against self-incrimination under the fifth amendment, a privilege 
which the Supreme Court has recently said is for the protection of 
freedom in conscience as well as self-incrimination; sixth, on the 
ground that this is in effect a legislative trial without judicial safe- 
guards; and, finally, on the ground that this is a personal, private 
matter which is being interrogated about for a nonlegislative purpose. 



5164 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Moulder. As I understand, when you wish to decline to answer 
a question, you desire that you may do so by referring to the reasons 

which you liave given by claiming the privilege, stating that 

Mr. DoNNER. I think that will save the time of this subcommittee. 
Mr. Moulder. By reference you are invoking the same reasons. 
Mr. DoNNER. Very well. 

Mr. Tavenner. In the course of your employment with the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board, did you become acquainted with an 
employee there by the name of Mortimer Riemer, R-i-e-m-e-r? 
Mr. Donner. The same answer. 

Mr. Moulder. You decline to answer for the same reasons ? 
Mr. DoNNER. That is correct. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you, during the course of your employment, 
become acquanited with Harry Cooper, another employee of the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board? 
Mr. DoNNER. I decliiie for the same reasons. 

Mr. Ta\^nner. Mr. Donner, three of the individuals I mentioned 
have appeared as witnesses before this committee and have advised 
it of the existence of Communist Party groups organized among 
members of the staff of the National Labor Relations Board. Their 
testimony indicates that at least two separate cells or groups were 
established there. That is Communist Party groups. Perhaps there 
were more. 

I want to ask you at this time if during the period of your employ- 
ment you were aware of the existence of one or more organized groups 
of the Communist Party, composed of employees of the National 
Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. DoNNER. I decline to answer that for the same reasons previ- 
ously given. 
Mr. Velde. Let me say just a word here. 

Of course, we have never recognized any of the reasons given by 
you when you first made your statement for refusing to answer the 
questions except the privilege against self-incrimination, but I would 
like to know just how you think that your answer to that question, 
whether you knew of any activities of a Communist Party nature, 
incriminates you in any way. It should not even violate your con- 
science, Mr. Donner. 

Mr. Donner. Mr. Velde, under the Burr case and other cases it is 
established that whether or not I have appropriately claimed the 
privilege is a judicial function, not a legislative one. 
Mr. Velde. I was just expressing my opinion. 
Mr. Donner. I understand. 

Mr. Velde. In one of your answers you said that you felt that the 
committee was illegally organized and illegally set up, so that maybe 
we are criminals up here, Mr. Moulder. 

Mr. Moulder. I understand you said that the law authorizing the 
committee to function did not authorize us to go into the subject of 
the question asked. 
Mr. Donner. That is correct. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Donner, during the course of the testimony of 
these three individuals, Mr. Herbert Fuchs, Mr. Mortimer Riemer, 
and Mr. Harry Cooper, you were identified as a member of the organ- 
ized group of the Communist Party composed of staff members of the 



COMMUNIST mriLTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5165 

National Labor Relations Board. Were you correctly identified as a 
member of the Communist Party or not ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I decline to answer that for the reasons previously 

given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of any organized group of the 
Communist Party while you were employed by the National Labor 
Relations Board ^ 

Mr. DoNNER. I decline to answer that for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with David Rein, an employee 
of the National Labor Relations Board ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliat was the nature of Mr. Rein's employment, 
if you recall? 

Mr. DoNNER. I think he was a review attorney. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he known to you to be a member of the Com- 
munist Party ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I decline to answer that for similar reasons, for the 
same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were vou acquainted with Wood row Sandler, 
S-a-n-d-1-e-r? 

Mr. DoNNER. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Woodrow Sandler a member of the Commmiist 
Party ? 

Mr. Donner. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with J. H. Krug, Jacob H. 
Krug, K-r-u-g ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he known to you to be a member of the Com- 
munist Party ? 

Mr. DoNNER. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with John W. Porter ? 

Mr. Donner. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was John W. Porter employed by the National 
Labor Relations Board while you were employed there? 

Mr. DoNNER. I don't recall his name. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know whether or not John W. Porter had 
also been employed by the Department of Justice ? 

Mr. DoNNER. No ; I just don't know. He may have left the board 
before I came. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with his wife, Margaret Ben- 
nett Porter ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I just don't recall. I may have met her, but I am 
not sure. 

Mr. Ta^tsnner. I understand that she was referred to generally 
by her friends as Peggy Porter. 

Mr. DoNNER. Oh, yes. Yes, I knew her. 

Mr. Tavenner. You recall Peggy Porter ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know the nature of her employment with 
the National Labor Relations Board? 

Mr. DoNNER. No ; I don't. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was she known to you to be a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I decline to answer that for the same reasons. 



5166 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with Kuth Weyand, 
W-e-y-a-n-d ? 

Mr, DoNNER. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was she known to you to be a member of the Com- 
munist Party ? 

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

Mr. Velde. Mr. Donner, as I recall, you declined to answer when 
asked whether he knew Herbert Fuchs. Now you are answering the 
question as to certain other acquaintanceships. Can you tell me the 
reason for that? 

Mr. Donner. No ; I would make the same answer to that. Congress- 
man. 

Mr. Velde. "VVTiat do you mean by the same answer ? 

Mr. Donner. That is, I decline to answer for all the reasons I gave 
before. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you acquainted with Edward Scheunemann, 
S-c-h-e-u-n-e-m-a-n-n ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he employed by the National Labor Relations 
Board at the time you were acquainted with him ? 

Mr. Donner. I believe he was. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he known to you to be a member of the Com- 
munist Party ? 

Mr. Donner. I decline to answer that for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Donner, according to the testimony of Mr. 
Fiichs, the original cell of the Communist Party organized within the 
National Labor Relations Board staff was formed by Mr. Fuchs, Allan 
Rosenberg, Martin Kurasch, and Joseph Robison. 

First, let me ask you, were you acquainted with Allan Rosenberg ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Martin Kurasch ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes ; I knew all those people. 

Mr. Tavenner. And Joseph Robison ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did any one of those three individuals at any time 
solicit your membership in the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Donner. I decline to answer that for the reasons previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did Mr. Fuchs solicit your membership ? 

Mr. Donner. I decline to answer that for the reasons given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Allan Rosenberg a member of the Communist 
Party as far as you knew ? 

Mr. Donner. I decline to answer that for the reasons given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Martin Kurasch a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Donner. I decline for the same. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Joseph Robison a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Donner. The same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Although you have refused to testify regarding 
your own relationship to the Communist Party, if there was such a 
relationship, and you have refused to testify relating to Communist 
Party membership of other persons, yet I would like to ask this ques- 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5167 

tion : Do you know what purposes the Communist Party endeavored 
to accomplish by the organization of a group within the National 
Labor Relations Board staff ? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. Were you present at any meetings attended by other 
persons who were members of the Communist Party which discussed 
the procedure and the action that the National Labor Relations Board 
or its staff should take on matters in which the Communist Party was 
interested ? 

INIr. DoNNER. I was a briefing attorney, Mr. Tavenner, and, when 
I got a case, the decision to enforce it had already been made by 
someone else, and then it was up to the courts to review it, and that 
was the limits of my job. 

Mr. Tavenner. I am not speaking particularly about any special 
case that may have been referred to you. The committee has heard 
testimony that at such meetings Communist Party members discussed 
what action should be taken by the Board or what procedures should 
be followed from the Communist Party standpoint. 

Mr. DoNNER. Mr. Tavenner, all I want to do is make clear to you 
that I did my job in accordance with my instructions from my superior, 
that I never followed advice from anybody else ; that is, as far as my 
job was concerned. I realize that you are asking another question 
and, in response to that, I plead the same reasons that I plead initially. 

Mr. Moulder. Mr. Tavenner is asking you a question as to whether 
or not you ever attended any meetings or conferences where those 
present were Communist Party members discussing the policy to be 
adopted by the employees of the National Labor Relations Board. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Donner. I am sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt. I take it 
this is a Communist Party meeting you are talking about ? 

Mr. Tavenner. No ; I did not confine it to a Communist Party meet- 
ing. I said meetings attended by persons who were members of the 
Communist Party. 

Mr. DoNNER. I would decline to answer that on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee has received evidence indicating 
that the members of the Communist Party within the National Labor 
Relations Board staff were directed by the Communist Party not to 
engage in work in mass organizations, and that that directive caused 
considerable dispute and argument within the Communist Party group 
and that on one occasion Victor Perlo appeared before the Communist 
Party group composed of employees of the National Labor Relations 
Board on that matter. 

First, let me ask you were you acquainted with Victor Perlo ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Not while I worked for the Government. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know of any occasion when Victor Perlo 
appeared before groups of employees irrespective of their Communist 
Party membership ? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. DoNNER. I would decline to answer that for the reasons given. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was the period during which you knew Victor 
Perlo? 

Mr. Donner. That was after I went into practice in New York. 

Mr. Ta\^nner. In private practice ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes. 



5168 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Tavenner. During what year or years did you know him ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Oh, 1949, 1950, in there. 

Mr, Tavenner. How was Victor Perlo employed at the time you 
knew him ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I just don't know. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did Victor Perlo at any time discuss Communist 
Party objectives with you ? 

(The witness confers with his counseL) 

Mr. DoNNER. I would decline to answer that for the reasons pre- 
viously given. 

]\Ir. Tavenner. When you were employed by the Government you 
filed the usual Government form giving a personal-history statement 
with the United States Civil Service Commission, did you not? 

Mr. DoNNER. I just don't recall. If you have one 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand you a photostatic copy of such an application. 
The signature is on the back of it. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavenner. You will find your signature on the last page of the 
document. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Donner. Yes ; that is my signature. 

Mr. Tavenner. You will note that the questions are answered in 
handwriting instead of being typed, do you not ? 

]\Ir. Donner. Yes. 

]\Ir. Tavenner. Is that your handwriting ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I have it a moment, please? [Handed.] I 
desire to introduce the document in evidence, and ask that it be marked 
"Donner Exhibit No. 1" for identification purposes, in the records of 
the committee. 

Mr. Moulder. The document referred to by counsel will be marked 
"Donner Exhibit No. 1." 

(The document referred to was marked "Donner Exhibit No. 1" for 
identification and filed for the record. ) 

Mr. Tavenner. It bears date of June 2, 1943. I read question 26 : 

Are you a member of any Communist or German bund organization or any 
political party or organization which advocates the overthrow of our constitu- 
tional form of government in the United States, or do you have membership in, 
or any affiliation wath, any group, association, or organization which advocates 
or lends support to any organization or movement advocating, the overthrow of 
our constitutional form of government in the United States? 

Do you recall that question on your application ? 

Mr. Donner. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Following the question there appears the answer 
"No." Did you give that answer ? 

Mr. Donner. I decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Moulder. I might ask for the reasons previously stated ? 

Mr. Donner. Correct. I am sorry. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you employed on June 2, 1943, with the 
National Labor Relations Board, at the time you filed this personal- 
history statement ? 

Mr. Donner. I have no independent recollection of it, but. I assume 
from your records that I was. 

Mr. Tavenner. Our records indicate that your appointment was 
March 22, 1940. 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5169 

Mr. DoNNER. Well, my memory was all right on that. I did 
remember March 1940. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do yoii recall the circumotanooe under which yon 
were asked to prepare this personal-history statement? 
Mr. DoNNER. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is true, is it not, that the answer "No," appears 
as the answer to question 26. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 
Mr. Donner. Yes, the answer "No" appears. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was that answer "No," made by you on June 2, 
1943, truthful as of that date, or was it false? 

Mr. DoNNER. I decline to answer that question for the reasons 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party on 
the 2d day of June 1943? 

Mr. Donner. I decline for the reasons previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Donner, the committee on a number of occasions 
has found that persons seeking Federal Government employment were 
required to make similar applications to this, or similar statements, 
and that, although their Communist Party membership has been shown 
to exist, they nevertheless answered the question in the negative. 

In other words, when applying for Government employment or 
giving the Government a statement 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Tavt^nner. They have untruthfully stated that they had not 
been members of the Communist Party. Can you give the committee 
any reason for that ? 

Mr. Donner. As to why other people ? 

Mr. Tavenner. As to why it is such a common practice for persons 
who were members of the Communist Party to state to the Govern- 
ment, when seeking employment or when required to make a state- 
ment that they had never Jbeen members of the Communist Party. 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. Donner. The way you put it, the question forces me to rely on 
my previous answer. 

Mr. Moulder. Do you have any knowledge of such practice or policy 
referred to by Mr. Tavenner ? 

Mr. Donner. I have knowledge that there have been people who 
pleaded the privilege to questions like this. Is that what you mean, 
sir? 

Mr. Moulder. No. He was asking the question as to the practice 
of certain persons. 

Mr. Donner. Well, I would decline, Congressman, for the reasons 
previously given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know whether any instructions or direc- 
tions were given by the Communist Party to its members that em- 
ployees within Government should keep secret, even from the Govern- 
ment when applying for positions, the fact that they have been mem- 
bers of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Donner. The same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Moulder. When you say the same answer, you mean you decline 
for the reasons previously stated ? 

Mr. Donner. That is correct. 



5170 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. Tavenner. As indicated a moment ago, you left the National 
Labor Relations Board in 1945 ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. To return to private practice in New York City ? 

Mr. DoNNER. No. I first was employed by the CIO. 

Mr. Tavenner. When did your employment begin with the CIO? 

Mr. DoNNER. It must have been some time shortly thereafter. I 
don't remember exactly when. 

Mr. Tavenner. Within 30 days, do you think, after leaving Wash- 
ington ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I would say it wasn't much of a hiatus. I don't re- 
member being unemployed. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliat was the nature of your employment? 

Mr. Donner. I was a lawyer for the CIO. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your title ? 

Mr. Donner. I was assistant general counsel. 

Mr. Tavenner. Who was the general counsel ? 

Mr. Donner. Lee Pressman. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long did you serve in that capacity as assistant 
general counsel? 

Mr. Donner. Until around 1948, somewhere in there. 

Mr. TA^'ENNER. Did you then transfer to some other type of work ? 

Mr. Donner. I went to New York to private practice. 

Mr, Tavenner. Lee Pressman, I believe, served as general counsel 
until 1948 also? 

Mr. Donner. That is correct. I think I stayed on after he left 
for a brief period. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was your employment terminated at approximately 
the same time as Lee Pressman's ? 

Mr. Donner. No ; I think I stayed on anywhere from a half year to 
a year after he left. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did Lee Pressman's leaving the position of general 
counsel have anything to do with your leaving the position as assist- 
ant general counsel ? 

Mr. Donner. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Pressman appeared before this committee as a 
witness. He testified that, although he was not a member of the Com- 
munist Party at the time he appeared before the committee and al- 
though he stated he was not, organizationally speaking, a member 
of the Communist Party while general counsel of CIO, yet he told 
the committee that he had numerous conferences, while counsel for 
the CIO, with members of the Communist Party. He testified that 
he had discussed problems with the members of the Communist Party : 
"when they made recommendations or suggestions which I deemed to 
be of assistance or helpful to the CIO I accepted them." 

Will you tell the committee, please, whether or not you engaged in 
any of the conferences that Mr. Pressman had with members of the 
Communist Party while you were employed as assistant general 
counsel ? 

Mr. Donner. I decline for the reasons previously given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know whether or not Mr. Pressman was tell- 
ing this committee the truth when he said that he conferred with 
members of the Communist Party about problems of the CIO ? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 



COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5171 

Mr. DoNNER. I decline for the reasons previously given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell us, please, how you received your em- 
ployment with the CIO ? 

Mr. DoNNER. I got pretty bored with being a bureaucrat for 3 years 
or so and wanted to get out of Government, and I went over there and 
applied for a job. That is what happened. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you apply to -Lee Pressman? 

Mr. DoNNER. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. So Lee Pressman was responsible for your employ- 
as his assistant ? 

Mr. Donner. I think that is correct. I think that is correct. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party while 
you were assistant general counsel of the CIO ? 

Mr. Donner. I decline to answer that for the reasons previously 
given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliile employed as assistant general counsel of 
CIO, did the leadership in the CIO inquire of you at any time if 
you were a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Donner. May I point out, Mr. Tavenner, that you are now ask- 
ing me questions about a period beyond my Government employment, 
and I don't think they are pertinent to the matter under inquiry, and 
I would like to get a ruling from that if I may. 

Mr. Moulder. Your objection will have to be overruled, Mr. Don- 
ner, because the inquiry is not necessarily confined or restricted to a 
period of time in which you were employed by the Government. 

Mr. Donner. May the question be repeated, please ? 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you read it back ? 

(The pending question was read by the reporter.) 

Mr. Donner. I just don't recall. You know that was 8 years ago 
and they say that, when you are drowning you remember everything 
that happens in your life, it all passes before you in review ; but I am 
just not drowning. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether or not 
the question of your Communist affiliation played any part in your 
resignation ? 

Mr. Donner. That is such a broad question. I would decline to 
answer that on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is broad. To be more specific ■ 

Mr, Donner. Did anybody ask me to leave because of any political 
views ? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Donner. As far as I know, no. 

Mr. Tavenner. You used the words "political views." I do not 
accept membership in the Communist Party as being concomitant with 
membership in a political party. My question is, was Communist 
Party membership discussed with you at the time of your resignation ? 

Mr. Donner. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Or in connection with your resignation? 

Mr. Donner. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you held any Government positions since your 
resignation with the CIO ? 

Mr. Donner. I don't think so. No ; I don't think so. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, you should not be in doubt about that. 



5172 COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 

Mr. DoNNER. Well, I have a very bad memory, but I would say no. 
Of course, I realize Government employment is almost a traumatic ex- 
perience. You remember it all your life. But, as far as I recall, I 
don't have any. I am almost certain of that. 

Mr. Tavenner. That Avould be since 1948. Yon would certainly 
know whether you have been. 

Mr. DoNNER. I understand it is possible to work for the Government 
and not know it, but I am pretty sure that I didn't work for tlie Gov- 
ernment. 

Mr. Tavenner. In the sense that we all pay taxes, that certainly is 
true. 

Are you now a member of the Communist Party ? 

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

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

Mr. Moulder. Do you have any questions, Mr. Velde ? 

Mr. Velde. I have one. I am not getting any information here 
whatsoever. We do have a quorum call on the House floor. 

Is it not a fact, Mr. Donner, that the reason you refuse to acknowl- 
edge your acquaintanceship with Herbert Fuchs is that he came be- 
fore this committee and gave us some valuable information about his 
Communist activities and that you do not like any one who cooperates 
with this committee or does a good job for his country ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Well, I wouldn't say that. 

Mr. Velde. What is your reason for not answering ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Well, I gave my reasons. 

Mr. Velde. As to your acquaintanceship with Herbert Fuchs ? You 
declined to answer, as I recall it. 

Mr. DoNNER. Yes ; those are reasons. 

Mr. Velde. I fail to see your point. 

Have you been engaged in activity of any illegal nature against 
the Government of the United States ? 

Mr. DoNNER. Would you be more specific? Really, I would like 
to help you. 

Mr. Velde. I think you realize, of course, that the Communist 
Party of the United States has been called by the Comintern the Inter- 
national Communist conspiracy. I am wondering if you did any- 
thing that would aid the Communist Party of the United States or 
the Communist conspiracy in any way which would be of an illegal 
nature ? 

(The witness confers with his counsel.) 

Mr. DoNNER. Well, I don't know about this being controlled and 
so on. From the papers, apparently there is a good deal of fuss 
being kicked up domestically. I can't answer your question any 
more specifically. I would like to answer it specifically, but I can't. I 
know that I have never advocated the overthrow of the Government 
or adhered to any policy of overthrowing the Government, or commit- 
ted espionage or leaked out illicit documents, or done anything that I 
regard as inconsistent as my duty to the Government. 

Mr. Velde. But you will not answer as to whether you aided the 
Communist Party of the United States, as to any of its activities? 

Mr. Donner. Yes ; I would decline to answer. 

Mr. Moulder. Is that all, Mr. Tavenner ? 



COMMUNIST mriLTRATION OF GOVERNMENT 5173 

Mr. Tavenner. That is all. 

Mr. Moulder. The witness is excused and, Mr. Donner, you are en- 
titled to claim your fees as a witness. 

The committee will stand in recess. 

(Whereupon, at 3 : 40 p. m., Thursday, June 28, 1956, the hearing 
was recessed, subject to the call of the Chair, there being present at 
time of recess Representatives Moulder and Velde.) 

X 



INDEX 



Individuals 

Page 

Cooi)er, Harry 5164 

Donner, Frank 5161-5173 (testimony) 

Fanelli, Joseph A 5153, 5154, 5155 

Fiichs, Herbert 5152, 5158, 5163, 5164, 5166, 5172 

Gorman, James E 5152,5158 

Knapp, Laurence A 5162 

Krug, Jacob H 5165 

Kurasch, Martin 5166 

Glim, Ellis George 5151-5159 (testimony) 

Perlo, Victor 5167, 5168 

Porter, John W 5165 

Porter, Margaret Bennett (Mrs. John W. Porter) 5165 

Pressman, Lee 5170, 5171 

Rabinowitz, Victor 5151, 5161 

Rein, David 5165 

Riemer, Mortimer 5164 

Robison, Joseph 5166 

Rosenberg, Allan 5166 

Sandler, Woodrow 5165 

Scheunemann, Edward 5166 

Weyand, Ruth 5166 

Witt, Nathan 5163 

Organizations 

Communist Party, District of Columbia : Cell within National Labor Re- 
lations Board 5164, 5166, 5167 

Congress of Industrial Organizations 5170, 5171 

Land Clearance Commission (Chicago) 5156, 5158 

United States Government: 

Housing and Home Finance Agency 5157 

Housing Authority, United States 5156 

Interstate Commerce Commission 5156, 5158 

National Labor Relations Board 5162, 5163 

Senate, United States: Wheeler committee (Subcommittee To Investi- 
gate Railroads, Holding Companies, and Related Matters of the Com- 
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce) 5152,5158 

I 



i 



k 



I 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 9999 05706 3248 



1^:^*^^ 



a 


^i'H<^ 


i-W yit ^ ^ 


4 






% 


^^'iy 


T>\Kr.l, 


^f 


"^U^ 


A/Qo^HftiftA f^ i'^ 


) 


%^^ 


LA fftJ 11 


k. 


UV6 


5»*W*t5.K;i^ dy^ 


■ f 


^>rl^ 


^C^^-Sf^CKc/K **^