(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 "State Department information program information centers. Hearing before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Government Operations, United States Senate, 83d Congress, 1st session, pursuant to S. Res. 40, a resolution authorizing the Committee on Government Operations to employ temporary additional personnel and increasing the amount of expenditures .."

STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

INFORMATION CENTERS 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON 
INVESTIGATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON 

^^, ss^ GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

EIGHTY-THIRD CONGEESS 

riKST SESSION 

PURSUANT TO 

S. Res. 40 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMITTEE ON 

GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS TO EMPLOY TEMPORARY 

ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL AND INCREASING THE 

LIMIT OF EXPENDITURES 



PART 2 



MARCH 27, APRIL 1 AND 2, 1953 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations 




UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
33616 WASHINGTON : 1953 






COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 

JOSEPH R. McCarthy, Wisconsin, Chairm<in 

KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas 

MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine CLYDE R. HOEY, North Carolina 

HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho HUBERT H. HUMPHLEY, Minnesota 

EVERETT McKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington 

JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri 

Walter L. Reynolds, Chief Clerk 



Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 
JOSEPH R. McCarthy, Wisconsin, Chairman 

KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas 

EVERETT McKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington 
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri 

Roy M. Cohn, Chief Counsel 
Francis D. Flanagan, General Counsel and IStaff Director 

n 



CONTENTS 



Page. 

Appendix 167 

Index I 

Testimony of — 

Baarslag, Karl, Silver Spring, Md 159 

Lumpkin, Grace, New York, N. Y 155 

Schappes, Morris U., New York, N. Y 139 

Stern, Dr. Bernard J., Columbia University, New York, N. Y 97 

Utley, Freda, Washington, D. C 129 

Weltfish, Gene, New York, N. Y 115 

SCHEDULE OF EXHIBITS 

Introduced Appears 

on page on page 

3. Table of contents from the book. The Family, Past and 

Present, bv Dr. Bernhard J. Stern 113 167 

4. Review by Prof. Ellis Rivkin of A Documentary History of 

the Jews in the United States 143 (*) 

5. Rejoinder of Morris U. Schappes to Prof. Ellis Rivkin 143 (*) 

6. Review by Nathan Schachner of A Documentary History of 

the Jews in the United States 144 (*) 

7. Articles from Congress Weekly, May 7, 1951, entitled "Dis- 

torted Literary Criticism," by Ward Moore 144 (*> 

8. American Jewish History — A Selected Bibliography 155 169 

9. List, dated January 1952, of American magazines received by 

United States Information Library, Paris, France 162 (*) 



•May be found in the files of the subcommittee. 

m 



STATE DEPAETMENT INFORMATION PROGEAM 
INFOEMATION CENTERS 



FRIDAY, MARCH 27, 1953 

United States Senate, 
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 

OF the Committee on Government Operations, 

WatsMngton, D. G. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to Senate Resolution 40, agreed to 
January 30, 1953, at 10 : 30 a. m., in room 357 of the Senate Office 
Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy (chairman) presiding. 

Present : Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, of Wisconsin ; 
Senator Stuart Symington, Democrat, of Missouri. 

Present also : Roy Cohn, chief counsel ; Daniel G. Buckley, assistant 
counsel ; David Schine, chief consultant ; and Ruth Young Watt, chief 
clerk. 

TESTIMONY OF DE. BEENHARD J. STEEN, COLUMBIA UNIVEESITY, 
NEW YOEK, N. Y., ACCOMPANIED BY JOSEPH FOEEE, ESQ., 
WASHINGTON, D. C. 

(The witness was duly sworn by the chairman.) 

Mr. Cohn. Mr. Reporter, the name of the witness is Prof. Bernhard 
J. Stern. Professor Stern teaches at Columbia University, and has 
taught at Yale University. He is the author of some 7 books which 
are in use in the State Department information program, being located 
at some 63 information centers throughout the world. Professor 
Stern declines to state whether or not he was a member of the Com- 
munist Party when he wrote any of these books on the ground that his 
answer might tend to incriminate him, although he states he is not 
now a member of the Communist Party. And he declines to tell us 
whether his Communist Party name was Bennett Stevens and whether 
or not under that name he had written a pamphlet entitled "The 
Church and the Records," which, we want to make clear for the record, 
was not in use as far as we can ascertain, in the information program. 

I want to ask you something else about objective and impartial 
writing. Do you think that these words constitute objective and 
impartial writing? 

Air. Stern. Would you repeat that? 

INIr. Cohn. I just want you to listen to this sentence I am going to 
read to you now : 

Tlie merit of the new Soviet Constitution and the national policy which it 
institutionalizes is seen by the fact that in the midst of a war for survival the 
powers of the constituent republics are not abridged but extended. 

97 



^3 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Do you consider that objective and impartial ? 

Mr. Stern. I do. That is actually what happened during the war. 

Mr. CoHN. That is your view of the Soviet Constitution ? 

Mr. Stern. That is my view of the 1936 constitution as compared 
to the earlier constitution. I said it was expanded as compared to the 
earlier constitution. 

Mr. CoHN. Do you regard the policy of the Soviet peoples as being 

farsighted? 

Mr. Stern. The Soviet people or Soviet leadership i 

Mr. CoHN. Peoples. 

Mr. Stern. I do regard. . 

Mr. CoHN. At this time you regard the policy of Soviet peoples. 

Do you regard the policy of the Soviet leadership as farsighted? 

Mr. Stern. Some, and some— perhaps again this is too broad a 
statement to make, a blanket statement one way or the other. 

Mr. CoHN. You make one. 

Mr. Stern. I asked you 

Mr. CoHN. You made one concerning the peoples, and I asked you 
if you could make the same one concerning the leadership. 

Mr. Stern. You asked me whether or not I believe that statement 
which you read. 

Mr. CoHN. I was reading your words published in 1947 m this book 
in use in the State Department information service. Page 24, Un- 
derstanding the Russians. It starts at the first sentence of the second 
full paragraph, page 24. 

Mr. Stern. I don't see this passage, sir. Will you read it again? 

Mr. CoHN. I will read you the whole thing : 

The merit of the new constitution and national policy which it institutional- 
izes is seen by the fact that in the midst of a war for survival the powers of the 
constituent republics are not abridged but extended. 

That was the first one. The second was : 

The war has strengthened this farsighted policy of the Soviet peoples. 

Mr. Stern. "This farsighted policy." You left that out. You said 
the farsighted. I was talking about the policy of the Soviet minorities. 

Mr. CoHN. What do you think about the policy of the Soviet minor- 
ities? Do you regard that as farsighted ? 

Mr. Stern. I certainly do. It has received acclaim from all 
sociologists. 

Mr. CoHN. Do you regard it as farsighted at the present time ? 

Mr. Stern. I do, yes. 

Mr. CoHN. Is that policy set by the Soviet people or by the Soviet 
leadership? 

Mr. Stern. The Soviet peoples and the leadership joined together 
in making policies, as I understand them. 

Mr. CoHN. Could you tell us any policy in the leadership which 
you did not consider farsighted ? 

Mr. Stern. That is too broad a statement to make an offhand judg- 
ment on. 

Mr. CoHN. You can't tell us anything ? 

Mr. Stern. No. You wouldn't expect me to be thinking up some- 
thing on the spur of the moment. That is hardly a just question to 
ask a scholar, to make a statement like that right off on the off-the- 
cuff. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 99 

The Chairman, Doctor, you can refuse to if you care to, but you 
have been writin^r for informational purposes? 

Mr. Stern. I have not been writing 

The Chairman. I be^ your pardon. You were not writing for 
them, they were purchasing your books. You made statements extol- 
ling the farsightedness of the Soviet peoples. The question is can 
you think of anything about the Soverit leadership that you would 
condemn, anything that was not wise, not farsighted. If you cannot 
think of anything, all right, we would like to know. In other words, 
you have set out good things about them. Can you think of anything 
bad about the Soviet peoples? 

Mr. Stern. I spoke of the farsighted policy on Soviet minority 
policy. It is a multinational state, a federated state, which serves 
as a model for many peoples. 

The Chairman. "Can you think of anything at this moment that you 
would condemn in so far as the present Communist leadership is 
concerned ? 

Mr. Stern (after consultation). I would have to give considerable 
thought to that before I issue any statement. 

The Chairman. In other words, on the spur of the moment you 
cannot think of anything. 

Mr. Stern. On the spur of the moment I cannot, no. I would like 
to oblige you, you understand, but I just can't. 

Senator Symington. Professor, are you teaching at Columbia now ? 

Mr. Stern. I am, yes. 

Senator Symington. Wliat do you teach? 

Mr. Stern. Sociology. 

Senator Symington. How long have you been teaching there? 

Mr. Stern. Since 1931. 

Senator Symington. Since 1931. 

Mr. Stern. Yes. 

Senator Symington. You say that you are not now a member of the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Stern. Yes, sir. 

Senator Symington. But you won't say whether you ever were? 

Mr. Stern. Yes, that is right. 

Senator Symington. Why do you make that segregation in your 
mind? 

Mr. Stern. I have given my reasons. 

Senator Symington. Well, "would you tell me again? Maybe I 
was late. 

Mr. Stern. On grounds of possible self-incrimination. 

Senator Syimington. So the fact that you say you_ are not now but 
won't say whether you were once, you think incriminates you; is 
that right? 

Mr. Stern. Might incriminate me. 

Senator Syiviington. Might incriminate you? 

Mr. Stern. Yes. 

Senator Syiviington. Your students, you have a respect for your 
students? 

Mr. Stern. The students have respect for me, too, I think. 
Senator Syimington. That is what I was going to ask you. _ I am 
glad you said it for me. Then they would feel, maybe, that it was 



100 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

right, based on your answers, would they not, for them to be a 

Communist? ^ . ^ ^ t i-i,- i 

Mr. Stern. I don't think students are such snnpletons. i think 
students make up their minds not on the basis of any decision such as 
whether or not the person uses the fifth amendment or not, as to 
whether or not they have a right to be a Communist. 

Senator Symington. You are teaching the students m the formative 
years of their youth. Wliat do you think their impression will be of 
the fact that you refused to answer whether or not you were a Com- 
munist? , J, 

Mr. Stern. I think they would support me on grounds of using 
constitutional privileges which were established for that purpose. 

Senator Symington. Why do you not refuse to answer on the first 
question, then, that you are not a Communist now? What is the 

point ? 

Mr. Stern. Because I am not a Communist now. 
Senator Symington. Then why do you not— if you were a Com- 
munist and changed, why are you not proud of it, like Mr. Budenz i 
Mr. Stern. I haven't said that I was ever a member. 
Senator Syt^iington. Then why do you not say you were not? 
Mr. Stern. I have given my answer. 

Senator Syihington. Do you not think that makes it look pretty 
conclusively that you were ? 

Mr. Stern. I do not think so. I think it may seem so to some, 
but it may not to all. 

Senator Symington. If you have left the party, why are you 
ashamed of it ? A lot of people are proud of the fact that they left it. 
Mr. Stern. That is their privilege. But I stand on my privileges 
under the fifth amendment. 

Senator Symington. Do you think if you refuse to say that you 
were a Communist, although you are perfectly willing to say that 
you are not now, that you should continue teaching? 
Mr. Stern. I beg your pardon ? I certainly do. 
Senator Symington. You do? 
Mr. Stern. By all means ; yes, sir. 

Senator Symington. Well, I have asked this line of questions to 
several people and had the same feeling about it. 

Mr. Stern. I answered that question before. Senator Symington, 
that I believe that a teacher should be judged on the basis of his 
scholarly production and on his teaching, that if you once start in- 
quiring of political views of a teacher, the whole corps of academic 
life will be destroyed, because you start with the Communists, then 
you go to the Socialists, then you go to the New Dealers, and then 
you go to the Catholics and everybody would be out. 

Senator Symington. You think a man who belongs to an organiza- 
tion, or has a right to say whether or not he does belong to an or- 
ganization, which has as one of its primary purposes the destruction of 
our form of government, can still be a good teacher ? 
Mr. Stern. That is a loaded question. 
Senator Symington. You unload it and answer it, then. 
Mr. Stern. Would you break it down. 
Senator Symington. All right. 

Mr. Stern. Would you formulate it again. Senator? Would you 
formulate it affain? 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 101 

The Chairman. I think you should be able to answer that question. 

Mr. Stern. I will answer the question, but I would like to under- 
stand it first. 

Senator Symington. Do you think that a man who refuses to say 
whether or not he has been a member of an organization which has 
as its primary motive or one of its primary motives the destruction 
of our way of government is still a person who can be a good teacher 
of American youth ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

The Chairman. ]\Iay I advise counsel while you are having this 
private conversation with your client, you may be on the air for all I 
know. 

Senator Syimington. If you have to go into such a long discussion 
about it, let's forget it. I think your attitude toward it implies your 
answer. 

Mr. Stern. No, it does not, Senator. There is some hitch to your 
question, you see. Maybe you are not aware of it, but I think there 
is, and because of my suspicion I am trying to clarify it. I want to be 
clarified. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Stern. My answer is. Senator, that since no inference can be 
drawn from a refusal to answer under the fifth amendment, that your 
question is irrelevant. Or my answer would be the whole question, 
the whole position is irrelevant. 

The Chairman. Well, I think it is a relevant question and you will 
be ordered to answer it unless you think your answer might tend to 
incriminate you. 

Senator Symington. It is relevant to me because I have a son at 
Columbia. 

Mr. Stern. He is not in one of my classes. I am sorry. You better 
send him around. 

Senator Symington. I would like to ask you sorrie more questions. 

Mr. Stern. Just one second, sir. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel. ) 

Mr. Stern. May I correct my answer ? 

Senator Symington. You can do anything you want. 

Mr. Stern. That when a person refuses to answer a question under 
the fifth amendment, he is merely exercising his privileges, and that 
therefore no inferences can be drawn. And therefore it is irrelevant 
from the point of view of whether a person should teach or not 
teach. 

Senator Symington. Then why do you say you are not a Com- 
munist ? 

Mr. Stern. Because I am not. 

Senator Symington. Then why do you not say you were not? If 
it is irrelevant in one case, why is it not relevant in both cases ? 

The Chairman. May I interrupt at this time? I would like to 
state that the witness has made the statement that no inference can 
be drawn from his refusal to answer. That is incorrect. The fact 
that you refused to answer a question on the ground of self-incrimina- 
tion cannot be used against you in a criminal proceeding. However, 
when you tell us that you will not answer a certain question because 
you honestly believe that if you told us the truth that it would tend to 

33616—53— pt. 2 2 



102 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATIOIsT PROGRAM 

incriminate you, inferences are drawn not only by this committee but by 
the public, I believe, as a whole. 

When you say no inference can be drawn, you are correct if you 
refer to a criminal trial, but not to an investigation. 

Mr. Stern. Inferences may be drawn, but they may not be justi- 
fiable inferences. 

The Chairman. Before you can exercise the privilege. Doctor^ 
you must say to us "I truthfully think or I honestly think, if I told 
the truth, that would tend to incriminate me." And if you honestly 
think an answer to whether you were a member of the Communist 
Party would tend to incriminate you, that does create certain infor- 
ences as to whether or not you are a member, before an investigating 
body. You are correct that it cannot be used against you at a criminal 
trial. Pardon me. Senator. 

Senator Symington. Now, if I may go back a minute, you said 
that you felt that you could not think up offhand anything about the 
Soviet Government, any policies which you did not disapprove; is 
that right? 

Mr. Stern. I said something to that effect ; yes. 

Senator Syimington. Wliat do you think about the purges ? Would 
you approve those or disapprove those ? 

Mr. Stern. What do you mean about the purges ? 

Senator Symington. The killing of people, like the Kulak purges, 
like the anti-Semitism activities. Do you think they are false and 
capitalistic press talk, or do you think it is true? 

Mr. Stern. I have not been able to evaluate this. That is why I 
do not wish to make a statement. I haven't seen the documents. I 
don't know from my own knowledge these facts. 

Senator Symington. ^Yimt do you think about shooting down the 
American planes? Would you call that a policy of 

Mr. Stern. I hardly call that a policy. 

Senator Symington. Well, it happened 3 or 4 times in a week, and 
they do not do much over there 

Mr. Stern. Even the American Government hasn't called it a policy. 

Senator Symington. I want to get it straight. You know nothing 
that you can think of with respect to the policies of the Soviet Govern- 
ment that offliand you can tell us you do not approve of ; is that right? 

Mr. Stern. In this book, in the introduction to this book, I say that 
no system is perfect, a-nd I would say the same from the point of view 
of the Soviet Union. 

Senator Symington. As counsel said, you said a lot of things that 
were good about the Soviet, and then he^ asked if you have anything 
that you thought was bad about the way they act, and you said offhand 
you could not think of anything. 

I was just trying to help you think of some things that you might 
consider that the Soviets did that you did not approve. 

Mr. Stern. There are many things that from time to time I have 
disapproved of ; many things. 

Senator Sy^iington. But you could not think of them offhand. 

Mr. Stern, But I would not wish to use this as a forum for the 
expression of my grievances. I am an American citizen. It is for the 
Soviet people to criticize their government. I am an American and I 
am concerned with the American way of life. 



STATE DEPARTMENT IXFORMATIOX PROGRAM 103 

Senator Symington. In other words, you think that as an Amer- 
ican you should criticize the American Government and let the Soviets 
criticize the Soviet Governments 

Mr. Stern. That is right. 

Senator Symington. No further questions. 

Mr. Stern. And I think it is justifiable for any American, espe- 
cially for a scholar who believes in the extension of knowledge to be 
free to criticize his government. That is what the nature of a 
democracy is. 

The Chairman. You said you were not a Communist today? 

Mr. Stern. I did. 

The Chairman. Were you a Communist a year ago ? 

Mr. Stern. I was not. 

The Chairman. Were you a Communist 2 years ago? 

Mr. Stern. I was not. 

The Chairman. Were you a Communist 3 years ago ? 

Mr. Stern. I was not. 

Tlie Chairman. Were you a Communist 4 years ago? 

Mr. Stern. I was not. 

The Chairman. How about 5 years ago? 

Mr. Stern. I was not. 

The Chairman. Now let us take the year 1947. Were you an active 
member of the party in the year 1947 ? 

Are you having some trouble with that ? 

Mr. Stern. I claim privilege on that. 

The Chairman. Pardon? 

Mr. Stern. I claim privilege on that. 

The Chairman. You refuse to answer whether you were in 1947? 

Mr. Stern. I refuse to answer. 

The Chairman. Have you attempted to recruit your students in the 
Communist Party at any time? 

Mr. Stern. I have not. 

The Chaikman. Have you attended meetings. Communist Party 
meetings, which were also attended by your students ? 

Mr. Stern. I have not. 

The Chairman. Never? 

Mr. Stern. Never. 

The Chairman. You are sure of that ? 

Mr. Stern. Yes, I am sure of it. There may have been Com- 
munists there, but I didn't know them as Communist meetings. 

The Chairman. In other words, you say you never attended a Com- 
munist meeting at which your students were also present? Perhaps 
I should first ask the question as to whether you have ever attended 
a Communist meeting. Have you ever attended a meeting of the 
Communist Party, a cell meeting? 

Mr. Stern. I claim privilege on that. 

The Chairman. You refuse to answer? 

Mr. Stern. A cell meeting ? "VVliat does that mean ? 

The Chairman. Do you not know what a cell in the Communist 
Party is? 

Mr. Stern. No. 

The Chairman. You do not know? 

Mr. Stern. No. 



104 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATIOX PROGRAM 

The Chairman. Have you ever attended a meeting of any Commu- 
nist group, a strictly Communist meeting ? 

Mr. Stern. I claim privilege. 

The Chairman. You refuse to answer that? 

Mr. Stern. I claim privilege on that. 

The Chairman. Let me rephrase the question : Have you ever at- 
tended a meeting which was closed to everyone except members of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Stern. Ever? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Stern. Ever attended a meeting 

The Chairman. That w^as closed to everyone except members of 
the Communist Party? 

Mr. Stern. I claim privilege on that. 

The Chairman. You do claim you never attended such a meeting 
at which you found any of your students ? 

Mr. Stern. Not to my knowledge. 

The Chairman. Have you discussed communism with your stu- 
dents ? 

Mr. Stern. I have not. 

The Chairman. Either inside or outside the classroom? 

Mr. Stern. I have not. 

The Chairman. Have you ever attended any Communist meetings 
which were also attended by other professors, teachers ? 

Mr. Stern. I claim privilege under the fifth amendment. 

The Chairman. Do you know of any of your fellow professors, 
teachers, who are now members of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Stern. Will you say that again. Senator ? 

The Chairman. Do you Imow of any teachers or professors who, to 
your knowledge, are members of the Communist Party, are or were 
members of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Stern. Or were? 

The Chairman. I know it is difficult to say whether they are as of 
today, because they could have resigned yesterday. 

Mr. Stern. I can't hear you half the time. 

The Chairman. The question is, Have you ever attended Commu- 
nist Party meetings which were also attended by other teachers or 
professors who were -members of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Stern. I thought I had answered that. 

The Chairman. You refuse to answer that ? 

Mr. Stern. I claim privilege. 

The Chairman. Now let me ask you this question : Do you know any 
professors or teachers who are teaching as of today who were members 
of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Stern. Not to my knowledge. Wait a minute. 

(The witness consulted w^ith his counsel.) 

Mr. Stern. Who were members ? , 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Stern. I claim privilege on that. 

The Chairman. You claim the privilege on that ? 

Mr. Stern. Yes. 

The Chairman. In other words, you refuse to tell us whether or not 
there are presently teachers, professors, teaching students who were 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 105 

known to you as members of the Communist Part}'? Your answer 
is that you refuse to answer that ? 

Mr. Stern. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds of self- 
incrimination. 

Mr. CoHN. Professor Stern, do you believe in communism today? 

Mr. Stern. What do you mean by a question like that? 

Mr. CoHN. I will withdraw that. 

Did you believe in communism in 1945? You know what com- 
munism is, do you not ? 

Mr. Stern. Well, there are at least 25 definitions of communism. 
What are you ref errino- to ? 

The Chairman. Answer the question keeping in mind your defini- 
tion. 

Mr. Stern. Now will you ask the question ? 

Mr. CoHN. Bearing in mind what communism means to you, do you 
believe in communism today ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Stern. I am very confused by a question like that. This is an 
omnibus question. What does "belief in" mean? You understand, 
I am not quibbling. I am not accustomed to such vague questions. 

The Chairman. You are instructed by counsel to use your own defini- 
tion of communism. When you consider communism, he asked if you 
believed in it as of today. 

ISIr. Stern. What do you mean by "belief in'' ? 

The Chairman. Well, let's take your definition. What you mean 
by "belief in''? Can you answer then ? Take your own definition of 
communism and your own definition of the word "belief." 

Mr. Stern. Belief for whom, how, under what circumstances, in 
what country ? 

Senator Symington. Let's consolidate it a bit. Do you believe in 
the current activities and policies of the Soviet Government ? 

Mr. Stern. For the Soviet Union? Yes, for the Soviet Union; 
is that what you are asking? 

Senator Symington. Well, I asked a question. I do not think if 
you have resigned from the Communist Party that you know much 
about the Soviet Union policies inside the Soviet Union. ^^Hiat I 
asked you was, Do you believe in the activities of the Soviet Govern- 
ment today and its policies ? That narrows the question down for you. 

Mr. Stern. There is political policy, theoretical policy; there are 
so many different policies. You can't ask a grandiose question like 
that and expect any specific answer, not from me. 

Senator Syimington. Do you believe in tlie military policies of the 
Soviet Union today? 

Mr. Stern. I don't know anything about the military. 

Senator Symington. Do you believe in the political policies of the 
Soviet Union today? 

Mr. Stern. Political policies? What political policies? Politi- 
cal policies toward minorities, political policy in relation to the state, 
political policy in relation to international affairs, local political pol- 
icy, provincial political policy ? I don't quite understand. 

Senator Symington. Are there any policies of the Soviet Union 
that you don't believe in, and if so, what are they? That is a pretty 
fair question. Professor. 



106 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Mr, Stern. You asked that question before, Senator. 

Senator Symington. Then I ask it again, right now, because we 
have gotten down to it again. Is there anything in the policies of 
the Soviet Union that you do not agree with ? 

Mr. Stern. There are many phases of Soviet life which I find in- 
adequate and I find somewhat perplexing, and would want more in- 
formation on. I find it very difficult to get these days. 

Senator St^iington. Let's narrow it down a little further, then. 
Let's say, Are there any policies of the Politburo, expressed policies, 
that you don't agree with ? 

Mr. Stern. On what? 

Senator Stiviington. I am not answering the questions. 

Mr. Stern. These questions are meaningful to me. 

Senator Stiviington. Let's say on anything. Are there any policies 
of the Soviet Politburo and the Kremlin on anything that you don't 
agree with. 

Mr. Stern. There are many things I don't agree with. 

Senator Symington. What are they? 

Mr. Stern. It is hard to list them in a situation like this and 
define 

Senator Symington. How ab-out just one or two illustrations of 
what you don't agree with that the Kremlin is doing today ? 

The Chairman. Senator, the witness puts me in mind of a divorce 
case I tried once as the judge, and the wife was on the stand telling 
what an awful husband she had. I asked her if she had any faults 
and she said, "Yes, I have my faults." And I said, "Name one." She 
said, "Judge, I can't think of any offhand." 

Mr. Stern. That is a very clever anecdote. But I am not a divorcee, 
I am not in a divorce court. I am concerned rather with more careful 
thinking, you see. 

Senator Symington. Even though you cannot tell a group of 
Americans, with the world the way it is today, that there is anything 
in the policies of the Politburo of the Kremlin with which you dis- 
approve, you still think that you have an entire right and also, and I 
will add that you won't say whether or not you were a Communist, you 
still think you have a right to teach American j^outh in a great uni- 
versity in this countr}^ ; is that right ? 

INIr. Stern. Provided that when I discuss the policies of the Soviet 
Union, that is, I do not try to indoctrinate the students to my views, 
provided I hold my views to myself and have my private political 
opinions. 

The Chairman. Doctor, how on earth can vou teach sociology' 

Mr. Stern. May I interrupt you a moment ? 

The Chairman, Let me ask jou a question. Had you finished ? 

Mr, Stern, I would like to consult counsel, 

(The witness consulted with his counsel,) 

Mr, Stern, I will answer your question. Do you want to ask an- 
other question before I answer Senator Symington's question, be- 
cause he has been after me for such a long time that I think I will 
tell him. 

Senator Symington. I don't think the expression is quite fair. I 
have been trying to find out what you think because you are teaching 
in the university. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 107 

Mr. Stern. Several years ago, during the Lysenko controversy, I 
wrote an article in which I evaluated the Lysenko controversy in a 
very critical fashion. I appraised it in a scholarly way, not in the agi- 
tational way whatsoever. I evaluated both sides and formulated a 
position which asked Lysenko certain questions which he had failed 
to answer in relation to genetics. I was cognizant of the value of 
Lysenko's work in plant breeding and increasing the food supply of 
the Soviet people, but I didn't like — I pointed out that he was using 
the materials of the geneticists Avrongly, quoting from materials in 
1932, and assuming that they were 1952. This is my scholarly ap- 
proach, you see. 

Now, I did. in a scholarly way, appraise Lysenko in an article called 
•"Genetics Teaching and Lysenko," which had international recogni- 
tion, quoted by Huxley, quoted by all the various people; unfor- 
tunately, in some ways that I didn't approve of. It was critical of 
the L3'senko approach to genetics as of that time. 

You see, this is what I am speaking of. When you asked this ques- 
tion as you did, I didn't want to be drawn into a long analysis of my 
position. 

Senator Symixgton. On genetics? 

Mr. Stern, On anything, you see. I will be glad to give you a lec- 
ture on genetics, because I have written very considerably on it. 

The Chairman. I think we will get along without the lecture. 

Mr. Stern. Thank you. I prefer not to give it, too. 

But, you see, it is not that I don't criticize the Soviet Union or 
what is going on there. It is just that the question was so broad that 
it permits the widest use of this platform for discussions which I 
don't want to be drawn into because I haven't time to discuss them 
fully. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you this question. Doctor. 

Mr. Stern. Does that clarify the fact that I have criticized certain 
aspects of Soviet life which I did not approve ? 

Senator Symington. Are you asking me? 

Mr. Stern. I am asking you, yes. Senator. 

Senator Symington. I asked you if there was anything that went 
on in the Kremlin today that you did not approve of, and you said 
some years ago you wrote a book criticizing genetics. 

Mr. Stern. I said a short time ago. 

Senator Symington. A short time? 

Mr. Stern. Yes. 

Senator Symington. And it had to do with genetics of Stalin and 
so forth. 

Mr. Stern. Of Lysenko. 

Senator Symington. I want to really know what you think about 
this international situation. As to the foreign policy relationship of 
this country and the Soviet, do you approve their aggressive policies 
in Korea ? 

Mr. Stern. Whose aggressive policies? 

Senator Symington. Of the Soviet Union, the furnishing of tanks 
and planes to North Koreans. 

Mr. Stern. I have no knowledge of that, from my personal knowl- 
edge. 



108 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Senator Symington. You have no knowledge as to whether or not 
the Soviets are supporting the North Koreans against the South 
Koreans and the Americans? 

Mr. Stern. I have read so in the press. 

Senator Symington. Do you believe it ? 

Mr. Stern. I don't — what is this? The question is whether I be- 
lieve that the Soviet Union — will you ask your question again? 

Senator Symington. I certainly will. Do you believe that the So- 
viet Union is furnishing tanks and planes and military help to the 
North Koreans against the United Nations? 

Mr. Stern. I believe that has been admitted by the Soviet Union. 

Senator Symington. But you w^ould not believe it unless they ad- 
mitted it? 

Mr. Stern. I mean that the evidence has to be evaluated in the war 
situation. 

Senator Symington. They have admitted it and you agree to it. 
Now, do you think it is right ? Do you think that their military ac- 
tivity over there 

Mr. Stern. I am no authority on military affairs. 

Senator Symington. You w^ould not want to discuss that ? 

Mr. Stern. I would not want to discuss military affairs. 

Senator Symington. In any way? 

Mr. Stern. In any way. 

Senator Symington. And if one of your pupils came up and asked 
you whether or not you thought it was right for the Russians to be 
supporting this war, you would say it was out of your field? 

Mr. Stern. I don't teach anything in relation to logistics or any- 
thing in relation to military. 

Senator Symington. I will make this observation: I don't think 
tiiat your answers are sincere, if you are teaching sociology, because 
we are very close to sociology in some of the questions that we have 
asked you that you have ducked. 

Mr, Stern. I tried to be, I have been, a very cordial and cooperative 
witness. 

The Chairman. You have been cordial but not cooperative. 

Mr. Stern. Indeed I have. 

Mr. CoHN. Do you believe our cause in Korea is a just cause, the 
cause of the United States, and the United Nations? 

Mr. Stern. Just? 

Mr. CoHN. Would you rather not discuss that, either? 

Mr. Stern. I have just said I would rather not discuss it. 

Mr. CoHN. Is it a matter of logistics ? 

Mr. Stern. Do you know what the meaning of the word is ? 

Mr. CoHN. I do not know the meaning of a lot of words you have 
used. 

The Chairman. You do not want to answer whether you think our 
cause in Korea is just or not? You will be ordered to answer the 
question unless you feel the answer might tend to incriminate you. 
It is rather an important question for a professor teaching young 
men who may be fighting in that Korean war. The question is, Do 
you think our cause is just? 

Mr. Stern. Senator, I have felt that the Korean war should have 
been brought to an end a long time ago. I feel that the whole situa- 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORIVIATION PROGRAM 109 

tion is an unfortunate one for this country to be involved in, and 
1 think millions of people in America share my view that the war 
should be brought to an end. Whoever started, I am no authority; 
I do not know any thing; about who started it, who is more just or less 
just. But I do know that our boys are dying there, and they should 
be brought home. 

Tlie Chairman. For the first time, there might be one element upon 
which you and I agree, and that is that the war could have been 
brought to an end a long time ago, except I would like to have it 
brought to an end by means of victory. Wlien you say it should 
be brought to an end, do jou mean by victory to the United States 
or should we withdraw? 

Mr. Stern. It would be a victory if it were brought to an end. 

Senator Symington. Do you think that when the North Korean 
Coiuniunists attacked South Korea, that it would have been an honor- 
able thing for us to have done not to have tried to defend them? 

Mr. Stern. I do not know who started the war. I have no evidence 
on this. I have made no analysis of the data. I cannot speak with 
autliority ; so I would have to refrain from answering. 

The Chairman. As a professor, Doctor, you certainly show a tre- 
mendous lack of knowledge of anything that the Russians did which 
might be wrong. But in your books you certainly profess tremendous 
knowledge of the intricate workings of the Soviet system. You extol 
it very highly. So it is rather interesting to find that you have no 
knowledge whatsoever, when Senator Symington asks you questions, 
about something which is general knowledge as to how the Korean 
war started, who started it. T\liere were you when the Korean war 
started ? Were you teaching then ? 

Mr. Stern. I believe it started 

The Chairman. June 26, 1950. 

Mr. Stern. That was during the summer. I was away on vacation. 

The Chairman, You were? 

Mr. Stern. Yes. I was vacationing at the time. 

The Chairman. Answer his question. Do you use your books in 
your classroom, your own books? 

Mr. Stern. Some of them; yes. 

The Chairman. Do you use the book, for example, The Family, 
Past and Present ? 

Mr. Stern. Tliat is an anthology, as you notice ? 

The Chairman. Do you use that in your classroom? 

Mr. Stern. I do ; yes. 

The Chairman. You told us you thought it was all right for a 
Communist to teach if he does not try to indoctrinate his students in 
the ways of Communists, in other words, not advocate communism. 
Do you think a teacher of sociology can teach without expressing his 
views to his students, without them knowing how he feels? 

Mr. Stern. I think that a good teacher can evoke from his stu- 
dents and present all points of view with a fine sense of impartiality, 
which I seek to do. In that book which you have. Senator, on the 
family, which you are going to quote from, you will see that there 
are quotations from Pope Pius XI, there is a statement of a Council 
of Trent on Catholic marriage, there is an objective statement of all 
points of view. You are going to quote the materials on the Soviet 



110 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATIOX PROGRAM 

Union. But if you turn the next page, I have the Catholic point of 
view, also. 

The Chairman. I am going to quote what you yourself said. In 
this book you do quote Agnes Smedley, a well-known Communist. 
You do quote some outstanding religious leaders 

Mr. Stern. Wliat do I quote? 

The Chairman. Let me finish. You do quote some outstanding re- 
ligious leaders to kind of sugar this up a bit. But I am not going 
to quote what somebody else said ; I am going to quote what you said. 
You said your students have a lot of respect for you. Page 410, 
do you have the book before you ? 

Mr. Stern. I do not have that there. I did not know you were 
going to use it. 

The Chairman. I will read this to you. You said : 

The family of the wage earner — 

Referring to the American wage earner— 

and salaried employee, deprived of land and a friendly neighborhood to give 
security and status, as is the case usually in industrial urban surroundings, 
finds this lack met in Russia by a highly developed system of social insurance 
and public service. 

Mr. Stern. Are you denying that there is a highly developed 

The Chairman. May I finish my question, Doctor? 

Mr. Stern. Surely. 

The Chairjvian. Here you profess complete knowledge of this 
highly developed system of social insurance and public service in 
Kussia. You say your students are given this to read, but you tell us 
that you know nothing whatsoever about the Korean war, for ex- 
ample, or anything inside of Russia that is apparently bad, except 
some article you wrote several years ago. Are we justified, do you 
think, in arriving at the conclusion that when you extol the virtues 
of the Soviet Union you are not doing that from your own personal 
knowledge but that you have gotten this from some other supporter 
of the Communist cause that professes to know what is going on in- 
side Russia ? 

Mr. Stern. May I see the book ? 

The Chairman. You certainly may. The passage is marked which 
was read [handing book to the witness] . 

Mr. Stern. Your quotation was not from me. 

The Chairman. Who is it from ? 

Mr. Stern. It is from Mildred Fairchild. 

The Chairman. May I see it ? 

It is not in quotes; it is written in your book and not in quotes. 
Where does it indicate it is from Mildred Fairchild? 

Mr. Stern. It is right on top. 

The Chairman. Let me see it. 

(The book was handed to the chairman.) 

The Chairman. In other words, you are quoting someone else? 

Mr. Stern. I am quoting an article published in a reputable journal. 

The Chairman. I may say that the record should show that the name 
"Mildred Fairchild" is on 10 pages; the material is not in quotes. 
Reading it as I did and my staff did, I would not consider this a quote 
from somebody else. But, if you say you are quoting her through 
approval, all right. But you do agree with this ? 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 111 

Mr. STt:i{N. I agi^ee that the Soviet Union has a large social-security 
system. 

The Chairman. Now. the question is 

Mr, Stern, That is what you asked me, was it not ? 

The Chairman. The question is, Did you agree with this quote from 
Mildred Fairchild which you reproduced in your book ? 

Mr. Stern. May I see it ? 

( The book was handed to the witness. ) 

The Chairman. In view of the fact that you do not take issue that 
it was your own statement. 

Mr, Stern. I take issue. I am stating the facts. 

The Chairman, Let us find out whether you agree with it if you 
quoted it; and, if you did, whether it is with the same force with your 
students as with yourself. 

Mr. Stern. This is a factual statement. This is no opinion at all. 
This is just a factual statement that there is a social-insurance and 
public-service system in the Soviet Union, and that is a factual state- 
ment which no one can disapprove of, because it is just simple fact. 

The CHATR:\rAN. Keep the book here, Doctor, will you. I want you 
to analyze that paragrapli. Is this a correct analysis of it? It states 
that the worker is taken better care of in Russia because of their highly 
developed social-security system. 

Mr. Stern. It does not say that, Senator. 

The Chairman. Will you read the entire paragraph out loud ? Read 
the entire paragraph. 

Mr. Stern (reading) : 

Other extraneous supports for the family have come from new sources, how- 
ever. The family of the wage earner and salaried employee, deprived of land and 
a friendly neighborhood to give security and status, as is the case usually in 
industrial urban surroundings, finds the lack met in Russia by a highly developed 
system of social insurance and public service. 

That is what you read. 

Tlie Chairman. Finish the paragraph. Will you finish the para- 
graph ? 

Mr. Stern (reading) : 

"Society undertakes to support and protect its members from undue hazards 
of life 

Tlie Chairman. You are referring to Russian society there, right? 
INIr. Stern. That is right. This is in the context, the Soviet Union, 
not only Russia but all of the Soviet Union. 
The Chairman. Yes. 
Mr. Stern (reading) : 

Society undertakes to support and protect its members from undue hazards of 
life, requiring work as a means of life, but supplying, in return, assurance from 
accident, chance, and misfortune. 

The Chairman, Is that required reading in your classroom? 

Mr. Stern, No ; it is not required. The students have it, and they 
can believe it or disagree with it as they will. 

The Chairman, Do you require that your students have this book? 

Mr. Stern. Yes. 

The Chairman, You do ? 

Mr, Stern, Yes, but this book, as I say. Senator — may I have that 
book again ? I would like to read you the table of contents, please. 



112 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATIOX PROGRAM 

The Chairma?^. I think you mav do that. This is one statement, 
you say, in many. 

Mr. CoHN. Do you want to read all four pages ? 
Mr. Stern. No ; I would not read all four pages. 
Mr. CoHN. Before I give this to you, Professor, there is one para- 
graph I wanted to read you and then I will give you the book and y®u 
can rea^ anything you like, if the chairman agrees. 

The Chairman. Before you read it, tell whether that is a quote from 
the professor. 

Mr. CoHN. It is difficult to tell. 

Mr. Stern. No ; it is not. On the top of the page it says who the 
author is. 

Mr. CoHN. Could you come up here ? Maybe you can help us out. 
Would you say what I am going to read is from you or a citation of 
what somebody else said ? 

Mr. Stern. That I wrote ; that is introduction telling what the con- 
tents will be. 

Mr. CoHN. You said that the Socialists Marx and Engels, however, 
saw beyond the misuse of women's labor by capitalists and contended 
their participation in large-scale production was the potential basis of 
their emancipation and thus of a higher form of the family life ; and 
that the efforts of women to achieve this emancipation through organ- 
ized movements will be discussed in the editor's article which ends the 
section. And that subsequent article is by you as well, is that right? 
Mr. Stern. I have to see it. 

Mr. CoiiN. You say the editor's article which ends this section. You 
are the editor. 
Mr. Stern. That is right. 

Mr. CoHN. Would you say that the Socialists Marx and Engels saw 
beyond the misuse of women's labor by capitalists and contended their 
utilization in large-scale production was the potential basis of their 
emancipation? Would you say that? 

Mr. Stern. Sure. This passage, this quotation 

Mr. CoHN. Are your words ? 

Mr. Stern. Those are my words, and this is what it means in the 
article, if you follow on through. In the early days of capitalism, 
there was a tremendous criticism of capitalism, you see, on the basis of 
the older family, the feudal family, which I hope you are not support- 
ing, Mr. Colm. 

Mr. CoHN. Sometime you can question me. 

Mr. Stern. And I said that at that time, in this particular book, 
there were different schools, and I quote one school that saw nothing 
but evil in capitalism, you see. Then you go to a short quotation from 
Marx and Engels in which I show that they saw not merely the de- 
structive factor of capitalism, but also the fact that when women 
were employed it would give them the opportunity to develop and to 
become emancipated, under capitalism. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, Professor, I want to ask you this : Do you agree 
with the statements of religious leaders, of the Pope and people like 
that, which are set forth in this book ? 

Mr. Stern. I present these views 

Mr. CoHN. No, my question was, Do you agree with them ? 

Mr. Stern. I present here 

Mr. CoHN. Conlfl A'oii fpll 111P tii'st if von no-vpp? 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAIVI 113 

Mr. Stern. Wait a moment. May I finish? The function of this 
book as an antholog}' is to jiive diverse points of view on the family. 
I selected a whole range, and I did not indicate which ones I agree 
with and which ones I did not agree with. 

Mr. CoHN. I am now asking you whether or not you agreed with 
tlie views of the Pope and the religious leaders, Catholic religious 
leaders which are set forth. 

Mr. Stekn (after consultation). Some I agreed with, and some I 
did not agree with. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, can you find one word in anything you wrote your- 
self, not that you quoted with approval such as the Fairchild thing or 
anytiiing else, but confining it strictly to things you yourself wrote, 
that is critical of the Soviet Union ? 

Mr. Stern. I have already said 

Mr. CoHN. In this book. 

Mr. Stehn. This book is not on the Soviet Union; this book is on 
tlie family. 

Mr. CoHN. But there are frequent references to Marx, Lenin, En- 
gels, the Soviet form. 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, I think we will gain nothing by pur- 
suing this. 

Mr. Stern. This has to be answered. 

The Chairman. You may answer. 

Mr. Stern. Marx and Eiigels wrote long before the Soviet Union 
was there, and this quotation from Marx and Engels has nothing to 
do with tlie Soviet Union. There is only one selection on the Soviet 
Union. I would like to read parts of the table of contents on this. 
The amount of space devoted to the Soviet Union here is about 4 
Images of a book of 448 pages. So this is not angled. 

The Chairman. How many pages do you propose to read now? 

Mr. Stern. I am not going to read any pages. I am going to read 
some of the titles. 

The Chairman. If you read any of the titles, you read all of them. 
How many pages are there ? 

Mr. Stern. Just a short— for example, you quoted from Agnes 
Smedley. 

Mr. FoRER. Five pages. 

The Chairman. We will not have you read the five pages. They 
■will be marked as an exhibit. 

Mr. Stern. I am not going to read pages. 

The Chairman. I have just gotten through telling you, if you read 
the table of contents— will you listen to me — you will read the entire 
table of contents, you will not pick out selected parts of it. Counsel 
tells me there are five pages of contents. I do not intend to listen to 
you read those. They will be marked and made a part of the record, 
if the press desires to see them, they can see them. 

(Material referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 3" and will be found 
in the appendix on p. 167.) 

Mr. Stern. Senator, may I say, you quoted Agnes Smedley here. 
You say I quoted from Agnes Smedley. I quoted from a fictional work 
of Agnes Smedley, a case study of an Oklahoma town. 

The Chairman. Were you\a Communist at the time you wrote that 
book? 



114 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Mr. Stern. I refuse to answer that on the grounds of possible self- 
incrimination, sir. 

Mr. CoHN. The book from which we have been reading is in use 
today at the Information center. 

The Chairman. You do not desire to tell us why you broke from the 
Communist Party, why you broke with it, and to what extent you 
believe in the Communist philosophy today ? 

Mr. Stern. I have not said I was a member of the Communist 
Party. 

The Chairman. The committee will adjourn until Monday at 
10 : 30, at which time we will take up Mr. Stassen. 

(Wliereupon, a recess was taken at 12: 05 p. m., the hearing to be 
reconvened Monday, March 30, 1953, at 10 : 30 a. m.) 



STATE DEPAETMENT INFOEMATION PKOGRAM— 
INFOKMATION CENTERS 



WEDNESDAY, APKIL 1, 1953 

United States Senate, 
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Inn'estigations 

OF the Committee on Government Operations, 

Washington^ D. C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to Senate Resolution 40, agreed 
to January 30, 1953, at 10 : 30 a. m., in room 357 of the Senate Office 
Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, presiding. 

Present: Senators Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin; 
Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota ; John L. McClellan, Demo- 
crat, Arkansas; and Stuart Symington, Democrat, Missouri. 

Present also: Roy Cohn, chief counsel; Donald Surine, assistant 
•counsel; Daniel G. Buckley, assistant counsel; David Schine, chief 
consultant ; Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The hearing will come to order. 

Will you call your first witness ? 

Mr. CoHN. Professor Weltfish. 

The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand? In this matter 
now in hearing before the committee, do you solemnly swear to tell 
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Miss Weltfish. That is right. 

The Chairman. Will you identify your counsel? 

Miss Agrin. My name is Gloria Agrin, A-g-r-i-n, of 220 Broadway, 
New York City. 

Mr. Cohn. And you are an attorney in New York ; is that right ? 

Miss Agrin. That is right. 

Mr. CoHN. And the name of the witness is G-e-n-e W-e-1-t-f-i-s-h. 
Is that correct. Miss Weltfish ? 

TESTIMONY OF GENE WELTFISH (ACCOMPANIED BY HER 
COUNSEL, GLORIA AGRIN) 

Miss Weltfish. Right. 

The Chairman. Will you proceed, Mr. Counsel ? 

Mr. Cohn. We have found a number of books in use in the State 
De]^artment information centers by Gene Weltfish. 

Will you give us a report on that, Mr. Schine ? 

Mr. Schine. Mr. Chairman, we have found three of Miss Weltfish's 
books in approximately 50 Information Center overseas libraries, of 
which there are about 228 copies, and it is significant that there are 

115 



116 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

75 copies at Paris alone. The others are widely scattered throughout 
the world. 

Senator Munot. Mr. Counsel, when we speak of this in the present 
tense, do you mean as of now, or as of some calendar date recently 
removed ? 

Mr. CoHN. As far as we know. Senator Mundt, it is as of now. 

I assume that with a large number of books there is some room for 
error or omission, and it is possible that a book has been destroyed 
or a new one added, and that might not have been reflected, but as it was 
explained to us, they try to keep the system well up to date. 

As the book is entered in the library, a slip is sent over from the 
Department of State information center headquarters to the Library 
of Congress file, and an immediate entry is made and it is placed in 
the card file. 

Senator Mundt. Your evidence probably antedates the new Dulles 
order. 

Mr, CoHN. There is no doubt about that. 

Senator Mundt. ^Yhen you say they are there, that means they were 
there before the Dulles order to take them out ? 

Mr. CoHN. There is no doubt about that. 

The Chairman. Let me say this to Senator Mundt : On March 18, 
the new order went out to remove the books of Communist authors 
from the libraries. What progress has been made up to this time I 
do not know. We will have witnesses here this morning, including 
Carl Baarslag, head of the committee of the American Legion, who 
will testify that he personally examined certain libraries, and he will 
testify as to what he found in those libraries. Freda Utley, who 
recently returned from Germany, will testify also on this matter. 

Senator Muntxt. What I would like to know is why they are still 
there when we have the order to take them out. When we say "now," 
1 think we should learn what the situation is. 

Mr. CoHN. I assume, of course, that the Secretary's order is being 
carried out. 

Senator Mundt. I think it should be indicated that when counsel 
says "now," he means the Ides of March. 

Senator McClellan. I think if we confine the testimony to books 
^ that were on the shelf and in use at the time this hearing began, we 
will be safe. 

If we start with the conditions as of the time these hearings started, 
we will be proceeding properly. "V-N^^ien you say "books there now," 
I assume you refer to those there at the time of the start of these 
hearings? 

Mr. CoHN. That is correct. Senator. We will make that very clear 
from now on. 

Now, you are the author of a book called Races of Mankind ; is that 
right. Miss Weltfish? 

Miss Weltfish. I am the coauthor of the book with my senior col- 
league, who is deceased, Ruth Benedict. It is a pamphlet. 

Mr. CoHN. And you say with Miss Benedict you are the coauthor of 
that book. Is that right ? 

Miss Weltfish. That is right. It is a pamphlet. 

Mr. Cohn. Are you also the coauthor of a book called : In Henry's 
Back Yard? 



guages 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 117 

Miss Wei.tfish. With the same collaborator; that is right. 
Mr. CoHN. With Miss Benedict as well? 
Miss Weltfish. That is right. 

Mr. CoHN. And j^ou are the author of some other books, too ? 
IVIiss Weltfish. I doirt know which. I don't think so. 
Mr. CoHN. These are the only ones that you are the author of? 
Miss Weltfish. These are the only ones that would be in public 
circulation. 

Mr. CoHN. Have your books been translated into any foreign lan- 

3? 

Miss Weltfish. This is something I do not know, because after it 
was written it was taken over by other agencies and distributed. I had 
nothing to do with its distribution. 

Mr. CoHN. Do you know a man by the name of Colon ? 

Miss Weltfish. No. 

Mr. CoHN. You don't know him. Do you know whether or not he 
is active in the Spanish department of the Comunist Party of the 
United States? 

Miss Weltfish. I do not know anyone by the name of Colon. 

Mr. Cohn. I see. Now, in what vear was Races of Mankind written, 
Miss Weltfish? 

Miss Weltfish. I must say I am a little hazy. I think it was 1942 ; 
1942, I believe. 

Mr. Cohn. And what was your principal occupation at that time ? 

Miss Weltfish. I was a teacher in the anthropology department at 
Columbia University. 

Mr. Cohn. And were you a member of the Comunist Party at the 
time you wrote this book? 

Miss Weltfish. I invoke the fifth amendment, because I do not want 
to enter into an arena of political manipulation at this time. 

Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that that is not a proper 
claim of privilege under the fifth amendment. 

The question is : 'N^Tien Professor Weltfish wrote this book which 
was in use until March 15, anyway, in the State Department informa- 
tion centers, was she a member of the Communist Party ? 

The Chairman. What is your answer to that. Doctor? 

Miss Weltfish. On the basis that it might tend to incriminate me, 
because of the present atmosphere, I invoke the fifth amendment. 

The Chairman. You are entitled to refuse on the ground that it 
might tend to incriminate you. 

May I say. Doctor, that you are at liberty to discuss any matter with 
your lawj'er at any time you care to. 

Miss Weltfish. Thank you. 

Mr. Cohn. Now, under the fifth amendment, the privilege against 
self-incrimination, you decline to answer whether or not you were a 
"Communist at the time you wrote that book. Is that right? 

Miss Weltfish. That is right. 

Mr. Cohn. Are you currently an instructor at Columbia University ? 

Miss Weltfish. I am a lecturer at Columbia University. 

Mr. Cohn. A lecturer at Columbia University. When were you 
served with a subpena to appear before this committee ? 

Miss Weltfish. Monday at 5 p. m. 

Mr. Cohn. Has anything happened between that hour and now con- 
cerning your status at Columbia ? 



118 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Miss Weltfish. I am still at Columbia. My tenure will terminate 
at the end of this semester. 

Mr. CoHN. When were you notified as to that ? 

Miss Weltfish. About 2 weeks ago. 

Mr. CoHN. You were notified that your tenure at Columbia will 
terminate. Is that correct ? 

Miss Weltfish. That is correct. 

Mr. CoHN. From whom was that notification received ? 

Miss Weltfish. The chairman of my department. 

Mr. CoHN. I see. Can we have his name? 

Miss Weltfish. Prof. Duncan Strong;. 

Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time have you been lecturing 
at Columbia? 

Miss Weltfish. Since 1936. 

Mr. CoHN. Were you a member of the Communist Party in 1936 ? 

Miss Weltfish. I invoke the fifth amendment on the grounds of 
possible self-incrimination. 

The Chairman. Are you a member of the Comunist Party as of 
today ? 

Miss Weltfish. I invoke the fifth amendment, on the grounds of 
possible self-incrimination, not because of any guilt but because I do 
not want to discuss political opinion. 

The Chairman. You will not be entitled to the privilege, then. 
You will be ordered to answer. 

Miss Weltfish. I do not understand. 

The Chairman. You understand, Doctor, that you are entitled to 
this privilege only if you honestly feel that your answer would tend 
to incriminate you. 

Miss Weltfish. I do honestly feel. 

The Chairman. That your answer might tend to incriminate you? 

Miss Weltfish. Might. 

The Chairman. You are entitled to invoke the privilege. 

Mr. Cohn. Now, were you a member of the Communist Party dur- 
ing the entire time you have been a lecturer at Columbia, from 1936 
until the present time ? 

Miss Weltfish. May I ask whether we are discussing the book? 

Mr. CoHN. Well, I think rather than ask, it might be better if you 
would answer the question. 

The Chairman. I think she is entitled to know the reason for the 
question. 

Doctor, we are principally interested at this time in checking into 
the type of material, the type of authors, used by the information 
progi'am. 

I understand we have purchased some 3 million books. That 
figure IS a very rough figure. It might be a million and a half or 
might be four, for all I know. Some 3 million books. 

Up to this time we have been going over the list of authors. We 
have weeded out 85 authors who have been named as members of the 
Communist Party. You were 1 of the 85. So we have been check- 
ing into your background to find out, if we can. whether that is true, 
and if possible why Communist authors were being used to fio-ht 
communism throughout the world. And for that reason, counse? is 
entitled to go into your background and find out if you were a Com- 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 119 

mimist, when you were a Communist, if you broke, wlien you broke, 
tlie reason you broke, whether you broke before you wrote the book, 
whether the fact you were a Communist was known when the book 
was purchased, the entire picture. 

And you will be ordered to answer those questions unless youi 
honestly feel that a truthful answer would tend to incriminate you. 

So, will you repeat the question, Mr. Counsel? 

Mr. CoHN. The question is : Have you been a member of the Com- 
munist Party from 1936, when you began teaching at Columbia, until 
the present day? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer on the grounds of possible self- 
incrimination. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, did j^ou ever state that you had documentary evi- 
dence to the effect that the United States and TTnited Nations Forces 
were using germ warfare, planning to use it, in Korea ? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer on the grounds of possible self- 
incrimination, under the fifth amendment. 

Senator McCi.ellax. j\Ir. Chairman, I would like for the record to 
question this witness about certain books of which she is the author. 
I do not know what the contents of the books are. 

Do you liave some quotations from the books that might be inserted 
in the record at this time ? 

The Chairman. Counsel tells me, Senator McClellan, that they had 
not gone through the book word for word and are not prepared at 
this time to read quotes into the record. 

The principal thing I was concerned about here was to show the 
background of tliis author, and I think these books should be read. I 
do not. of course, want to indoctrinate mj^ staff. 

Senator McClellan. My only point, Mr. Chairman: Apparently 
you have a witness here who is, or has been, a member of the Commu- 
nist Party, or one who is for some reason not known to anyone else, 
apparently unwilling to give her background in this respect. 

The question then arises, if the books are being used, what their con- 
tents are ; whether they are harmless, whether they contain the regular 
party line propaganda, or not. 

Wlien you make a record, I do not care about this particular point, 
but I think excerpts from the books, what we would regard as anti- 
American propaganda or Communist propaganda, should be inserted 
in the record so that those who read the record may know some of the 
substance. 

The CiTAiRMAx. Just opening at random, I find something on page 
18 of the book entitled, "The Races of Mankind," which should inter- 
est my southern colleagues to some extent. 

It shows the intelligence tests of the southern whites: Arkansas, 
41.55 ; northern Negroes, Ohio, 49.50. 

Miss Weltfish. May I state that this came from Army records? 

The Chairman. Pardon? 

Miss Weltfish. That this material came from Army records. 

Mr. CoiiN. That particular statistic? 

Miss Weltfish. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. All of the material in the book did not come from Army 
records, did it ? 

Miss Weltfish. No. 



120 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORIVIATION PROGRAM 

Mr. CoHN. Senator McClellan, in answer to your question, wliat 
Ave are trying to do is get excerpts from every book that is referred 
to here and prepare them for the record as rapidly as we can, so that 
it will be complete. 

; Senator McClellan. I think that is pertinent to this record. Some 
of the contents that are objectionable as Communist propaganda, at 
least some of it, should be inserted in the record, so that those who read 
the record will have some understanding of what is involved. 

Mr. CoHN. We have done that in the case of a number of witnesses. 
We are going to try to make that complete as fast as we can. 

The Chairman. I may say, Senator McClellan: I have given the 
staff the instruction that where you have a well-known Communist, 
like Earl Browder, William Z. Foster, in those cases it is not too 
necessary to read the book, because the person buying the book sliould 
recognize its nature from the name of the author. Where you have 
an under-cover Communist, one not generally known, then, unless the 
book itself contains Communist propaganda, you could not blame the 
individual who purchased the book. 

Senator McClellan. That is right. I think for the record we are 
undertaking to find out why the taxpayers' money has been spent to 
propagandize other countries and other peoples in a way favorable to 
communism instead of anticommunism, or the American way, so I 
think it is pertinent to the record, at least, when we have a book like 
this, that we make the record complete by showing the character of 
the publication and some of its contents. 

Mr. CoHN. I might ask you this, along those lines, Miss Weltfish : 
Were any changes made in this book from manuscript form prior to 
its publication ^ 

Miss Weltfish. Not that I know of. I mean, I don't know much 
beyond the fact that we handed this material to the publisher, RutK 
Benedict and I, Ruth Benedict, my senior author. And beyond thut, 
I couldn't know" what occurred. As far as I know, the manuscript 
was published as we presented it. 

Senator Mundt. Who is the collaborator with you in the book, Ruth 
Benedict ? 

Miss Weltfish. Professor Ruth Benedict was my senior colleague 
in the anthropoloy department. She is now deceased for several 
years. 

The Chairman. Wag she a Communist? 

Miss Weltfish. I know nothing about her political beliefs. We 
didn't discuss them together. 

The Chairman. Do you know whether she was a Communist? 

Miss Weltfish. As I say, I know nothing about her political beliefs. 
We did not discuss them together. 

The Chairman. I am going to have you answer that question, un- 
less you think it will incriminate her. I am not talking about her po- 
litical beliefs. I am talking about whether or not she was a Com- 
munist. Do you know whether or not she was a Communist? 

Miss Weltfish. As I say, I know nothing about her political be- 
liefs. 

The Chairman. Well, you see, this |)articular chairman does not 
consider the Communist Party as a political party. 

I agree wdth the Supreme Court decision, which has found that it is 
an international conspiracy, not a political party. 



STATE DEPARTAIENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 121 

Therefore, I am going to ask you whether you know whether she was 
a Communist, regardless of what you knew about her political beliefs* 
It is very simple. Either you knew she was a Communist 

Miss Weltfish. As I say, I know nothing about either her political 
beliefs or any activities that she may have been engaged in. I have 
no way of determining such a thing. She was my senior colleague at 
Columbia. This is all I know about her. 

The Chairman. You will be ordered to answer the question. 

Do you know whether or not she was a Communinst? 

Miss Weltfish. I have no way of knowing what her political out- 
look, beliefs, activities, were. 

The Chairman. I am going to order you to answer the question. 
It is a very simple question. 

Do you know whether she was a Communist? This woman who 
helped you write the book? 

Miss Weltfish. I helped her write the book. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Do you know whether she was a Communist ? 

Miss Weltfish. Of course not; no. 

The Chairman. You do not know whether she was Communist? 

Miss Weltfish. I have no way of knowing such a thing. 

The Chairman. Do you know ? 

Miss Weltfish. I do not know. 

Mr. CoiiN. Did you ever attend a Communist meeting with her ? 

]\Iiss Weltfish. I assert my privilege, that it would tend to incrim- 
inate me, under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoHK^. Do you want to reconsider the prior answer you gave, 
as to whether or not vou know if she w^as a Communist ? 

Miss Weltfish. ^o, I don't. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, I think I have asked you this question. T don't 
recall whether you have stated within the last 2 years that you had 
documentary evidence that this country was using 

The Chairman. May I ask the witness : Does it bother you to have 
the cameras in front of you ? 

Miss Weltfish. No. I don't like to curb public communications. 
On the contrary, this is what I have been trying to do with my books. 
However, it is a problem and is rather disturbing to have the light 
in my face. 

The Chairman. I think it is disconcerting. 

We have the rule, which I wish you would not violate, not to use 
flash cameras unless the witness indicates ahead of time that they 
would like to have them used, in which case I do not care whether 
they are used or not. 

Miss Weltfish. I won't say that I like them or don't like them. I 
just say I don't like to stop people from communicating if they want 
to communicate. 

The Chairman. I am going to ask the cameramen not to take any 
flash pictures while the witness is testifying. I think it is discon- 
certing. 

Senator Mundt. Do we have in the record the subject on which 
the witness was delivering lectures at Columbia ? 

Mr. Cohn. Anthropology. 



122 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

You have been lecturing in the anthropology department since 
1936? 

Miss Weltfish. That is right. 

Mr. CoHN. My question is : Have you stated within the last 2 years 
that you had documentary evidence that the United States was using 
germ warfare in Korea ? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer, on the grounds that it would 
tend to incriminate me — fifth amendment. 

The Chairman. Let me ask counsel if it is correct that this witness 
has so stated. 

Mr. CoHN. Newspaper reports, universal newspaper reports, have 
so indicated, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. And you refuse to answer whether or not that is 
true ? 

Miss Wei/tfish. I do. 

Mr. CoHN. Are you a sponsor today of the committee to secure 
j ustice in the Rosenberg case ? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer on the grounds that it would 
tend to incriminate me, under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoHN. Are you a member of any conunittees supporting the 
convicted Communist Party leaders ? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer, on the grounds that it would 
tend to incriminate me, under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoHN. Have you attended any Conmmnist meetings with any 
members of the faculty of the Columbia University ? 

Miss Welitish. I refuse to answer, on the grounds that it would 
tend to incriminate me, under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoHN. Have you attended any meetings with any students at 
Columbia ? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer on the grounds that it would 
tend to incriminate me, under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoHN. Have you attended any Connnunist meetings with any 
students in your classes at Columbia ? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer on the grounds that it would 
tend to incriminate me, under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoHN. Have you ever solicited any student to join the Com- 
munist Party ? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer on the grounds that it would tend 
to incriminate me, under the fifth amendment. 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I have to attend an Armed 
Services Committee meeting in a few minutes. 

Could I ask the witness a few questions before leaving ? 

Are you an American citizen, Doctor ? 

Miss Weltfish. I am. 

Senator Symingix)n. Do you think you are a good American ? 

Miss Weltfish. I am certain that I am a good American. I trust 
the American people. I believe in the American form of govern- 
ment. I believe in my country and its bright future and its important 
past. 

Senator Symington. Then you could not consider yourself a good 
American if you belonged to an organization that was dedicated to 
the destruction by force of the American Government ; could you? 

Mis Weltfish. This is, of course, absolutely true. 



STATE DEPARTMENT ESTFORMATION PROGRAM 123 

Senator Symington. I beg your pardon? 

Miss Weltfisii. Of course, I couldn't. 

Senator Symington. What you are really saying is, then, that you 
are not a member of the Communist Party ; is it not? 

Miss Weltfisii. I would not want to destroy the American Govern- 
ment under any circumstances. 

Senator Symington. Do you believe that the Communist Party is 
controlled by the Soviet, in this country ? 

Miss Weltfisii. I refuse to answer on the grounds of self-incrimi- 
nation. 

Senator Symington. Do you believe that the Communist Party is 
dedicated to the destruction by force of the American Government? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer on the grounds of possible self- 
incrimination. 

Senator Symington. You would not answer whether you think the 
Communist Party is dedicated to destroy the democracies of the free 
world? 

Miss Weltfish. No. 

Senator Symington. Then I would like to ask you this question: 
At one time the Communist Party and the Communists were allies 
of this country ; and, tlieref ore, if you had been a member of the Com- 
munist Party in the thirties, and said, as many have, that they were 
mistaken, why would you be afraid of answering the question or 
ashamed of answering the question if once you have been a Communist 
and now you feel you are a good American ? 

Miss Weltfish. I am neither afraid nor ashamed to answer any 
questions. I have always been a good Ameican. I will continue to 
be always a good American. 

Senator Symington. The chairman asked you if you had been a 
member of the Communist Party in 1936, and you now say that you 
are a good American. Why are you afraid or ashamed to answer 
that question ? 

Miss Weltfish. I am not afraid to answer nor ashamed to answer 
any questions. 

Senator Symington. Why do you not answer it, then, as to whether 
you were a member of the Communist Party in 1936? 

Miss Weltfish. I feel that these issues that are being discussed 
here are so involved with the present tangled condition of political 
manipulation and administration that I cannot enter into such 
discussions. 

Senator Sttsiington. Well, do you think that the Soviet regime 
today is friendly to the United States? 

Miss Weltfish. As I say, these are questions — we are not at war. 

Senator Symington. Doctor, that is a very simple question. I asked 
you : Do you believe that the Soviet Government today is friendly 
to the United States ? 

Miss Weltfish. As I say, the simplest of questions on the surface 
are more complicated than they can possibly indicate in a few words. 

Senator Symington. I will pursue the question, although I am 
surprised at your answer. How could you be a good American if you 
are not willing to say today that you are not a member of the Com- 
munist Party? 

Miss Weltfisii. I can be a good American by not discussing my 



124 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Senator Symington. In other words, you think that, as to whether 
or not you are a member of an organization which is dedicated to over- 
throwing the United States Government by force, it is incidental as to 
whether or not you are a good American. Is that correct ? 

Miss Weltfish. The only thing that is involved in my being a good 
American is to act on each issue and on each occasion as my conscience 
and knowledge tell me in a given situation. 

Senator Symington. Well, on this occasion we would like to ask 
you, based on what has been going on in the world recently — you have 
said you are a good American ; we would like to ask — are you a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party today ? 

Miss Weltfish. As I say, what has been going on in the world has 
reached a stage of complexity where all I can say in general and in 
particular is that I am always a good American ; that this is all I care 
about, and that is what means the most to me. 

The Chairman. You have not answered the question. 

Senator Symington asked you whether or not you were a member of 
the Communist Party as of today. 

Miss Weltfish. I have answered the question. I think I have 
already. 

Is this now a separate occasion from the one that Mr. Colin 
brought up ? 

The Chairman. Well, counsel wants to know whether you are a 
Communist as of today. 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer on the grounds of possible self- 
incrimination. 

Senator Symington. I would like to ask you again, then, based on 
conditions in the world, how you feel you could be a good American 
and still be a member of the Communist Party ? Do you think that is 
possible ? 

Miss Weltfish. I don't know, as I say. 

Senator Symington. You do not know. You do not know what ? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer these political questions on the 
grounds of possible self-incrimination. 

Senator Symington. You are a teacher at Columbia University, or 
a lecturer. Is that right ? 

Miss Weltfish. That is correct ; yes. 

Senator Symington. Do you think your pupils have respect for 
your opinion ? 

Miss Weltfish. I think they have respect for my opinions, because 
Ihey continue to register for my classes and pay the necessary fees in 
order to hear them. 

Senator Symington. When you teach, do you express any political 
opinions ? Does the record show ? 

Miss Weltfish. I do not. I try to teach them the material of my 
subject. 

Senator Symington. Do you think your pupils would be interested 
to know whether or not you were a Communist at this stage of the 
world ? 

Miss Weltfish. They do not ask me my political opinions, and I do 
not ask them theirs. 

Senator Symington. If you were a good teacher, Avould they not 
respect your political opinions, if they knew what they were ? 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORIVIATION PROGRAM 125 

Miss Weltfish. I presume they would respect tliem, but we do not 
discuss them. 

Senator Symington. Wliat do you tliink tlieir reactions would be 
<o the fact that you are ashamed or afraid to admit what your political 
opinions are? 

Miss "Weltfish. I am neither ashamed nor afraid to say anything. 

Senator Symington. Then why do you not answer the question? 

Miss Weltfish. I have answered the question. 

Sen.ator Symington. What do you think their reactions would be 
to the fact that you refused to answer these questions ? 

Miss Weltfish. ^Mien I refused to answer questions, I do not try 
to ligure out what the opinions of others will be. 

Senator Symington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Doctor, have you ever received instructions from 
any of your superiors in the Communist Party that you should in- 
doctrinate your students? 

Miss WrxTFiSH. I refuse to answer on the grounds of possible self- 
incrimination, under the fifth amendment. 

The Chairman. Did you ever try to indoctrinate your students 
with Communist ideaS? 

Miss Weltfish. I never tried to indoctrinate my students with any 
ideas. That is not the waj^ I teach. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you this: First, I think you should 
know that while your refusal to answer whether you were a Com- 
munist or not could not be used against yon in a criminal court, when 
you come before this committee, which is an investigating body, and 
you say: "I won't tell you whether I am a Communist, because if I 
told the truth it would tend to incriminate me," the inference that 
any reasonable man draws is that you must be a member of the Com- 
munist Party, because if you were not a member you could say "No"; 
that would not incriminate you. 

Let me ask you this question. First, did you answer the question 
as to whether you attended Communist Party meetings with other 
professors, or have you refused to answer that ? 

Miss Agrin. I believe there was a refusal in the record, Senator. 

The Chair^ian. Did you refuse to answer that? I do not recall 
that ; so I will reask it. 

Have you ever attended Communist Party meetings with other 
professors or teachers ? 

Miss Weltfish. I think this was a question that has been asked. 

The Chairman. You refuse to answer that ? 

Miss Weltfish. Yes. 

The Chairman. On the grounds of self-incrimination. 

Let me ask you this question : Did you ever attend such a meeting 
where there was discussed the necessity of selling the Communist idea 
or indoctrinating the students wtih the Communist ideology? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. Now, you refuse to answer whether you have ever 
solicited any of your students to join the Communist Party. 

Let me ask you this: Do you think a teacher has the right to 
solicit her students to join the Communist Party? 



126 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Miss Weltfish. Teachers should not work with students on politi- 
cal issues. The function of the teacher within the university is to 
teach the subject that they are teaching. 

The Chairman. Just one final question. Do you think that a 
teacher is within her rights when she tries to get her students to join 
the Communist Party? 

Miss Weltfish. I think the teacher on the campus has only the 
function to teach her subject. 

The Chairman. Let us take on and off the campus. Do you think 
the teacher has a right, on or off the campus, to solicit her students 
to join the Communist Party? 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to discuss that question on the grounds of 
possible self-incrimination. 

The Chairman. Counsel has one more question. 

Mr. CoiTN. Have 3^ou received royalties from the sale of this book 
Eaces of Mankind? 

Miss Weltfish. No. Ruth Benedict and I received a small hono- 
rarium for tlie purpose of expenses in connection with typing and 
other material like that. Since then, I have had no connection with 
the pamphlet. * 

Mr. CoHN. I see. It was done under an honorarium. 

Miss Weltfish. Yes. 

The Chairman. Have you ever contacted anyone in the information 
program in regard to the purchase of your books? 

Miss Weltfish. No. 

The Chairman. Do you know whether your agent has? 

Miss Weltfish. I had no agent. 

You mean the Public Affairs Committee who published it? I have 
no agent for this book. This book was done as a public service and 
was given over to whatever public-service agencies might want to 
make use of it for whatever purpose they saw fit. It contained some 
scientific truths which were checked with enough people in the 
academic world to be validated, and it contained simply that. 

The Chairman. Do I understand that you never discussed with 
anyone in the information program the purchase of your books or 
the use of your books ? 

Miss Weltfish. No ; I never discussed its purchase or use as far as 
I know, because I never made any dealings about purchase or use. 

The Chairman. Do you know Mr. Reed Harris ? 

Miss Weltfish. No ; I do not. 

The Chairman. Have you ever met him? 

INIiss Weltfish. No. 

The Chairman. Senator McClellan? 

Senator McClellan. Would it tend to incriminate you to answer 
this question : whether you have recognized and now recognize that 
Soviet or international communism is an enemy of this country and 
our form of Government? Would it tend to incriminate you to 
answer that? 

Miss Weltfish. Again, I want to assert my privilege on such a 
question. 

Senator McClellan. You think it would tend to incriminate you 
to answer that question? 

Miss Weltfish. I think it would tend to incriminate me to discuss 
my political opinions in this context. 



STATE DEPARTMENT ENFORMATION PROGRAM 127 

Senator McClellan. You think in a free America it might incrim- 
inate you if you discussed your political opinions and beliefs? Is 
that what you are saying? 

Miss Weltfisii. In this context, yes. 

Senator McClellan. Well, have you discussed them in other con- 
texts ? 

Miss Welittsh. Yes, of course. 

Senator McClellan. You have ? 

Miss Weltfish. Sometimes I have discussed my political opinions. 

Senator McClellan. You have discussed them under conditions 
where you thought you would not be cross-examined. But, on an 
occasion when the Government is interested in some of its own func- 
tions, you are unw^illing to discuss them because of possible self-in- 
crimination. Is that correct ? 

Miss WfiLTiasH. I discuss my political opinions outside official con- 
texts. 

Senator McClellan. That is right. 

Miss Weltfisii. Outside official contexts. 

Senator McClellan. You think you can do that without incrim- 
inating yourself. But, when you are subjected to interrogation about 
them, you think it would incriminate you if you told the truth. Is 
that correct ? 

Miss Weltfisii. I think that question, as put, conceals within it 

Senator JNIcClellan. It does not conceal anything. If there is any- 
thing concealed in it, tell me what it is. 

There is nothing concealed except what you are concealing; that you 
do not want to tell the truth. 

Miss Weltfish. I want to say that, within ordinary contexts, my 
opinions are subject to change according to circumstances. 

Senator McClellan. Well, have you changed your opinions? 

Miss Weltfisii. I change them often. 

Senator JNIcClellan. All right. Have you changed them about 
communism? Or are you of the same opinion? 

Miss Weltfish. I have changed them on many subjects. I have 
changed them on ever}'^ subject in the course of time. 

Senator McClellan. You change on all of them? 

Miss Weltfish. Certainly. 

Senator McClellan. Would you tell us how you have changed re- 
garding communism and Americanism? 

Miss Weltfish. I have never changed with regard to my identity 
as an American, certainly. 

Senator McClellan. I am willing to accept your sworn statement 
that if you told the truth it might incriminate you. 

Miss Weltfish. The truth has many interpretations, as everyone 
who works with words and concepts knows; and, as I say, the implica- 
tion here that it is possible to develop the truth in a context of this 
sort, where opinions are being frozen instead of allowed the fluidity 
that they should have — I think I have covered the question. 

The Chairman. Doctor, I have in my hand an issue of the New 
York Times for April 1, 1953, and I do not quote from it because it 
happens to be my favorite paper at all. [Reading :] 

Dr. Weltfish has served as president of the Congress of American Women. 
She could not be reached for comment yesterday. Dr. Weltfish, in speeches in 



128 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Vienna and New York, in June 1952, offered to prove the Communist charges 
that the United Nations Forces used germ warfare in Korea. 

I am just curious. Is that a correct quotation ? 

Miss Weltfish. I have never been in Vienna. 

The Chairman. So then you never spoice in Vienna? 

Miss Weltfish, I have never been in Vienna, nor have I spoken 
there. 

The Chairman. You say you never have been there and you could 
not very well have spoken there. Well, how about New York? Did 
you make a speech in New York in which you offered "to prove the 
Communist charges" 

Miss Weltfish. I refuse to answer the rest of that material on 
grounds of possible self-incrimination. 

The Chairman. Just so the record will be complete, let me finish 
the question. 

Did you make a speech in New York in which you "offered to prove 
the Communist charges that the United Nations Forces used germ 
warfare in Korea"? 

I assume your answer is that you refuse to answer ? 

Miss Weltfish, Right. 

The Chairman. You may step down. 

Miss Agrin. May I get my subpena endorsed ? 

The Chairman. Yes; you may do that down in room 101. 

Miss Agrin. Thank you. 

The Chairman. May I say this: This has nothing to do with the 
hearing we are holding today. I read a story this morning to the 
effect that the Greek shipowners — I do not know which of the owners ; 
apparently Kulukundis is quoted — claimed that those Greek ships 
actually had not been plying trade with Red China. 

That is not the information we have had. It is not the informa- 
tion they gave us when they agreed amongst themselves that they 
would discontinue such shipping. So, I am ordering the staff to sub- 
pena all the owners who were so quoted to find out just where their 
ships have been plying the trade, and why, if this is true, they would 
represent to us that they had been trading with Red China. And I 
may say the reports of ONI, the Office of Naval Intelligence, indicate 
that the principal scavenger-ship trade has been the Greek-owned 
ships, most of which ,were bought from us. So, counsel will be re- 
quested to bring those shipowners in at the earliest possible moment, 
if that is acceptable to the other members of the committee. 

Senator McClellan. Could we not get statements from them before 
bringing them in ? I think they should be given an opportunity. We 
perhaps should write them and ask them to make any comments ; and, 
if they deny the report in the paper, that should be sufficient. 

The Chairman. That might be a good idea. 

Senator McClellan. If they say the statement in the press is true, 
or qualify it in any way, we might want to examine them. 
The Chairman. I think that is an excellent idea. 
Senator McClellan, I am trying to avoid unnecessary expense. 
The Chairman. Yes ; I think that is an excellent idea. Senator Mc- 
Clellan. 

So, the staff who interviewed them previously will be requested to 
contact them again and find out why the change in their story, and 
check again with the Office of Naval Intelligence and get the verifica- 
tion of the fact that these ships have been used in the China trade. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 129 

Counsel, I liate to interrupt this particular proceeding with com- 
ments on a dilferent proceedinn;, but this is for the benefit of the press. 

You gentlemen this morning asked me about the Chinese ships. 
Mr. Kennedy tells me that they have copies of charters issued as late 
as March of this year showing trade with Communist China, into 
Connnunist China itself. These are copies of the charters supplied 
them by the shipowners. 

Senator jMcClellan. Mr. Chairman, may I ask if your statement 
now applies to those shipowners listed in the paper this morning ? 

The Chaikmax, ISIay I say that the ships concerned were 206 ships 
owned by the New York Greek Shipowners Association. Now, the 
story says five shipowners. I do not have the names of those five 
shipowners. The storj^ does not name them. Counsel has the 
charters of the ships covered by the agreement, showing that charters 
were issued as late at March of this year. 

Senator McClellan. In other words, some of the shipowners defi- 
nitely were engaged in such commerce during March of this year. 

The Chairman. That is right. I think we should make it clear to 
the press that there never has been any claim that all 242 ships were 
engaged at any particular moment. They were all available for what 
has been referred to as scavenger trade with Red China. 

As Mr. Kennedy points out, the charters show they were carrying 
clear into China. 

Will you raise your right hand, Miss Utley ? In this matter now in 
hearing, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and 
notliing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Miss Utley. I do. 

The Chairman. First, may I ask a few questions. 

Miss Utley, you are a writer ? 

TESTIMONY OF EREDA UTLEY 

MissUTLET. Yes. 

The Chairman. And you have written a number of books over the 
past number of years? 

Miss Utley. I have written about nine books. 

The Chairman. About nine books. 

Where were you born? 

Miss Utley, I beg your pardon ? 

The Chairman. Where were you born? 

Miss Utley. I was born in London, England. 

The Chairman. And for a short period of time were you a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party ? 

Miss Utley. I was a member of the British Communist Party from 
January 1928 until some time in the middle of 1931. I would like 
to explain there, if I may, Senator, that I went to live in Russia 
in 1930, and I ceased to be a Communist a few months after I got 
there, but I lemained in Russia because m37 husband was a Russian 
and couldn't get out. 

He was not a member of the Communist Party. 

The Chairman. Was your husband liquidated by the Communist 
regime ? 

Miss Utley. Was my husband what? 

The Chairman. Was your husband killed by the Communists? 



130 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Miss Utlet. He was arrested in 1936 and I have long presumed 

him dead. • -, o 

Mr. CoHN. You escaped from Eussia thereafter. Is that right i 
Miss Utlet. I got out with my son, who was 2 years old, and I 
still had my British passport, which enabled me to get out. 
Mr. CoiiN. Where did you receive your education ? 
]Miss Utley. At London University. I was a fellow of the London 
School of Economics at the time I went abroad in 1928. 

Mr. CoHN. And you are the author of some books. Is that cor- 
rect? ^ . 
Miss Utley. I am the author of a good many books on Russia and 

on the Far East. 

Mr. CoHN. You are the author of a book called the Lost Illusion ? 

Miss Utlet. Yes. And if I may say, my first book, of which Lost 
Illusion was a cut down, my first book against Russia, was in 1940, 
called The Dream We Lost. 

The Chairman. I am going to ask the photographers to observe the 
rule, taking no flash pictures while the witness is testifying. We 
have that rule. You must observe it. If you do not, I will have to 
very, very reluctantly remove you from the room. I do not want to 
do that, because you young men have been cooperating fully, but 
in the last few days you have been violating that rule. If you want 
to take pictures that are not flash pictures from beyond this enclosure, 
you may do that, but no flash pictures within that enclosure. 

Mr. CoiiN. Miss Utley, have you recently returned from a trip 
abroad ? 

Miss Utlet. I came back in February from having spent 8 or 9 
months, since last May, in Europe. 

Mr. CoiiN. Now, while you were in Europe, were you in Germany? 

Miss Utlet. I was in Germany the greater part of the time, also 
in Italy and in France and in England. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, while in Germany, and also in these other countries, 
did you have occasion to pay a visit to any of the State Department 
information centers, wherein are located this collection of books the 
State Department circulates to give a picture of American life and 
cur fight against communism? 

Miss Utlet. I visited what is called in Germany the America House 
Libraries, which are ,in all the cities of Germany, and I made 
a special study of the books there, for various reasons, for a book, 
and because I was writing an article on the kind of books which 
we gave to the Germans to read, which was published in The Freeman 
last December. And I got hold of the catalogs, and I made a special 
study of what was in them, as well as looking to see what was on the 
shelves. 

Mr. CoiiN. Let me ask you this first basic question. You, of course, 
h>ave recently conducted an actual examination of these books on the 
open shelves. Do you feel that the selection of books, as a general 
proposition, accomplishes the result the State Department said^ it 
wanted to accomplish, of giving a true picture of American life 
and our fight against communism? 

Miss Utlet. No ; I do not. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, I wanted to ask you some questions in detail here. 
First of all, are there catalogs indicating which books are located 
on the open shelves in these State Department information centers? 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 131 

Miss Utley. No; there are just general catalogs, some merely under 
names and some under subject matter, but it never says whether a 
thing is on the open shelves or not. It is taken for granted that all 
(he books there are available. 

Mr. CoHN. You assume the books listed there are available. 

Miss Utley. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. Do you have any of those catalogs? 

Miss Utley. I have some here, and I also have some notes of their 
contents. 

Mr. ConN. Now, my first question on these catalogs will be this, 
Miss Utley : Did you go through these catalogs? Have you examined 
them ? 

Miss Utley. I examined them in detail. 

Mr. CoiiN. Do you find that the catalogs are so set up that you can 
find, say, anti-Communist books with great ease? 

Miss Utley. No. On the contrary, one of the greatest difficulties 
in seeing what is in the libraries is that there is no section at all on 
communism. And if I may just explain, there, what is possibly the 
reason : In the beginning of the occupation Ave agreed with the Rus- 
sians that no anti-Communist or anti-Soviet books should be used 
in Germany at all. That is control council order No. 4. And if 
you will give me a moment on that, because I think it is rather im- 
portant, I might mention that I discovered last year in Munich that 
Hubertus zu Loewenstein, a famous anti-Nazi German who was in 
America for many years as a Carnegie professor and went back to 
Germany after the war, was refused permission by the Munich Public 
Library to read the memoirs of von Seeckt, the Weimar Republic 
general discarded by Hitler. The reason given was an Allied control 
council law, drawn up by Marshal Zhukov, forbidding the Germans to 
read anything critical of the Allies, or militarist in content. There 
is also another control council law. No. 5, which forbids any book 
prejudicial to the Allied forces. 

There is also another council law called No. 5, which covers any- 
thing prejudicial to the Allied forces. 

Mr. CoHN. And that includes the Soviet Union? 

Miss Utley. That includes the Soviet Union. And to further 
answer your question, the result is — or perhaps this is not the real 
reason, but if this is the reason — that there is no section on com- 
munism in those catalogs. So you have to find the books in all sorts 
of odd places, like Labor and Capital, Form of State, and so on. 

Also, in the portion marked "Russia," the listing of books on Russia, 
you find hardlv any anti-Soviet books. 

Mr. CoHN. Vou say you find hardly any ? 

Miss Utley. Hardly any. You can find some anti-Soviet books 
in the catalogs, but tliey are not listed under Russia, and they are not, 
of course, under communism. 

If the committee wants me to, I can later give some details on 
that. 

Mr. CoHN. I think if you can file that with the committee, it will 
be very helpful. I think you have given us a general picture of just 
what the situation is. 

The Chairman. Did I understand you correctly, Miss Utley, that 
you found that the order originally made against the use of the anti- 
Communist works in our occupied area is still being enforced? 

Miss Utley. Senator, I don't imagine that tliis order is being fully 



132 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

enforced in Germany, but I think there are places where it is still in 
force, because maybe they have never been told that they need not 
enforce it any more. And I just guess that that is the reason why 
the catalogs have no section on communism. But, I mean, this is one 
of many orders, which are a kind of debris of the past, when we were 
collaborating with the Soviet Union, and there are lots of this kind 
of thing in Germany, that have never been cleared away. 

The Chairman. I did not quite get the import of what you said, 
that there was a certain individual who could not get a book because 
it was contrary to an order of Marshal Zhukov's? 

Miss Utley. Well, this is Control Council Law No. 4, September 
1945. It was, I understand, originally drawn up by I^Iarshal Zhukov, 
but then was incorporated, and it was accepted by us, and all the four 
occupying powers issued it as an Allied Control Council law. 

The Chairman. Now, what was this example you cited? Who is 
the individual, and what book ? 

Miss Utley. Well, it was Hubertus zu Loewenstein, who was in 
exile here during the whole Hitler regime, and went back afterward. 

The Chairmaist. Can you spell that name for me ? 

Miss Utley. Hubertus Loewenstein, L-o-e-w-e-n-s-t-e-i-n, 

The Chairman. And the first name is Hubert ? 

Miss Utley. Hubertus. He is a Catholic historian. 

The Chairman. And you say he could not get a certain book he 
wanted in Munich because it was contrary to the original order drafted 
by Zhukov ? 

Miss Utley. Well, he was refused under that order by the Munich 
Public Library, not by the American Library but by the German 
Library. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, you say it is extremely difficult to find anti-Com- 
numist and anti-Soviet books. Even those that are in the catalog, 
if the average person would pick up the catalog and look under the 
logical titles ; is that correct? 

_Miss Utley. Yes. For instance, I found Fulton Sheen's Commu- 
nism and the Conscience of the West. Now, that, you would imagine, 
since the catalogs have no section on communism, might be listed 
under "Russia." But it came, as far as I remember, under "Land 
and Capital." 

Mr. CoHN. Under what? 

Miss Utley. Under'"Labor and capital"; sorry. 

Mr. CoHN. Under "Labor and capital," 

Miss Utley. And curiously enough, most of the anti-Communist 
books are to be found under the heading "Labor and capital." So the 
German reader, reading, is led to the assumption that we think, in 
America, that anybody who is anti-Communist is capitalist and any- 
body who is pro-Communist is labor. I mean, that is the implication 
of the list. 

Mr. CoHN. I want to ask you this : Did you find a significant num- 
ber, IMiss Utley, of anti-Communist works,' works by well Imown anti- 
Communists in these information centers ? 

Miss Utley. No ; I found very few. 

Mr. CoHN. You say you found very few ? 

Miss Utley. Very few ; and, as I say, scattered around under various 
curious headings. I made a list here that I can give the committee. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 133 

Mr. CoHN. I would like you to file that with the committee. But 
jou say there were very few. 

Now, I might ask you this, to show that you are somewhat of a 
disinterested witness. One of the books was a book written by you? 

Miss Utley. Yes, they had my Lost Illusion on Russia. It is listed 
under "Europe." That is another heading where you get some very 
curious books put. under "Europe,'* which you would think naturally 
would come under "Russia.'' And mine is not by any means the only 
one. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, you say you found a very small number of books 
by anti-Communists. 

Miss Utley. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. Let me ask you this: Did you find any books by well 
known Connnunists and pro-Communists? 

Miss Utlet. I found several. I think the most outstanding and 
shocking example is Ilya Ehrenburg's book. The Tempering of Russia. 

Mr. CoHN. You mean you actually found on the shelf of an Ameri- 
can information center a book by Ilya Ehrenburg? Was this listed 
in the catalog? 

Miss Utley. It is in the catalog. It is actually in the catalog. And 
I suppose everybody knows he is not only a Soviet propagandist but 
a Soviet citizen, and one of the most notorious Communist propa- 
gandists. 

Mr. CoHN. And his book is listed in the catalog as being stocked by 
the United States information centers. Where is that? 

Miss Utley. In Germany. 

Mr. CoHN. Was that Tempering of Russia by Ilya Ehrenburg? 

Miss Utley. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman, we have checked that with the State 
Department, here, and it is a fact that as of March 15, in some of the 
German libraries. The Tempering of Russia, by Ilya Ehrenburg, the 
top Soviet propagandist, was listed as being in use. 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire, to make the 
record clear? 

You did not actually see the book in the library? 

Miss Utley. No. 

Senator jNIcClellan. But the catalog that was given to you came 
from the library listing the book as available to those who might want 
to read it? 

Miss Utley. I saw it there, yes. I saw it in these books [indicating] . 

These are not my own copies, but I secured copies in Hamburg last 
summer, and it was in these actual lists. 

Senator McClellan. What I was getting at : You do not say you 
saw the books. 

Miss Utley. No. 

Senator McClellan. But the catalog that was passed out by the 
library listed the book as available to those who wanted to read it? 

Miss Utley. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. May I ask this. Miss Utley. Just for the record, 
this man, Ilya Ehrenburg, is considered generally as one of the top 
and very efficient Russian propagandists; is that right? 

Miss IJtley. Yes, definitely. 

Senator McClellan. And he, being a Russian citizen, has a perfect 
right to propagandize for Russia. 



134 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Miss Utlet. Another rather striking or shocking example I found 
only in the German language part of the catalog ; that is, books which 
are in the America House libraries but are in the German language. 
And there I found Egon Irving Kisch's Paradise America. I remem- 
ber Egon Irving Kisch. I do not know whether he is still alive, but 
I think he was originally a German. But he was also a very well 
known Communist propagandist. 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, have you been able to determine in 
how inany other libraries in the world there is stocked this book by this 
Russian propagandist ? 

Mr. CoHN. As far as I know, the indication is that it is only in the 
German information centers. We have no information that it is 
elsewhere. 

The Chairman. Do you know how many copies ? 

Mr. CoHN. No, we don't. We got this information from Miss 
Utley, and we checked it, and the information has been confirmed to 
us. We do not have details. But as far as we know, we found no 
copies other than the one in the German information centers. 

Senator Mdndt. What other books. Miss Utley, did you discover, by 
well known Communists ? 

Miss Utley. William Mandell, whom this committee has already 
examined ; there were five or six of his books, I think. Another one I 
think is not by an admitted Communist or some one recognized as a 
Communist, but he is Louis Dolivet. 

The Chairman. Could you spell that for us, please? 

Miss Utley. D-o-l-i-v-e-t. 

The Chairman. And you say his name was one that you recognized 
as that of a member of the Communist Party ? 

Miss Utley. I think that material is available on him, that his 
original name was Brecker, and that he was Secretary of the Rumanian 
Communist Party years ago. But he has had a lot of aliases. 

The Chairman. I think that is general knowledge. I merely asked 
you so that the record is complete. How do you spell that name, 
again ? 

Miss Utley. D-o-l-i-v-e-t. 

The Chairman. And the other name ? The Communist Party name. 

Miss Utley. That is Kisch, K-i-s-c-h. 

Senator Mundt. Wliat are the names of some of these other Com- 
munist books ? 

Miss Utley. There is Anna Louise Strong, three of hers. 

Senator Mundt. Those that you are sure from your own knowledge 
are actuallj' Communist writers? 

Miss Utley. Well, I have been very careful in these first names I 
have given. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. I have no question about Anna Louise Strong. I 
met her in Russia. 

Miss Utley. Actually, she is not a member of the party, but she is 
certainly a leading propagandist for the Soviet. Then, Howard Fast, 
you know about. There are nine books of his. 

Mr. CoHN. He has refused to answer whether or not he was a Com- 
munist before this committee, Mr. Chairman, in connection with 
something else. 

You said there were nine books by Howard Fast in Germany? 



STATE dkpartmp:nt information program 135 

Miss Utley. Yes. Of course, some of tliem are novels. Then there 
is Louis Aragon, who is a well known French Communist, one book, 
and, oh. Agnes Smcdley, who I think is recognized as a Communist. 

Senator Mundt. You mean they had books by Agnes Smedley in 
l.he American Information Library ? 

Miss Utley. Yes, only one. 

The Chairman. I tliink the ivcord should show that when Agnes 
Smedley died, she left her will stating that her body was to be cre- 
mated and the ashes spread over Communist territory. 

Miss Utley. On the following names, I will stand corrected. I do 
not know whether Mr. Jaff'e can be listed or not as a Communist. 

Mr. CoHN. Is that Phillip J a He 'i 

]\Iiss Utley. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. There are references to him in the oflficial hearings of 
the Internal Security Committee vrhich are available. 

Miss Utley. Another one is Gunther Stein, who was mentioned in 
General Willoughby's book as a Soviet spy, and whose latest book is 
called, The World the Dollar Made, which is sold by the Communist 
Party in London. 

Mr. CoHN. B'y the way, were there any books in that library 
written by Owen Lattimore, who has been found by the Senate Judi- 
ciary Committee to be a conscious, articulate tool of the Soviet con- 
spiracy ? 

Miss Utley. There are lots of his books, naturally. And also by 
Hewlett Johnson, the dean of Canterbury. 

Mr. CoHN. Known as the Red dean ; is that right? 

Miss Utley. The Red dean. And such pro-Communist propagan- 
dists as Johannes Steel. 

I don't know whether they are Communists or not. 

And Jerome Davis and Corliss Lamont. 

Mr. CoHN. I would suggest this, to save time, Mr. Chairman. Miss 
Utley has a considerable number of notes on this, and I wonder if, 
after I ask her a few more questions, she could file with the committee 
the entire list of her findings on these authors and on these books. 

Miss Utley. May I just make one point there? You asked me 
about Lattimore. I counted some 2 dozen books which belonged to the 
Lattimore School on China, and in this China section in particular, 
which I naturally studied in particular as my own subject. I could 
find practically nothing, almost nothing, that was not favorable to the 
Communists, the Chinese Communists; practically every book there. 

Mr. CoHN. You made a thorough examination of the books on 
China, and you say it was well stocked with books by the Lattimore 
School, and you say you found practically nothing that gave the anti- 
Communist side of the China situation? 

Miss Utley. Practically nothing. And if I may, Mr. Cohn, I 
would like to mention here: There is a book about which I made 
particular inquiries, because I thought that possibly they had not had 
time to get it into the catalogs. 

The Chairman. I am having difficulty hearing you. Will you try 
and speak a little louder ? 

Miss Utley. I am sorry. There was one book I asked about because 
I thought it was pretty important, and they might not have had time 
to get it into the catalog. That is Brain Washing in Red China. 



136 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

The Chairman. Brain Washing in Red China? 

Miss Utlet. Brain Was]iin<r in Red China ; Etl Hunter. 

The Chaikman. And that was by whom? 

Miss Utley. Written by Ed Hunter, formerly of the New York 
Post. It is one of the best books in showing- what is happening in 
China now under the Connnunists. And I asked especially for that 
book in various places, and they had not got it. And that was the 
same on any other anti- Communist book on China I asked for. 

Of course, naturally, there are not very many of them. That is 
why it is easy to ask about. 

Senator Mundt. Did you find, Miss Utley, that the books in these 
libraries in the main were books selected by the local librarian in the 
USIS shop? Or were they books selected in Washington and sent 
out? 

Miss Utley. Senator, I can only tell you what the librarians told me. 
In Hamburg, where I spent more time in the America House than any- 
where else, there the German librarian brought the subject up of my 
own book, The China Story, which she said they had wanted very 
much to get into the library, but it had not been permitted by Patricia 
Van Decden, who was in charge of the Amerika Haus libraries under 
Shephard Stone, who ran our Information Services luider McCloy. 

Senator Mundt. I would interpret that as being in violation of this 
order. 

The Chairman. I am going to ask Senator Mundt to take over. I 
have an appointment. 

Counsel, I wish you would try to speed up this process by the State 
Department of trying to identify the individuals who purchased-these 
Communist books. We had Mr. Barrett in before us yesterday in 
executive session. He was in charge for a long time. We thought he 
might be able to shed some light on this, but he could give us no in- 
formation at all. 

Mr. CoHN. We have a witness on that coming in in executive ses- 
sion this afternoon. 

The Chairman. If you have other witnesses, put them on a little 
later, because I will not be back until 2 : 30. 

Senator Mundt. I believe the testimony indicates, Mr. Counsel, that 
in the German situation the advent of the State Department is rather 
recent; that most of , these libraries were stocked in conjunction with 
the High Commissioner's Office rather than the State Department. Is 
that correct ? 

Miss Utley. Well, the latest of these catalogs is up to April 1952. 
That is several years. And one before 1951. So I think it does come 
under the State Department. 

Of course, this opens up a much wider subject. The America Houses, 
like the books that we subsidize and the books we translate, have been 
all more or less under the control of the High Commissioner's Office. 
and probably as to book selection they may be more responsible than 
the State Department, but I do not actually know. I know that as 
regards the newspapers, the German newspapers, to which we give 
money, the ones that we like, or that we have helped, that is decided 
by the High Commissioner's Office. That was headed by Mr. Shephard 
Stone. And the same about the books that are translated into German, 



STATK DKPAPvTMKNT IKFOKMATION PKOGRAM 137 

which is another subject I am not touching on here, which also dis- 
phiys a sort of softness toAvard the left. But this also is decided by 
HICOG in Bonn, as far as I know. 

Mr. CoHN. I think I have no further questions of Miss Utley at 
this time, JNIr. Chairman. 

Senator Muxdt. I would like to ask Miss Utley. since she has spent 
considerable time in Germany and Italy, France and England, whether 
^^he feels that there are other phases of the progiain which would 
merit the attention or investigation of this committee, other than the 
libraries, where you have disclosed some rather shocking situations. 

Miss Utley. Senator Mundt, I am very glad you asked me that 
question, because I think it is one of the most crying needs of our time. 
Having seen how China was lost, I am very much afraid that some 
of the same type of people, or the same attitude of mind that lost us 
China, is operating in Germany. And in particular there, because the 
remnants of the Morgentliau plan are there, and the remnants of 
those orders that we issued together with the Soviet Union. And the 
question of which books are put in the American libraries in Ger- 
many is more important than anywhere else, because up until quite 
recently they could not import the books they wanted themselves. 
They had no money, and also we censored books. 

Up until 1951, Germany could not import anything they liked. 

Now, 1 think this is one of the most important things this committee 
could examine, the operations of our High Commissioner's Office in 
Germany, not because I am saying there are masses of Communists 
there, but because it is tlie same attitude of mind that operated in 
China, the softness, or whatever you w^onld call it. The bookshelves 
are loaded up with what you might call anti-anti-Communist material, 
not fellows-traveler or Communist-sympathizer material but people 
who are extremely anti those who are doing anything against the Com- 
munists. And you could take as an example that you couldn't find 
Ralph Toledano's book on the Hiss trial, but you could find such books 
as Earth's The Loyalty of Free Men. 

Senator Mundt. Do thev have Mr. Chambei-'s book, "Witness, on the 
shelf? 

Miss Utlet. Xo, but I think that that has subsequently been 
brought in. It is being translated into German only now. 

And I would like to say also, Senator Mundt, there may have been 
certain books added since November. I noticed a distinct difference 
in the attitude of various ]ieople in the High Commissioner's Office 
after the election, and it is quite possible that certain books that I say 
are not there may have been added in the last few months. 

Senator Mundt. To the best of your judgment, do you think these 
old rules and regulations Avliich were confirmed at Potsdam, which 
limited the use of anti-Communist material in the western zones of 
Germany, still prevail ? 

Miss Utley. They don't exactly prevail, excepting odd cases, like 
in Munich. They don't prevail as laws that are enforced, but they 
prevail in the sense that the Germans are a little afraid of taking a 
very strong line against communism. 

You see, in the old days, in the first years of the occupation, we said 
anybody anti-Communist was probably pro-Xazi. So if you are anti- 



138 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Communist today, the Germans are a little afraid of being labeled as 
Nazi sympathizers. It operates in that way. 

Senator Mundt. Any further questions? 

You may step down. Thank you very much. 

The committee will stand in recess until 10 : 30 tomorrow morning. 

(Whereupon, at 11: 59 a. m., a recess was taken until 10:30 a.'^m., 
Thursday, April 2, 1953.) 



STATE DEPAKTMENT INFORMATION PROGEAM— 
INFORMATION CENTERS 



THUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1953 

United States Senate, 
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 

OF THE Committee on Government Operations, 

Washington^ D. C. 

The subcommittee met (pursuant to S. Res. 40, agreed to January 30, 
1953) at 10: 30 a. m., in room 357 of the Senate Office Building, Sen- 
ator Karl E. Munclt presiding. 

Present: Senator Karl E. Mundt, (Republican), South Dakota, 
and Senator John L. McClellan (Democrat), Arkansas. 

Present also : Roy Cohn, chief counsel ; Donald Surine, assistant 
counsel ; Daniel G. Buckley, assistant counsel ; and Ruth Young Watt, 
chief clerk. 

Senator Mundt. Is Dr. Schappes in the room ? 

Will you raise your right hand ? Do you solemnly swear the testi- 
mony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Schappes. I do. 

Senator Mundt. You may be seated. 

Will you give your name and present address and present occupa- 
tion for the record, Dr. Schappes, and also the name and address of 
your counsel, the gentleman whom I assume is your comisel, sitting 
there beside you ? 

Are you ready, Doctor Schappes ? 

TESTIMONY OF MORRIS IJ. SCHAPPES, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS 

COUNSEL, JOSEPH FORER 

Mr. SchAppes. I have no doctoral degree, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Professor? Or mister? Or what is it? 

Mr. Schappes. Mister. 

Senator Mundt. Will you tell us your name and address and pres- 
ent place of employment ? 

Mr. Schappes. My counsel, is Mr. Joseph Forer; F-o-r-e-r. His 
address is 711 14th Street NW. 

Senator Mundt. Washington ? 

Mr. Schappes. Washington, D. C. 

My name is Morris U. Schappes. And I should like, sir, to present 
a brief statement to the committee. 

Senator Mundt. Will you give us your address and your present 
place of employment? 

139 



140 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. My address is 94 Hamilton Place, New York 31, 

N. Y. 

I should like to present this statement, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. And your present employment ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. May I present this statement at this point? 

Senator Mundt. We want to get you identified. Your present place 
of employment ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I am largely self-employed. I also have other em- 
ployment, which I refuse to identify here, for the following reasons : 

First, I regard this inquiry as an invasion of freedom of mind, of 
scholarship, and of association, or, to put it more eloquently, as the 
American Association of University Professors on March 27 in its 
convention, as reported in the Times of jNlarch 28, said 

Senator Mundt. I think you should be addressing your complaint 
to another committee. We are not investigating that here. But if 
you have a statement to read, you may go ahead. 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I had no idea exactly what your purpose was, since 
the subpena did not state what you were investigating me for. I 
should like to finish my reasons, if I may. 

Senator Mundt. How long will it be ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. It will be very brief. 

Senator Mundt. Go right ahead. 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. This statement by the American Association of 
University Professors stated that : 

Political misuse of legal devices, suppression of disseut, the banning and 
censorship of books, either because of their ideas or because of what their authors 
believe, the boycotting of the creative mind — these and other methods of control 
are among the most dangerous enemies of a free society. 

So, under the provisions of the first amendment to the Constitution, 
which guaranteed freedom of mind, scholarship, and association, 
that is my first reason. 

My second reason is that this inquiry exceeds the powers of Congress, 
because it invades certain rights constitutionally reserved to the people 
of our country under the ninth and tenth amendments to our Con- 
stitution. 

And the third and last reason that I refuse to answer is under my 
privilege under the fifth amendment, not to be compelled to be a wit- 
ness against myself., 

I want to say that this is a privilege for the benefit of the innocent 
as well as for the guilty, and that no imputation of guilt can properly 
be inferred from my claim under this fifth amendment. 

Senator Mundt. Have you finished your statement? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. If you mean this statement which I want to intro- 
duce at this point, if 'the identification has been completed 

Senator Mundt. Yes. I asked you the question where you were 
presently employed, and if you choose to answer that question by 
saying that you' do not want to tell this committee where you are 
presently employed, because to do so might tend to incriminate you, 
then you may appeal to your rights under the fifth amendment and 
refrain from answering the question, but that is the only basis on 
which you can refrain from answering that specific question. 

So I will now repeat it to you. 

Where are you presently employed ? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I refuse to answer for the reasons already stated. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 141 

Senator Mundt. You will have to state the reason under the fifth 
amendment. Otherwise, the committee cannot accept it. 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. The reasons I have stated are three, including the 
fifth amendment. 

Senator Muxdt. Then you refuse to answer that question because- 
you feel to tell us where you are presently employed might tend to> 
incriminate you ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. All right. You may proceed. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. May I, sir, introduce this brief statement? 

Senator Mundt. Not at the moment. 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. Wliy not, sir ? 

Senator Mundt. Counsel is going to interrogate you temporarily. 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. It is a brief statement. 

Senator Mundt. You will be given a chance to make a brief state- 
ment, but counsel is now going to interrogate you. 

Mr. ScHAppES. And I will be given a chance to introduce this state- 
ment ? 

Senator Mundt. That is correct. 

Mr. Cohn? 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman, first I would ask Mr. Surine if he can 
tell us whether any works by this witness, Mr. Schappes, were in use 
by the State Department information program as of March 15, 1953. 

Mr. SuRiNE. In a book entitled "Documentary History of the Jews, 
in the United States," written by this witness, as of March 15 of 
1953, our information shows that it is being used in the program at 
Tel Aviv. We do not have the full details as to the other places in 
various parts of the world where it may be used. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call your attention to the 
fact that this book was published in the year 1950. It is entitled,, 
"A Documentary History of the Jews in the United States," by this 
witness, and was published in the year 1950, and it was in use as of 
March 15 in Tel Aviv. 

Senator Mundt. Who was the publislier? 

Mr. CoHN. This was published hj the Citadel Press, New York. 

Now, Mr. Schappes, when you wrote this book, which is in use in the 
State Department information center in Tel Aviv, Israel, this book 
entitled, ^'A Documentary History of the Jews in the United States," 
were you a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Schappes. I want to say, first, that a revised second edition was 
published in 1952. That will complete your record on the publication. 

Mr. CoHN. There was a revised edition in 1952. All right, sir. Fine. 
Thank you. 

Now, the question is : In 1950 when the original edition was j^ub- 
lished, were you a member of the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Schappes. I refuse to answer that for the reasons already 
stated. 

Senator Mundt. You will have to repeat your reasons, sir. 

Mr. Schappes. The reason that this inquiry is an invasion of free- 
dom of mind 

Senator Mundt. If you appeal to the fifth amendment, and if you 
honestly feel that an answer that is forthright will tend to incriminate 
you, you do not then have to answer the question. 



142 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I wish to say, Senator, that you may recognize one, 
or none, of the reasons I gave, but the question asked by counsel was : 
What are my reasons? I am stating those. And you will, of course, 
make your own judgment on what you wish to recognize as appro- 
priate. There are differences of opinion between us, and, I dare say, 
between millions of xVmericans, and this committee. 

Senator Mundt. Apparently the difference of opinion is between 
you and the courts of the United States, because they recognize only 
one. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. My information is otherwise, sir, but I will turn to 
the question in hand. 

I refuse to answer this question for the reasons stated, including the 
fifth amendment. 

Senator JSIundt. You may proceed with the other questions. 

Mr. CoHN. My next question is : Wlien this revised edition you have 
told us about was ]niblished, in 1952, at that time, at the time you 
revised the edition, were you a member of the Communist Party ^ 

Mr. SoHAPPES. I refuse to answer that for the reasons stated. 

Senator Mundt. For which reason ? 

Mr, ScHAPPES. For the -3 reasons, under the 1st, 9th, 10th, and 5tli 
amendments. 

Mr. CoHN. You are again taking recourse to the fifth amendment? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I am. 

Mr. CoHN. All right. 

Now I will ask you this, Mr, Schappes : Are you a member of the 
Communist Party today? 

Mr. Schappes. I refuse to answer that for the reasons stated, includ- 
ing the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoHN. Did you consult with anyone in authority in the Com- 
munist Party at the time you were writing this book which is in the 
State Department Information Center in TelAviv ? 

Mr. Schappes. I refuse to answer that question for the reasons 
stated. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman, at this point I wonder if I might read 
one sentence each from two reviews of this book by responsible Jewish 
organizations in this country and then have the entire reviews made 
exhibits and attached to the record. 

Senator Mundt. Yoii may. 

Mr. CoHN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The first is a review by Prof. Ellis Rivkin, professor of Jewish 
history at the Hebrew Union College — Jewish Institute of Religion, 
m the American Jewish Archives, June 1952, in which Professor Riv- 
kin states, concerning this book, on page 98 — I see you have the re- 
view, Mr. Schappes, and you can follow me — in the second sentence 
from the bottom of the first paragraph on the page : 

In this review an attempt has been made to show what the boolf reallj' is, 
namely, an effort to win Jews over to the policies of the American Communist 
Party. 

That is the sentence. 

Now, I would ask that the entire review, Mr. Chairman, be made 
an exhibit, attached to these hearings. 

Senator Mundt, It will be marked as an exhibit and attached to 
the record. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 143 

(Tlie document referred to was marked "Exhibit 4" and may be 
found in tlie files of the subcommittee.) 

Mr. ScHAPPES. May I, sir, also ask that as an exhibit my ll-page 
refutation of the entire review be incorporated into the record, also 
published in the same journal, the American Jewish Archives for 
January 1953? 

Senator Muxdt. That will be accepted as an exhibit. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 5" and may be 
found in the files of the subcommittee.) 

Mr. CoHN. When you wrote that refutation, were you a member 
of tlie Communist Party? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I will turn this over as evidence. 

Senator McClellan. The witness asked that an excerpt from his 
book be published in the record ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. No ; I didn't ask that. 

Senator McClellan. What did you ask? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I asked that my reply to this review, which appeared 
in the very next number of the same periodical, the same scholarly 
journal 

Senator McClellan. You said something about 11 pages. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. It was an 11-page reply to an 11-page review. 

Senator McClellan. Well, we are not putting the whole review in 
the record. 

Senator Mundt. I accepted it as an exhibit. 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. May I ask whether Dr. Rivkin's review is accepted 
as an exhibit or incorporated into the record ? 

Mr. CoHN. It is being treated exactly as yours is, sir. 

Now, when you wrote this book, which Mr. Rivkin's review states 
was an effort to win Jews over to the policies of the Communist Party, 
and when you wrote this 11-page refutation, were you a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I refuse to answer that on the gromids stated. 

Mr. CoHN. You refuse to answer that under the fifth amend- 
ment on the grounds your answer might tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I refuse to answer that on the grounds stated, 
including the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoHN. I see. Now, Mr. Chairman, the next review is one 
by Nathan Schachner, editorial consultant of the American Jew- 
ish Committee and a well-known historian and himself the author 
of a number of books. Mr. Schachner states this in his review, 
which I ask be made an exhibit. 

I will just read one sentence. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Where was that review published, sir? 

Mr. CoHN. This was published by the American Jewish Com- 
mittee. I have a copy here, and I would be glad to make it available 
to you. 

Mr. Schachner states, in the second paragraph of his review, and 
I quote: 

Mr. Schappes states frankly in his introduction that to him "history is 
not a toy but a tool." It is also "his aspiration that the tool be used well 
and often." And Mr. Schachner .states that : 

"The tool he uses happens to contribute to CommunLst ideology." 

Ruth, will vou show this to the witness? 



144 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Mr. FoRER. He has a copy. 

Mr. CoHN. Oh, you have a copy. Do you have a refutation? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I have a refutation, and I want to make this point. 
First, that what counsel called a review never appeared in print. 
It was surreptitiously distributed in a mimeographed form, widely,, 
but not through ordinary channels of scholarship, and it was re- 
futed not by me — I didn't need to stoop to this — but it was refuted 
in the American Jewish Congress Weekly of May 7, 1951, by the 
reviewer of that periodical, under the title: "Distorted Literary 
Criticism." I ask for permission to enter this. 

Senator Mundt. What is the name of the reviewer? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. The reviewer's name is Ward Moore, M-o-o-r-e. I 
should like to have this incorporated in the same way in which the 
other is. 

Senator Mundt. Moore, did you say? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. Moore. The first name is Ward. 

Senator Mundt. Do you know Mr. Moore? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I do not know Mr. Moore. 

Senator Mundt. It will be accepted as an exhibit. 

(The documents referred to were marked exhibits 6 and 7, and 
may be found in the files of the subcommittee.) 

Mr. SuRiNE. Do you know whether or not Mr. Moore is a Com- 
munist ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I have no knowledge at all on that. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, when was Mr. Moore's review written? Do you 
know? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Mr. Moore's review was published on the 7th of 
May 1951. 

Mr. CoHN. On the 7th of May 1951 were you a member of the 
American Communist Party ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I refuse to answer that for the reasons already stated, 
including the fifth amendment. May I at this point offer as exhibits 
certain generally laudatory reviews of my book that have appeared 
in historical and other learned journals and quarterlies? 

Senator Mundt. They will be accepted as supplemental data. 

(The material referred to above may be found in the files of the 
subcommittee. ) 

Mr. CoHN. Now, Mr. Schappes, are you the Morris U. Schappes 
who was convicted of perjury in denying that you were a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Schappes. I was convicted of perjury. I do not remember ac- 
curately, since this took place 12 years ago or more, what the four 
charges in the indictment were. 

Mr. CopiN. Could you just give us the substance of the charges? 
Did it involve your denial of Communist membership ? 

Mr. Schappes. I have not looked at the record for 11 years. 

Mr. CoHN. Did you serve a term in jail ? 

Mr. Schappes. I served 131/^ months in prison. 

Mr. CoHN. Well, don't you remember just why you went there? 

Mr. Schappes. I remember that I was convicted of perjury, yes. 

Mr. CoHN. For what? 

Mr. Schappes. Well, there was a witch hunt on a State scale going 
on 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 145 

INIr. CoHN. Would you tell us what the indictment charged, and of 
what the jury found you guilty? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. The indictment charged perjury on four counts, 
iind I was found guilty. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, just give us the substance of the indictment. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I do not remember the details of the indictment. 

Senator IMundt. Are you frequently indicted for perjury, so that 
it is kind of confusing? 

]\Ir. SciiAPPEs. That is an insulting question, sir. I ask you please 
to withdraw it. 

Senator Mundt. It is very difficult for me to understand. If you 
go to jail frequently you might be confused, but I understood this 
was the onlv time vou have been in jail. Or is it ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. It is the only time I was in jail. 

Senator Mundt. I would think you would know why you went. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I know why I went. I went because I was con- 
victed, in a witch hunt, of perjury on four counts. The exact form 
of the four counts I do not remember. It is a matter of public record, 
and you can easily ascertain it by resort to the public record. 

Mr. CoHN. I don't happen to have the public record here, Mr. 
Schappes, and I find it very difficult to accept the fact that you can't 
give us any idea as to the nature of the indictment against you. 

Mr. Schappes. I deplore your difficulty, but I have said I do not 
remember exactly and I do not wish to make any statement that may in 
any sense be inaccurate, since this is a formal question. The indict- 
ment was specific on four counts. And I do not remember the details 
of the counts. 

Senator McClellan. You use the shopworn term "witch hunt." 
Since you do not remember, you say, what the charges were, can you 
give us your opinion on whether the witch hunt in your case was 
successful or not? 

Mr. Schappes. No, because there was on the faculty of City Col- 
lege, which was one of the targets of the witch hunt, a Japanese 
agent, who was not uncovered by the witch hunt, who was impris- 
oned on the initiative of the FBI after the witch hunt closed and 
when the war began. 

Senator McCleelan. They missed him and found you? Is that 
what you are saying? 

Mr. Schappes. I am saying this was a real witch hunt, because it 
was not aimed at finding enemies of our country, such as this Japanese 
spy, but aimed at terrorizing teachers and impairing academic free- 
dom and undermining the morale of the student body. 

Senator ]\IcClellan. And it wound up finding you guilty of per- 
jury? 

Mr. Schappes. It wound up in much more disastrous consequences 
for the free educational system of our country. 

Senator McCleelan. And for you ? 

Mr. Schappes. For me it led to a prison term. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman, of course, the reason I want to get the 
exact nature of the charge — and if ISIr. Schappes can't give it to us 
I will ask for the official record— is the obvious point that here is a 
man convicted of perjury, my recollection is, for denying member- 
ship in the Communist Party and some 9 years after that conviction, 



146 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

a matter of public record, known all over the country, a book of his 
is published and placed on the shelves in Tel-Aviv, Israel, which these 
two responsible reviewers say followed the Communist line. 

Mr. Sqhappes. In other words, you had a sufficient answer. You 
didn't have to badger me that way in order to get me to make state- 
ments about things I do not accurately remember. 

Mr. CoHN. I asked you a very simple question, whether or not it 
was a fact that the charge was the denial of your membership in the 
Communist Party. If you don't recall, and that is your honest testi- 
mony under oath, we will leave it and go on to something else. 

Mr, SoHAPPES, I don't recall, 

Mr. CoHN. You don't recall. 

Now, I will ask you this. At the time you wrote this book, which 
is in the State Department information center at Tel- Aviv, did you 
believe that the Soviet Union was an enemy of the United States ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES, At the time I wrote this book, did I believe the 
Soviet Union was an enemy of the United States? 

Mr. CoHN. That is right. 

Mr, ScHAppES. No. 

Mr. CoHN. Let me ask you this. Did your book in any way reflect 
the Communist Party line at that time ? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I refuse to answer that, on the grounds stated, in- 
cluding the Fifth Amendment. 

Senator Mundt. Do you now believe that the Soviet Government 
is an enemy of the United States ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Your present question is — may I have it read? 

Senator Mundt. Do you now believe that the Soviet Government is 
an enemy of the United States ? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. No. And I should like to return to the previous 
question and make a fuller answer to that. 

Senator Mundt. Which question do you have in mind ? 

Mr. ScHAppEs. The question about what my book reflected, whether 
it reflected a Communist line. 

Mr. CoHN. You refused to answer that on the ground the answer 
might tend to incriminate you. Do you want to withdraw that? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I want to withdraw that answer. 

Mr. CoHN. May I ask you, before you withdraw : Was your answer 
made in good faith when you made it ? 

Mr. ScHApPEs. It was made in good faith. 

Mr. CoHN. You honestly believed, at the time you said the answer 
might tend to incriminate you, that the answer might tend to in- 
criminate you ? 

Mr, ScHAPPES. I did. 

Mr. CoHN. And you now, 2 minutes later, think it would not? 

Mr. ScHApPEs. You recall that I hesitated before answering, and 
spoke too soon. My tongue worked more rapidly at that point than 
my mind. And, as I was uttering it, I reflected that I might consult 
counsel on this. 

I have consulted counsel and want to answer the question differently 
now. 

Senator Mundt. Go right ahead. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. The opinions, the views, the scholarship in the book, 
reflect my own understanding at every point of what I believe to be 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORIVIATION PROGRAM 147 

the historical truth and the proper interpretation of that historical 
truth. 

Mr. CoHN, I will ask you this: Do you want to reconsider, with- 
draw your claim of privilege, and give us a full answer on this now? 

With reference to the exact same situation, were you in consultation 
with any authorities of the Communist Party at the time you were 
writing this book? 

Mr. ScHApPEs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds al- 
ready stated, including the fifth amendment. 

Mr. OoHN, Do you persist in your refusal to tell us whether or not 
3'ou. yourself, were a member of the American Communist Party at 
the time you wrote this book? 

Mr. ScEL^ppES. I do. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, are you a sponsor of the National Committee to 
Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case ? 

]\Ir. ScHAPPES. I refuse to answer that on the grounds stated, in- 
cluding the fifth amendment. 

Senator Mundt, Is it your feeling, then, that to identify yourself 
with tliat committee might tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I have stated my reasons. 

Mr. CoHN. Have you ever taught at any official school of the Com- 
munist Party ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I may say in elaboration on that that I have decided 
opinions about the injustice being done the Rosenbergs, in the sen- 
tences and in the questions about due process that have been raised 
by eminent scientists and others. 

Senator Mundt. Proceed, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, have you ever taught at an official school of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I refuse to answer that, on the grounds already 
stated, includino; the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoiiN. Have you ever taught at the Workers School in New 
York? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I refuse to answer that, on the grounds stated, in- 
cluding the fifth amendment, that I need not be compelled to testify 
against myself or be a witness against myself. 

Mr. CoHN. Did you, in 1938 or 1939, teach or advocate the over- 
tlirow of the United States Government by force or violence? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I do not believe in or advocate the overthrow of the 
Government by force or violence, but I refuse to answer the question 
on the grounds stated, including the fifth amendment. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, you are implying to this committee 
that while you do not believe in or advocate the overthrow of the 
Government by force and violence, you may have taught that? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I am implying no such thing, sir. 

Senator Mundt. You certainly are implying that to this particular 
Senator. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. You are inferring it, but I am not implying it. I 
think your inference is incorrect. 

Senator Mundt. The inference is based on your testimony. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. No, it is based on a preconceived idea. 

Senator Mundt. You are in control of your implications, but I am 
in control of my inferences. 



148 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAJVI 

Mr. ScHAPPES. That is where we and millions of people differ with 
you. 

Mr. CoHN. Have you ever taught at the School for Democracy ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I refuse to answer that on the grounds already 
stated, including the fifth amendment. 

Mr. CoHN. Is the School for Democracy a Communist school? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Not in my opinion. 

Mr. CoHN. It is not. You refuse to answer whether or not you 
taught there. Were its lectures advertised in the Daily Worker? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I don't remember whether they were or not. 

Mr. CoHN. Are you a reader of the Daily Worker ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Yes. I am a reader of the Daily Worker. 

Mr. CoHN. To the present time? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. To the present time. 

Mr. CoHN. Did the Daily Worker review your book, by the way? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. It probably did. I have no exact recollection, but 
it probably did. I hope it did. 

Mr. CoHN. Would you say it was a rather favorable review ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Since I don't have an exact recollection, I could not 
have an idea as to the tenor of the review. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, have you written articles for the Morning Frei- 
heit, a Communist newspaper in New York ? 

I will withdraw that. 

Have you written articles for the Morning Freiheit ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I refuse to answer that, on the grounds stated. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, Mr. Schappes, by how many names other than 
the name you have given this committee have you been kown ? 

Mr. Schappes. You mean pen names, like Mark Twain for Samuel 
Clemens ? 

Mr. CoHN. No, I mean Communist Party names. 

Mr. Schappes. I refuse to answer that, on the grounds already 
stated. 

Mr. CoHN. Were you ever known by the name of M. Vetch, 
V-e-t-c-h? 

Mr. Schappes. I refuse to answer that on the grounds already 
stated. 

Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been known by the name of Allen Hor- 
ton, H-o-r-t-o-n ? 

Mr. Schappes. I refuse to answer that on the grounds already 
stated. 

Mr. Cohn. I see. And you persist in your refusal to tell us whether 
you were a member of the Communist Party and in consultation with 
Communist functionaries at the time you wrote this book, at the time 
it was published in 1950, and at the time the revised edition was writ- 
ten and published in 1952. Is that right ? 

Mr. Schappes. Are you in the habit of asking scholars whom they 
consult in order to work on their projects? ' 

Mr. Cohn. Well, I am in the habit of trying to determine whether 
or not a book on the shelf of the State Department information center 
was written in consultation with any functionary of the Communist 
Party — very definitely. 

Mr. Schappes. I refuse to answer the question, on the grounds 
stated. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 149 

Mr. CoijN. I have no further questions. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCleHan? 

Senator JNIcClellan. I would like to ask the witness if he regards 
international communism as a conspiracy. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. That is a loaded question. "International com- 
munism" is a loaded phrase. I have an opinion on it. In my opinion, 
communism is not a conspiracy. 

Senator McClellan. You do not regard it as a conspiracy? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. No. I do not see how a movement which embraces 
hundreds of millions of people can be a conspiracy. Conspiracy im- 
plies a quantitative difference so vast that I can not share your opinion. 

Senator McClellan. There would have to be at least more than two 
people to conspire, would there not ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. But 800 million people or a billion people can't 
conspire. 

Senator McClellan. You seem pretty well informed with it. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I am a historian and writer by profession, sir. 

Senator McClellan. You think 800 million people, of their own 
free will, have accepted international communism as a world ideology 
and philosophy? Do you believe that? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I think there are 

Senator McClellan. Do you believe that? Answer my question. 

Mr. SciiAPPES. I am answering the question, sir. 

Senator McClellan. All right, do you believe that 800 million peo- 
ple have freely accepted international communism as an ideolog}?^ and 
philosophy ? 

Mr. Schappes. I believe that there are hundreds of millions of peo- 
ple who are freely, and to a large extent, with increasing prosperity 
and happiness, living under socialism. 

Senator McClellan. You have not answered my question. 

Do you believe what I have asked ? 

Mr. Schappes. Your question is stated in such a prejudiced way. 

Senator McClellan. Well, I used your words. You said SOU 
million. 

Mr. Schappes. Well, I am using my words, and you want to strait- 
jacket me to using your words. 

Senator McClellan. Have these 800 million people voluntarily and 
of their own free will accepted it? 

Mr. Schappes. I believe that these people have voluntarily and of 
their own free will determined how they are going to live, and they are 
abiding by that decision, despite the cold war propaganda and all of 
its "project X's" and other attempts to change their way of life for 
them. 

Senator McClellan. Well, if it is so excellent, why do you hesitate, 
why are you ashamed, or why are you afraid to honestly state your 
views ? 

]\Ir. Schappes. I am stating my views, sir. 

Senator McClellan. Yes, but state your position as to whether you 
belong or do not belong to that group. 

^Ir. Schappes. Is that a question of view ? 

Senator McClellan. Well, I will ask you the pointed question, 
then: Why do you hestitate to tell the committee and tell the public 
that you believe in it and you subscribe to it and you belong to it? 
Why do you hesitate ? 



150 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORIVIATION PROGRAM 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. As to belonging, I have stated the grounds of my 
refusal to answer. 

Senator McClellan. I know you have. You have stated the 
grounds of refusal. But that is a refusal. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. That is right. 

Senator McClellan. Along with the grounds. And I ask you if 
you are proud of it, if you think that it is what you are trying to claim 
it is, why you are afraid to acknowledge your membership in the 
Communist Party. Why are you afraid to publicly declare that you 
subscribe to it ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. My opinions are published as widely as I can secure 
publication for them, and I do not hide them. In fact, I am always 
eager to expand them. 

Senator McClellan. But you do hide a profession of it or acknowl- 
edgement of it when you are called under oath. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Profession of belief, acknowledgement of belief is 
one thing, and affiliation I am privileged under the Constitution to 
reserve to my own conscience. 

Senator McClellan. You are certainly privileged. And you are 
exercising that privilege. And I think it is exercised out of fear. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. If, sir, it is exercised out of fear, it is because in our 
country, despite the protections that are in the Constitution, there 
have been such systematic violations of that Constitution, and espe- 
cially of the first amendment 

Senator McClellan. And despite the obligations of citizenship 
under it, you refuse to cooperate with a duly constituted governmental 
agency of the Congress of representatives elected by the people in 
helping and aiding in eradicating communistic influences from this 
Government. 

Mr. Schappes. May I, in fuller answer 

Senator McClellan. You refuse to do that, do you not? 

Mr. Schappes. I want to introduce my statement at this point, 
which is highly pertinent, and will state exactly the answer to the 
question. May I do that now. Senator? 

Senator Mundt. How long a statement is it ? 

Mr. Schappes. It is brief. 

Senator Mundt. You may before you conclude your testimony, but 
not at this moment. 1 am interested in one of the statistics you gave 
us. Did I understand you correctly to say that it was your opinion 
that there were about 800 million Communists in the world? 

Mr. Schappes. No ; there are 800 million people living under gov- 
ernments in which the Communist parties are either the leading party 
or in coalition with other parties. 

Senator Mundt. That is a vastly different statement now than what 
you gave the Senator from Arkansas. 

Mr. Schappes. I acknowledge the difference. It is more exact. I 
am afraid I was being a little provoked by the unscholarly form of 
the question. 

Senator Mundt. I presume you believe in the doctrine that majority 
rules, so how many of these 800 million people would you feel are 
Communists and have anything to say in the government in their 
area? 

Mr. Schappes. Oh, I think they have a great deal to say as citizens 
of those countries. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 151 

Senator Mundt. About how many would you say are members of 
Ihe majority Communist Party ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I think your question is misleading, because if I 
were to ascertain how many members there are of the Republican 
Party, certainly it would not equal the electoral vote of the Republi- 
can Party. Therefore, membership and support of a party are two 
obviously different matters. 

Senator Mundt. All right. I will grant that the Republican Party 
tries and sometimes succeeds in wooing some Democratic votes and 
some Independent votes. But that still does not answer my question 
about how manj^ of these 800 million you believe belong to this 
majority party. 

Mr. SciiAPPES. That is a question of fact and not one of belief. 
1 don't have the facts at my fingers. 

Senator Mundt. Let me tell you, sir, that the last time I asked that 
question of a man in a position to know, it was asked in the Kremlin 
of a man by the name of Andrei Vishinsky who did not stand on 
the fifth amendment, because they did not have such an amendment 
over there, as they do not have a bill of rights over there. 

I asked him the question, and he did not stand on his privilege, and 
he said there were 5 million Communists. That was in 1945. You 
would say that has grown to 800 million people, I suppose, because 
they control 800 million people. How far do you think they have 
expanded from that 5 million ? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I have no such belief as you imputed to me, sir. 
If we were to add the total number of members of the Democratic 
and Republican Parties, the parties which have ruled our country 
now for some 28 or 30 years, I don't know whether the percentage 
of members of both the Democratic and Republican Parties would 
be smaller or larger, but there would not be a great difference between 
that and the proportion that are members of the Communist Party 
in the Soviet Union. 

Senator Mundt. Let me see if I understand your answer. Your 
answer is that you believe that the number of Communists in the 
Soviet Union percentagewise is substantially the same as either the 
Democratic Party or the Republican Party of this country, where 
they are pretty evenly divided. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Both, I would say. They are substantially the 
same as both the Democratic and Republican Parties, more or less. 
It might be a million or two one way or the other. But the important 
point, if we are not to quibble 

Senator Mundt. How ever, I asked Andrei Vishinsky, a pretty well- 
known Communist, and he said 5 million. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Well, accepting that figure, I don't know whether 
there are in this country now 5 million members, not voters supporting 
but members, of both the Democratic and the Republican Parties. 
I don't know. If you know, sir, you are a Republican, I assume 

Senator Mundt. I can assure you that the registration figures of 
either party are a great many times over 5 million. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Is registration the same as membership, sir ? 

Senator Mundt. Correct. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. It is ? 

Senator Mundt. Correct. Because you register that you are a 
member of the party. 



152 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. If you are correct, then I have added to my little 
fund of knowledge about this. My understanding was that one can 
register without being a dues-paying member of the party in which 
one registers, or a card-carrying Republican or Democrat. 

Senator Mundt, I suggest you continue to learn something about 
our American system. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. My mind is open to learn. I wish yours were, sir. 

Mr. CoHN. Your mind is open, you say ? 

Senator Mundt. You have a statement you wish to read? You 
may proceed. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I do. 

I appear before this committee in response to its power of subpena ; 
that is, under a legal compulsion which I yield to as a law-abiding 
citizen. 

I wish to declare, however, that as a loyal American and 
as a historian of the American Jewish people, I regard the aims, the 
methods, and the manners of this committee with the same abhorrence 
with which most of the American people have learned to regard the 
concept of McCarthyism. As the historian, Charles A. Beard, once 
said of the debased journalism of William Randolph Hearst, I would 
not, as historian and citizen, otherwise touch McCarthyism with a 10- 
foot pole. 

I presume that I am summoned before this committee because one 
or another of my books has been discovered somewhei-e in a United 
States Government library abroad. I do not know whether it is my 
Documentary History of the Jews in the United States, or my edition 
of the Letters of Emma Lazarus, published as part of the Emma 
Lazarus Centennial Celebration in 1949 by the New York Public 
Library, or my edition of the Prose and Poetry of Emma Lazarus, 
which has somehow found its way into these libraries in other coun- 
tries under the sponsorship of our national administration. 

Senator Mt'> dt. You now, however, know why you were called. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Yes, but I was not given the courtesy of prior infor- 
mation about that. 

Senator Mundt. Yes, and you did not give us the courtesy of sub- 
mitting a statement 24 hours in advance, which is a rule of the com- 
mittee. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I was not advised of that by any counsel of the 
committee. 

Senator Mundt. You may proceed. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. My intention in all my work as scholar and historian 
has been to find the truth, to reflect the democratic traditions of our 
country and to promote human ideals. There is nothing in them that 
would serve the cold-war propaganda. There is very much there 
that would help people abroad the better to understand the American 
people and their glorious democratic heritage, and particularly the 
relation of the Jews in the United States to that. Is it these truths 
that the McCarthy committee fears, as it seems to fear all truth ? 

The Committee on Justice and Peace of the Central Conference of 
American Rabbis on March 15, 1953, condemned the undemocratic 
methods of these congressional investigations, as have hundreds of 
other American organizations. Many millions now believe that the 
American people cannot tolerate but must eliminate McCarthyism; 
we cannot contain McCarthyism, we must liberate ourselves from 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORIVIATIOX PROGRAM 153 

McCai'thyism, During this Passover season, a time for recollection of 
liberation struggles of the past and dedication to the liberation strug- 
gles of the present. I as a citizen and Jewish writer and scholar renew 
publicly my intention to work for the liberation of our people from 
McCarthyism. 

Senator Muxdt. In that statement, you made some protestations 
of being a loyal American. At the time you wrote it, were you a mem- 
ber of the Communist Party? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I refuse to answer that question, on the grounds 
stated. 

Senator ]MuNr)T. Wliat grounds? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. The grounds of the 1st, 9th, 10th, and 5th amend- 
ments. 

Senator Muxdt. Is it your contention that a man can be a loyal 
American and a member of the Communist Party at the same time? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. In my opinion, that is possible ; yes. 

Senator Mundt. You think that is possible ? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. Yes. I believe that our Constitution provides for 
differences of opinion. 

Senator Mindt. Can you name any Communist who is a loyal 
American ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I beg your pardon ? 

Senator Mundt. Could you name any Communist who is a loyal 
American ? Your testimony is in direct conflict with the FBI. 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. I suppose it is. The FBI is in direct conflict with a 
great many institutions of our country, including those protected by 
the first amendment. 

Senator ]Mundt. This committee, and quite a few Americans, seems 
to think tliat the FBI's testimony might be better than yours on the 
subject, but if you can name some Communist who is a loyal Ameri- 
can, I would like to have you name him, 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Well, if you will look up the records and find the 
names of those Communists who died in defense of our country and 
were honored by Congress and by other institutions, legal, legislative, 
executive, military, for their services to this country, services that 
went back to the Civil War, when Communists fought in this country 
on the Union side, when officers, including officers of the rank of gen- 
eral, who were Communists, were officers of the Union Army, I think 
you can find adequate substantiation indeed in the records of our 
Government that Communists have been and therefore obviously can 
be loyal Americans. 

Senator MuNiyr. You have claimed that you are a scholar. You 
have admitted that you are a historian. You have referred to your- 
self as a great writer. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I would not be so immodest, sir, as to refer to myself 
as a great writer. 

Senator Mundt. Well, to your book as a great piece of writing. Let 
us put it that way. 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. Your sarcasm is really petty, sir. Don't you think 
so? 

Senator Mundt. I did not think it was sarcastic. I thought it was 
a statement of the facts. 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. Your tone belies you, sir. 



154 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Senator Mundt. Very well. The point I am trying to maker 
Having studied so much about the records of this country, can you 
give the name of a Communist who was a loyal American citizen? 
You still have not named any. 

Mr. ScHAppES, Well, I can think of Maj. Gen. Joseph Weidmyer, 
who fought in the Union Army. I can think of Capt. Herman Bacher. 

Senator Mundt. All right. Let us think of somebody who since 
1917 has been a Communist, at the time that the Communist apparatus 
took over Russia and changed its whole procedure from the doctrine 
of the original Communist Manifesto. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Capt. Herman Bacher was killed in World War II 
and was decorated by our Government. I think he got a Congres- 
sional Medal of Honor. I am not certain of that, sir, but I think so. 

Senator Mundt. And he was a Communist ? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. And he was a Communist. 

Senator Mundt. All right. Can you give us some more names? 
Let us bring it up to date now. Can you think of a present-day 
Communist 

Mr. ScHAPPES. My statement would include all those now living. 

Senator Mundt. You mean the top echelon leaders who are now in 
the Federal penitentiary ? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I have no reason to believe that they are not loyal 
Americans. I have reason to believe to the contrary, 

I know, for example, that some of them were also decorated by our 
Government for distinguislied service in World War II. 

Senator Mundt. In the unhappy eventuality that this country 
should become involved in war with Soviet Russia, would you fight on 
the side of the United States ? 

Mr. ScHAPPEs. An unhappy eventuality, it certainly would be, and 
one which I think the lessening of the cold war attitude and cold war 
propaganda would make more difficult and impossible to develop, 
and I have been devoting myself to promoting the idea that we can 
and must live in peace with the Soviet Union and other countries with 
whose social systems we do not agree. 

Senator Mundt, Very good. 

Mr. ScHAppEs. If drafted in any war, I should, like those now fight- 
ing in Korea — I should, of course, submit to the draft and participate. 
In that way, just as today, as a taxpayer, I am compelled to support 
the Korean war. As a citizen paying high prices, I am compelled to 
support the Korean war. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, if the Government forced you to 
fight against communism, you would. Would you volunteer in any 
way? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I volunteer in the cause of peace and in the cause 
of democracy. I volunteer in the cause of amicable relationships, not 
in causes that might involve, as you well know, the destruction of all 
life upon this planet. 

Senator Mundt. That is right. Nobody wants war with Russia. 
And the causes to which you said you would volunteer are very noble. 

Mr. ScHAPPES, I invite you to volunteer in them, too, sir. 

Senator Mundt. But my question was : If there was war with Rus- 
sia, would you then volunteer to fight on the side of the United States? 
Not because the Government says, "Do that, or go back to jail," but 
because you want to volunteer for our way of life ? 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 155 

Mr. ScHAPPES. Our way of life depends upon peace. It does not 
depend upon war. 

Senator Mundt. If you do not want to volunteer, you do not have 
to. I just wanted to give you a chance to answer the question. 

Mr. CoHN. Do you believe that our cause in Korea is a just cause? 

Mr. ScHAPPES. I do not. 

May I elaborate my answer to that? 

Senator Mundt. I think not. You have had a chance to elaborate 
at great length, and unless you want to answer all questions I do not 
think you should elaborate further on some questions. 

Mr. ScHAPPES. In other words, because I invoke constitutional priv- 
ileges, you would shut me off at certain points ? 

Senator Mundt. Do you think you have been shut off, with all the 
statements you have made? 

Mr. SciiAPPES. I am just now being shut off. 

Senator Mundt. That is right. You are now shut off. You are 
right. 

Miss Lumpkin, will you stand, please? 

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 ? 

Miss Lumpkin. I do. 

Senator Mundt. Miss Lumpkin, for the record, will you please give 
us your name and present address, and your present occupation, if 
any ? 

TESTIMONY OF GRACE LUMPKIN 

Miss Lumpkin. Grace Lumpkin, Miss Grace Lumpkin. I live at 61_ 
Gramercy Park, New York City. My occupation ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Miss Lumpkin. I am a proofreader for a firm of printers called 
the Golden Eagle Press. 

Mr. CoHN, Mr. Chairman, just before we begin Miss Lumpkin's 
testimony, I want to say that a responsible Jewish organization, the 
American Jewish Committee, has supplied us with a list of books 
covering exactly the same subject matter as that written by Mr. 
Schappes, and I ask that that be attached as an exhibit to this record. 

After that we can forward it to the State Department, and maybe 
they can look at some of those books and see if they would not better 
suit this particular purpose. 

Senator Mundt. That will be done. 

(The list referred to was marked "Exhibit 8," and will be found 
in the appendix on p. 167.) 

Senator Mundt. You may proceed, Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. CoHN. You have told us your name, Miss Lumpkin, and where 
you live. We would like a few biographical facts. 

Are you an authoress? Are you an author of any books? 

Miss Lumpkin. Yes. I have written several novels, three that were 
published. 

Mr. CoHN. Can you give us their names, please? 

Miss Lumpkin. The first one was To Make My Bread, which was 
dramatized and made into a play that opened on IBroadway under the^ 
title, "Let Freedom Ring." 



156 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAJVI 



The second was a Sign for Cain. 

The third was called the Wedding. 

Mr. CoHN. And one of them was a Sign for Cain ; is that correct ? 

Miss Lumpkin. That is right. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman, I believe it is correct that a Sign for Cain 
is currently in use in State Department information centers, and also 
some excerpts from some writings by Miss Lumpkin are included in 
a book by Professor Stern, entitled, "The Family," which has been 
referred to in the annals of this committee. 

Senator Mundt. When you say "currently" 

Mr. CoHN. I mean as of March 15. 

Senator Mundt. By the way, are you any relation to former Senator 
Lumpkin ? 

Miss Lumpkin. I am his sister. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, you say you did write the book, A Sign for Cain. 
Is that right? 

Miss Lumpkin. Yes, that is right. 

Mr. CoHN. At the time you wrote that, were you a sympathizer of 
the Communist movement '( 

Miss Lumpkin. I would sav that I was under the influence and the 
discipline of the Communist movement, although I was not a member. 

Mr. CoHN. Although not a member of the party, you tell us very 
frankly that you w^ere under Communist discipline. Is that right ? 

Miss Lumpkin. To the extent that someone who takes part in fvac- 
tion meetings and cell meetings and goes where the party asks them 
to go, I was under Communist discipline. 

Mr. CoHN. That was at the time you wrote this book which was in 
use as of March 15, namely, A Sign for Cain. Is that right ? 

Miss Lumpkin. That is right. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, did you ever have any discussion with any official, 
with any functionary, of the Communist Party, around the period of 
time you were writing this book ? 

Miss Lumpkin. During the year that I was preparing and writing 
this book there were times when, during the period I was with the 
party, somehow my past training would catch up with me, and I would 
make a protest about certain things. 

Could I give an example of that ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, surely. 

Miss Lumpkin. For example, once I was down with a Coimnunist 
organizer in Alabama. I was staying with sharecroppers down 
there. We were organizing the Negro sharecroppers. For some 
reason, there had been some trouble, and a deputy sheriff was patrolling 
the road outside of the home of these Negroes. I believed in helping 
the Negro race. I believe in helping them to help themselves, because 
they are God's children, as important as I am. That is what I believe 
now. But the Communist organizer ordered me to go out and slap 
the deputy sheriff in the face. He said as a result of that I would be 
arrested, and as a way of trying to get me to do that, he said, "Now, 
your picture will appear in all the newspapers all over the coun- 
try, and you will sell a lot more of your books." That was an added 
inducement ! 

I felt that the situation was tense enough without doing something 
to bring a worse situation about, and I refused to do it. I mean, there 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 157 

Avere certain things like that, that I would not submit to Communist 
discipline about. And so, when this book came along, they had known 
such things about me, so that I was called to the New Masses office. 

Mr. CoHN. That was a Connnunist publication ? 

Miss Lumpkin. Yes, a Communist publication; on which I had 
worked in 1929 for a year and a half. And Joshua Kunitz, who was 
one of the editors 

Mr. CoiiN. Joshua Kunitz, K-u-n-i-t-z ? 

Miss Lumpkin. K-u-n-i-t-z. 

Mr. CoHN. Go ahead. 

JNIiss Lumpkin. And the}^ called me ostensibly about something else, 
about an article I had written. They wanted to talk it over, for the 
New Masses. But there were two or three of them. Joshua Kunitz 
was the head editor. He had me in the office, and they said : "You are 
writing a new novel, and we want to tell you that if this novel has any- 
thing against the party line in it" 

Mr. CoiiN. Against the party line? 

Miss Lumpkin. Yes. '"AVe will break you as a writer. We have 
])eople in strategic positions on magazines, on papers, who will write 
i-eviews of 3^our books, and we have" — I have forgotten how many 
thousands of readers he said were in this country who were sympa- 
thetic to communism. 

Senator Mundt. That was in 1929 ? 

Miss Lumpkin. This was in 1934. My book was published in — it 
jnight have been just at the passing of the year. It might have been 
in 1985. The book was published in the fall of 1935. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, in 1934 or 1935, you were told by 
the Communists that they had strategically placed some of their mem- 
bers as book reviewers in important magazines and newspapers, and 
that they would break you, and discredit your book, if it contained any- 
thing against the Communist Party line. Is that your testimony? 

Miss Lumpkin. That is true. That is right. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CoHN. And this was told to you by Mr. Kunitz ? Is that right ? 

Miss Lumpkin. Yes. He was the one who spoke for the others. 

Mr. CoHN. And did you, being under Communist discipline at that 
time, obey those instructions? 

Miss Lumpkin. I went back and went over the book, and at least 
as I was writing it — I have forgotten just what spot I was — in writing 
the book. And I knew that the party line changed at different times, 
and so I felt that if I put the fundamental philosophy of communism 
in that book, I wouldn't go far wrong. And that is what I did, or 
tried to do. And I think I succeeded. I think I succeeded, because 
after it was published and I read it over, I had one of the first doubts 
about my stand. Because as I read it, I said, '"This is really the Nazi 
doctrine, the Nazi philosophy." But I put that in the back of my 
consciousness, because I dicin't want to believe it. 

Mr. CoHN. Miss Lmnpkin, it is the fact, of course, that you no 
longer are in sympathy with and for some years past have been com- 
pletelv out of sympathy with the Communist movement. Is that 
right? 

Miss Lumpkin. That is right. 

Mr. CoHN. Now, let me ask you a frank question. Do you think 
that they should be using this book which you wrote, which reflected 



158 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

the party line, when you were under Communist discipline, in a State 
Department information center today? 

Miss Lumpkin. No; I do not. I feel that, to be as charitable as 
possible, a group of people who were not confused would not send such 
a thing out for anything in the world. 

Mr. CoHN. I think that is very frank. 

Senator Mundt. You came to the conclusion, in reading your book, 
that basically the Nazi line and the Communist Party line were the 
same? 

Miss Lumpkin. Not the party line. The philosophy, I would 
like to make that difference. 

Senator Mundt. What is that? 

Miss Lumpkin. Not the party line. Because the party line 
changed. I would like to make that difference. The philosophy. 

Senator Mundt. You believed the foreign "isms" were identical 
and the same ? 

Miss Lumpkin. Yes. I feel that is true. 

Senator Mundt. We completely agree on that. 

Mr. CoHN. I wanted to ask you this one question, Miss Lumpkin. 
I do not think you have told us this. I don't think I have asked you. 

Wliat are you doing today ? 

Miss Lumpkin. You mean my occupation? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes. 

Miss Lumpkin. I am a proofreader for books, and I also work in a 
church and for a church. 

Mr. CoHN. What denomination ? 

Miss Lumpkin. The Episcopal Church. My oldest brother was an 
Episcopal minister, and I grew up in that church, was confirmed in 
that church. 

Mr. CoHN. I think I have nothing more of Miss Lumpkin, Mr. 
Chairman, except that I want to thank you very much for coming 
down here. Miss Lumpkin. We appreciate it very much. 

Miss Lumpkin. Could I make just one statement, if you wouldn't 
mind, Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Surely. 

Miss Lumpkin. I would like to say why I think it is good for me to 
be here, and for this committee, especially in view of the statement 
made by the previous witness this morning. I feel that when I went 
back to the church in 1941 and left the influence of the party, you 
might say that that was the end of the whole thing. It took me years, 
I assure you, to rid myself of that influence. If you are even re- 
motely connected with the party, you get the corrupt influence that 
"lies do not matter," that "an oath makes no difference in the world," 
and even you have to give your inner consent to murder. That 
is true, because I did. When you come out of the party, that doesn't 
change all of those underlying corruptions that have occurred in your 
subconsciousness. Because all the time, as a Communist, on the sur- 
face you are very self-righteous and you feel yourself above all the 
other people. So when I came out, it took me years to clean out all of 
that corrupt thinking, day after day, changing my habits of thought 
back to what I had been taught as an American and as a member of a 
church, as a believer in God. Also in view of what the previous wit- 
ness said, that one can be a loyal American and a Communist at the 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 159 

same time, I would like to say that this is utterly impossible. That 
the Communist Party is just another political party in our national 
life, as the previous witness indicated, is an untruth. Even in the 
party its political activities are looked upon as the least important. 
What is demanded, and given, by any member of the party as 
well as by anyone even connected with the party for any length of 
time, is complete loyalty to Moscow and contempt and hatred for 
everything that is basically and truly American. One lives in that 
world of loyalty to Moscow and loiows no other world. From that 
demanded loyalty the step to active treacher to one's own country 
is inconsequential. 

So I think that a committee like this is important, because this 
country needs, calmly, compassionately, but firm in the right, as God 
gives us to see the right — this country needs to have this cleaned out, 
here and abroad. 

Senator Mundt. Thank you very much, Miss Lumpkin. And if the 
old category still holds in journalism as it held when I went to school, 
that certainly comes under the heading of "hot news," because it is 
not the custom to have people say nice things about our committee. 

Mr. CoHN. The next and final witness this morning, Mr. Chairman, 
is Karl Baarslag. 

Senator Mundt. Is Karl Baarslag in the room ? 

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 ? 

Mr. Baarslag. I do. 

Senator Mundt. You may be seated. For the record, will you give 
your name and address and something about your past record, your 
occupation, and so on ? 

TESTIMONY OF KARL BAARSLAG, NATIONAL AMERICANISM 
COMMISSION, THE AMERICAN LEGION 

Mr. Baarslag. My name is Karl Baarslag. I live at 1509 East-West 
Highway, Silver Spring, Md. 

Senator Mundt. That is B-a-a-r-s-1-a-g. Is that right? 

Mr. Baarslag. Yes. "Karl" is spelled with a "K." 

I was for the past 6 years research director on subversive and un- 
American activities for the National Americanism Commission of the 
American Legion. I resigned as of the end of this month to go into 
private advisory and consultative research work. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Baarslag, is it true that you recently made a trip 
abroad ? I think you mentioned that. 

Mr. Baarslag. I went as an accredited correspondent of the Ameri- 
can Legion Magazine to Europe in September of last year, on what 
might be called a general survey trip of political warfare in western 
Europe, what the effect and impact of Soviet propaganda in all its 
aspects was on our counter measures, and what, if anything, we were 
doing in the way of counterpolitical warfare against Russia's massive 
offensive. 

Mr. CoHN- Now, Mr. Baarslag, we had some testimony yesterday 
from someone who had examined the State Department information 
centers from the particular standpoint of books. You went over, as 
an accredited representative of a magazine, and I want to ask you 



160 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAAI 

this. Did 5"ju pay particular attention to the magazines and peri- 
odicals which were stocked in the State Department information 
centers ? 

Mr. Baarslag. I got into that, Mr. Counsel, only indirectly, at 
Frankfurt, because the allegation was made to me there by an Ameri- 
can newspaper man, a reputable newspaper man, that you could not — 
and this was a thino; that I was interested in — find any anti-Commun- 
ist books or magazines in any USIS libraries or for that matter the 
Army Special Services libraries. 

Mr. CoHN. Did you look to see whether you could find any anti- 
Communist material? 

Mr. Baarslag. I checked on that information, and I went to the 
USIS library in Frankfurt on October the 23d. It is housed in a 
palatial mansion on one of the main "alees"' of Frankfurt. I would 
say that the library was excellently and well stocked with all types 
of books, including, for the record, those by Vera Micheles Dean, 
William Mandel, Rosinger, Edgar Snow, Jack Belden, Derk Bodde, 
and, of course, the "learned" Dr. Owen Lattimore. 

I also must in all fairness say I found some anti-Communist books, 
to wit, by Arthur Bliss Lane, Kravchenko, Dallin. My estimate of 
the proportion would be that the pro-Soviet anti-American literature 
ran roughly 8 or 9 to possibly 4 or 5 books on our side. 

Senator IkluNDT. You are not talking now about the public library 
in Munich. You are talking about the library supported by the 
United States Information Service ostensibly to fight communism? 

Mr. Baarslag. I am talking about the USIS library in Frankfurt- 
I didn't cover the armed services special services libraries. 

Senator Mundt. We are interested only in the libraries that have 
been operated by the taxpayers' money in what has been called a cru- 
sade and campaign for truth. So your testimony should be limited 
to that type of library, to see whether they have been doing the job 
properly or subverting the funds. 

Mr. Baarslag. I then went to Munich, and I visited the Amerika 
Haus, which, again, was housed in a sumptuous, palatial, and for all 
practical library purposes thoroughly adequate library, which cer- 
tainly reflected credit on the United States. There I found books by 
Jack Belden, Edgar Snow, Ruth Gruber, Alan Barth, and I have a 
note here "and others." 

Now, I must point out, Mr. Chairman, that I didn't know at the 
time I made these lists that I would ever use this information for 
anything other than a magazine article. I would have been much 
more thorough and would have jotted down other titles, otherwise. I 
don't want to leave the impression that these were the only ones, but 
I noted these articles and these books in these libraries. 

Senator Mundt. In Munich, what would you say was roughly the 
proportion of pro-Communist books as against anti-Communist 
books ? 

Mr. Baarslag. Well, in Munich, I found Witness by Chambers, 
Dipper's book. Eleven Years in Soviet Prison Camps and books by 
Lyons, Eugene Lyons, James Burnham, Koestler, Kravchenko, Ful- 
ton Sheen, Timasheff, Dr. Walsh, Edmund Walsh, of Georgetown 
University, Markham, Reuben Markham, Kintner, Colonel Kintner, 
and David J. Dallin. I would say that the percentage in the INIunich 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 161 

library of aiiti-Coiumunist books was better than in the Frankfurt 

library. 

Senator Muxdt. In INIunich you thoui^ht it Avas better stocked? 

Mr. Baarslag. It seemed better stocked with more recent books. 
The anti-Communist books in the Frankfurt library were all 2 or 3 
years old, or older. There were no recent books. 

Mr. CoHN. Let me ask you this, now: ^A^iat interests me particu- 
larly here is, because we have had no testimonj^ about this, the situa- 
tion concerning magazines and periodicals. 

Mr. Baarslag. Well, as an accredited correspondent for the Ameri- 
can Legion magazine, with a circulation of 3 million, and having a 
reputation of publishing a consistent series of articles on communism, 
I naturally looked for that and was rather shocked. But I am not 
naive. I was rather shocked, nevertheless, to find that they had never 
heard of it. So I hopefully asked for the Freeman. They had never 
heard of that. I asked for the National Republic, and they had never 
heard of that. There were no anti-Communist magazines. 

Mr. CoHN. You could not find any anti-Communist magazines? 

Mr. Baarslag. That is right. I could find Nation and New Repub- 
lic, of course, in all of them. 

Mr. CoHN. This is one point that has always interested me. You 
mentioned that you found a liberal selection from the so-called Insti- 
tute of Pacific Relations school, Lattimore, Edgar Snow, et cetera. 
Now, did 3'ou look to see whether or not you could find any copies of 
the official reports on the Institute of Pacific Relations of the United 
States Senate Internal Security Subcommittee? 

Mr. Baarslag. Well, Mr. Counsel, I had a lot of disappointments 
and bad shocks on my European trip, and, of course, that was one. 
When I found so little anti-Connnunist material in a Government- 
supported library, taxpayers' supported library, or libraries, rather, 
ostensibly set up to counter and to contra vert Soviet propaganda, I 
naturally asked for the reports of the Senate Internal Security Sub- 
committee, the so-called McCarran IPR hearings. They had not only 
never heard of the IPR hearings ; they had never even heard of the 
committee. So I asked them to go to their catalogs and to check very 
carefully, because this information was important to me. And they 
checked, and they had no Senate committee reports of any kind on 
communism, Soviet espionage, subversion, or any related subjects. 

Mr. CoHN. How much would those reports have cost them? 

Mr. Baarslag. I assume that, being published by Congress, they 
could be obtained from Congress for nothing, and that the committee 
would have been happy to ship them over there. 

Now, if I may continue, then, because the House Un-American Ac- 
tivities Committee was so much older, I asked for their hearings and 
reports. And they had never heard of the House Un-American Ac- 
tivities Committee, although it had been in existence for 14 years. 

Senator Mundt. When you say "they," Mr. Baarslag, to whom are 
you referring? 

Mr. Baarslag. I am talking about the librarians with whom I 
talked. They were, of course, the girls on the floor in charge of the 
publications.' I must make it clear that they were not the chief li- 
brarians or the people in the front office, so called. I just walked in 
as an ordinary visitor. 



162 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 

Senator Mundt. But they were American citizens ? 

Mr. Baarslag. I woiikl have no way of knowing. They all spoke 
very good English, and my information is that most of them were 
Germans, or, in the case of Paris, French, but whether they were 
citizens or not, I wouldn't know. 

Senator Mundt. Did you gather from your study of the European 
libraries that each librarian is more or less a judge of what went into 
that particular library, or that they got their books from some central 
source in Washington or New York or some other place? 

Mr. Baarslag. Well, I must admit that I didn't make a careful, 
exact study of the difference in the libraries. It was noticeable that 
there was a considerable disparity or difference between, for example, 
the library in INIunich and that in Paris, which I have not got to, but 
will in a minute. 

Now, while I am on Munich, I would like to get this in. I then asked 
this librarian in charge of the reference section: "I am interested, 
coming from my organization, in any publications, any Goveiimient 
hearings, any reports that you have on communism in the United 
States." She went to a file cabinet, ransacked through it, and came up 
with a folder entitled, "Communism in the United States." Slie 
opened the folder, and, of course, there was nothing in it. So the 
German reader, as far as I could see, was left with the obvious conclu- 
sion that, one, there was no communism in the United States, or, two, if 
there was, no material had ever been published on it, or, if material had 
been published on it, for some curious reason, it didn't get into our 
official Government libraries. 

Mr. CoHN. Would you tell us about Paris ? 

Mr. Baarslag. Before I leave Frankfurt and Munich, I might just, 
if I ma}^ Mr. Chairman, parenthetically observe that there were 
prominent UNESCO and United Nations displays in all the lobbies 
where they would catch the eye. I saw no such displays of any mate- 
rial on communism, Soviet espionage, subversion, or communism in 
the United States. 

The Paris library was interesting because, having caught on, in 
Munich and Frankfurt, to something that I had not suspected ex- 
isted, I made it a point to drop into the United States Information 
Library, at 131 Avenue des Champs-Elysees, which is right on the 
Etoile, one of the ce;iiters of the life of Paris. I again asked for a 
certain list of those American magazines which consistently publish 
information on communism, and they had none of them. So then the 
librarian gave me this list, which I will submit for the record, if you 
care to have it, of some 520 publications. 

Mr. CoHN. You say out of those 520 there was not one magazine 
that consistently published information on communism ? 

(Tlie document referred to was marked "Exhibit 9," and may be 
found in the files of the subcommittee.) 

Mr. Baarslag. Not one. You can find in it the Geology News 
Letter, Microfilm Abstracts, and other magazines, many of which 
I have never heard of and most other Americans haven't, obscure 
trade papers, but magazines like the Legion magazine, with a circula- 
tion of 3 million, I couldn't find there. 

Mr. CoHN. Was Nation and New Republic in there ? 

Mr. Baarslag. Yes; they were there. Nation and New Republic 
you will find in here [indicating]. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 163 

Senator Mtjndt. Did you examine any other libraries besides the 
ones in Frankfurt and Munich? 

Mr, Baarslag. Two in Frankfurt, one in Munich, and one in Paris, 
because, as I observed before, it was not my intention to look into these 
libraries. It was incidental to investigating an allegation that there 
was no anti-Communist material in these libraries, which, as I say, 
was not true, because there were some anti -Communist books. 

Senator Mundt. In the displays around the library, you mentioned 
about UNESCO and the United Nations. You have said you found 
none which were anti-Communist. Did you find strong displays which 
were pro-American, which built up our Bill of Eights or standard of 
living or judicial system? Did you help convey, in other words, how 
freedom functions over there ? 

Mr. Baarslag. They may have had them. If they did, I didn't 
see them, and I would assume, too, that these displays are periodically 
changed, and at the time I was there I didn't see them. It is possible 
that they may have such displays. 

I just have one other thing, if I may make just this observation, that 
I think is of interest to the Senator. The facts which I have testified 
to here today are in the current issue — it just so happens to be the 
current issue — of the American Legion magazine, and you will find it 
all in there. 

Mr. CoHN. I read that article, and that is why we asked you to 
come in. 

Mr. Baarslag. Then, also, I want to point this out. I think this is 
important, if I may say it. The pattern is one of a vast, as we feel, 
planned conspiracy that has been going on in this country for many 
years not only to push pro- Soviet and pro-Communist books but, to 
me what is far more sinister and dangerous, the blacklisting, sup- 
pression, and knifing of books on our side, the anti-Communist books, 
and the books telling the truth about Soviet Russia. 

Senator McClellan. May I ask whether you can tell us if those 
books that you referred to, and the magazines, following generally the 
Communist line, were purchased, or if they were donated to those 
libraries, contributed to them ? Do you know ? 

Mr. Baarslag. I have no way of knowing that. My assumption is 
that they were all purchased, but it is quite possible that some were 
donated. How the books got into the library, I could not testify to, sir. 

Senator MgClellan. The preponderance in favor of communism 
certainly prevailed, whether they were purchased or contributed ? 

Mr. Baarslag. Yes. If I may just say this. Senator, in conclusion: 
The presence of these pro-Communist, pro-Soviet books in these li- 
braries was one thing ; that somebody put them there. But that is only 
half the picture. What I was interested in, and I have tried to point 
this out in my testimony, was the absence of the books on our side, 
because that also implies conscious knowledge of what is an anti-Com- 
munist book, and conscious activity in keeping them out of libraries. 

Now, presumably even innocents or dupes or uninformed people who 
could have put a pro-Communist or pro-Soviet book on those library 
shelves, also innocently would have put the other side on the shelves. 
I leave that inference with you. 

Senator McClellan. Apparently, then, it was by design. 

Mr. Baarslag. That is the only inference that any reasonable man 
could draw, that if pro-Soviet books by notorious Communists like 



164 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAiM 

Manclel and others found their way onto the shelves, books on our side 
woukl also have found their way there. But, as I said, the books were 
there, but the magazines were totally absent. And you couldn't find 
a single Government hearing. Although one committee had been in 
existence for 14 years, you couldn't find a single Government report 
on Soviet espionage and communism in these libraries. That, as the 
Commies say, can hardly be an accident. 

Senator Mundt. One other question. I would like to ask you this, 
on the basis of the fact that for 6 years you have been head of the 
Americanism Commission of The American Legion, and it is gen- 
erally conceded that no organization in America has done as much 
both to fight communism and to bring to people a realization of the 
advantages of our American system as the American Legion. So, 
on the basis of that background, I would like to have the expression 
from you, one, as to why you feel that these libraries overseas, if prop- 
erly conducted and properly stocked, do provide an opportunity for 
not necessarily an Americanism program over there, but a program 
of freedom, which would be conducive to the expansion of the areas of 
freedom in the world and the curtailment of communism, or whether 
you feel that people are not interested in what is in the libraries, and 
that the opportunity simply does not exist, no matter what you put 
in these libraries. 

Mr. Baarslag. I think the libraries would serve an excellent purpose, 
but here is a problem involved there. Senator, that, though I did 
not actually count percentages, my estimate is that the majority of the 
books were published in the English language. That would limit 
their reading, of course, to that part of the population that could read 
in English. And to answer affirmatively your question: Yes, if the 
proper types of books setting forth the American side were in those 
libraries, they would serve a definite and useful purpose. 

Senator Mundt. In the main, as you visited around the libraries, 
the reading rooms, did you find a great many people from the coun- 
tries in there reading the books, or were they pretty empty? 

Mr. Baarslag. On the days I visited, they were pretty well filled, 
and they seemed to represent a fair cross section of the population, 
although in many cases the libraries were located in the so called 
better class parts of town and would be a long distance from working 
class neighborhoods, where I would say it would be important that 
some of our material and literature reach down to. And, of course, 
if they did not read English, a great part of it would not be of any 
use to them. 

Senator Mundt. The testimony before this committee and before 
the so-called Hickenlooper committee, and as far as I know before 
all other committees, is uniformly to the effect that people do go into 
these libraries, that they are centers of interest, and that if proper 
care were given to the material it would provide a tremendous and 
rather inexpensive opportunity to protect the freedom cause in the 
areas where the libraries function. 

Mr. Baarslag. I would say that out of this narrow field that we 
are discussing, if it is narrow, books on the world crisis, the Soviet 
Union, and related subjects, the books are well stocked and well 
handled. And this is not by way of comic relief necessarily, but I 
should relate one little thing that happened in the Paris library. 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 165 

The librarian there, with whom I talked on the floor — being French, 
I suppose, and rather quick — suspected apparently what I was after. 
And she said as follows, as I recall her conversation. She said : "These 
libraries are set up to show the best side of America. We try to win 
influence and get the French people to like us by showing the values 
of American culture and American civilization. Now,'* she says, "you 
certainly wouldn't say that communism is anything that we want to 
brag or boast or show around the world." She added, "That is why 
we don't carry books on communism in the United States." 

I said, "That is a particularly happy thought. Let me ask you, 
do you have anything on crime, racketeering, or prostitution in the 
United States?" 

Her face kind of fell, and she said I would find the books in the 
catalogue. 

I said, "That wasn't a particularly good answer, was it? 

And she had to agree. 

But the point was that no books on communism in the United States 
were available to the French public, because it "wouldn't show the 
best side of America to the French people," but they did have books on 
racketeering, corruption, crime, prostitution. 

Senator McClellan. For the record, Mr. Chairman, I have de- 
livered to the chief counsel of the committee a letter which I received 
from Governor Stassen in response to my request, in testimony taken 
a few days ago, when he testified on the ship, investigation matter. I 
should like to have that placed in the record immediately following 
his testimony. 

Senator Mundt. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

(Wliereupon, at 12: 10 p. m., Thursday, April 2, 1953, the hearing 
was recessed, to the call of the Chair.) 



APPENDIX 



Exhibit No. 3 



Table of Contents From the Book : The Family, Past and Present, by 
Dk. Bernhard J. Stern, foe the Commission on Human Relations 

Page 

Preface, Alice V. Keliher v 

1. Family Life iu Primitive Societies 1 

The Family Cannot Live Alone, Julian H. Stevpard 3 

Contrasts and Comparisons, Margaret Mead 5 

Property in Primitive Families, Ruth Benedict 13 

The Family and the Clan, Robert H. Lowie 18 

The Economic Basis of Social Life, Edward Sapir 21 

Among the Seal and Caribou Hunters in Arctic America, Edward 

INIoffat Weyer, Jr.; Naomi Musmaker Giffen 24 

Bushmen Hunters in the Kalahari Desert of Africa, I. Schapera 27 

The Family Among Southeastern Asiatic Food Collectors, A. R. 

Brown 30 

How Wealth Affects Family Relations : The Tolowa-Tututni, Cora 

Du Bois 33 

Among the Patrilineal Pondo of South Africa, Monica Hunter 37 

The Family Among Cultivators in the Hills of Madagascar, Ralph 

Linton 42 

West African Marriage Customs, A. B. Ellis 44 

The Family on the Polynesian Islands of the Pacific, Ralph Linton 46 
The Family on the Coral Islands of the Pacific, Bronislaw Mali- 

nowski 49 

The Family Within the Clan in Southwest United States, Ernest 

Beaglehole 55 

Marriage at Isleta in the Pueblo Country, Elsie Clews Parsons 59 

Africa in Transition, P. Amaury Talbot 62 

Imperialism Hits the Pondo Family, Monica Hunter 65 

2. Our Family Pattern Develops 68 

Marriage in Ancient Babylon, L. T. Hobhouse 69 

Ancient Egyptian Marriage, L. T. Hobhouse 71 

The Wife in Ancient Greece, F. Warre Cornish 75 

The First Known Document on Woman's Rights, Aristophanes 81 

A Greek Woman's Protest, Euripides 87 

How Ischomachus Trained His Wife, Xenophon 88 

The Roman Law of Marriage. James Bryce 93 

Marriage Custom in Ancient Rome, Ludwig Friedlander 98 

The Roman Slave Family Under the Empire, R. H. Barrow 101 

The Old Testament Ideal of a Married Woman, Proverbs 103 

3. Sixteen Hundred Tears in Europe 105 

Early Christian Teachings on Sex, Geoffrey May 106 

The Position of Women in Medieval Theory and Practice, Eileen 

Power 112 

Woman's Place in the Later Medieval Household, Thomas F. Tout- 122 

Bigamy Among Christians and Jews, Israel Abrahams 127 

Erasmus on Christian Marriage, Erasmus 129 

Luther Expresses the Thoughts of the Reformation on Marriage, 

Martin Luther 131 

Catholic Doctrine on the Sacrament of Matrimony, Council of 

Trent 134 

Woman in the Renaissance, Lula McDowell Richardson 137 

167 



168 STATE DEPARTMENT INFORISIATIOX PROGRAM 

Page 

4. Concurrent Family Traditions : Cliinese and Islamic 140 

The Chinese Family, Sing Ging Su 141 

The Greater-Family, Ching-Chao Wu 142 

Mohammed's Views on the Status of Wives, L. T. Hobhouse 144 

5. The Commercial and Industrial Revolutions in England 148 

How the Rise of Capitalism Affected the Role of the Wife, Alice 

Clark 150 

An Eighteenth-Century English Woman Reflects on Marriage, Mrs. 

M. Astell }^l 

Through the Eyes of Victorian Reformers, Wanda F. Nefc lb2 

The Effect of the Industrial Revolution as Seen by Two Socialists, 

Karl Marx, Frederick Engels 176 

The Changing Status of Women, Bernhard J. Stern 178 

6. American Historical Backgrounds 186 

Women in Early New England, Mary Sumner Benson 187 

Colonial Family Roles. Katherine DuPre Lumpkin 191 

The Early American Family in North and South, Arthur W. Cal- 
houn i^y 

A Poor Family in Early America, Thomas Boyd 204 

A Glance at Early American Morality, Nicholas Cresswell 206 

Dr. Franklin Moralizes, Benjamin Franklin 208 

Popular Sentiments on the American Home, Meade Minnigerode— 209 

The Factory System Comes to America, Arthur W. Calhoun 212 

The American Family of the Nineteenth Century, Willystine 

Goodsell 215 

7. Contemporary American Scene 230 

Family Incomes in the United States, Maurice Leven, Harold G. 

Moulton, Clark Warburton 231 

The Houses in Which American Families Live, Edith Elmer 

Wood 234 

Employed Women Who Maintain Homes, Mary Elizabeth Pidgeon, 238 
Child Labor in Town and City, Katharine DuPre Lumpkin, Dor- 

othv W. Douglas 243 

The Changing Function of the Family, William F. Ogburn 247 

The Family's Altered Pattern, Lawrence K. Frank 251 

8. In Milltown, Mine, and Metropolis 256 

From Farm to Mill, Grace Lumpkin 257 

A Lower Middle-Class Family, Josephine Herbst 263 

A Coal Miner's AVidow, Jack Conroy 270 

A Negro Miner's Family, Angelo Herndon 273 

In a Midwestern Town, Robert S. and Helen Merrell Lynd 275 

An Immigrant Worker's Family in the City Tenements, Isidor 

Schneider 280 

Among the Conspicuously Wealthy, Joseph Hergesheimer 283 

9. Down on the Farm 287 

Economic Backgrounds of Rural American Families, President's 

Committee 289 

Income of Farm Families, Maurice Leven, Harold G. Moulton, 

Clark Warburton, Rupert B. Vance 294 

Agricultural Child Labor, Katharine DuPre Lumpkin, Dorothy 

W. Douglas 297 

The Family on the Tobacco Road, Erskine Caldwell 300 

The Negro Family in the Shadow of the Plantation, Charles S. 

Johnson r. 304 

An American Farm Wife's Day, Belinda Jelliffe 306 

Poverty Breeds Family Tragedy, Agnes Smedley 308 

A Migrant Family, John L. Spivak 309 

10. The Depression strikes the family 315 

The Middletown Family in the Depression, Robert S. and Helen 

Merrell Lynd 316 

How the Depression Affects the Home, Katharine DuPre Lump- 
kin, Dorothy W. Douglas 317 

Sickness and the Depression, G. St. J. Perrott. Selwyn D. Collins— 320 

How the Economic Depression Affected Family Health, Clyde V. 

Kiser, Regine K. Stix 324 

Marriage and Divorce Rates Drop During the Depression, Samuel 

A. Stouffer, Lyle M, Spencer 330 



STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM 169 

Page 

11. Life and Death 340 

Families Grow Smaller, Frank Lorimer, Frederick Osborn 341 

Marriage and Long Life, Metropolitan Life Insurance Co 344 

Infants Need Not Die, Robert M. Woodbury 348 

12. Current Ideals and Realities 351 

Protestant Ideals of Love and ^larriage, Federal Council of the 

Churches of Christ in America 353 

Catholic Ideals of Marriage, Pope Pius XI 357 

Sex Life before Marriage, Lorine Pruette 362 

Sex Life in INIarriage, Robert Dickinson, Lura Beam 365 

What Research on 100 Families Revealed about Sex Relations Out- 
side of Marriage, G. V. Hamilton 368 

Why People Are Unhaiipy in Marriage, Katharine Bement Davis— 369 

Why Husbands and Wives Quarrel, Karen Horney 370 

Marital Tensions, Sally Benson 372 

Wray Trains His Wife, Theodore Dreiser 375 

Protected Childhood. Anna Louise Strong 382 

Intermarriage, Bernhard J. Stern 386 

The Family Under Fascism, Alfred INIeusel 393 

The Family in the Soviet Union, INIildred Fairchild 400 

13. The Family Milieu 412 

The Family as a Builder of Personality, Lawson G. Lowrey 413 

The Family as Training Agency, Marjorie Boggs 422 

The Family as Initial Cultural Influence, John Dollard 426 

Authority and the Family, Max Horkheimer 428 

As Seen by the Clinician, James S. Plant 431 

The Child" in the Contemporary Family, Karen Horney 442 

Acknowledgments 451 

Index 455 



Exhibit No. 8 

Apbil 1, 1953. 

American Jewish History — A Selected Bibliography 

Friedman, L. M. Early American Jews. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard Univ. 

Press, 1934. 238 p. 
Jewish pioneers and patriots. Philadelphia. Jewish Publication Society of 

America, 1942. 430 p. 
-Pilgrims in a new land. Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society of America, 



1948. 471 p. 

By the past president of the American Jewish Historical Society. 
Goodman, A. V. American overture; Jewish rights in Colonial times. Phila- 
delphia, Jewish Publication Society of America. 1947. 265 p. 
By the Rabbi of Temple Emanuel, Davenport, Iowa. 
Grinstein, H. B. The rise of the Jewish community of New York, 1654-1860. 
Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society of America, 1945. 645 p. 

A dissertation accepted by the Faculty of Political Science. Columbia Uni- 
versity. The author is associate professor of American Jewish history, Yeshiva 
University. 
KoRN, B. W. American Jewry and the Civil War. Philadelphia, Jewish Publica- 
tion Society of America, 1951. 331 p. 

By the Rabbi of the Reform Congregation, Keneseth Israel, Philadelphia, Pa 
Lebeson, Anita L. Pilgrim people. New York, Harper, 1950. 624 p. 

A full-length history of the Jews in the United States. 
Levinger. L. J. A history of the Jews in the United States. 4th rev. ed. Cin- 
cinnati, Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1949. 616 p. 
By the Rabbi of the Palo Alto Veterans Hospital, Los Altos, Calif. 
Marcus, J. R. Early American Jewry; the Jews of New York, New England, 
and Canada. Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society of America, 1951. 
301 p. 

By the Adolph S. Ochs professor of Jewish history at the Hebrew Union 
College, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
Pool, D. de Sola. Portraits etched in stone; early Jewish settlers, 1682-1831. 
New York, Columbia Univ. Press, 1952. 543 p. 

By the Rabbi of the Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue, Shearith Israel, 
New York City. The author is also vice president of the American Jewish 
Historical Society.