Skip to main content

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 .."

See other formats




peemaneIt subcommittee on 
investigations of the committee on 




S. Res. 40 


JULY 14, 1953 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations 

33610 WASHINGTON : 1953 

Toslon Public Library 
Superintendent of Documents 

NOV 4 1953 


JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman 

KARL E. MDNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Aikansas 






Francis D. Flanagan, Chief Counsel 
Walter L. Reynolds, Chief Clerk 

Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 

JOSEPH R. McCarthy, Wisconsin, Chairman 

KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota 

ROY M. COHN, Chief Counsel 
Francis P. Carr, Staff Director 




Index I 

Testimony of — 

Huberman, Leo 486 

O'Connor, Harvey 484 



TUESDAY, JULY 14, 1953 

United States Senate, 
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 

OF the Committee on Government Operations, 

Washington^ D. C. 

The subcommittee met at 10 : 45 a. m., pursuant to Senate Resolu- 
tion 40, agreed to January 30, 1953, in room 318 of the Senate Office 
Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy (chairman) presiding. 

Present: Senators Joseph R. McCarthy (Republican, Wisconsin), 
Karl E. Mundt (Republican, South Dakota), Everett McKinley Dirk- 
sen (Republican, Illinois). 

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

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

Senator Potter asked that we put in the record the fact that he was 
at the executive session this morning and is now over at a subcom- 
mittee of the Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, meeting 
on a matter pertaining to the Maritime Commission, and will be in 

Last week, we announced that Allen Dulles would appear this 
morning and go into the question of whether he objected to having 
members of the CIA subpenaed by this committee. Since that time 
we have had some contacts with Mr. Dulles. I talked to him last 
night. I talked to some of his representatives later. The committee, 
I believe, recognizes his problem fully, and I think he recognizes the 
problem of the committee also. Number one, we realize that he does 
have a security problem. We have not proposed to question any CIA 
members about their work in the CIA. We have, however, subpenaed 
a man, Bundy, who had been proposed for a job as liaison between 
the National Security Council and the Atomic Energy Commission. 
There has been no proposal to question him about his work in the 
CIA, but merely to question him about his connections with Alger 
Hiss, his Communist-front activities, which are very clearly docu- 
mented. This fellow, Bundy, gave $400 to Hiss for his defense ; stated 
that he thought it was imperative that Hiss be cleared ; stated that 
he was doing it to help out his father-in-law, Acheson. And from 
the preliminary talks which we have had with Mr. Dulles' organiza- 
tion, I feel that they a^ee with us that the Congress should be en- 
titled to subpena any witness where you have evidence of graft, cor- 
ruption, or subversion. At the same time, they do not want to en- 
danger any of their undercover agents, in any of their operations. 



We are now trying to work out a formula with Mr. Dulles whereby 
the Congress can get the information to which it is entitled without 
in any way adversely affecting the Intelligence Agency. 

I am meeting with Mr. Dulles this afternoon at 3 o'clock. 

Senator Mundt, do you have anything to add on that matter? 

Senator Mundt. No; except that I express the confidence that at 
the meeting this afternoon we will be able to work out some formula 
of cooperation with the CIA which will protect its interests and 
also protect the rights of Congress and enable us to carry out our 

The Chairman. Who is your first witness, Mr. Counsel ? 

Mr. CoHN. Harvey O'Connor, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Mr. O'Connor, will you take the witness chair ? 

You are reminded, Mr. O'Connor, that you were administered the 
oath this morning. You are still under oath. 

Mr. Counsel, will you identify yourself? 

Mr. BouDiN. Leonard B. Boudin, of New York. 
^ , The Chairman. You are the same Leonard Boudin who defended 
Judy Coplon; are you not? 

Mr. Boudin. I didn't understand that I was called as a witness, 
Mr. McCarthy. 

The Chairman. Just for the record. 

Mr, Boudin. Is that necessary? Is it usual for counsel to have 
attributed to him all the other clients he has had ? 

The Chairman. You need not answer any questions. 

Mr. Boudin. I am not answering any questions. I think the ques- 
tion is improper, and I don't know why you are asking it. 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, just for the identification of the 
attorney. Is this the same counsel who defended Judy Coplon ? 

Mr. CoHN. That is a matter of record, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Mr. O'Connor, you have been subpenaed here today 
to answer questions in regard to the writings which were purchased 
by the old Acheson State Department. Before we ask you any ques- 
tions, may I ask : 

Mr. Cohn, has it been established and confirmed by the State De- 
partment that Mr. O'Connor's writings have been purchased and 
have been distributed in various information centers throughout the 
world ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Then, Mr. O'Connor, we will ask you this question : 
At the time you wrote the books which were purchased by the old 
State Department, were you then a member of the Communist Party ? 


Mr. O'Connor. Mr. Chairman, may I make a brief statement? 

The Chairman. No. You will answer the question. 

Mr. O'Connor. About my objection to the jurisdiction of this 
committee ? 

The Chairman. Yes; you may make a statement on that. 

Mr. O'Connor. Thank you. 

Under the first amendment to the Constitution, my writings, my 
books, and my political opinions are of no legitimate concern to this 


committee. If I have violated any laws in the writings that I have 
written, that is a proper concern for the kiw enforcement agencies and 
not the proper concern of this committee. 

The Chairman. Will you get nearer to the microphone, Mr. O'Con- 
nor, so that we can hear you ? 

Mr. O'Connor. My second point would be that this committee has 
no right to inquire into my writings, under the point of the constitu- 
tional limitations on the powers of Congress and its committees. I 
might say in that regard that I have not known until this moment that 
my books were in overseas libraries, and most certainly I had nothing 
whatever to do with their selection there. 

In the third place, I would object to the authority of the committee, 
under the statute by which it was created by Congress, to inquire into 
my writing or my political views. 

The Chairman. Just for your information, Mr. O'Connor, we are 
not concerned with any political views of yours. We would not be 
concerned about your writings. You are entitled to write what- 
ever you care to write. Any American or anyone else is entitled to 
purchase your books, your writings. You are here this morning be- 
cause your writings were purchased by the old Acheson State Depart- 
ment, distributed throughout the world, ostensibly for the purpose of 
fighting communism. Now, when the taxpayers pay for your books, 
when the royalties of your books, paid by the taxpayer, go into the 
Communist coffers, then this committee is concerned with that. For 
that reason, I again ask you the question : At the time you wrote the 
books which were purchased with taxpayers' money and put in our in- 
formation libraries throughout the world, at that time were you a 
member of the Communist conspiracy ? 

IMr. O'Connor. I object to the question on the three grounds I have 
already stated. 

The Chairman. You can object. Now you will answer, unless you 
feel that the answer will tend to incriminate you. 

Mr. O'Connor. I do not feel that the answer will tend to incrimi- 
nate me. 

The Chairman. Then you are ordered to answer. 

Mr. O'Connor. I have already answered. 

The Chairman. I apparently did not hear your answer then. 

You are ordered to answer whether or not you were a member of 
the Communist Party. 

INIr. O'Connor. On the three grounds I have stated, I have declined 
to answer. 

The Chairman. Let us have the record clear, so that we will know 
what you have declined to answer. I will repeat the question. At 
the time you wrote the books which were purchased by the old Acheson 
State Department and distributed in our information centers, were 
you a member of the Communist conspiracy? 

Mr. O'Connor. My political affiliations or lack of political affilia- 
tions are no legitimate concern of this committee. 

The Chairman. Do you refuse to answer ? 

Mr. O'Connor. Apparently. 

The Chairman. Not "apparently." Do you refuse to answer ? 

Mr. O'Connor. I refuse to answer. 

The Chairman. You are not refusing on the ground that the an- 
swer might tend to incriminate you ? 


Mr. O'Connor. I am not asserting the privilege against self-incrim- 

The Chairman. Yon are not asserting the privilege against self- 
incrimination. All right. Yon may step down. 

Incidentally, I think Senator Mnndt wishes that a meeting of the 
subcommittee be called to have this man immediately cited for con- 
tempt. I will call a meeting of the subcommittee at the earliest con- 
venience for that purpose. 

Your other witness, Mr. Colin ? 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Leo Huberman. 

The Chairman. Will you raise you right hand and be sworn? 

In this matter 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 ? 

Mr. Huberman. I do. 

May I request that the lights be turned oif , please ? 

The Chairman. The witness asks that the lights be turned off. He 
is entitled to have them turned off. 

Mr. Counsel, will you proceed? 

Mr. CoHN. May we have your full name, please ? 



Mr. Huberman. Leo Huberman. 

Mr. Cohn. By the way, could we get the name of counsel for the 

Mr. Sharfsin. Joseph Sharfsin, S-h-a-r-f-s-i-n, of Philadelphia. 

Mr. CoHN. And where do you reside, Mr. Huberman? 

Mr. Huberman. 66 Barrow Street, New York City. 

The Chairman. May I interrupt ? I do not believe you have been 
before the committee before, Mr. Counsel. So that you may know the 
rules of the committee : You are entitled to advise your client at any 
time you see fit. 

Mr. Sharpsin. I have been before the committee. 

Mr. Cohn. Mr. Huberman, are you the author of America, In- 
corporated ? 

Mr. Huberman. Yes ; I am. 

Mr. CoHN. Are you the author of Man's "Worldly Goods? 

Mr. Huberman. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. Are you the author of We, the People ? 

Mr. Huberman. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. Are you the author of the Truth About Unions? 

Mr. Huberman. Right. 

Mr. CoHN. They have all four of those books in use in the State 
Department information program ? 

Mr. ScHiNE. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. And are you the author of the Truth About Socialism? 

Mr. Huberman. Yes. 

Mr. Cohn. Is that book in use as well ? 

Mr. ScHiNE. Yes ; it is. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman, all of these books are in use. In the case 
of one of them, over 100 copies were purchased by the old team in the 
State Department. 


The Chairman. Do you know whether those books are still in the 
libraries ? 

Mr. CoHN. We haven't gotten any authoritative information on 
that, but from what we do know they are still in there. 

Mr. Huberman, these books you have written are in use and wide 
use in the State Department information centers as part of a program 
to furnish information about the American way of life in our form 
and system of government. I want to ask you this. Do you believe 
in our form of government ? Do you believe in capitalism ? 

Mr. Huberman. Do I believe what ? 

Mr. CoHN. Do you believe in capitalism? 

Mr. Huberman. I shall decline to answer that question. 

Mr. CoHN. On what ground? 

Mr. Huberman. On several grounds. 

The Chairman. Would you speak a little louder, Mr. Huberman, so 
that we can hear you ? 

Mv. Hubeiuvian. The question invades my freedom of conscience, 
belief, and thought, which is protected against official intrusion by the 
first amendment. The question curtails my rights as an author to 
freedom of speech and of the press, and it thereby tends to curb not 
only my own freedom but that of all other writers. The question is 
outside the scope of the authority of this committee as defined by the 
statutory provision which created it and as permitted by the Consti- 

Mr. CoHN. You assert no privilege under the fifth amendment; is 
that right? 

Mr. Huberman. That is right. 

The Chairman. You are ordered to answer. And for your infor- 
mation, may I say the committee has no concern whatsoever with any 
of your beliefs, any of your writings, except insofar as those writings 
are purchased by the taxpayers who are our bosses and distributed 
ostensibly for the purpose of fighting communism. And as long as we 
purchase your works and distribute them throughout the world — will 
you listen to me? As long as we purchase your works and distribute 
them throughout the world with the stamp of approval of our Govern- 
ment, then we are interested in knowing whether or not you espouse 
the Communist cause, whether you believe in our system of Govern- 
ment. Whether our system is right or wrong, the point is that the 
American people apparently believe in it. And if they purchase the 
works of a man who does not believe in it, who is trying to destroy this 
form of government, they are entitled to know that. For that reason 
you will be required to answer all of the questions that are pertinent, 
unless you feel that a truthful answer might tend to incriminate you. 

You were asked the question : Do you believe in our system of gov- 
ernment? You will be ordered to answer that, unless you feel the 
answer might tend to incriminate you. 

Mr. Huberman. Isn't that another question ? 

The Chairman. I will ask that question : Do you believe in our form 
of government? 

Mr. Huberman. Yes; I do. 

Senator Mundt. Maj' I ask you this, Mr. Huberman : Did 5'ou write 
a book called America, Incorporated ? 

Mr. Huberman. Yes ; I did. 

33616— 53— pt. 8 2 


Senator Mundt, On pa^^e 233 of that book I find this statement: 
"America is suffering from only one disease, capitalism." Did you 
write that statement? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. Yes. I am a Marxist and a Socialist. 

Senator Mundt. You are a Marxist and a Socialist? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. I know what you mean by a Socialist, but when 
you say "a Marxist and a Socialist," to me that means you are a Com- 
munist and a Socialist. Does that mean the same to you ? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. No ; it does not. 

Senator Mundt. Will you explain what it does mean ? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. It would be very difficult to explain what Marxism 

Senator Mundt. I do not want another book, but I want a kind of a 
brief answer, because if you simply say, "I am a Socialist," that I 
understand; but you say, "I am a Marxist and a Socialist"; so that, 
I suppose, is something beyond the kind of socialism that Norman 
Thomas is identified with. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. It would be impossible for me to tell you briefly 
what a Marxist is. It would take me 10 lectures. 

Senator Mundt. Let me put it this way, then. To you, at least, 
when you say, "I am a Marxist and a Socialist," it does not mean 
what it means to me when you say, "I am a Marxist and a Socialist." 

]Mr. HuBERMAN. Yes; I am a Marxist and a Socialist, and like 
millions of other non-Communists throughout the world, I believe in 
working, together with others, including Communists, to the extent 
that their aims and methods coincide with mine. 

Senator Mundt. How large an extent is that? Are they identical? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. I am not a member of the Communist Party, and 
what I do believe is explained in my books and writings, and I stand 
behind them. 

May I read a short statement, sir? 

Senator Mundt. I would like to have you answer some questions 
first. I think we will let you read the statement in due course if it is 

Mr. HuBERMAN. It is short. 

Senator Mundt. Your books, you must agree, are rather voluminous, 
and I have not read them. So t am trying to interrogate you and get 
answers of comparative brevity as to just what distinction you draw 
between being a Marxist and a Communist. You say you are not a 

Mr, HuBERMAN. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Do you mean that you are not only not a member 
of the Communist Party but that you do not associate yourself with 
the Communist creed or doctrine? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. I have just said, in answer to a previous question, 
that I have on occasion associated myself in the sense of working to- 
gether with Communists to the extent that their aims and methods co- 
incide with my own. 

Senator Mundt. Will you pull the microphone up a little nearer? 
I did not hear you. 

Maybe we can approach the question this way, Mr. Huberman. I 
asked you whether your views were identical with those of communism, 
and I think your answer implies that they are not. Will you give us 


some idea as to how your ideas differ from those of communism? I 
think that would clarify the question. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. May I read my statement, which will then clarify 
the point ? 

Senator Mundt. Well, I would like to get your answers to the ques- 
tions, and then you can read your statement in due course. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. The statement will clarify it. 

Senator Mundt. This is a very easy question to answer. You can 
read that portion of your statement which points out where you de- 
viate from the Communist viewpoint, if you care to. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. I am a writer and editor. I have no other occupa- 
tion and no other source of income. 

Senator Mundt. I just want you to read the part of your statement 
now that answers the question. How do your viewpoints deviate from 
those of the Communist Party? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. I shall refuse to answer that question. 

The Chairman. On what grounds? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. If I may read the statement, I will give the grounds. 
On the stated grounds. 

Senator Mundt. On what? 

Mr. HuBERJiAN. On the stated grounds previously given. 

Senator Mundt. Give them again, because I did not hear you. 

Mr. HuBERjiAN. The question invades my freedom of conscience, 
belief, and thought, which is protected against official intrusion by the 
fiist amendment. The question curtails my rights as an author to free- 
dom of speech and of the press, and it thereby tends to curb not only 
my own freedom but that of all other writers. 

Senator Mundt. May I point out that my question has in no way 
curbed your freedom of speech. I am trying to induce you to use 
your freedom of speech. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. May I ask a question, Senator ? 

The Chairman. May you what ? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. May I ask a question ? 

Senator Mundt. Not until you answer this question. This book is 
Man's Wordly Goods. Did you write this book ? 

Mr. Huberman. I did. 

Senator Mundt. I quote to you a statement that appears in your 
book on page 241 : 

One answer commonly made by revolutionists is that force must be used, 
blood must flow, not because they want to use violence but because the ruling 
class will not give up without it. There is a strong case for that argument. 

Are you thereby advocating the use of force and violence to over- 
throw our way of government, as it seems to me you clearly indicate 
in the statement? 

First of all, did you write the statement ? 

Mr. Huberman. If you say it is in the book, I wrote it. 

Senator Mundt. I am quoting it. 

Mr. Huberman. Right. I wrote it. 

Senator Mundt. Are you implying that what we need is force and 
violence in this country to change our system over to what you would 
call Marxism and Socialism? 

Mr. Huberman. I decline to discuss contents of my books and other 
writings before this committee, whose purpose, it seems to me, is not 


to discuss the books as books but to probe into my political views. 
I have written only what I believe to be true, and I am glad to let 
readers judge any passage, including the one you just quoted, in its 
proper context. 

Senator Mundt. Let me ask you another question, before you get 
to your statement. Do you feel that a statement such as I have just 
road is a good piece of salesmanship for the Acheson State Depart- 
ment to purchase with American taxpayers' money for the purpose of 
convincing foreigners that we have a good way of life in tliis country 
which they might want to emulate ? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. It is my job as a writer to write the truth, to write 
books with scholarship and accuracy, and then my responsibility ends. 
Whether or not a book appears in the State Department library is 
by no stretch of the imagination any concern of mine. I didn't know 
these books were in the State Department library. 

May I finish, please? 

My responsibility as a writer ends with the preparation of the book 
to the best of my ability in regard to truth, accuracy, and style. 

Now, at that point it is up to competent experts to judge whether or 
not the book should be in this or that or the other library. 

Senator Mundt. I agree with all of that. But now I am asking you 
a question, as probably the world's best expert on this book, because 
you wrote it : whether you feel that is the kind of book that the tax- 
payers might rightfully be asked to support in trying to sell the 
American way of life to people in foreign countries. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. By my definition of the American way of life, 
that book, chosen by competent experts, properly belongs in the li- 
brary, unless the converse of that would be that the American way of 
life has one particular line and only certain books shall be in it. I do 
not think that books should be chosen by a political test. They should 
be chosen by experts competent in their field. If that was done in 
this case, the book properly belongs there. 

May I read my statement ? 

Senator Mundt. I think the committee may have some other ques- 
tions to ask. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. Senator McCarthy, I was here in this room last 
week when you told tlie witness it was the rule of this committee that 
you would allow a statement to be read. 

The Chairman. Just a minute. Anything you want to say, you can 
say. You will have an opportunity to do it. There are certain ques- 
tions you will be asked to answer first. 

Now, Senator Mundt asked you a question as to whether or not 
at the time you wrote these books which were purchased by the old 
Acheson State Department, you in any way deviated from the teach- 
ings of communism, and in what way you deviated. I believe you 
refused to answer that. I will re-ask the question now, and I would 
like to have the grounds upon which you refuse to answer. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. I would like respectfully to suggest that you are 
changing the rules here ; as I understood it, having answered the ques- 
tion as to whether or not I was a member of the Communist Party, I 
was to be allowed to read my statement. This I heard you say was the 
rule of the committee. I would like to suggest therefore that I be 
allowed to read my statement. 


The Chairman. You will answer the questions first or refuse to 
answer them on tlie grounds they might incriminate you. You said 
you were a Marxist. Senator Mundt asked you a very simple ques- 
tion. He asked you whether you had deviated in any way from the 
teachings of communism at the time you wrote these books, books 
purchased by the taxpayers, books distributed by our Government 
throughout the world to teach the American way of life. You are 
ordered to answer that question, unless you feel that the answer might 
tend to incriminate you. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds stated, which do not include the ground that the answer 
would incriminate me. 

Mr. SiiARFSiN. Senator, may I 

The Chairman. You may only advise your client. 

Mr. Sharfsin. I was asking your indulgence in the interest of clar- 
ifying something, if I may. 

The Chairman. Certainly. You may do that. 

Mr. Sharfsin. I think it is clear both from your question 

The Chairman. If you are asking a question, you may proceed. 
I will not hear a speech from you. Did you have some question to 
ask to clarify this for the benefit of your client, to protect your client's 
rights ? You may do that. 

]\Ir. Sharfsin. Is the question propounded by you and Senator 
Mundt directed at this witness for the purpose eliciting from liim 
what his beliefs are, what his opinions are? I don't think that is 
quite clear, sir. And I think that his refusal to answer is based upon 
his understanding that your question probes the questions relating to 
his beliefs. And he invokes the first amendment, the clear, simple 
language of the first amendment, with respect to that. 

Now, with respect to passages read out of context, necessarily so, 
from one of his books, Mr. Huberman's position is that the books are 
there and speak for themselves. His expression of opinion as to 
whether or not 

The Chairman. You said you were going to ask a question. We 
will not hear any speech from you. 

Mr. Sharfsin. Yes. The question is whether the question seeks to 
probe what his political or social beliefs are. Because that is the basis 
upon which he seeks to invoke the first amendment. 

The Chairman. All right. We will give your client that infor- 

As I have stated before, we do not care what his beliefs are except 
insofar as he tries to put those beliefs in a book which is purchased by 
our taxpayers. 

My question is : At the time that he wrote the books, did he believe 
in communism ? If not, to what extent did he deviate from it ? 

Mr. Shapjfsin. You are asking what he believes. Senator. 

The Chairman. We will hear no more from you. Your client will 
either answer, or he may refuse to answer on the ground that the 
answer might incriminate him. 

Mr. Sharfsin. Your indulgence for just a moment, sir? 

The Chairman. Certainly. 

(Mr. Sharfsin confers with Mr. Huberman.) 

Mr. Huberman. Implicit in your question 

The Chairman. Senator Mundt has some questions. 


Senator Mundt, Let me ask you this question. You wrote a book 
called the Truth About Socialism. Right? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. And on page 176 I find this statement. I want to 
ask you whether you wrote it. 

Now we need no longer guess whether or not it is possible for a nation to have 
centralized planning. Now we know. The Soviet Union has tried it. It works. 
It is possible. 

Did you write that statement ? 

Mr. HUBERMAN. I did. 

Senator Mundt. At the time you wrote it, were you a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. At the time what? I am sorry. 

Senator Mundt. At the time you wrote it, were you a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. I have never been a member of the Communist 

May I read my statement, sir ? 

Senator Mundt. Eventually. But do not interrupt all my ques- 
tions by asking to read your statement. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. How long is "eventually" ? 

Senator Mundt. Between now and 12 o'clock. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. Thank you. 

Senator Mundt. How long is the statement ? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. Very short. Three pages. 

Senator Mundt. Now I want to ask you another matter of opinion. 
We are dealing here with a process under the law where certain Gov- 
ernment officials, those in the State Department, were authorized under 
the law to purchase books for specific purposes, those purposes being 
to explain the American foreign policy and the American system of 
government and the American way of life to foreign people; the pur- 
pose also being implicit in the law that the purchase of the books was 
to be in part the fighting of the Communist conspiracy emanating 
from Moscow. 

I want to ask you, as the world's best expert on this book, whether in 
your opinion the circulation of that book abroad would help fight com- 
munism and help convince people that communism is not an acceptable 
and a satisfactory way of life. This book was distributed in 27 dif- 
ferent countries. Mr. Acheson's team bought 114 copies. The Ameri- 
can taxpayers paid for it. I have read what you said. You have ad- 
mitted that you said it. I am asking you a question which you may 
refuse to answer if you want to. It is, frankly, a matter of opinion. 
But you are an expert on the book. 

In your opinion, would that book help fight communism ? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. Since it is a matter of opinion, I take the position 
that I refuse to answer. I decline to answer, on the matter of opinion. 

May I read my statement ? 

Senator Mundt. I suggest you let him read his statement, Mr. 

The Chairman. I am getting rather curious about the statement. 
Go ahead and read it. 

How many pages do you have, incidentally ? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. About two and a half. 


Tlie Chairman. May I say that we are violating the rules of the 
committee in allowing yon to read it. The rules under the Reorganiza- 
tion Act provide that a statement must be submitted 72 hours before 
the witness appears. We have liberalized tliat iiile and provided that 
you must submit the statement 24 hours before you appear. However, 
if the Senators have no objection, we will let you read it. We will 
waive the rule and let you read the statement. 

Senator Mundt. I presume that there are no matters of opinion 
expressed in the statement, because you apparently are very reluctant 
to testify to any matters of opinion. 

Mr. HuBERMAN. I am a writer and editor. I have no other occupa- 
tion and no other source of income. 

Senator Mundt. May I inquire at that point : What do you edit? 

Mr. HuBERMAN. I am coming to that. If you will let me read the 
statement, a lot will be clear. 

Senator Mundt. Very good. 

Mr. HuBEEMAN. I have written eight books and many pamphlets 
and at present I am occupied full-time as coeditor, with Paul M. 
Sweezy, of Monthly Review — An Independent Socialist magazine 
which is published in New York City. 

My ideas are best indicated in the subtitle of the magazine — In- 
dependent Socialist. I have never been a member of the Communist 
Party. However, like millions of other non-Communists throughout 
the world, I am a Marxist and a Socialist and believe in working 
together with others, including Communists, to the extent that their 
aims and methods are consistent with mine. 

I have never sought to conceal what I think or where I stand. My 
Socialist principles were fully set forth in the first issue of Monthly 
Review — May 1949 — and have been reprinted in its pages from time 
to time. I am anxious that my ideas and beliefs should be known to 
as many people as possible; anyone interested in them can readily 
satisfy his curiosity by reading my books and Monthly Review. I 
have nothing to hide, quite the contrary. 

So much I have stated under oath, not because I concede the right 
of this committee to ask for such information, but because I want to 
make it crystal clear that communism is not an issue in this case and 
to focus attention on what is the issue — my right as an author and 
editor to pursue my occupation without interference from Congress 
or any of its committees. To assert this right, I have refused ta 
answer any further questions put to me by the McCarthy committee 
concerning what I think, or what I believe, or with whom I associate. 
That, in accordance with good old American tradition, is my own 
business — to be discussed only with whom I choose. I do not choose 
to discuss it with the McCarthy committee. These are my reasons: 

First, my freedom as a writer and editor, and that of all other 
writers and editors, is fully protected from congressional interference 
by the first amendment to the Constitution. Hence, to the extent that 
the purpose of the questions put to me by the committee is, as I am 
convinced it has been in the past, to invade that freedom by frightening 
or discouraging me and others from its full exercise, the committee is 
violating the Constitution and I refuse to be a party to such a pro- 

Second, this committee, as I understand its enabling resolution, is 
charged with investigating matters relating to the spending of Gov- 


eminent funds. Conducting such investigations is obviously a proper 
and necessary function of Congress, and in discharging this function 
Congress has the right to require the cooperation of any citizen who 
is in a position to help. But I am not an expert in this field ; I have 
never been on the Government payroll ; I have never disbursed Gov- 
ernment funds ; and no one has ever consulted me about the disburse- 
ment of Government funds. Moreover, I deny that the fact that 
Government funds have been spent to buy a book or books of mine — 
if it is a fact — constitutes a valid ground for the committee's calling 
me to testify. Hence, to the extent that the committee asks questions 
relating to me as an author and editor, it is acting beyond its powers 
and I refuse to be a party to such a proceeding. 

These, then, are my reasons for refusing to answer questions about 
ideas, beliefs, and associations put to me by this committee. I do 
not believe that the committee has the right, under the Constitution 
or under its enabling resolution, to ask such questions. I refuse to be 
a party to what I consider to be unconstitutional and illegal pro- 

But my motives are much broader. The problem at issue here is 
not solely one of legality. Also at stake are the preservation of tradi- 
tional American liberties and the good name of our country in the 
eyes of the whole world. 

A manifesto voted by the American Library Association on June 
25, and concurred in by the American Book Publishers Council, opens 
with these words : 

The freedom to read is essential to our democracy. It is under attack. 

Everyone knows that the main attacker is this conunittee of Con- 
gress and its chairman. 

A resolution, unanimously adopted by the National Education Asso- 
ciation on June 30 — 

•condemns the efforts of those who advocate book burnings, purges, or other 
devices which restrict freedom of thought and which are, in effect, an expression 
of lack of confidence in the integrity, loyalty, and good judgment of the American 

Everyone knows that this forthright resolution is aimed at this 
•committee of Congress and its chairman. 

No less a personage than the President of the United States has 
recently felt it necessary to denounce the book burners as a menace to 
this country and its democratic institutions. Everyone knows that 
the chief book burner is this committee of Congress and its chairman. 

Warnings and denunciations such as these are welcome signs of a 
growing revulsion against book burning in all its forms. But what is 
really needed is action. Ultimately, action will have to come from 
the voters of the country, and I am confident that it will. But, in the 
meantime, I am convinced that even an individual can, by standing 
up for his rights under the Constitution and the law, issue an effective 
challenge to the congressional book burners. I firmly believe that 
their methods constitute an abuse and usurpation of power. I refuse 
to cooperate with them. My refusal is based, in the words of Dr. Al- 
bert Einstein: 

on the assertion that it is shameful for a blameless citizen to submit to such an 
Inquisition and that this kind of inquisition violates the spirit of the Constitution. 


111 the event that my refusal leads to a judicial test, I stand ready 
to carry the case up to the Supreme Court so that the important consti- 
tutional questions involved herein, may be decided. 

Senator Mundt. Now, Mr. Chairman, may I make a statement? 

The Chairman. You may. 

Senator Mundt. Have you concluded your statement, Mr. Huber- 

]\Ir. HuBF.RMAN. I have. 

Senator Mundt. May I point out, Mr. Chairman, that this witness 
has answered the question which was asked him directly as to whether 
or not he is or has ever been a member of the Communist Party. He 
has answered that question in the negative. He has read us a state- 
ment of opinion, in which I am not particularly interested, because 
being a Marxist and a Socialist, he expresses opinions which are obvi- 
ously contrary to viewpoints that anybody holds who believes in our 
American concepts of freedom, individual ownership, and human 

I Avould like to point out, however, that this witness demonstrates 
very clearly the importance of the function of this committee in mak- 
ing certain that the purposes of Public Law 402 are carried out in the 
expenditure of public funds. We have had from this witness an 
admission that he wrote the statements which have been quoted. In 
his own statement he advocates publicly Marxism and socialism. He 
tells us he is the editor of a book or a magazine that advocates that. 
He has a perfect right to engage in that kind of writing under our 
system of government, contrary to the rights which he would not have 
if he were attempting to oppose communism in a Communist country. 

He has admitted in testimony here that he has written books which 
have been purchased by the Acheson State Department with tax- 
payers' money for distribution to information centers abroad, which 
in one instance advocate the overthrow of Government by force and 
violence, and which in another instance publicly and enthusiastically 
applaud the Kussian regime, the system prevailing in Communist 
Kussia, and in a third instance repeatedly find fault with every phase 
of American life. 

In niy opinion, the purchase of those books and the distribution of 
them in our information centers is in clear violation of the law as 
passed by the 80th Congress, and in my opinion it demonstrates clearly 
that those in charge of the book purchasing and distribution program 
and procedure are |?oing to have to avoid the procurement, the pur- 
chase, and the distribution of books of this kind, unless by deliberate 
malfeasance they violate the intent of Congress in establishing these 
information libraries. 

I am not interested in this man's opinion. I think he has demon- 
strated clearly that books of that kind have no place in information 
centers abroad financed by the American taxpayers' money. Insofar 
as I am concerned, Mr. Chairman, I suggest that we dismiss this 
witness. We are not interested in his viewpoints or his opinions. By 
his testimony, he has helpfully proved the case of the committee, 
demonstrating that while people in this country have a right to write 
anything they care to and sell it any place they want to, public 
officials under Public Law 402 do not' have the right to spend tax- 


payers' money to distribute that kind of trash to our information 
centers overseas. 

I suggest we dismiss the witness. 

The Chairman. You may step down. 

"Would counsel, just to complete the record, read the various Com- 
munist activities it has been established that Mr. Huberman has been 
identified with? 

Mr. CoHN, Citizens Committee for Harry Bridges ; Committee for 
a Democratic Far Eastern Policy; Committee for the Reelection of 
Benjamin J. Davis on the Communist Party ticket in 1945; Greater 
New York Emergency Conference on Inalienable Rights; National 
Federation for Constitutional Liberties; writer for New Masses; 
writer for Science and Society ; Scientific and Cultural Conference for 
World Peace; signer of open letter calling for cooperation with the 
Soviet Union ; writer for Soviet Russia Today ; supporter Communist 
bookshops ; "Win the Peace Conference. 

These have been supplied to us from the indexes of the House 
Committee on TJn- American Activities, each of these having been 
cited officially. 

The Chairman. All of them have been cited officially as Com- 
munist fronts? 

Mr. CoHN. That is right. 

The Chairman. The committee will stand adjourned until further 

("Wliereupon, at 11:30 a. m., the hearing was recessed, subject to 
the call of the Chair.) 



Acheson 483^85, 490, 492, 495 

America, Incorporated (book) 486, 487 

American Book Publishers Council 494 

American Library Association 494 

Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) 483 

Boudin, Leonard B 484 

Bridges, Harry 496 

Bundy 483 

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 483,484 

CIA. {See Central Intelligence Agency.) 

Citizens Committee for Harry Bridges 496 

Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy 496 

Committee for the Reelection of Benjamin J. Davis on the Communist 

Party Ticket in 1945 496 

Communist Party 484, 485, 488-490, 492, 493, 495, 496 

Communist Russia 495 

Congress 483-485, 493, 494, 495 

Constitution of the United States 484, 487, 493, 494 

Coplon, Judy 484 

Davis, Benjamin J 496 

Dulles, Allen 483, 484 

Eightieth Congress 495 

Einstein, Albert 494 

Eisenhower, President 494 

Government of the United States 487 

Greater New York Emergency Conference on Inalienable Rights 496 

Hiss, Alger 483 

House Committee on Un-American Activities (files) 496 

Huberman, Leo, testimony of 486-496 

Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee 483 

Man's Wordly Goods (book) 486, 489 

Maritime Commission 483 

Marx, Karl 488, 489, 491, 493, 495 

Monthly Review (magazine) 493 

Moscow 492 

National Education Association 494 

National Federation for Constitutional Liberties 496 

National Security Council 483 

New Masses (publication) 496 

O'Connor, Harvey, testimony of 484r-486 

Philadelphia 486 

President of the United States 494 

Public Law 402 495 

Reorganization Act 493 

Science and Society (publication) 496 

Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace 496 

Sharfsin, Joseph 486, 491 

Socialist 488, 493, 495 

Soviet Russia Today (publication) 496 

Soviet Union 492, 496 

State Department 484-487, 490, 492, 495 

State Department (library) 490 

Supreme Court of the United States 495 

Sweezy, Paul M 493 

Thomas, Norman 488 



Truth About Socialism (book) 486, 492 

Truth About Unions (book) 486 

Un-American Activities Committee (files) 496 

United States Congress 483^85, 493, 494, 495 

United States Constitution 484, 487, 493, 494 

United States Government 487 

United States Supreme Court 495 

We, The People (book) 486 

Win the Peace Conference 496 



3 9999 05445 3327