Skip to main content

Full text of "Strategy and tactics of world communism"

See other formats


rE" 


t 


^^jMl^Mot 


d^ 


-I 


<% 


Given  By 
E  5.  ^TIPT.  OF  DOCUMENTS 


3^ 


TtRATEGY  and  tactics  of  world  COIMUNISM 

THE  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  THE  MATUSOW  CASE 


HEARING 


BEFORE  THE  nsTjr;    .. 


SUBCOMMITTEE  TOJNVESTIGATE  THE 

ADMINISTEATION  OF  THE  INTERNAL  SECUBITY 

ACT  AND  OTHER  INTERNAL  SECURITY  LAWS 


OF  THE 


COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 

UNITED  STATES  SENATE 

EIGHTY-FOURTH  CONGRESS 

FIRST  SESSION 
PURSUANT  TO 

S.  Res.  58 


APRIL  18,  1955 


PART  9 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary 


( 


P*B.^ 


UNITED  STATES  ^      i± 

<  ^  7 


GOVERNMENT  PRINTING  OFFICE 
•°'-***^6  WASHINGTON  :   1935 


Boston  I'ublic  Library 
superintendent  of  Documents 


COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 


HARLEY  M.  KILGORE, 
JAMES  O.  EASTLAND,  Mississippi 
ESTES  KEPAUVER,  Tennessee 
OLIN  D.  JOHNSTON,  South  Carolina 
THOMAS  C.  HENNINGS,  Je.,  Missouri 
JOHN  L.  McCLELLAN,  Arkansas 
PRICE  DANIEL,  Texas 
JOSEPH  C.  O'MAHONEY,  Wyoming 


West  Virginia,  Chairman 
ALEXANDER  WILEY,  Wisconsin 
WILLIAM  LANGER,  North  Daliota 
WILLIAM  E.  JENNER,  Indiana 
ARTHUR  V.  WATKINS,  Utah 
EVERETT  Mckinley  DIRKSEN,  lUlnols 
HERMAN  WELKER,  Idaho 
JOHN  MARSHALL  BUTLER,  Maryland 


SXJBCOMMITTEE  TO  INVESTIGATE  THE  ADMINISTRATION  OF  THE  INTERNAL  SeCUBITT 

Act  and  Other  Internal  Security  Laws 

JAMES  O.  EASTLAND,  Mississippi,  Chairman 
OLIN  D.  JOHNSTON,  South  Carolina  WILLIAM  E.  JENNER,  Indiana 

JOHN  L.  McCLELLAN,  Arkansas  ARTHUR  V.  WATKINS,  Utah 

THOMAS  C.  HENNINGS,  JR.,  Missouri  HERMAN  WELKER,  Idaho 

PRICE  DANIEL,  Texas  JOHN  MARSHALL  BUTLER,  Maryland 

J.  G.  SOUBWINE,  Chief  Counsel 
BiCHABD  Abens  and  Alva  C.  Carpenter,  Associate  Counsel 
Benjamin  Mandel,  Director  of  Research 
n 


5ui 


CONTENTS 


Pase 
Testimony  of — 

Ralph  N.  Shapiro 817 

Mandel  A.  Terman 802 

Nathan   Witt 747 

ni 


STRATEGY  AND  TACTICS  OF  WORLD  COMMUNISM 


MONDAY,  APRIL   18,   1955 

United  States  Senate, 
Subcommittee  To  Investigate  the 

Administration  of  the  Internal  Security  Act  and 

Other  Internal  Security  Laws,  of  the 

Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 

Washington^  D.  C. 

The  subcommittee  met,  pursuant  to  call,  at  2 :  45  p.  m.,  in  room  457, 
Senate  Office  Building,  Senator  James  O,  Eastland  (chairman  of  the 
subcommittee)  presiding. 

Present :  Senators  Eastland,  McClellan,  Daniel,  and  Jenner. 

Also  present:  J.  G.  Sourwine,  chief  counsel;  Alva  C.  Carpenter, 
associate  counsel;  Benjamin  Mandel,  director  of  research;  and  Eob- 
ert  C.  McManus,  professional  staff  member. 

The  Chairman.  Wlio  is  your  first  witness,  Mr.  Sourwine? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Nathan  Witt. 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Witt,  do  you  have  any  objection  to  the  tele- 
vision camera? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes ;  I  do.  Senator  Eastland,  while  I  am  testifying.  If 
you  please,  I  would  just  as  soon  get  the  picture  taking  out  of  the  way 
before  I  am  sworn. 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  solemnly  swear  the  testimony  you  are  about 
to  give  the  Internal  Security  Subcommittee  of  the  Committee  on  the 
Judiciary  of  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  is  the  truth,  the  whole 
truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help  you  God  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  do. 

The  Chairman.  Sit  down.  I  want  the  photographers  not  to  sit 
between  the  witness  and  the  committee. 

Do  you  object  to  photos  while  you  are  testifying? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes;  I  do,  sir.  I  have  no  objections  to  as  many  pictures 
as  they  want  to  take  before  I  testify,  but  I  would  rather  not  have  them 
while  I  am  testifying. 

TESTIMONY  OF  NATHAN  WITT,  ACCOMPANIED  BY  JOSEPH  FORER, 

HIS  ATTORNEY 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  are  a  lawyer,  Mr.  Witt  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Where  do  you  practice  law  ? 

^Ir.  Witt.  Xew  York  City. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  your  address,  sir? 

Mr.  Witt.  9  East  40th  Street,  New  York  16. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  ^Vho  are  your  partners,  Mr.  Witt  ? 

747 


748  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  no  partners.    I  practice  by  myself. 
Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Do  you  have  any  office  associates  ? 
Mr.  Witt.  Only  in  the  sense  that  there  are  other  lawyers  who  share 
the  same  suite  as  I  do,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  do  not,  then,  employ  any  lawyer? 
Mr.  Witt.  No,  I  don't. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr,  Witt,  pursuant  to  a  telephone  discussion  be- 
tween us  as  to  expediting  the  course  of  this  hearing,  you  were  fur- 
nished earlier  with  a  memorandum.  Do  you  have  that  memorandum 
with  you  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes,  Mr.  Sourwine.  If  you  refer  to  the  memorandum 
I  was  furnished  in  the  committee  office  downstairs  earlier  this  aft- 
ernoon ;  yes,  I  have  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  It  is  a  memorandum  of  your  affiliation  with  organ- 
izations cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney  General  or  by  the  House 
Committee  on  Un-American  Activities,  with  references  for  the  cita- 
tions, and  it  was  indicated  to  you,  at  the  time  it  was  given  to  you,  that 
you  would  be  asked  to  state  in  what  specific  instances  you  question  its 
accuracy. 

Mr.  Witt.  This  was  given  to  me  at  approximately  1 :  30  this  after- 
noon in  the  committee  office  downstairs. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  had  time  to  look  it  over  ? 
Mr.  Witt.  I  have  had  some  little  time,  Mr.  Sourwine. 
Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  there  items  on  there  which  you  wish  to  question 
with  respect  to  accuracy  or  fact  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Mr.  Sourwine,  and  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  ask  the  chair- 
man a  question  before  I  answer  Mr.  Sourwine's  question? 
The  Chairman.  You  can  ask  me  the  question ;  yes. 
Mr.  Witt.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  the  record  show  what  the  reason 
is  for  my  having  been  subpenaed  in  connection  with  this  hearing  ? 

The  Chairman.  That  is  a  matter  for  the  determination  of  the  Chair. 
We  are  conducting  an  investigation.  I  don't  think  it  is  proper  for 
the  Chair,  the  chairman  of  the  committee,  to  refer  to  that  in  its 
investigation. 

Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine.  4't 

Mr.  Witt.  May  I  say  a  word  on  that,  Mr.  Chairman  ?  ^  i 

The  Chairman.  No,  sir ;  I  don't  care  to  hear  you  on  that,  sir. 
Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  question  was,  Mr.  Witt,  whether  there  are  any 
items  on  this  memorandum  with  respect  to  which  you  want  to  make 
a  contrary  statement,  or  items  which  you  want  to  declare  are  inaccu- 
rate or  unf  actual. 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes.  And  your  adjectives  don't  cover  all  the  categories 
of  the  comments  I  have  to  make,  Mr.  Sourwine,  but  anyway  I  will 
go  ahead  and  make  my  comments. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  am  attempting  to  determine  whether  your  com- 
ments in  regard  to  this  are  going  to  be  lengthy.  If  they  are,  we 
will  defer  it  until  a  little  later  on  in  the  testimony.  This  was  an 
effort  to  expedite  things.  If  it  is  not  going  to  expedite  them,  we  had 
better  get  into  another  subject  here. 

Mr.  Witt.  My  comments  won't  be  lengthy,  Mr.  Sourwme. 
Mr.  Sourwine.  They  will  not  be  lengthy  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Don't  be  alarmed ;  no.  I  am  anxious  to  get  out  as  soon 
as  I  can  this  afternoon,  as  you  know,  pursuant  to  our  telephone  dis- 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  749 

cussion.  I  have  to  get  out  to  Chicago  this  afternoon,  and  I  would 
like  to  get  out  as  soon  as  possible,  so  I  will  make  my  comments  as 
short  as  I  can,  but  I  do  want  to  make  my  comments,  if  I  may. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Yes.  And  would  you,  in  commenting  on  this  memo- 
randum, please  address  yourself  to  items  in  order  as  they  appear  here, 
picking  up  the  ones  that  you  want  to  challenge. 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  that  is  a  little  difficult,  but  I  will  do  the  best 
I  can,  Mr.  Sourwine,  to  save  time. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Very  good. 

Mr,  Witt.  Just  let  me  say  generally,  since  I  was  handed  this  only 
about  an  hour  and  a  half  ago  and  had  no  opportunity  to  refer  to 
records  in  my  possession,  some  of  these  items  refer  to  alleged  activ- 
ities of  mine  or  affiliations  of  mine  which  took  place  as  much  as  20 
years  ago.  I  have  difficulty  with  some  of  them,  but  I  will  do  the  best 
I  can. 

Taking  them  in  order,  as  suggested  by  you,  Mr.  Sourwine,  first 
this  item  to  the  effect  that  I  was  a  signer  of  the  freedom  crusade 
petition  issued  by  the  Civil  Eights  Congress,  January  17,  1949,  at 
the  present  moment  I  have  no  recollection  of  that. 

I  wouldn't  be  surprised  if  I  did,  if  I  get  what  it  was  about  from 
its  title  and  the  organization  it  was  issued  by.  I  probably  wouldn't 
have  hesitated  to  sign  it,  but  at  the  moment  I  have  no  recollection  that 
Tdid. 

Second  item  refers  to  my  being  a  member  of  the  Citizens  Committee 
for  Harry  Bridges.  Of  course,  I  think  it  is  unfortunate,  since  Mr. 
Bridges  has  been  involved  in  four  cases  in  the  past,  he  has  been  in- 
volved, he  is  now  involved  in  a  fifth,  that  this  doesn't  refer  to  what 
this  committee  was  for  or  what  case  it  had  reference  to,  but  in  any 
event  I  do  have  a  recollection  that  I  was  at  one  time  a  member  of 
some  citizens  committee  for  Harry  Bridges,  and  the  many  attempts 
to  persecute  him. 

The  next  item  refers  to  me  as  being  a  signer  of  a  statement  for  the 
Council  for  Pan-American  Democracy.  I  have  no  recollection  of 
that. 

Shall  I  continue,  Mr.  Sourwine  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes. 

Mr.  Witt.  Oh,  I  thought  you  were  busy  up  there. 

Next  item  refers  to  my  membership  in  the  International  Juridical 
Association.  I  was  a  member  of  the  International  Juridical  Associa- 
tion. 

The  next  item  refers  to  my  having  been  a  member  of  the  board  of 
trustees  of  the  Jefferson  School  of  Social  Science.  That  is  an  item 
on  which  I  refuse  to  make  any  comment,  Mr.  Sourwine  and  Mr. 
Chairman. 

The  next  item  refers  to  my  having  been  counsel  and  a  member  of 
the  executive  committee  of  the  National  Federation  for  Constitutional 
Liberties.  I  was  counsel,  one  of  counsel  of  the  NFCL,  and  a  member 
of  its  executive  committee. 

The  next  item  refers  to  the  fact  that  I  have  been  a  writer,  or  I  was 
a  writer  for  Science  and  Society  in  1945.  That  is  an  item  on  which 
I  refuse  to  make  any  comment. 

The  Chairman.  For  what  reason  ? 


750  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Witt,  The  reason  that  T  think  it  is  an  improper  question  to  be 
posed  by  this  committee,  as  I  think  thase  all  are,  Mr.  Chairman,  but 
I  am  expediting  proceedings  and  I  am  making  a  division  in  my  mind. 

The  Chairman.  I  am  instructing  you  and  ordering  you  to  answer 
that  question. 

Mr.  WiTF.  I  refuse  to  answer  it,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Chairman,  in  order  that  the  question  might 
be  specifically  stated,  the  question  with  reference  to  this  item  would 
be  whether  or  not  he  was  a  writer  for  Science  and  Society  in  1945, 
a  publication  cited  as  subversive  by  the  House  Committee  on  Un- 
American  Activities,  and  I  ask  that  question,  Mr,  Chairman,  if  I  may. 

Mr.  Witt,  This  is  Mr.  Daniel  addressing  the  question  to  me? 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes. 

Mr.  Witt.  First,  Mr.  Daniel,  to  the — my  objection  to  it  is  on  the 
ground  that  such  a  question  violates  my  rights  under  the  first  amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution.  As  you  know,  Mr.  Daniel,  that  amend- 
ment guarantees  the  right  of  free  speech  and  free  press,  generally  free 
thought ;  and  the  fact  that  I  wrote  for  Science  and  Society  or  for  any 
other  publication  in  America  is  an  improper  question  to  be  put  to  me 
by  a  committee  of  the  United  States  Senate. 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr,  Chairman,  I  ask  that  he  be  ordered  to  answer 
the  question.  Certainly,  it  is  no  violation  of  free  speech  to  ask  a  man 
if  he  was  a  writer  for  a  certain  publication  that  claims  the  right  of  a 
free  press. 

The  Chairman.  Yes ;  you  are  ordered  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  Mr,  Daniel,  addressing  another  lawyer,  I  want  to  ex- 
press my  strongest  disagreement  with  you.  I  think  it  is  a  violation 
of  my  rights  under  the  fifth  amendment  for  a  committee  of  the  United 
States  Senate  to  ask  me  whether  I  ever  wrote  something,  without  even 
telling  me  what  I  wrote,  or  without  describing  the  publication,  except 
that  some  House  committee  once  called  it  subversive — whatever  that 
may  mean. 

Senator  Daniel,  All  I  wanted  to  do  was  to  know  just  exactly  on 
what  basis  you  refuse  to  answer  whether  you  were  a  writer  for  this 
publication. 

Do  you  now  claim  the  fifth  amendment ;  that  it  might  incriminate 
you  if  you  gave  a  truthful  answer  to  the  question  ? 

Mr,  Witt,  I  would  like  a  ruling  from  the  Chair  on  my  claim  that 
the  question  itself  put  to  me  violates  my  rights  under  the  first 
amendment. 

The  Chairman,  The  Chair  overrules  your  objection  and  orders  you 
to  answer  the  question,  Mr,  Witt,  You  are  ordered  and  instructed  to 
answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  All  right.  I  disagree  with  that  with  greatest  respect, 
Senator  Eastland,  but  in  order  to  save  time  I  won't  argue  it  any  fur- 
ther, and  you  leave  me  no  alternative  except  to  refuse  to  answer  on  the 
grounds  that,  under  the  fifth  amendment,  I  have  the  right  not  to 
answer  any — I  have  the  right  not  to  be  a  witness  against  myself,  even 
though  it  pertains  to  something  I  may  have  written. 

To  continue 

Mr.  Sourwine,  Mr,  Witt,  may  it  be  clear  you  are  not  being  asked 
to  comment  upon  every  item  here.  You  are  only  being  asked  to  point 
out  and  mention  those  items  which  you  wish  to  challenge. 

Mr.  Witt,  I  understand. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  751 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Cliairman,  we  passed  up  one  other;  member 
of  board  of  trustees,  Jefferson  School  of  Social  Science,  on  which  the 
witness  refused  to  comment.  I  would  like  to  ask  whether  or  not  the 
witness  has  been  a  member  of  the  board  of  trustees,  Jefferson  School 
of  Social  Science,  which  was  cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney 
General. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  the  same  objection  to  that,  Mr.  Daniel,  as  I  had  to 
the  question  relating  to  Science  and  Society.  I  think  the  question  or 
the  item  violates  my  rights  under  the  first  amendment. 

Senator  Daniel.  Do  you  decline  to  answer  under  the  fifth  amend- 
ment ? 

The  Chairman.  I  order  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  WiiT.  Will  you  rule  on  my  objection  on  the  first  amendment? 

The  Chairman.  Yes.  It  is  overruled,  and  you  are  ordered  to  an- 
swer the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  In  order  to  save  time,  then,  Mr.  Chairman  and  Mr.  Sour- 
Avine.  when  I  finally  refuse  to  answer  after  you  overrule  any  objec- 
tion I  may  have  under  the  first  amendment,  may  it  be  understood  that 
I  am  exercising  my  privilege  not  to  be  a  witness  against  myself  under 
the  fifth  amendment. 

Do  you  want  me  to  repeat  it,  or  may  that  be  understood  ? 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

jNIr.  Witt.  I  will  follow^  your  suggestion,  Mr.  Sourwine,  and  com- 
ment on  only  those  items  which  seem  to  me  to  require  comment. 

I  liave  no  recollection  of  having  been  a  lecturer  at  the  School  for 
Democracy.  I  may  have  been,  but  at  the  moment  I  have  no  recol- 
lection. 

I  have  no  recollection  of  having  been  a  sponsor  of  a  May  Day 
parade  under  the  auspices  of  the  National  Council  of  Arts,  Sciences, 
and  Professions. 

I  have  no  recollection  of  having  signed  a  petition  against  the  con- 
tempt conviction  of  lawyers  who  defended  the  11  Communist  leaders, 
but  I  would  like  to  say  for  the  record  that  if  such  a  petition  had  been 
presented  to  me  at  the  time,  I  would  have  considered  it  my  duty  as  a 
lawyer  to  sign  it.     But  as  to  the  fact,  I  have  no  present  recollection. 

I  do  recall  writing  an  article  for  Social  Work  Today,  defending 
loyalty  cases  and  attacking  investigating  committees.  I  have  con- 
tinuecl  taking  this  position  at  all  times  since  1941,  when  I  wrote  that 
article.  I  do  defend  so-called  loyalty  cases.  I  do  continue  to  attack 
investigating  committees,  including  this  one. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Witt,  to  your  knowledge,  is  the  publication 
Social  Work  Today  a  publication  which  has  been  cited  as  subversive 
by  the  Attorney  General  or  the  House  Committee  on  Un-American 
Activities  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  no  knowledge,  Mr.  Sourwine,  and  I  made  no  par- 
ticular investigation.     I  don't  pay  much  attention  to  such  citations. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Why  do  you  make  a  distinction  between  this  publi- 
cation, your  writing  for  which  you  are  willing  to  admit,  and  the  pub- 
lication Science  and  Society,  your  writing  for  which  you  did  not  desire 
to  testify  with  regard  to  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Because  this  sheet  of  yours  tells  me  that  Science  and 
Society  has  been  cited  by  the  House  Committee,  while  it  doesn't  say 
anything  about  a  citation  against  Social  Work  Today. 

59886 — 55— pt.  9 2 


752  STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Thank  you. 

Now,  will  you  go  ahead,  please. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  no  recollection  of  having  been  an  attorney,  or 
the  attorney  in  the  case  of  Nancy  Eeed,  who  1^3  referred  to  here  as  a 
Communist  defendant  before  the  New  York  State  Labor  Department 
in  1941.  Of  course,  that  item,  Mr.  Chairman,  is  completely  inexplic- 
able to  me.  I  am  a  member  of  the  bar.  I  have  the  right  to  defend 
Communists,  non-Communists,  murderers,  rapists. 

The  Chairman.  Just  answer  his  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  just  don't  understand  the  question. 

In  any  event,  I  have  no  recollection  of  it,  nor  do  I  have  any  recol- 
lection of  having  been  the  attorney  or  an  attorney  for  the  Communist 
Party  in  Binghamton,  N.  Y.,  in  1947. 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  ask  a  question  there? 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  Senator. 

Senator  Daniel.  Do  you  state  to  this  committee  under  oath  that 
you  were  not  attorney  for  the  Communist  Party  in  Binghamton.  N.  Y., 
in  1947?  ^  fe  .  , 

Mr.  Witt.  Senator  Daniel,  I  thought  I  made  myself  clear,  and  that 
is  not  what  I  said.     I  said  I  had  no  recollection  of  it. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  have  made  yourself  clear,  but  I  am  now  ask- 
ing you  this  question: 

Do  you  say  to  the  committee  that  you  were  not  attorney  for  the 
Communist  Party  in  Binghamton,  N.  Y.,  in  1947  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Oh,  no,  I  couldn't  say  that  in  view  of  the  fact  I  have 
already  told  you  I  have  no  recollection.  Then  how  can  I  say  to  you 
affirmatively  that  I  didn't  represent  them? 

Although,  I  will  say  again.  Senator  Daniel,  that  if  in  the  course 
of  my  professional  work  I  felt  called  upon  to  represent  the  Communist 
Party,  I  wouldn't  hesitate  to  do  so.  Let  there  be  no  misunderstand- 
ing about  that.  But  just  on  the  question  of  fact  whether  I  did  or 
didn't,  I  have  no  recollection. 

Senator  Daniel.  Have  you  ever  represented  the  Communist  Party 
at  any  time? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  no  recollection  that  I  did,  officially. 

Senator  Daniel.  Officially? 

Mr.^  Witt.  Officially,  I  mean,  in  the  sense  of  having  represented 
them  in  any  trial  or  hearing  on  any  proceeding. 

Senator  Daniel.  Have  you  represented  them  in  any  capacity,  the 
Communist  Party? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  no  recollection  that  I  have  done  so.  I  have  ad- 
vised individual  Communists  and  individual  Communist  leaders  from 
time  to  time  about  problems,  but  I  have  no  recollection  of  having  rep- 
resented the  Communist  Party,  as  such,  in  any  kind  of  proceeding, 
judicial,  administrative. 

Senator  Daniel.  Have  you  ever  advised  officials  of  the  Communist 
Party? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have,  with  respect  to  problems  of  one  kind  or  another, 
and  I  will  continue  to  do  so.  Senator  Daniel. 

Senator  Daniel.  With  respect  to  problems  of  the  party  itself  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No;  I  have  no  recollection  of  that.  With  respect  to 
individual  problems.  I  was  counsel — let  me  say  this — I  was  counsel 
for  Irving  Potash  after  his  incarceration  as  a  result  of  his  conviction 


STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  753 

in  the  first  Communist  trial  in  New  York.  I  represented  him  while 
he  was  in  Leavenworth  Prison.  That  representation  came  about  be- 
cause I  then  represented  the  union  of  which  he  was  an  official. 

Mr.  Sourwine,  do  you  want  me  to  comment  on  this  quotation  from 
the  testimony  by  Whittaker  Chambers? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Only  if  you  wish  to  deny  it,  sir,  or  declare  that  it 
is  in  some  respect  factually  inaccurate. 

Mr.  Witt.  Senator  Eastland,  would  you  bear  with  me  a  moment 
on  this? 

The  Chairman.  I  just  want  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes ;  I  am  going  to  try  to  answer  it. 

The  Chairman.  All  right. 

Mr.  Witt.  But  it  may  take  me  more  than  a  sentence  or  two  in  this 
case.  And  the  reason  is,  Senator  Eastland,  that  my  experience  with 
this  committee,  not  under  your  chairmansliip ;  understand.  Senator 
Eastland,  but  with  this  committee  first  under  the  chairmanship  of 
the  late 

The  Chairman.  Wait  just  a  minute.    I  don't  care  to  hear  that. 

Mr.  Witt.  Won't  you  hear  the  end  of  my  sentence.  Senator  East- 
land ?     Will  you  bear  with  me  just  a  moment  ? 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  desire  to  comment  on  that  testimony  of 
Mr.  Chambers? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes,  I  do. 

The  Chairman.  All  right,  tlien  comment. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  not  interested  in  criticizing  this  committee,  Senator 
Eastland.  I  am  interested  in  protecting  myself  and  protecting  myself 
against  what  this  committee  has  already  done  to  me,  Senator  East- 
land, and  you  are  compounding  the  improper  procedure  which  this 
coromittee  has  pursued  since  1950. 

The  Chairman.  Now  if  you  desire  to  comment,  you  will  be  permitted 
to  do  so. 

Mr.  Witt.  If  you  will  permit  me,  my  comment  on  this.  Senator  East- 
land, is,  first,  that  since  I  wasn't  given  this  until  this  afternoon,  I 
have  no  way  of  checking  up  on  this  quotation.  But  what  I  am  trying  to 
say.  Senator  Eastland,  if  you  will  bear  with  me  as  one  lawyer  to 
another  for  just  2  minutes 

The  Chairman.  No,  sir.  You  stated  that  you  had  no  way  of  check- 
ing the  information.  Your  statement  is  that  you  don't  know  whether 
that  testimony  is  accurate  or  not ;  is  that  correct  ?  _ 

Mr.  Witt.  No.     I  have  no  comment  on  it.    It  is  a  quotation. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  is  it  correct?  Did  Mr.  Chambers  tell  the 
truth  there  ? 

Mr.  Wrrr.  Well,  Senator  Eastland,  I  must  say  something  before  I 
answer  that  in  this  way.  This  statement  has  apparently  been  edited. 
That  is  what  I  am  trying  to  tell  you,  Senator  Eastland.  I  think  you 
ought  to  be  interested  in  that. 

The  Chairman.  All  right,  are  those  statements  there  true  or  false  ? 
Now  you  can  answer  that  in  one  word  and  then  explain. 

jMr.  Win.  All  right,  sir,  thank  you  very  much.  I  think  that  may 
take  care  of  my  problem.  Although,  as  I  say,  I  can't  recall  this 
specific  testimony  by  Whittaker  Chambers,  given  almost  7  years  ago, 
it  has  been  edited  in  such  a  way  as  to  give  rise  to  the  implication  that 


754  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Whittaker  Chambers  then  testified  that  he  knew  me  as  a  person  who 
had  been  engaged  in  espionage.^ 

Now  first  let  me  say,  Senator  Eastland,  whether  that  implication 
is  contained  in  this  quotation,  Mr.  AVhittaker  Chambers'  testimony  as 
a  whole,  or  the  testimony  of  anybody  else  in  part  or  in  whole,  that 
any  testimony  that  I  have  ever  engaged  in  espionage  either  when  I 
was  a  Government  official  or  since  is  entirely  false. 

The  Chairman.  You  stated  "as  a  Government  official."  What 
places  have  you  held  with  the  American  Government? 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  we  are  coming  to  that. 

The  Chaieman.  I  am  asking  you  the  question  now,  sir. 

Mr.  Witt.  You  want  it  now.  I  was  an  attorney  in  the  Department 
of  Agriculture  in  1933  until  early  1934.  Beginning  early  in  1934  I 
was  an  attorney  on  the  staff  of  what  we  referred  to,  as  you  recall. 
Senator  Eastland,  as  the  old  National  Labor  Relations  Board,  to 
distinguish  it  from  the  NLEB  which  was  set  up  under  the  Wagner 
Act. 

In  1934  that  was  the  NLRB  which  was  set  up  under  Public  Resolu- 
tion No.  44  passed  pursuant  to  the  framework  of  the  National  Indus- 
trial Recovery  Act. 

I  was  on  the  staff  of  the  old  NLRB  until  the  Wagner  Act  was  passed 
in  July  1935,  July  5,  1935,  when  I  became  an  attorney  on  the  staff 
of  the  new  NLRB  set  up  under  the  Wagner  Act. 

In  December  1935  I  became  the  Assistant  General  Counsel  of  the 
NLRB. 

In  November  1937  I  became  the  Secretary  of  the  NLRB,  and  I  re- 
mained in  that  post — at  least  I  remained  on  the  payroll  although  I 
severed  my  actual  connections  somewhat  earlier — until  the  end  of  1940. 
That  is  my  experience  with  the  Government,  Mr.  Chairman. 

The  Chairman.  Now  at  any  time  during  that  period  were  you  at 
the  head  of  an  underground  Communist  group  whose  original  purpose 
was  Communist  infiltration  of  the  American  Government  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Senator  Eastland,  as  I  have  already  tried  to  tell  you,  at 
no  time  in  my  life,  either  before  I  was  in  the  Government,  while  I  was 
in  the  Government,  since  I  have  been  in  the  Government,  have  I  been 
engaged  in  espionage,  and  I  would  deny  that  no  matter  if  you  brought 
10  or  50  witnesses,  and  despite  the  dangers  in  America  today  of  denying 
such  allegations. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Witt,  you  are  a  lawyer.  Are  you  aware  that 
the  question  of  whether  you  were  engaged  in  espionage  is  a  legal  con- 
clusion, and  what  the  Senator  is  asking  you  are  facts  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Break  it  down,  Mr.  Sourwine.  Break  it  down  any  way 
you  want.  Now,  Mr.  Sourwine,  that  is  why  I  refrained  to  tell  Senator 
Eastland 

The  Chairman.  Wait  just  a  minute. 

Mr.  Witt.  Because  he  is  unfamiliar  with  it,  but  you,  Mr.  Sourwine, 
were  in  Salt  Lake  City  when  Senator  McCarran  conducted  his  hearings 
in  October  1952.  You  were  there  when  J.  B.  Matthews  testified  be- 
fore this  committee  that  there  had  been  testimony  before  a  congres- 
sional committee  that  I  had  engaged  in  espionage. 


1  The  full  text  of  the  paragraphs  of  Chambers'  testimony  which  were  referred  to  in  the 
committee  document  appears  at  p.  763. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMJVrUNISM  755 

And  when  I  appeared  before  Senator  INIcCarran,  neither  you  nor 
Senator  McCarran  gave  me  an  opportunity  to  deny  it  or  to  demand 
that  J.  B.  Matthews  point  out  to  the  committee  where  there  had  been 
suc]i  testimony. 

When  I  appeared  before  this  committee  in  May  of  1953,  Mr.  Sour- 
wine,  you  weren't  present,  but  Mr.  Mandel  was  present  and  Robert 
Morris  was  then  counsel  to  this  committee,  and  the  same  question  was 
raised  and  I  asked  Senator  Jenner  for  a  ruling  on  this  question.  He 
said  he  would  take  it  under  advisement ;  he  would  let  me  have  a  ruling. 
I  never  got  a  ruling. 

At  tlie  time  I  appeared,  Senator  Eastland — I  will  be  done  just  with 
this  one  comment.  This  committee  issued  a  press  release  saying  that 
Elizabeth  Bentley  had  accused  me  of  having  been  engaged  in  espio- 
nage, and  when  I  took  that  up  with  the  New  York  Herald  Tribune, 
the  New  York  Herald  Tribune  secured  a  correction  from  this  com- 
mittee and  I  wrote  Robert  Morris,  counsel  for  this  committee,  asking 
him  to  make  that  part  of  the  record  of  this  committee,  and  that  hasn't 
been  done.  And  I  think  you  have  gone  far  enough  with  this,  Mr. 
Sourwine,  and  Chairman  Eastland.     I  have  had  enough  of  it. 

The  Chairman.  I  think  we  have  gone  far  enough  with  this  pro- 
ceeding.    Are  you  now  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  First,  Senator  Eastland,  I  think  the  question  is  imma- 
terial and  improj^er  because,  from  what  I  understand,  I  am  here  today 
under  subpena  of  this  committee  because  of  my  professional  work  as 
counsel  for  Clinton  Jencks  who  is  attempting  to  secure  justice  in  the 
Federal  court  in  El  Paso. 

Tlie  Cilvir:man.  Answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  think  the  question  is  improper  because  it  violates  my 
oath  as  a  lawyer  to  represent  my  clients,  and  you  are  trying  to  make  it 
difficult.  Senator  Eastland,  and  I  think  you  as  a  lawyer  should  appre- 
ciate that. 

The  Chairman.  You  know  very  well,  Mr.  Witt,  that  whether  you 
are  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  or  not  has  not  anything  to  do 
with  obligation  that  you  might  owe  clients,  I  ask  you  this  question. 
Are  you  now  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Oh,  Senator  Eastland,  perhaps  you  could  make  that  last 
comment  if  I  hadn't  been  in  El  Paso  as  counsel  for  Clinton  Jencks. 

The  Chairman.  Answer  my  question,  please,  sir. 

Mr.  Witt.  You  know.  Senator  Eastland,  I  am  here  today  because  I 
am  counsel  for  Clinton  E.  Jencks. 

The  Chairman.  Answer  my  question,  sir. 

Mr.  Witt.  And  I  spent  all  these  months 

The  Chairman.  Answer  my  question. 

Mr.  Witt  (continuing) .  As  a  lawyer  to  secure  justice  for  my  client 
pursuant  to  my  oath  as  a  lawyer.  Senator  Eastlancl. 

The  Cilvirman.  Answer  my  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  And  I  think  3^our  question  is  improper  as  a  violation  of 
the  right  which  American  lawyers  have  to  practice  their  profession  as 
long  as  they  don't  violate  the  law. 

The  CiiAiiafAN.  Answer  the  question.  Are  you  now  a  member  of 
the  Communist  Party  U.  S.  A.? 

IMr.  Witt.  Will  you  give  me  a  ruling  on  my  first  objection,  Mr. 
Chainnan  ? 


756  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

The  Chairman.  Well,  I  overrule  your  objection. 

Mr.  Witt.  All  ri<?ht,  sir. 

The  Chairivian.  I  order  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  think  it  is  unfortunate  that  you  as  a  lawyer  don't  ap- 
preciate the  position  I  am  in,  Senator  Eastland. 

The  Chairman.  Answer  the  question,  please,  sir. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  know  whether  you  have  ever  been  in  the  posi- 
tion of  trying  to  secure  justice  for  a  client  of  yours  as  a  lawyer. 

The  Chairman.  Answer  the  question,  please,  sir. 

Mr.  "Witt.  And  you  know 

The  Chairman.  Answer  the  question,  please,  sir. 

Mr.  Witt.  An  American  lawyer  has  no  higher  responsibility  than 
trying  to  secure  justice  for  his  client. 

The  Chairman.  What  are  you  afraid  of  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  afraid  of  nothing.  I  am  certainly  not  afraid  of  this 
committee.  I  am  certainly  not  afraid  of  my  responsibilities  as  a 
lawyer. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  certainly  not  afraid  of  my  position  as  an  American 
brought  up  under  the  Constitution  and  the  first  amendment,  and  on 
my  responsibilities  as  a  member  of  the  bar. 

The  Chairman.  Are  you  afraid  of  the  position  that  you  betrayed 
your  country  now?    Are  you  afraid  to  answer  the  question? 

Mr.  Witt.  Senator  Eastland,  I  resent  that  with  all  my  heart. 

The  Chairman.  I  know  you  resent  it. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  not  betrayed  my  country,  I  am  not  betraying  my 
country  by  representing  my  client,  and  I  don't  intend  to  betray  my 
country,  and  if  you  want  a  debate  as  to  whether  you  or  I  have  been 
more  guilty  of  betraying  this  country,  Senator  Eastland,  in  an  open 
forum  where  neither  of  us  are  under  subpena,  I  would  be  delighted  to 
debate  that  with  you  on  the  basis  of  your  record  as  against  my  record. 
Don't  you  say  that  again,  Senator  Eastland,  under  the  protection  of 
your  prerogative  as  chairman  of  this  committee.  Don't  you  tell  me 
again  I  betrayed  my  country. 

The  Chairman.  Yes,  you  betrayed  your  country  if  you  are  a  member 
of  the  Communist  Party. 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  you  don't  know  that.  You  didn't  say  that  before, 
and  furthermore 

The  Chairman.  Any  American  citizen  would  be  glad  to  answer 
that  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  think  you  violate  your  oath  as  a  Senator  in  this  con- 
text to  say  that  to  a  witness  who  is  here  under  a  subpena. 

The  Chairman.  I  would  be  glad  to  state  whether  or  not  I  was  a 
Communist.  I  would  be  glad  to  state  that  I  was  not  an  agent  of  the 
Soviet  Government.     Now  you  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  'VV'liich  question  are  you  asking  me  now,  Senator  East- 
land? 

The  Chairivian.  You  know  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  You  just  said  you  would  be  glad  to  answer  that  you  are 
not  an  agent  of  the  Soviet  Government.  Do  you  want  me  to  answer 
that  question? 

The  Chairman.  I  asked  you  the  question  if  you  were  a  member  or 
are  now  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 


STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  757 

Mr.  Witt.  Senator  Eastland,  in  the  course  of  asking  that  you  said 
to  me  that  you  would  be  glad  to  state 

The  Chairman.  I  don't  care  to  hear  that, 

Mr.  Witt  (continuing) .  You  are  not  an  agent  of  the  Soviet  Govern- 
ment. So  am  I.  I  am  not  an  agent  of  any  foreign  government.  I 
am  not  an  agent  of  the  Soviet  Government.  I  am  not  an  agent  of 
Chiang  Kai-shek.  I  am  not  an  agent  of  Peron.  I  am  not  an  agent 
of  Franco  and  I  certainly  was  not  an  agent  of  Hitler's.  I  am  an  agent 
for  my  rights  as  an  American  citizen  and  in  my  professional  capacity 
I  am  an  agent  for  my  clients. 

The  Chairman.  Eead  him  the  question. 

(The  reporter  read  back  the  question.) 

Mr.  Witt.  You  overruled  my  first  objection,  Senator  Eastland. 
My  second  objection 

The  Chairman.  Answer  that  question,  please,  sir. 

Mr,  Witt.  I  have  another  objection  if  you  please,  sir.  My  next 
objection  is  that  the  question  violates  my  rights  under  the  first  amend- 
ment. 

The  Chairman.  That  is  overruled.     You  are  ordered  to  answer, 

Mr.  Witt.  Then,  Senator  Eastland,  I  have  no  alternative  except 
to  refuse  to  answer  the  question  on  the  grounds  that  under  the  fifth 
amendment  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be  a  witness  agamst  myself. 

The  Chairman.  Now  proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine, 

Mr,  Sourwine.  Mr.  Witt,  may  I  ask  that  in  proceeding  you  confine 
yourself  to  comments  concerning  items  on  here  which  you  wish  to 
challenge  factually  or  with  respect  to  their  accuracy. 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Chairman,  before  we  leave  this  item  No.  14, 1 
would  like  to  ask  the  witness  this  question,  whether  or  not 

Mr.  Witt.  Excuse  me,  Senator  Daniel,  my  sheet  doesn't  show  the 
number  to  be  itemized.  You  are  talking  about  the  Whittaker  Cham- 
bers testimony? 

Senator  Daniel.  I  have  simply  numbered  them  myself.  This  is 
under  Whittaker  Chambers'  testimony.  You  were  not  asked  to  say 
whether  or  not  Whittaker  Chambers  testified  to  this  quotation,  but  I 
want  to  ask  you  this  question,  and  that  is  the  question  Mr.  Sourwine 
wanted  your  comment  on,  and  that  is  whether  or  not  you  were  a  mem- 
ber of  the  top-level  group  of  seven  or  so  men,  and  whether  or  not  vou 
were  the  head  of  that  group  whose  purpose  was  the  infiltration,  the 
Communist  infiltration  of  the  American  Government  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  You  are  not  now  asking  me.  Senator  Daniel,  whether 
Whittaker  Chambers  gave  that  testimony. 

Senator  Daniels,  That's  right,  I  am  just  asking  you  whether  or 
not  at  anj^  time  in  your  life  you  were  either  a  member  or  the  head  of 
a  top  level  group  whose  purpose,  original  purpose,  was  Communist 
infiltration  of  the  American  Government, 

Mr.  Witt,  Mr,  Chairman,  mnj  I  make  the  same  objection,  first  as 
to — there  is  so  much  noise  here.  May  I  make  the  first  objection  first 
as  to  materiality  ? 

The  Chairman.  It  is  overruled.    Answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  May  I  then  make  the  same  objection  under  the  first 
amendment? 

The  Chairman.  That  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  Then  I  refuse  to  answer  on  the  same  ground  I  have 
taken  before. 


758  STRATEGY    AXD    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Senator  Daniel.  You  refuse  to  answer  on  what  ground  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Don't  you  know  the  ground  I  have  been  stating,  Senator 
Daniel? 

Senator  Daniel.  I  want  you  to  state  it  for  the  record,  sir. 

Mr.  Witt.  Oh,  you  do.    It  is  in  the  record. 

Senator  Daniel.  Anyone  who  will  not  state  whether  or  not  he  was 
a  member  of  a  top  level  group  with  the  original  purpose  of  infiltrating 
with  communism  in  the  American  Government — I  would  like  for 
you  to  state  the  reason  why  you  will  not  tell  this  committee  whether 
that  is  true  or  false. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  understand  you  do,  but  I  thought  I  had  already  stated 
it,  but  if  you  want  me  to  go  through  it  again  I  will  be  happy  to  say  I 
refuse  to  answer  on  the  grounds 

Senator  Daniel.  A  little  louder. 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  there  is  so  much  noise  outside. 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  refuse  to  answer  that  question.  Senator  Daniel,  on  the 
ground  that  under  the  fifth  amendment  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be 
a  witness  against  myself. 

Senator  Daniel.  Thank  you. 

Mr.  Witt.  But  again,  Senator  Daniel,  I  will  try  not  to  repeat  it  but 
I  want  the  record  to  be  very  clear,  if  that  kind  of  language  has  any 
reference  to  espionage  either  from  the  legal  point  of  view  or  Mr.  Sour- 
wine  thinks  it  has  some  other  meaning,  my  answer  to  it  is  no.  Let 
there  be  no  doubt  about  that. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  there  any  other  items  here  that  you  wish  to 
challenge  factually  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  The  next  item  I  can't  comment  on.  If  a  certain  person 
by  the  name  of  Louis  Budenz  says  he  once  heard  my  name  mentioned 
some  place  when  I  wasn't  present,  I  don't  understand  what  comment 
you  want  from  me. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  didn't  ask  you  for  a  comment,  sir,  except  on  such 
items  as  you  desire  to  challenge  the  factual  accuracy  of. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  sorry,  I  thought  you  said  the  next  item.  Well, 
let  it  be  understood,  like  the  next  item  also,  Mr.  Sourwine,  where  I 
W'Ould  have  no  way  of  knowing,  I  can't  comment  one  way  or  the  other, 
like  the  first  item  on  top  of  the  second  page. 

Then  the  next  item  is — it  doesn't  say  whether  I  was  or  am,  but  it 
simply  states  '•'attorney  for  International  Union  of  Mine,  Mill  and 
Smelter  Workers."  That  is  true.  I  have  been  and  I  am  now  the  attor- 
ney or  the  general  counsel  for  the  International  Union  of  Mine,  MiU 
and  Smelter  Workers. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  have  been  such  since  early  1941  except  for  a 
short  period  during  the  war  ? 

Mr.  Wii-T.  That's  right,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Go  ahead. 

Mr.  Witt.  Now  the  next  item  states  that  my  former  name  was  Wit- 
kowsky.  Now,  Chairman  Eastland,  as  I  have  indicated,  I  have  diffi- 
culty with  some  of  these  other  items,  but  this  one  gives  me  a  peculiar 
difficulty. 

I  take  it  from  what  tlsis  committee  is  doing  and  from  these  other 
itenis,  that  these  items  are  supposed  generally  to  indicate  my  "sub- 
versive'' affiliations  and  activities  even  though  they  are  my  regular 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  759 

legal  activities,  but  this  item  standing  without  more,  Chairman  East- 
land, does  give  rise  to  a  peculiar  resentment  on  my  part  having  noth- 
ing to  do  with  the  definition  of  subversive  activities. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  will  explain  it  for  you,  Mr.  Witt.  The  whole 
purpose  is  to  identify  you,  if  it  is  true,  as  the  same  man  as  one  Wit- 
kowsky.  The  syllables  in  the  name  have  no  meaning.  The  name,  if 
you  were  supposed  to  be  the  same  as  one  Kelly  or  one  O'Shonessay  or 
one  Sourwine  under  similar  circumstances,  you  would  be  asked  about 
that  name.  It  is  simply  a  name  which,  according  to  tlie  committee's 
information,  you  at  one  time  used,  and  if  you  desire  to  deny  that  that 
is  true,  please  do  so.     If  not,  there  is  no  other  comment  called  for. 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  especially  in  view  of  that  comment,  Mr.  Sourwine, 
if  the  committee  has  this  information,  I  assume  that  the  committee's 
research  director  prepared  this,  perhaps  you  have,  the  committee 
would  know  if  it  were  doing  its  job  accurately  in  this  respect,  that 
this  is  my  family  name  which  was  changed  when  I  was  a  minor. 

A  congressional  committee  once  dealt  with  this  subject  when  I  was 
with  the  Govermnent.  Unfortunately  I  let  it  pass  at  that  time.  I 
am  not  disposed  to  let  it  pass  today. 

If  Mr.  Mandel  prepared  this  sheet,  whoever  it  is  on  the  committee 
staff  who  prepared  this  sheet  should  know,  should  know  from  records 
of  a  congressional  hearing,  that  this  was  my  father's  name,  that  it 
was  my  name  as  a  boy,  and  it  was  legally  changed  while  I  was  a  minor. 
And  I  say.  Senator  Eastland 

The  Chairman.  You  have  answered  the  question. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Let  me  ask  you  this  question 

Mr.  Witt.  Senator  Eastland 

The  Chairman.  Wait  just  a  minute  please,  sir. 

Mr.  Witt.  That  was  pi-eliminary  to  asking  that  this  item  be  with- 
drawn. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  respectfully  request  that  this  item  be  withdrawn. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Witt.  Chairman  Eastland,  I  respectfully  request  that  this  item 
be  withdrawn.  I  think  it  is  an  insult  to  me,  it  is  an  insult  to  my 
people. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Witt.  And  it  has  absolutely  no  relevance  and  it  does  carry 
anti-Semitic  overtones.  Chairman  Eastland. 

The  Chairman.  It  doesn't  carry  any  such  thing,  but  it  raises  a 
question  in  my  mind  as  to  what  you  fear  from  an  investigation.  Now 
proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Let  me  ask  you  this  question 

Mr.  Witt.  I  fear  nothing.     Chairman  Eastland 

The  Chairman.  Wait  just  a  minute. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  think  you  should  explain  yourself.  Chairman  East- 
land. I  have  nothing  to  fear  from  an  investigation  of  my  family  or 
my  name. 

The  Chairman.  Then  cooperate  with  the  committee. 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  then  you  cooperate  with  me  in  obeying  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States. 

The  Chairman.  I  am  not  going  to  cooperate  with  a  Communist. 

59886 — 55— pt.  9 3 


760  STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Witt.  I  say  an  item  like  this  is  disgracefully  violative  of  the 
whole  meaning  and  spirit  of  our  Constitution,  Senator  Eastland. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  May  I  respectfully  ask  the  Chair  to  instruct  the 
reporter  not  to  take  down  anything  said  by  anyone  in  the  room  after 
the  gavel  falls,  until  the  chairman  instructs  someone  to  proceed. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Witness,  after  you  attained  your  majority  did 
you  ever  use  the  name  Witkowsky  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  It  is  clear  from  what  I  said,  Mr.  Sourwine,  that  if  my 
family  name  were  changed  when  I  was  a  minor,  of  course,  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Just  answer  the  question,  sir.  After  you  attained 
your  majority  did  you  ever  use  the  name  Witkowsl^  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Our  family  name,  I  believe,  was  changed  in  1919  by  my 
father  when  I  was  16  years  old.  Since  that  time  I  have  always  used 
my  present  name,  Nathan  Witt. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Would  you  just  answer  the  question,  Mr.  Witt? 
Since  you  attained  your  majority,  have  you  ever  used  the  name 
Witkowsky  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Proceed.  Are  there  any  other  items  on  here  that 
you  wish  to  deny  or  challenge  the  factual  accuracy  of  ? 

Mr.  WnT.  I  have  no  recollection  about  being  asked  about  those 
people  named  in  the  next  item  before  the  House  Un-American 
Activities  Committee. 

As  to  the  next  item,  I  do  recollect  representing  Helen  Miller.  I 
wouldn't  know  what  the  item  relating  to  the  International  Fur  and 
Leather  Workers  Union  in  1947  refers  to,  because  my  firm  was  then 
general  counsel  to  the  union.  I  don't  know  the  significance  of 
September  1947. 

I  did  appear  as  counsel  for  Mr.  Flaxer  because  I  was  general  counsel 
for  his  union  at  that  time  in  1948,  and  again  as  to  this  item  that  I 
defended  the  Communist  Party  in  a  suit  to  bar  from  the  ballot  in 
1946, 1  have  no  recollection  of  that,  especially  since  it  doesn't  give  the 
State  or  what  the  occasion  was  or  anything  else. 

Then  the  next  item,  "Defended  Communist-controlled  United  Fed- 
eral Workers  in  1941";  well,  I  was  counsel  for  the  United  Federal 
Workers  in  1941.  Now  you  want  me  to  review  that  summary  of 
my  Government  history,  Mr.  Sourwine  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Not  unless  there  is  something  there  that  you  desire 
to  challenge,  sir. 

Mr.  Witt.  All  that  seems  to  me  to  be  accurate,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  will  state  that  this  two-page  memo- 
randum was  prepared  under  my  direction  from  official  sources 
available  to  the  committee  from  research  by  the  committee.  I  ask 
that  it  be  inserted  in  the  record  at  this  point  as  a  memorandum  con- 
cerning which  Mr.  Witt  has  now  testified. 

Mr.  Witt.  We  haven't  finished  it,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  thought  you  had  just  stated  there  were  no  other 
items  on  which  you  cared  to  comment. 

Mr.  Witt.  Oh,  no;  I  thought  we  were  talking  about  that  section 
digesting  testimony  before  the  House  Un-American  Activities  Com- 
mittee.   I  have  1  or  2  other  comments  on  the  rest  of  it. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  761 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  So  as  to  save  time  with  the  request  that  it  now  be 
inserted  in  the  record,  will  the  Chair  order  that? 

The  Chairman.  Yes,  it  is  inserted. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  48"  and 
appears  below :) 

Exhibit  No.  48 

Nathan  Witt 

Signer,  Freedom  Crusade  petition  issued  by  the  Civil  Rights  Congress, 
January  17,  1949  (Civil  Rights  Congress  cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney 
General,  December  4, 1947,  and  September  21, 1948). 

Member,  Citizens  Committee  for  Harry  Bridges  (booklet)  (cited  as  subversive 
by  the  Attorney  General,  April  27, 1949.) 

Signer  of  statement  for  Council  for  Pan-American  Democracy  (booklet) 
(cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney  General,  April  1,  1954.) 

Member,  International  Juridical  Association  (letterhead,  May  18,  1942)  (cited 
as  subversive  by  the  House  Committee  on  Un-American  Activities,  March  29, 
1944). 

Member,  board  of  trustees,  Jefferson  School  of  Social  Science  (catalog,  1948- 
49)  (cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney  General,  December  4,  1947). 

Counsel  and  member  of  executive  committee,  National  Federation  for  Con- 
stitutional Liberties  (letter,  April  14,  1946,  and  program  of  meeting,  April  19-20, 
1940)  (cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney  General,  December  4,  1947,  and  Sep- 
tember 21,  1948). 

Writer  for  Science  and  Society,  1945  (a  publication  cited  as  subversive  by  the 
House  Committee  on  Un-American  Activities,  March  29,  1944). 

Member,  board  of  directors,  New  York  Conference  for  Inalienable  Rights 
(letter  November  25,  1941)  (cited  as  subversive  by  the  House  Committee  on 
Un-American  Activities,  March  29,  1944). 

Lecturer,  School  for  Democracy  (catalog,  January  1942)  (cited  as  subversive 
by  the  House  Committee  on  Un-American  Activities,  March  29,  1944). 

Sponsor,  May  Day  parade  under  the  auspices  of  the  National  Council  of  the 
Arts,  Sciences,  and  Professions  (Daily  Worker,  April  30,  1948,  p.  5)  (National 
Council  of  the  Arts,  Sciences,  and  Professions  has  been  cited  as  subversive  by 
the  House  Committee  on  Un-American  Activities,  April  19,  1949). 

Signer  of  petition  against  contempt  conviction  of  lawyers  who  defended  11 
Communist  leaders  (Daily  Worker,  November  2,  1949). 

Writer  of  article  in  Social  Work  Today  for  December  1941,  defending  loyalty 
cases  and  attacking  investigating  committees. 

Attorney  in  the  case  of  Nancy  Reed,  a  Communist  defendant,  before  the  New 
York  State  Labor  Department  in  1941. 

Attornev  for  the  Communist  Party  in  Binghamton,  N.  Y.  in  1947. 

Testimony  by  Whittaker  Chambers  on  August  3,  1948,  before  the  House  Com- 
mittee on  Un-American  Activities : 

"For  a  number  of  years  I  had  myself  served  in  the  underground,  chiefly  in 
Washington,  D.  C.  *  *  *  It  was  an  underground  organization  of  the  United 
States  Communist  Party.  *  *  *  I  knew  it  at  its  top  level,  a  group  of  seven  or  so 
men.  *  ♦  •  The  head  of  the  underground  group  at  the  time  I  knew  it  was  Nathan 
Witt.  *  *  *  Its  original  purpose  was  the  Communist  infiltration  of  the  American 
Government"   (p.  565). 

Testimony  of  Louis  F.  Budenz  on  August  24,  1948,  before  the  House  Committee 
on  Un-American  Activities : 

"I  have  never  met  him  (Nathan  Witt),  but  I  have  heard  his  name  repeatedly 
mentioned  in  the  political  committee  and  national  headquarters.  *  ♦  *  i  know 
that  he  was  a  member  of  the  party.  *  *  * 

"Mr.  Stripling.  When  you  were  the  managing  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker,  and 
located  at  party  headquarters,  you  were  given  to  understand  by  conversations 
that  you  had  with  party  functionaries  that  Nathan  Witt  was  a  Commimist  Party 
member? 

"Mr.  BuDENz.  Yes,  sir  (p.  1036)." 

His  name  was  found  in  the  telephone  finder  of  the  Communist  Party  headquar- 
ters, Washington,  D.  C,  on  October  3,  1948. 

Attorney  for  International  Union  of  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers.  Note 
that  cases  involving  this  union  came  before  the  NLRB  when  he  was  connected 
with  that  agency. 


762  STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Former  name,  Witkowsky   (HUAC,  2924). 

Declines  to  answer  knowing  Katherine  AVills,  Solomon  Adler,  Abraham  George 
Silverman,  Harry  Dexter  White,  Harold  Glasser  (HUAC,  2932,  2933). 

Defended  the  following  Government  employees  in  cases  involving  loyalty: 
Helen  Miller,  United  States  Labor  Department,  1941.  Also  defended:  Interna- 
tional Fur  and  Leather  Workers  Union,  September  1947  (Communist  controlled)  ; 
appeared  as  counsel  for  Abram  Flaxer,  president.  State,  Council  [County],  and 
Municipal  Workers,  later  United  Public  Workers  (Communist  controlled)  before 
House  Labor  Committee  in  1948 ;  defended  Communist  Party  in  suit  to  bar  the 
party  from  the  ballot  in  1946. 

Defended  Communist-controlled  United  Federal  Workers  in  1941. 

Oovernment  employment 

Attorney,  Department  of  Agriculture,  National  Labor  Relations  Board. 
Digest  of  testimony  'before  EUAC,  August  20, 1948 

1.  Law  partner  of  Harold  Cammer. 

2.  Home  address :  160  West  77th  Street ;  office :  9  East  40th  Street,  New  York 
City. 

3.  Attorney,  Agricultural  Adjustment  Administration,  July-August  1933-Feb- 
ruary  1934 ;  legal  staff,  National  Labor  Relations  Board,  February  1934-Decem- 
ber  1940;  Assistant  General  Counsel,  NLRB,  December  1935-November  1937; 
Secretary,  NLRB,  November  1937-D8cember  1940,  resigned. 

4.  Graduate,  Harvard  Law  School,  June  1932. 

5.  Recommended  to  AAA  by  Lee  Pressman. 

6.  Refuses  to  answer  regarding  being  in  the  same  office  with  Alger  Hiss  on 
grounds  of  the  first  and  sixth  amendments,  also  that  committee  is  illegally  con- 
stituted and  has  no  jurisdiction.     Also  under  fifth  amendment. 

7.  Declines  to  answer  as  to  same  office  with  Lee  Pressman  on  same  grounds. 
Admits  knowing  Lee  Pressman.  Declines  to  answer  on  same  grounds  knowing 
Harold  Ware,  Alger  Hiss,  Whittaker  Chambers,  Victor  Perlo,  Charles  Kramer, 
Earl  Browder,  Gerhart  Eisler,  Henry  Collins,  Donald  Hiss,  J.  Peters,  and  as  to 
his  membership  in  the  Communist  Party  now  or  ever. 

Testimony  before  Senate  Internal  Security  Subcommittee,  Oovermnent  hearings, 
May  26, 1953 

May  26,  1953,  pleads  fifth  amendment  regarding  membership  in  the  Harold 
Ware  cell  of  the  Communist  Party,  page  623. 

Denied  membership  in  the  Communist  Party  before  the  Howard  Smith  com- 
mittee in  1940,  page  630. 

Refuses  to  answer  regarding  meetings  with  Communist  leaders  Earl  Browder, 
Israel  Amter,  and  Harry  Bridges,  page  630. 

Civil-service  record,  page  636. 

Testimony  before  the  Senate  Internal  Security  Subcommittee  on  Mine,  Mill,  and 
Smelter  Workers,  October  6-9,  1952 

Declines  to  answer  regarding  knowledge  of  Whittaker  Chambers'  espionage 
activities,  page  117. 

Declines  to  answer  re  dealings  with  Lee  Pressman,  pages  118,  119. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Go  ahead,  Mr.  Witt. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  no  other  comment  with  respect  to  the  rest  of  it 
except  to  make  the  most  serious  and  solemn  objection,  Mr.  Chairman, 
to  the  fact  that  this  whole  document  is  so  very  carefully  edited,  and 
just  this  one  example  from  the  hearing  record  of  this  committee. 

You  take  that  section  relating  to  my  testimony  before  this  com- 
mittee on  May  26,  1953.  That  testimony  has  been  carefully  gone  over 
and  carefully  culled  for  these  items.  I  have  particular  objection — 
with  this  objection  I  hope  I  will  be  done  unless  the  committee  has 
some  more  questions — to  the  fact  that  although  Senator  Jenner 
was  kind  enough  on  that  occasion  to  permit  me  to  make  part  of  the 
record  of  that  hearing  material  relating  to  my  service  for  the  United 
States  Government,  particularly  in  the  form  of  letters  from  members 
of  the  NLRB  under  whom  I  served,  which  material  begins  at  page 
'638  of  that  transcript  of  my  testimony,  particularly  because  of  Sen- 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  763 

ator  Jenner's  kindness  I  am  somewhat  shocked  tliat  Mr.  Sourwine, 
if  it  was  he,  edited  out  from  these  hearings  just  these  few  items  which 
give  such  a  distorted  picture  of  my  Government  history. 

The  Chairmax,  Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  there  was  an  early  challenge  with 
regard  to  alleged  editing  of  the  testimony  of  Whittaker  Chambers. 
I  should  like  to  ask  that  two  contiguous  paragraphs  of  Mr.  Chambers' 
testimony  which  embody  all  of  the  material  in  the  question  asked  of 
Mr.  Witt,  these  paragraphs  being  the  ones  I  have  marked  appearing 
on  page  565  of  the  hearings  before  the  Committee  on  Un-American 
Activities  of  the  House  of  Eepresentatives,  which  I  now  hand  to  the 
chairman,  may  be  ordered  inserted  in  the  record. 

The  Chair^iax.  It  is  ordered  inserted  in  the  record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  49"  and  appears 
below :) 

Exhibit  No.  49 

I  had  sound  reason  for  supposing  that  the  Communists  might  try  to  kill  me. 
For  a  number  of  years  I  had  myself  served  in  the  underground,  chiefly  in  Wash- 
ington, D.  C.  The  heart  of  my  report  to  the  United  States  Government  consisted 
of  a  description  of  the  apparatus  to  which  I  was  attached.  It  was  an  under- 
ground organization  of  the  United  States  Communist  Party  developed  to  the 
best  of  my  knowledge,  by  Harold  Ware,  one  of  the  sons  of  the  Communist  leader 
known  as  Mother  Bloor.  I  knew  it  at  its  top  level,  a  group  of  seven  or  so  men, 
from  among  whom  in  later  years  certain  members  of  Miss  Bentley's  organiza- 
tion were  apparently  recruited.  The  head  of  the  undergi'ound  group  at  the 
time  I  knew  it  was  Nathan  Witt,  an  attorney  for  the  National  Labor  Relations 
Board.  Later,  John  Abt  became  the  leader.  Lee  Pressman  was  also  a  member 
of  this  group,  as  was  Altier  Hiss,  who,  as  a  member  of  the  State  Department, 
later  organized  the  conferences  at  Dumbarton  Oaks,  San  Francisco,  and  the 
United  States  side  of  the  Yalta  Conference. 

The  purpose  of  this  group  at  that  time  was  not  primarily  espionage.  Its 
original  purpose  was  the  Communist  infiltration  of  the  American  Government. 
But  espionage  was  certainly  one  of  its  eventual  objectives.  Let  no  one  be  svu:- 
prised  at  this  statement.  Disloyalty  is  a  matter  of  principle  with  every  member 
of  the  Communist  Party.  The  Communist  Party  exists  for  the  specific  purpose 
of  overthrowing  the  Government,  at  the  opportune  time,  by  any  and  all  means ; 
and  each  of  its  members,  by  the  fact  that  he  is  a  member,  is  dedicated  to  this 
purpose. 

(Hearings  Regarding  Communist  Espionage  in  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment— hearings  before  the  Committee  on  Un-American  Activities,  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, SOth  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  p.  565.) 

Mr.  Witt.  Of  course,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  doesn't  correct  the  fact 
that  the  excerpt  which  already  appears  on  this  sheet  shows  on  its  face 
that  it  has  been  edited. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  It  does  show  that,  but  the  record  will  permit  any 
reader  to  compare  them  to  see  in  the  editing  if  it  was  in  any  way 
unfair. 

Mr.  Witt.  If  I  write  a  letter  to  the  committee  this  time,  it  will 
be  made  a  part  of  the  record  the  way  my  letter  to  Mr.  Morris  was  not 
made  part  of  the  record. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  It  might  depend  on  what  you  said  in  the  letter  or 
whether  or  not  it  was  in  affidavit  form.  Your  testimony  here  is  under 
oath.  I  propose  to  ask  you  a  number  of  questions  having  to  do  with 
your  connection  with  Harvey  Matusow.  If  you  will  consent,  I  will 
ask  these  in  the  form  of  leading  questions.  I  think  we  can  cover  much 
more  territory  that  way. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  will  be  very  happy  to. 


764  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  In  asking  these  questions,  what  I  want  to  know  from 
you,  is:  Is  it  true  what  I  state?  If  I  cover  too  much  gi'ound,  if  I 
make  an  inaccurate  statement,  please  correct  me. 

Mr.  Witt.  All  right. 

May  I  explain  to  you  what  I  am  holding  in  my  hand.  Also,  I  think 
it  is  something  that  will  help  us  expedite  this  hearing,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

This  is  a  transcript  of  testimony  already  given  in  connection  with 
this,  what  I  will  call  the  Matusow  matter.  I  hold  it  in  my  hand  for 
refreshment  of  recollection,  if  the  occasion  arises. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Where  did  you  get  that  testimony? 

Mr.  Witt.  Strange  to  say,  this  is  testimony  I  gave  before  the  grand 
jury  sitting  in  the  southern  district  of  New  York.  But  it  became 
public  the  course  of  the  hearing  on  the  motion  for  a  new  trial  for  my 
client,  Clinton  Jencks,  in  El  Paso,  and  this  is  a  transcript  of  the  testi- 
mony from  the  El  Paso  court. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  offering  that  for  the  record  ? 

Mr.  WiTi\  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Or  merely  asking  to  hold  it  in  your  hands? 

Mr.  Witt.  Right ;  so  you  understand  what  I  am  referring  to. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  became  aware  of  the  possibility  of  a  recanta- 
tion by  Mr.  Matusow  of  his  earlier  testimony  when  Bishop  Oxnam 
made  his  speech  and  referred  to  that  subject  in  June  of  1954? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  thereafter  followed  closely  the  developments 
in  the  Matusow  case  and  told  Rod  Holmgren,  publicity  director  of 
Mine  and  Mill,  to  do  so  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  that  is  a  little  too  general.  Just  a  word  on  that. 
You  say  the  Matusow  case.  I  followed  closely  any  developments  re- 
lating to  a  possible  recantation  on  Mr.  Matusow's  part,  and  I  did  work 
with  Mr.  Rod  Holmgren,  of  the  Mine,  Mill  staff,  in  that  connection. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Was  it  he,  Mr.  Holmgren,  or  you  who  wrote  Mr. 
Bishop  Oxnam  in  July  1954  requesting  that  information  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  It  was  Mr.  Holmgren. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  Bishop  Oxnam  supply  you  that  information  on 
August  27  and  September  28,  1954,  in  regard  to  his  two  conferences 
with  Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  He  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now,  was  it  you  or  Mr.  Holmgren  who  contacted 
Mr.  Brown  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  think  it  was  either  of  us.  I  know  I  didn't,  and  I 
don't  think  Mr.  Holmgren  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  will  put  these  questions  in  the  affirmative.  Did 
either  you  or  Mr.  Holmgren  contact  Senator  Mansfield  about  any 
contact  with  Mr.  Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  think  neither  of  us ;  all  that  happened  in  that  connec- 
tion is  that  I  happened  to  be  in  Butte,  Mont.,  on  Wednesday,  September 
22,  1954,  when  I  met  Mr.  Mansfield's  administrative  assistant  on  the 
street,  and  I  talked  to  him  about  a  visit  that  Mr,  Matusow  had  paid 
to  him.  I  think  his  name  is  Jim  Sullivan,  isn't  it,  Mr.  Mansfield's 
administrative  assistant? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Was  contact  made  by  you  or  on  your  behalf  or  on 
behalf  of  Mine,  Mill,  with  Senator  Murray  or  his  office  about  a  contact 
with  Mr.  Matusow  ? 


STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  765 

Mr.  Witt.  It  was  not  made  by  me.  It  was  made  by  Mine,  Mill  staff 
members  in  Montana,  not  with  Senator  Murray  but  with  Senator  Mur- 
ray's assistant,  his  son,  Charles  Murray. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  was  similar  contact  made  with  Carey  Mc- 
Williams? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  made  that  contact  myself. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  With  Charles  Brannan  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Charles  Brannan;  you  mean  general  counsel  for  the 
Farmers'  Union? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  The  former  Secretary  of  Agriculture. 

Mr.  Witt.  No  ;  I  think  Mr.  Holmgren  tried  to  make  contact  with 
him.     I  don't  think  he  ever  succeeded. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  With  Martin  Solow  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  recently  discovered — I  didn't  know  at  the  time — that 
Mr.  Holmgren  had  some  correspondence  with  Mr.  Martin  Solow. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  With  Miriam  Kolkin? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  would  gave  the  same  answers  as  I  did  with  respect  to 
Solow,  except  that  I  did  know  at  the  time  that  I  was  having  cor- 
respondence with  Miss  Kolkin. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Will  you  identify  for  the  record  Martin  Solow  and 
Miriam  Kolkin? 

Mr.  Witt.  Martin  Solow  is  on  the  staff  of  the  Nation,  the  publica- 
tion which  is  edited  by  Carey  McWilliams,  and  Miss  Kolkin  was — I 
don't  think  she  is  a  member  any  longer — a  member  of  the  staff  of 
Federated  Press. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Was  similar  contact  made  with  various  news- 
papermen ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes.     Not  many,  but  some  newspapers. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  All  as  a  part  of  what  you  have  stated  was  your 
desire  at  this  time  to  keep  in  close  touch  with  any  developments  bear- 
ing on  possible  recantation  by  Matusow  of  his  prior  testimony  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Right.  That  was  during  the  period — it  is  important  for 
my  purposes,  Mr.  Sourwine,  to  fix  it — during  the  period  from  the  time 
Bishop  Oxnam  made  his  first  speech,  until  late  in  October  1954. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now,  you  had  in  mind  then,  that  is  during  this 
period,  an  affidavit  in  support  of  a  motion  for  a  new  trial? 

Mr,  Witt.  Yes;  I  had  in  mind  a  motion  for  a  new  trial  to  be  sup- 
ported by  an  affidavit,  either  an  affidavit  from  Matusow  or,  if  we 
couldn't  get  that,  materials  supporting  the  motion  for  a  new  trial  in 
the  absence  of  an  affidavit. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  it  true  that  on  September  13  or  September  14, 
1954,  you  talked  with  John  T.  McTeman,  an  attorney  associated  with 
you  in  the  defense  of  Clinton  Jencks  in  the  original  trial  in  El  Paso, 
talking  with  him  about  the  possibility  of  Harvey  Matusow  writing 
a  book  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  would  like  to  correct  that  to  this  extent  with  respect  to 
the  last  few  words  you  used,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

I  am  sorry,  it  slipped  my  mind.  You  referred  to  the  possibility  of 
Mr.  Matusow's  writing  a  book.  You  have  the  dates  correct,  you  have 
the  name  correct  and  the  association  correct,  but  it  was  on  that  occa- 
sion that  Mr.  McTernan  and  1  discussed  the  fact  that  Mr.  Matusow 
had  already  told  people  he  was  writing  a  book,  and  what  we  discussed 
at  Mr.  McTernan's  suggestion  was  the  possibility  that  we  would  in  one 


766  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COIMMUNISM 

way  or  another  lend  assistance  to  that  book-writing  project  on  Mr. 
Matusow's  part. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Was  it  then  Mr.  McTeman's  suggestion  that,  by 
doing  so,  you  might  eventually  facilitate  the  securing  of  an  affidavit 
from  JNIr.  Matusow  to  support  your  motion  for  a  new  trial  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes.  We  didn't  spell  it  out  that  way,  but  that  was 
clearly  the  thinking  of  b-oth  of  us. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Before  then  you  had  already  drafted,  had  you  not, 
a  motion  for  a  new  trial  in  the  Jencks  case? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  had  drafted  it,  but  we  hadn't  filed  it. 

Mr.  SoTTRWiNE.  That  motion  assumed  a  recantation  by  Matusow, 
did  it  not? 

Mr.  Witt.  No,  Mr.  Sourwine,  it  didn't.  That  motion  was  based, 
that  motion  which  I  drafted  sometime  in  August  1954  I  think  was 
based,  on  the  public  statements  which  had  theretofore  been  made  by 
Bishop  Oxnam  and  by  Russell  Brown. 

Mr.  SoTJRwiNE.  Well,  it  was  based  on  the  theory  that  Matusow  had 
lied,  was  it  not? 

Mr.  Witt.  Oh,  yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now,  you  took  the  matter  up,  that  is,  the  matter 
of  assisting  the  financing  of  Matusow's  book,  to  officials  of  the  Mine, 
Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers  Union  about  September  20,  and  they  au- 
thorized an  advance  of  a  thousand  dollars  for  the  project? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes;  it  was  September  22  or  23;  it  doesn't  matter.  It 
was  that  week. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  This  money  came  from  the  Jencks  defense  fund? 

Mr.  AYiTT.  It  did  eventually. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  saying  that  at  the  time  it  was  authorized 
in  September  it  was  not  authorized  to  come  from  the  Jencks  defense 
fund  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No,  no ;  what  I  meant  by  that,  Mr.  Sourwine,  is  that  I 
was  authorized  to  expend  it  if  the  project  got  underway,  and  then  I 
would  be  reimbursed  in  my  account  I  maintain  for  the  union,  from 
the  Jencks  defense  fund. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  But  the  authorization  from  the  beginning  was  that 
the  money,  if  spent,  should  come  from  the  Jencks  defense  fund? 

Mr.  Witt.  Right. 

Mr.  Sour"vvine.  Was  that  a  fund  appropriated  from  the  union,  or 
a  fund  to  which  the  union  members  had  contributed  directly  ? 

Mr.  Witt,  I  think  it  is  both,  Mr.  Sourwine.  It  is  a  fund  to  which 
the  members  of  the  union  contribute,  also  a  fund  to  which  local  unions, 
as  such,  from  their  treasuries  contribute  also,  a  fund  to  which  the 
international  union,  as  such,  contributes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  When  you  started  out  to  get  a  publisher  for  the 
book,  Matusow's  book,  you  went  directly  to  Albert  Kahn;  is  that 
right? 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  I  stop  only  because  of  the  use  of  the  word  "di- 
rectly." I  think  in  view  of  the  fact  you  know  the  story,  you  know 
what  I  have  in  mind.     You  want  me  to  anticipate  you  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  mean,  Kahn  is  the  first  publisher  you  went  to, 
and  you  never  went  to  any  other  publisher  about  it  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  didn't  go  to  Albert  Kahn.  It  was  indirect,  but  I  never 
went  to  any  other  publisher ;  that  is  true. 


STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  767 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  I  don't  mean  you  necessarily,  Nathan  AVitt,  went 
over  to  him,  but 

Mr.  Witt.  Eight. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  actually  it  was  Clinton  Jencks 
who  first  broached  the  subject  to  Kahn  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  That's  right. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  you  had  talked  to  Jencks  and  suggested  that 
he  do  so  ? 

Mr.  Wrrr.  That's  right. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Now,  you  gave  Kahn  $450  during  October  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  I  am  not  sure  of  those  amounts.  May  we  go  off  the 
record  a  moment?  If  you  will  read  them  all  to  me,  Mr.  Sourwine, 
you  will  refresh  my  recollection.  It  will  be  quicker  than  if  I  go 
through  this. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  It  is  my  understanding  your  testimony  is  you  gave 
Kahn  $450  during  October,  $220  in  November,  and  $580  in  December, 
making  a  total  of  $1,250,  which  represented  an  increase  of  $250  over 
the  original  authorized  thousand,  an  increase  which  had  been  subse- 
quent! v  authori/'ed  by  the  union. 

Mr.  Witt.  That's  right. 

Will  you  give  me  that  figure  for  December  again  ?  I  am  quite  sure 
3'ou  are  right. 

Mr.  SouRmNE.  $580. 

Mr.  Witt.  That's  right,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  SouR\\T:]srE.  Now,  the  first  payment  to  Mr.  Kahn  during  October 
of  1954,  was  either  $200  or  $250  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  That's  right. 

Mr.  SouR^^^:NE.  Your  best  recollection  is  it  was  $250  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  That's  right. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now,  the  additional  $250  above  the  first  authorized 
thousand,  was  that  authorized  through  you  or  was  that  authorized 
on  the  basis  of  direct  contact  that  Mr.  Kahn  had  with  union  officials? 

Mr.  Witt.  The  latter. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  He  got  the  authorization  for  that  additional  $250, 
and  then  you  were  told  about  it  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Then  the  officials  of  the  unioji  told  me  they  had  told  him 
they  would  authorize  me  to  advance  the  $250  more. 

Mr.  Sourw^ine.  Mr.  Witt,  did  you  have  a  definite  understanding 
with  Maurice  Travis  of  Mine,  Mill  about  Matusow's  book  as  early  as 
December  1954? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  not  sure  I  understand  your  question — a  definite 
understanding.    Will  you  explain  what  you  mean  ? 

Mr,  Sourwine.  I  send  down  to  you  a  telegram  addressed  to  Maurice 
Travis,  International  Union  of  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers, 
Tabor  Building: 

Situation  rather  difficult.  Would  very  much  appreciate  your  confirming  under- 
standing with  Nat.    Best  regards. 

Albert. 

Sent  by  Mr.  Albert  Kahn  on  December  19.  Attached  to  this  is  a 
letter  from  the  assistant  United  States  attorney  who  testified  that 
this  is  a  photostat  of  an  exhibit  in  the  trial  in  New  York,  which  shows 
how  it  came  into  our  custody.    And,  I  ask  whether  you  can  identify 

59886— 55— pt.  9 i 


768  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

it  at  this  time  and  tell  us  about  the  agreement  that  is  referred  to  by 
Mr.  Kahn  in  that  note. 

Mr.  WiiT.  Well,  I  don't  think  I  have  ever  seen — I  started  to  say, 
Mr.  Sourwine,  I  don't  think  I  have  ever  seen  this  telegram  or  a  copy 
of  it,  but  I  can  speculate  very  easily  about  it,  and  I  think  I  can  give 
you  the  answer. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  All  right.    I  am  not  asking  you  to  identify  it. 

Mr.  Witt.  Right;  I  understand. 

Well,  Mr.  Kahn  did  come  to  me  and  said  he  needed  more  money, 
the  project  was  costing  more  than  he  originally  thought. 

I  told  him  I  had  just  been  authorized  to  expend  $1,000 ;  if  he  wanted 
to  make  a  request  for  more,  he  should  take  that  up  with  the  responsible 
officials  of  the  union,  which  I  then  understood  he  did,  and  then,  as 
we  have  already  agreed,  I  was  advised  by  Mr.  Travis  that  he  had  told 
Mr.  Kahn  that  he  would  authorize  me  to  give  him  $250  more. 

I  take  it  this  telegram  was  sent  during  a  period  when  Mr.  Kahn 
was  talking  to  Mr.  Travis  by  long-distance  phone  and  was  apparently 
asking  me  whether  I  had  had  word,  and  I  told  him  I  had  no  word, 
so  he  sent  the  wire  to  Travis  telling  him  to  hurry  up. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Your  judgment  is  he  was  trying  to  get  Mr.  Travis 
to  confirm  to  you  the  agreement  he  already  had  with  Kahn  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Right. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  We  had  arrived  at  the  same  conclusion,  but  yours 
has  perhaps  a  greater  basis  for  validity. 

Mr.  Chairman,  may  this  go  in  the  record  ? 

The  Chairman.  Yes. 

(The  documents  above  referred  were  marked  "Exhibits  50  and  50 A,** 
and  appear  below:) 

Exhibit  No.  50 

United  States  Depaetment  of  Justice, 

United  States  Attorney, 
SouTHEBN  District  of  New  York, 

Ueic  York,  N.  Y.,  March  22, 1955. 
Re  United  States  v.  Flynn,  et  ah 
Frank  W.  Schroedeb,  Esq., 

Senate  Office  Building,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Dear  Mr.  Schroeder:  Pursuant  to  your  request  I  am  enclosing  a  copy  of 
Government's  exhibit  48,  a  telegram  dated  December  19,  from  Albert  E.  Kahn  to 
Maurice  Travis. 

Very  truly  yours, 

J.  Edward  Lumbard, 
United  States  Attorney. 

By  Robert  M.  Pennoyer, 
Assistant  United  States  Attorney. 
Enclosure. 

Exhibit  No.  50A 

Cboton  on  Hudson,  Deceniber  19. 
Maurice  Travis, 

International  Union  of  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers,  Labor  Building: 
Situation   rather   difficult.     Would   very   much   appreciate  your   confirming 
understanding  with  NAT. 

Best  regards, 

Albert, 
A.  Kahn, 
Glengary  Road,  Croton  on  Hudson. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  769 

Mr.  SoTjRwiNE.  You  gave  Kahn,  that  is,  Albert  Kahn,  the  address 
of  Matusow's  parents'  home  in  the  Bronx? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  did. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Toward  the  end  of  January  1955  did  your  clients 
in  Mine,  Mill  tell  you  to  tell  Kahn  that  they  would  give  him  another 
$2,000? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes.  Specifically,  the  officials  of  Mine,  Mill  told  me 
that  in  El  Paso,  Tex.,  on  Sunday  morning,  January  30. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  convey  that  message  to  Mr.  Kahn? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  did. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  conveyed  that  message  to  him  after  you  had 
returned  to  New  York? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  returned  to  New  York  that  same  day,  and  my  recol- 
lection, we  spent  a  lot  of  time  on  that  in  Judge  Dimock's  court.  You 
are  probably  familiar  with  it. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  I  am  not  asking  you  that. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  know  you  are  not  getting  into  it,  but  just  that  you 
understand  the  context  of  my  answer — my  recollection  still  is  that 
I  conveyed  that  to  Mr.  Kahn  either  on  Monday,  the  31st,  or  Tuesday, 
the  1st,  or  Wednesday,  the  2d  of  February. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  I  am  simply  fixing  one  limit.  It  was  after  you 
returned  to  New  York? 

Mr.  Witt.  Right. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Two  or  three  days  after  you  conveyed  that  informa- 
tion to  Mr.  Kahn  and  at  a  time  when  he  still  had  not  received  the 
$2,000,  did  he  ask  you  about  it? 

Mr.  Witt.  He  did. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  did  you  then  talk  to  Denver  by  telephone  and 
ask  them  to  please  send  him  the  $2,000  so  that  you  would  no  longer 
be  annoyed  with  the  problem? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes,  I  had  occasion  to  talk  to  Denver  at  that  time  on 
gome  other  problem,  and  since  Mr.  Kahn  had  talked  to  the  officials 
in  Denver  before  they  saw  me,  he  was  impatient,  I  said  to  Denver, 
since  we  have  agreed  to  it,  I  have  told  him  we  have  agreed  to  it, 
please  pay  him  so  I  will  get  him  off  my  neck. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  they  say  they  would? 

Mr.  Witt.  They  said  they  would. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  And  subsequently  he  got  a  check? 

Mr.  Witt.  Subsequently  he  did. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Dated  February  3? 

Mr.  Wm.  That's  right. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Now,  Mr.  Chairman,  this  is  preliminary.  I  would 
like  to  ask  at  this  time  that  there  may  be  put  in  the  record,  there  may 
be  ordered  put  in  the  record,  the  marked  item  on  page  2  of  the  issue 
of  February  28,  1955,  of  the  publication  El  Sindicato,  which  is  the 
Spanish  edition  of  the  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers  Union  paper. 

The  Chairman.  Put  it  in  the  record. 

(The  article  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  51"  and  appears 
below:) 

(Note. — -.The  cover  of  the  book  False  Witness  was  reproduced  with 
the  following  paragraph  below :) 


770  STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Exhibit  No.  51 

This  is  a  sensational  story.  It  is  more  than  the  confession  of  a  paid  stool- 
pigeon.  It  tells  of  meetings  and  parties  of  Joe  McCarthy  and  his  staff,  how 
testimony  is  made  to  order  for  investigations  and  trials.  Use  the  coupon  below 
to  order  your  copy. 

Canada  Pledges  $32,500 — ^Defense  Campaign  Gains  Momentum 

Denver. — The  Mine-Mill  defense  committee's  campaign  for  funds  is  getting 
into  high  gear,  according  to  Dave  Jenliins,  committee  executive  director,  who  just 
returned  after  several  weeks  in  the  Southwest,  East,  and  Canada. 

The  Canadian  Mine-Mill  Council,  in  a  meeting  at  Toronto  attended  by  Jenkins, 
set  up  a  Canadian  Mine-Mill  Defense  Committee  and  named  William  Longridge 
as  national  secretary.  Longridge,  who  was  made  executive  secretary  of  the 
Canadian  Council  last  year,  is  stationed  in  Toronto. 

A  nationwide  tour  of  Canada  on  behalf  of  the  defense  will  be  made  by  "Vice 
Presidents  Nels  Thibault  and  Orville  Larson  following  the  international  conven- 
tion in  Spokane.  Thibault  will  also  make  a  trip  to  Europe  to  inform  unions 
over  there  about  the  attacks  on  Mine-Mill. 

The  Canadian  council  also  set  a  goal  of  $32,500  to  be  raised  in  Canada  in 
the  next  few  months,  and  pledged  the  sale  of  5,000  copies  of  False  Witness,  the 
book  of  Harvey  Matusow's  confessions. 

Meantime,  contributions  and  pledges  have  been  coming  in  from  Mine-Mill 
locals  in  growing  amounts.  They  include :  Bisbee  Local  551,  $429 ;  Miami 
Local  586,  $50;  El  Paso  Local  509,  $1,000;  Los  Angeles  Local  700,  $1,000; 
Hayden  Local  886,  $1  per  member  assessment;  Ray-Sonora  Local  915,  $1  per 
member  assessment;  Kimberley  Local  651,  $50  a  month;  'Sudbury  Local  598, 
$250  monthly  ;  Trail  Local  480,  $100  a  month  ;  Alice  Arm  Local  906,  $50  a  month ; 
Alabama-Mississippi-Tennessee  Locals,  $1  per  member  assessment;  Timmins 
Local  241,  $25  a  month ;  Port  Colborne  Local  637,  $25. 

The  Fur  and  Leather  Workers  Union  has  contributed  $1,000.  The  Midwest 
district  of  the  United  Electrical  Radio  &  Machine  Workers  has  sent  in  $200. 
The  American  Communications  Association  contributed  $100. 

The  following  locals  of  the  International  Longshoreman's  and  Warehouse- 
man's Union  have  also  contributed:  Portland  Local  8,  $7.50;  Raymond,  Wash., 
Local,  $5 ;  Fisherman's  Local,  $50 ;  North  Bend-Coos  Bay  Local,  $50 ;  Wilmington 
Local  13,  $50 ;  Eureka  Local  14,  $50 ;  Aberdeen  Local  24,  $25 ;  Los  Angeles  Local 
20,  $25 ;  Newport  Local  53,  $180 ;  Olympia  Local,  $50 ;  Vancouver  Local  507,  $25 ; 
Bellingham  Local  1-7,  $25 ;  and  Honolulu  Local  142,  $100. 

Order  form 

Mine-Mill  Defense  Committee, 

412  Tabor  Building,  Denver  2,  Colo.: 

Enclosed  is  my  check  for  $___    Please  send  me copies  of  False  Witness, 

by  Harvey  Matusow,  at  $1  each. 

Name 

Street  

City  

State  or  Province 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Witt,  did  you  ever  discuss  with  officials  of  the 
Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers  Union  a  publicity,  or  public  rela- 
tions campaign  with  regard  to  Harvey  Matusow's  book  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No,  Mr.  Sourwine,  not  in  any  organized  way;  just 
generally. 

It  was  taken  for  granted  from  the  beginning  that  if  the  book  were 
published  and  the  union  had  some  such  relationship  to  it,  as  has  been 
indicated  by  my  testimony,  then  the  union  would  be  interested  in 
having  its  members  and  other  people  read  it;  just  in  that  sense. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  It  was  understood,  was  it  not,  that  the  union  would 
use  the  book  to  the  fullest  possible  extent  if  it  was  published? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  771 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  want  to  quarrel  with  you  about  lan^age.  It 
was  understood  that  since  the  book  and  the  subsequent  affidavit  was 
so  important  to  the  union  and  to  Clinton  Jencks,  that  the  union  would 
do  everything  in  its  power  to  make  the  best  possible  use  of  it. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Do  you  know  whether  the  publicity  with  regard 
to  this  book  was  written  by  ordinary  employees  of  the  union  or  whether 
anyone  was  employed  specially  for  the  purpose  of  writing  publicity 
about  this  book  ? 

Mr.  WriT.  I  don't  think  anyone  was  employed  specially  to  write 
publicity  about  the  book. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  When  did  you  first  meet  Harvey  Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  On  the  afternoon  of  December  14,  1954. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  You  did  not  meet  him  in  Salt  Lake  City  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Oh,  yes ;  I  am  sorry.  I  saw  him  at  Salt  Lake  City  in 
your  presence,  Mr.  Sourwine.  I  saw  him  when  he  gave  his  false 
testimony  against  my  client,  Clinton  Jencks,  in  El  Paso  in  January 
1954.  But  I  didn't  meet  him  face  to  face  as  one  person  meets  an- 
other until  December  14,  1954. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  You  never  talked  with  him  before  December  14, 
1954? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  ever  been  Mr.  Matusow's  attorney  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No,  except  in  this  sense :  I  think  you  are  familiar  with 
the  testimony. 

When  he  did  come  to  me  on  December  14,  Mr.  Sourwine,  before 
he  talked  to  me  about  his  book  and  the  Jencks  matter,  he  did  have 
a  minor  question  about  the  sublease  of  his  apartment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes ;  but  you  weren't  retained  by  him  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No  ;  oh,  no. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  There  was  no  attorney-client  relationship  there? 

Mr.  Witt.  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  All  right. 

Wlien  did  you  first  know  that  Matusow  was  going  to  write  a  chap- 
ter about  Jeni^ks  in  the  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  hearings  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Let  me  answer  it  this  way,  if  I  may,  Mr.  Sourwine.  Af- 
ter Mr.  Matusow  made  his  arrangements  with  Cameron  &  Kahn  Octo- 
ber 26,  he  got  to  work  on  the  book  and  I  would  see,  as  I  have  already 
testified,  I  would  see  Mr.  Kahn  from  time  to  time  and  he  would  tell 
me  how  the  project  was  proceeding. 

So  I  knew  by  December  14  that  Mr.  Matusow  would  be  writing 
a  chapter  on  his  appearance  before  Senator  McCarran  and  his  testi- 
mony against  Clinton  Jencks.  And  I  think  I  saw  a  draft  of  some 
chapter  before,  or  2  chaptei*s,  I  think  they  were  2  separate  chapters, 
before  December  14. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  are  saying  now  you  certainly  knew  it  before 
December  14,  and  you  may  have  seen  the  chapters  before  December 
14? 

Mr.  Witt.  Right.     I  am  quite  sure  I  saw  the  chapters. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  discussed  this  matter  with  Matusow  on  De- 
cember 14 ;  did  you  not  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  he  not  at  that  time  promise  to  send  you  the 
chapter  when  it  was  written? 


772  STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes.  Well,  I  have  to  explain  that,  an  apparent  con- 
tradiction with  the  answer  I  just  gave,  in  this  way,  Mr.  Sourwine: 
During  the  period  from  October  26,  1954,  when  the  contract  between 
Matusow  on  the  one  hand,  and  Cameron  &  Kahn  on  the  other,  was 
signed,  until  December  14, 1954,  and  in  fact  not  until  I  returned  from 
El  Paso  after  we  filed  the  motion  for  new  trial  on  January  28,  1955, 
did  Mr.  Matusow  know  about  the  arrangements  between  Mine,  Mill 
and  Cameron  &  Kahn.     That  we  kept  from  him,  for  obvious  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  has  no  bearing  on  the  question  I  asked  you. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  sorry  to  be  so  long-winded  and  so  roundabout. 
But  I  am  trying  to  explain  to  you  that  even  though  I  may  have  seen 
material  before  December  14,  Mr.  Matusow  didn't  know  I  had  seen 
material  because  he  didn't  know  about  my  relationship  with  Cameron 
&  Kahn,  because  we  didn't  want  to  be  accused,  with  which  we  have 
anyway,  of  course,  and  which  we  will  be,  I  suppose,  by  this  committee, 
we  didn't  want  to  be  accused  of  subsidizing  Mr.  Matusow  to  his 
knowledge,  so  we  kept  it  from  him. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  saying,  in  effect,  this :  That  Mr.  Matusow 
•did  promise  on  December  14  to  send  you  the  chapter  when  it  was 
written  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Right. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  But  you  didn't  let  him  know  at  that  time  that  you 
knew  it  was  already  written,  because  you  had  seen  it  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  As  I  say,  I  am  still  not  sure  I  had  seen  it,  but  if  T  had 
known  they  were  written,  if  I  had  seen  them,  I  would  not  have  let 
him  know  on  December  14  because  we  didn't  want  him  to  know  about 
our  relationship,  as  I  say,  until  we  filed  our  motion  in  the  Jencks  case, 
the  thing  was  out  in  the  open,  and  then  we  could  tell  him,  Kahn  and 
myself  and  Mine,  Mill  could  tell  him,  the  one  fact  which  we  hadn't 
told  him  for  obvious  reasons :  that  we  had  made  this  arrangement  with 
Cameron  &  Kahn,  in  order  to  avoid  the  accusation  that  we  were  paying 
for  his  book  or  paying  for  his  affidavit. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  But  Mr.  Matusow  did  promise  you  on  December  14 
that  he  would  send  you  that  chapter  after  it  was  written  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Wliich  certainly  carried  the  clear  connotation  at 
that  time  that  he  was  saying  it  hadn't  been  written  yet  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  whether  he  said  it  was  written  or  drafted,  I  think 
you  know  from  his  testimony  and  from  Mr.  Kahn's  testimony  that  it 
went  through  various  drafts. 

I  am  lost  in  that  area;  I  didn't  follow  up  on  all  that.  But  if  he 
said  when  it  was  written,  then  he  would  have  meant  if  there  had  been 
an  early  draft,  or  redraft,  or  a  final  draft,  whatever  you  want  to  call  it. 

Mr.  houRwiNE.  Did  you  talk  with  Matusow  himself  after  December 
14,1954? 

Mr.  Witt.  At  any  time  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes. 

Mr.  Witt.  Oh,  yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Prior  to  his  appearance  before  this  committee? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes,  yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  is  a  foundation  question,  Mr.  Chairman.  I 
will  come  back  to  that. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  773 

Mr.  SouEwiNE.  On  December  14,  1954,  Mr.  Matusow  came  to  your 
office  and  there  told  you  that  he  would  give  you  the  chapters  from  his 
book  on  the  Mine,  Mill  case  and  on  Clinton  Jencks  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  When  you  say  the  Mine,  Mill  case,  you  mean  what  we 
call  the  McCarran  hearings? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  There  were  the  separate  chapters. 

Mr.  Witt.  In  Salt  Lake  City,  in  October  1952? 

Mr.  SouRWTNE.  And  Matusow  promised  you  on  December  14,  1954, 
that  he  would  give  you  both  those  chapters? 

Mr.  Witt.  That's  right. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  actually  got  those  chapters  from  Kalin  some- 
time between  December  14  and  January  3 ;  is  that  right  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  That's  right. 

jVIr.  SouEwrNE,  Even  though  you  may  have  had  the  Jencks  chapter 
earlier,  yet  pursuant  to  Mr.  Matusow's  statement,  he  sent  you  by  Mr. 
Kahn  these  two  chapters  during  that  period  between  December  14 
and  January  3  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  That's  right. 

Mr.  SouRWTNE.  At  least,  you  had  them  with  you  and  took  them  to 
Denver  on  the  3d  of  January  1955  ? 

]\Ir.  Witt.  I  had  one  copy  of  them  when  I  went  to  Denver  on  Decem- 
ber 3, 1955. 

Mr.  SouiiwiN^E.  Now,  when  Matusow  and  Witt  came  to  your  office 
on  December  14 

jNIr.  WiTF.  Excuse  me,  you  misspoke  yourself. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  beg  your  pardon.  Wlien  Matusow  and  Kahn 
came  to  your  office  on  December  14,  did  they  or  either  of  them  bring 
with  them  the  tape  transcription  of  their  conversation  of  that  date? 

Mr.  Witt.  No. 

Mv.  SoTjRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  hear  that  tape  recording  or  read  a 
transcription  of  it  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  certainly  never  heard  the  tape  played.  I  never  heard 
any  of  the  tapes  played. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  You  never  did  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  never  did.  And,  in  fact,  let  me  answer  that  this  way : 
It  wasn't  until  I  was  on  the  stand  in  Judge  Dimock's  court,  I  think, 
that  T  learned  that  there  was  such  a  tape  on  this  subject,  or  these 
subjects,  on  December  14. 

Mr.  SoLTRwiNE.  That  was  as  you  now  know  the  last  tape  that  was 
recorded ;  is  that  right  ? 

JNIr.  Witt.  I  don't  even  know  that.  I  have  no  knowledge  about  the 
tapes. 

I  had,  as  you  know  from  my  testimony,  duplicates  of  the  tapes 
which  Mr.  Kahn  gave  me  to  hold,  which  I  turned  over  to  the  grand 
jury  in  New  York.    I  never  played  them;  I  wasn't  interested  in  them. 

Mr.  SouRWiXE.  Did  you  ever  have  them  transcribed  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No  ;  I  never  had  them  transcribed. 

Mr.  SoTJRwiNE.  Did  they  ever  give  you  that,  Mr.  Kahn,  Mr.  Cam- 
eron, or  Mr.  Matusow,  ever  give  you  or  send  you  transcriptions  of 
those  tapes  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Mr.  Kahn  would  send  me  transcriptions,  as  I  tried  to 
say  before,  but  I  think  I  was  saying  so  much,  it  got  lost,  during  the 
period  from  the  time  Matusow  got  to  work  in  October  or  November 


774  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

right  through  to  the  end,  of  different  sections  of  it.  And  as  I  tried 
to  say,  I  wasn't  paying  too  much  attention  to  it,  not  even  to  the 
chapters  on  Mine,  Mill,  or  Jencks. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Can  you  say  whether  you  have  ever  read  the  tran- 
scription of  the  tape  of  the  conversation  between  Matusow  and  Kahn 
on  December  14? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  can  say  I  never  did. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  You  never  did  read  it? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  never  did.  I  said  I  saw  that  first  in  Judge  Dimock's 
court.  I  think  I  saw  it  first,  or  heard  it  testified  about  or  argued 
about  in  El  Paso  during  the  course  of  the  hearing  on  the  Jencks 
motion  for  new  trial. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  know  that  Matusow,  in  the  tape-recorded 
conversation  with  Kahn  on  December  14,  had  labeled  Jencks  as  a 
Communist  under  party  discipline  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No  ;  I  didn't  know ;  I  don't  know  that  now,  Mr.  Sour- 
wine.  I  don't  think  you  are  accurate.  I  don't  think  you  are  being 
accurate,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Without  arguing  that  point,  Mr.  Witness 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  it  is  a  very  important  point. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  won't  argue.  May  I  ask  the  Chair  to  order  that 
all  references  to  Mr.  Jencks  in  the  tape-recorded  conversations  be- 
tween Matusow  and  Kahn  of  the  14th  of  December  1954,  in  context, 
be  ordered  inserted  in  the  record  at  this  point. 

The  Chairman.  Yes. 

(The  material  above  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  52"  and 
appears  below:) 

Exhibit  No.  52 

Mr.  Kahn.  Now  let  me  ask  you  this  for  example — 'cause  I  think  this  could 
come  in  well.  You  say  in  your  testimony  you  met  one  of  the  Vincents  at  a  Com- 
munist Party — at  the  Albert  Hotel.    Now  actually,  what  was  that  party? 

Matusow.  Oh,  I  was  being  flippant.  I  think  I  said  it  was  a  hootenany — 
or  a  wing  ding.  An  affair  put  on  by  Peoples  Artists.  No,  it's  unimportant  here 
what  it  was.  It  wasn't  a  Communist  Party  party.  There's  a  difference,  you  see. 
I  drew  the  line  to  myself.  A  Communist-front  party — so  it's  a  Communist  party. 
I  said  Vincent  was  introduced  to  me  as  a  Communist  Party  member.  I  wasn't 
introduced  to  him  saying  this  is  Craig  Vincent.  He  is  a  party  member.  No,  not 
like  that.  The  intangible  again.  Vincent  was  a  party  member.  I  knew  Vincent 
was  a  party  member  from  talking  to  him.  When  I  was  expelled  from  the  Com- 
munist Party  Vincent  received  the  information  from  the  party  directly — through 
the  party  organization  in  New  Mexico.  I  knew  this  too.  There  was  no  doubt  in 
my  mind  about  Vincent's  party  membership.  "When — I  mean  that  I  can't  say 
that  I  didn't — there  was,  I  can't  say  that  I  really  didn't  know  that  Vincent  was 
a  party  member.  Then  I'd  be  lying.  I  knew  he  was  a  party  member  and  I 
said  so.  I  knew  Jencks  was  a  party  member  and  I  said  so.  I  can't  say  here  that 
Jencks  wasn't  a  party  member  after  he  signed  the  aflSdavits  because  I  know  that 
he  was.    But  I  shouldn't  have  testified.    That's  the  important  thing. 

Kahn.  Why  do  you  say  you  know  he  was? 

Matusow.  I  say  I  know  he  was — I  mean  in  this  way.  Men  like  Ben  Gold  who 
have  been  indicted  on  the  same  charge.  He  ofiicially  resigned  from  the  Communist 
Party.  Jencks  also  officially  resigned  from  the  party.  Or  he  could  have.  Let's 
put  it  that  way.  But  in — to  my  mind — then,  in  my  thinking,  it  made  him  no  less 
a  Communist  because  he  put  a  piece  of  paper  down  and  said  "I'm  no  longer  a 
member."  As  far  as  I  was  concerned,  Jencks  was  still  under  Communist  Party 
discipline.  And  there's  a  difference.  He  legally,  according  to  the  law,  might 
not  have  been  a  member  of  the  party.  I  didn't  know  that  difference.  Jencks 
didn't  change  his  thinking  because  he  issued  that  scrap  of  paper. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  775 

Mr.  SouR^VINE,  Mr.  Witt,  you  have  testiiied  that  copies  of  the  tran- 
scriptions of  the  tape  recordings  of  conversations  between  Matusow 
and  Kahn  were  furnished  to  you,  but  at  least  one  of  them  you  did 
not  read.     Now,  did  you  read  the  others,  any  of  them  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes;  I  glanced  at  the  material  from  time  to  time.  I 
was  terribly  busy  during  this  whole  period,  and  my  whole  psychologi- 
cal slant  was  to  stay  away  from  the  writing  and  publishing  project, 
because  I  was  fearful  of  becoming  too  heavily  involved  and  fearful 
of  accusations  which  would  be  leveled  at  me. 

I  know  from  experience  since  then  that  I  haven't  avoided  the  accusa- 
tions. They  have  been  leveled  nonetheless,  and  I  am  here  this  after- 
noon, no  matter  how  hard  I  tried  to  lean  over  backward,  so  here  I  am. 
Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Witt,  I  would  like  to  ask  you  to  affirm  or  deny, 
with  such  comment  as  you  may  care  to  make,  this  theory :  That  in  fact 
you  were  told  on  the  14th  of  December  1954  of  Mr.  Matusow's  state- 
ment of  that  date  in  his  conversation  with  Mr.  Kahn,  the  statement 
which  has  now  been  ordered  put  in  the  record,  that  it  was  as  a  result 
of  your  knowledge  of  that  that  arrangements  were  made  to  bring  you 
into  personal  contact  with  jNIr.  Matusow  on  that  date ;  that  as  a  result 
of  that  personal  contact,  assurance  was  given  satisfactory  to  you 
with  regard  to  the  chapters  on  the  so-called  McCarran  hearings,  as 
you  referred  to  them,  and  on  the  Jencks  case,  and  it  was  also  as  a 
result  of  your  knowledge  of  that  conversation  that  the  tape  record- 
ings were  terminated  after  that  date. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  afraid,  Mr.  Sourwine,  I  have  to  have  that  read 
back  to  me.  I  think  I  follow  you,  but  I  want  to  make  sure  because  of 
this  important  question,  an  important  series  of  questions. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  would  be  glad  to  repeat  it  in  substance,  or  have  it 
hear,  as  you  prefer. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  would  rather  have  it  read. 
(Question  read.) 

Mr.  Witt.  My  answer,  yes  or  no,  and  then  give  you  as  brief  an 
explanation  as  I  can. 

The  answer  to  that,  and  I  wish  this  one  negative  could  be  inserted  in 
this  record  17  times,  at  least,  but  we  will  go  by  our  traditional  methods 
of  reporting  and  insert  my  answer  "No"  in  the  record  just  once. 

But  to  go  on  with  the  short  explanation,  if  I  can  keep  it  short, 
there  is  no  explanation  that  can  be  found,  no  matter  how  many  hear- 
ings this  committee  conducts,  how  many  committees  conduct,  how 
many  judges  decide,  there  are  no  explanations  which  will  be  found  for 
what  Matusow  finally  said  in  his  book  about  Mine,  Mill,  and  Jencks, 
and  his  affidavit  in  the  Jencks  case,  except  that  Matusow  is  now  telling 
the  truth. 

Certainly,  as  far  as  I  am  concerned,  there  is  no  other  explanation. 
Throughout  this  whole  period  I  was  leaning  over  as  backward  as  I 
could  lean  over  without  licking  my  own  boots  from  the  rear,  to  avoid 
any  suggestion  that  my  conduct,  the  conduct  of  Mine,  Mill,  or  Matu- 
sow, or  Cameron  &  Kahn  was  improper, 

I  knew  from  the  beginning,  I  knew  from  the  beginning  that  when 
we  tried  to  have  the  truth  told  about  our  union  and  our  client,  that 
the  heavens  would  fall  in  Washington,  New  York,  Texas,  and  in  vari- 
ous other  places. 

59886— 55— pt.  9 5 


776  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  i 

I  am  reconciled  to  that,  Mr,  Sourwine,  but  I  am  amazed  at  the  ex- 
tent to  which  the  heavens  haA'e  fallen  since  January  17,  1954,  when 
Matusow  signed  his  first  affidavit  in  the  Jencks  case. 

Now,  one  other  word.  I  am  not  being  brief,  but  I  will  now  be  brief. 
It  is  true  that  w^hen  I  did  get  the  chapter  on  Jencks,  I  found  this  para- 
graph that  I  think  you  are  particularly  interested  in,  copy  of  which 
1  took  to  Denver  with  me. 

But  despite  how  you  or  anybody  else  reads  that  paragraph,  I  didn't 
read  it  that  way.  If  you  want  me  to  take  time  I  will  tell  you  why,  but 
I  won't  unless  you  ask  me  to. 

But  the  important  thing  is  that  I  just  didn't  concern  myself  with 
that  paragraph  that  you  are  so  interested  in,  because,  as  I  saw  it  as 
a  lawyer,  it  didn't  disprove  the  fact  that  in  January  1954  Matusow 
had  lied  on  the  witness  stand  against  my  client. 

Well,  let  me  just  say  in  a  w^ord  as  I  read  that  paragraph,  it  may  as 
well  be  part  of  the  record,  as  I  read  that  paragraph  that  you  are  talk- 
ing about,  it  meant  to  me  only  that  Matusow  was  explaining  his  psy- 
chology in  being  able  to  say  that  Jencks  admitted  he  was  a  Commu- 
nist to  him  when,  in  fact,  Jencks  did  not  so  admit. 

Mr.  Sourwine,  How  would  you  identify  the  paragraph  I  am  talk- 
ing about,  Mr.  Witt? 

Mr.  Witt.  How  can  I  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes. 

Mr.  Witt.  Because  after  I  did  get  those  chapters  between  Decem- 
ber 14  and  January  3  I  read  them. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  thought  you  testified  here  that  you  had  never  read 
the  tape-recorded  statement. 

Mr.  Witt.  No,  no ;  if  I  said  that,  all  I  intended  to  say  was  I  didn't 
know  that  that  tape  had  been  made  on  December  14. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  But  you  have  now  read  it  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Oh,  I  have  read  it.    I  read  it  at  the  time. 

Mr.  Sourwine,  What  do  you  mean  at  the  time  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  At  the  time  I  got  the  chapters  from  Mr.  Kahn.  I  read 
it  at  the  time,  but  I  am  telling  you,  No.  1,  that  I  did  nothing  about  it. 
I  didn't  talk  to  Mr.  Matusow  or  Kahn  or  anybody  else  in  the  world 
about  it,  and  I  am  explaining  to  you  why,  as  a  lawyer,  I  did  nothing 
about  it.     Now,  one  final  word 

Mr.  Sourwine.  But  if  your  prior  testimony  here  was  that  you  did 
not  read  that  chapter,  that  testimony  was  inaccurate  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  sorry,  then  I  misspoke  myself. 

One  final  word,  the  way  I  reconstructed  the  situation;  when  I  did 
hear  in  El  Paso  that  this  tape  had  been  made  on  December  14,  the 
understanding,  as  I  think  I  said  to  you,  between  Kahn  and  myself, 
during  the  period  from  October  until  December  14,  was  that  the  time 
would  come  when  Kahn  would  say  to  Matusow,  "Why  don't  you  come 
and  meet  Witt?" 

He  had  already  told  him  he  had  gotten  his  original  testimony  in  the 
Jencks  case  from  me,  so  Matusow — that  he  knew  me  and  was  in  touch 
with  me.  But  the  December  14  meeting  came  about,  according  to  what 
both  Matusow  and  Kahn  told  me,  at  Matusow's  instigation  or  at  his 
suggestion,  and  the  way  I  reconstruct  it  is  now,  knowing  that  he  made 
the  tape  in  my  area  that  day ;  that  having  done  it  he  was  making  prog- 
ress ;  he  had  more  and  more  confidence  in  Kahn ;  he  had  back  in  his 
mind  undoubtedly  the  fact  that  he  would  see  me  someday.    He  said  to 


STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  777 

himself,  "Well ;  I  may  as  well  go  see  Witt.    I  have  this  little  tenant 
problem  anyway.     I'll  kill  2  birds  with  1  stone." 

I  think  that  is  what  happened,  but  you  can  ask  him  whether  that 
was  his  thinking.  I  haven't  talked  to  him  about  it  since  I  first  dis- 
covered that  this  tape  was  made  on  December  14. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  all  through  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  But  that  is  a  simple  explanation.  I  think  it  makes  sense ; 
but  there  it  is. 

Mr.  SouEwiNE.  All  through. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  think  I  am.     I  wasn't  brief. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  present  at  the  meeting  of  the  board  of 
the  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers  Union  in  January  1955,  when 
Albert  Kahn  of  the  firm  of  Cameron  &  Kahn  told  the  board  about  the 
scheduled  publication  of  the  book  False  Witness  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No;  if  that  was  the  meeting  which  took  place,  the 
board  meeting  which  took  place  during  the  week  of  Monday,  January 
24.  I  had  been  present  at  the  board  meeting  early  in  the  week  on 
my  way  down  to  El  Paso  to  file  a  motion  in  the  Jencks  case,  and  I 
think  Mr.  Kahn  followed  me  into  Denver,  if  that  is  the  occasion  you 
are  talking  about. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  It  isn't  necessary  to  place  the  date.  The  question 
was :  were  you  present  at  the  board  meeting  when  Mr.  Cameron  made 
this  presentation  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  You  said  in  January,  Mr.  Sourwine.  I  am  sorry  to  take 
time  being  so  precise,  but  I  am  anxious  to  be  precise. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  identified  the  meeting  as  having  taken  place  in 
January. 

Mr.  Witt.  There  may  have  been  another  one.  If  you  ask  me  now 
whether  there  were  two  executive  board  meetings  in  January,  I 
wouldn't  be  sure. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  at  any  board  meeting  of  Mine,  Mill,  and 
Smelters  Union  at  any  time  when  Mr.  Cameron  told  the  board  about 
the  scheduled  publication  of  the  book  False  Witness  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  You  have  now  said  Mr.  Cameron.  You  mean  Cameron 
or  Kahn? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  beg  your  pardon;  Mr.  Albert  Kahn? 

Mr.  Witt.  No  ;  I  was  not  at  any  board  meeting. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You,  sir,  drafted  the  form  of  an  affidavit  for 
Matusow ;  is  that  right  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  May  I  have  that  read  back  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You,  sir,  drafted  the  form  of  affidavit  for  Matusow? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes ;  but  it  is  important  for  me  to  say,  although  I  think 
our  minds  meet  on  it 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  left  space  for  what  you  call  his  recantations 
and  told  him  to  fill  in  those  blank  spaces? 

Mr.  Witt.  Right. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Matusow  gave  you  two  affidavits  about  the  Jencks 
case. 

Mr.  Witt.  He  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  One  on  the  I7th  or  18th  and  the  other  on  the  20th? 

Mr.  Witt.  One  on  the  I7th  and  one  on  the  20th.  The  affidavit  of 
the  20th  was  just  a  recasting  in  terms  of  structure  aside  from  a  couple 
of  minor  changes. 


778  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  With  respect  to  the  first  affidavit  you  had  given  him 
a  form  with  blanks  in  which  he  was  to  fill  in  his  recantation? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  He  had  gone  home  and  typed  out  several  pages  of 
material  and  had  initialed  each  page;  and  then  you  put  that  material 
in  the  affidavit  and  he  signed  it. 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  thereafter  you  thought  it  would  be  helpful  if 
you  placed  the  specific  recantation  in  each  instance  in  the  same  para- 
graph or  subparagraph  with  the  original  testimony  on  the  point  ? 

Mr.  Wrrr.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  So  you  did  that? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  you  told  Matusow  you  had  done  that  and  then 
he  signed  the  affidavit  as  it  was? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes;  on  the  20th.  That  is  the  one  that  was  filed  with 
the  motion  for  a  new  trial  on  the  28th. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Now  after  Matusow  had  executed  his  affidavit  in 
the  Jencks  case;  you  talked  with  Mr.  Kahn  or  with  a  Mr.  Gerson, 
a  defendant  in  the  Flynn  case,  about  the  possibility  of  Matusow  exe- 
cuting an  affidavit  in  the  Flynn  case  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  not  sure  I  could  fix  that  in  time. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  It  was  not  before  Matusow  executed  his  affidavit  in 
the  Jencks  case ;  was  it  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  It  might  have  been. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  will  put  the  question  this  way :  Did  you  at  some 
time  talk  with  either  Mr.  Kahn  or  with  Mr.  Gerson  about  the  pos- 
sibility of  Matusow  executing  an  affidavit  in  the  Flynn  case  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes.  As  long  as  the  question  carries  no  implication 
that  I  sought  them  out  to  talk.  I  did  talk  to  him  no  matter  who 
solicited  the  conversation. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Seeking  them  out  would  imply  that  they  were  to- 
gether. As  a  matter  of  fact  the  two  people  I  named  were  Mr.  Kahn 
and  Mr.  Gerson.     They  aren't  associated  in  your  mind;  are  they? 

Mr.  WiiT.  I  didn't  intend  it  that  way.  I  just  was  talking  short- 
hand, Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Wliat  is  your  best  recollection  as  to  whether  you 
talked  about  this  with  Mr.  Kahn  or  with  Mr.  Gerson  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  think  I  talked  to  both  about  it  on  different  occasions. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  With  whom  did  you  talk  about  it  first  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  That  I  would  have  no  recollection  of. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Wliat  is  your  best  recollection  as  to  whether  you 
talked  about  it  first  before  or  after  Matusow  had  executed  his  affidavit 
in  the  Jencks  case  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  wouldn't  have  a  good  recollection  on  that.  If  you 
asked  me  to  guess ;  I  would  say  I  had  at  least  one  conversation  about 
the  Flynn  case  before  Matusow  executed  his  first  or  second  affidavit 
in  the  Jencks  case. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now  the  Gerson  we  are  talking  about  is  the  national 
legislative  representative  of  the  Communist  Party,  is  that  right  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  The  national  legislative  representative? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  really  don't  know  his  title. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  779 

Mr.  SotTiwixE.  Do  you  know  that  he  holds  any  official  position  with 
the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  know  that.  I  know  he  is  a  full-time  representa- 
tive of  the  Communist  Party;  a  full-time  employee,  worker,  official, 
but  just  what  his  work  is  or  what  his  title  is  I  don't  know. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  This  is  Simon  Gerson  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Simon  Gerson  I  understood  you. 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  Now  as  a  result  of  the  talk  that  you  had  with  Mr. 
Gerson,  did  Mr.  Eobert  Zavell  Lewis,  an  attorney  for  the  defendants 
in  the  Flynn  case,  come  to  your  office? 

Mr.  Witt.  He  did. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  you  gave  the  insert  material,  a  copy  of  the 
January  17  affidavit  in  the  Jencks  case,  a  draft  of  a  motion  for  a  new 
trial  and  some  case  authorities  on  the  question  of  a  new  trial? 

Mr.  Witt.  Right. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you,  Mr.  Witt,  at  the  request  of  the  Mine,  Mill 
people,  your  clients,  make  arrangements  respecting  companionship  for 
Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Do  you  want  to  repeat  that  question  ? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Yes.  Did  you,  sir,  at  the  request  of  the  Mine,  Mill 
people,  your  clients,  make  arrangements  respecting  companionship 
for  Matusow? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Male  companionship? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes.  Oh,  I  understand  you  are  not  accusing  me  of  being 
a  pimp,  Mr.  Sourwine? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  When  did  you  first  meet  Herb  Tank  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  I  am  not  sure  of  that  date.  I  have  tried  to  recon- 
struct it,  I  have  been  asked  before,  but  he  has  testified — I  am  not 
sure — that  it  was  in  my  office  on  or  about  Januarj^  18  or  19. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  did  not  meet  him  prior  to  the  first  of  1955; 
is  that  right? 

Mr.  Witt.  No,  I  had  never  met  him  before  that  occasion  in  my 
office. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  he  come  to  your  office  with  Mr.  Ivahn  and  Mr. 
Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  in  a  sense  he  did.  He  was  expecting  Mr.  Matusow 
and  Mr.  Kahn.  And  I  remember  Mr.  Kahn  called  me  that  afternoon 
and  said  somebody  would  be  there  at  the  time  he  had  his  appointment 
with  me,  and  he  would  tell  me  about  it  when  he  got  there,  which  he 
did.  He  met  Mr.  Tank  at  my  office,  and  brought  Mr.  Tank  in,  intro- 
duced him  and  said,  "This  is  Herb  Tank ;  this  is  Nat  Witt." 

Mr.  Sourwine.  "N^Hio  got  there  first? 

Mr.  Witt.  Mr.  Tank  did,  according  to  my  recollection.  He  was 
waiting:  for  Mr.  Kahn  in  mv  outer  office.  I  wasn't  aware  of  the  fact 
that  he  was  waiting.    I  don't  know  where  he  was  waiting  in  my  office. 

Mr.  Sourwine,  You  weren't  aware  of  the  fact  that  he  was  waiting. 
If  Kahn  brought  him  in,  how  do  you  know  he  was  waiting  before 
Kahn  arrived? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  forget.  Somebody  told  Kahn  before  Kahn  came,  may- 
be Matusow  or  somebody  in  the  office  told  him. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  Mr.  Kahn  and  Mr,  Matusow  arrive  together? 

Mr  Witt.  Mv  recollection  is  not. 


780  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Then  did  Mr.  Matusow  arrive  before  Mr.  Kahn  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  That  is  my  recollection,  but  I  couldn't  be  too  certain. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Then  Matusow  and  Tank  were  waiting  together  in 
your  office? 

Mr.  Witt.  When  I  say  my  office  I  mean  my  own  work  office  where 
Mr.  Matusow  was  when  he  came  to  keep  the  appointment.  When  I  say 
Mr.  Tank  was  waiting  in  the  outer  office  or  the  library,  I  mean  in  the 
reception  room  or  in  the  library  in  the  middle  of  our  suite  which  all  of 
the  lawyers  on  the  floor  use.  So  I  dicbi't  see  Mr.  Tank  until  Mr.  Kahn 
came  in,  but  whether  he  came  into  my  office  before  I  talked  to  Mr. 
Tank  or  not  I  don't  remember.  But  in  any  event,  as  I  said,  he  brought 
Mr.  Tank  into  my  own  work  office,  my  private  office,  and  introduced 
me  to  him. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Was  Mr.  Matusow  in  your  own  work  office  at  that 

time  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  My  recollection  is  that  he  was. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Matusow  and  you  were  talking  privately  be- 
fore Mr.  Kahn  and  Mr.  Tank  came  in ;  is  that  right  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes,  we  were  chatting  or  talking;  I  don't  know. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  ever  discuss  the  case  of  Harvey  Matusow 
with  any  official  of  the  Communist  Party  known  to  you  to  be  such? 

Mr.  Witt.  No,  with  the  exception  of  Si  Gerson,  if  he  is  an  official. 
As  I  said,  I  don't  know. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  You  discussed  with  Matusow  on  different  occasions 
the  possibility  of  a  perjury  charge  against  him  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  got  him  a  copy  of  the  Attorney  General's  mes- 
sage asking  for  a  new  perjury  statute  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes ;  the  one  he  delivered  to  the  last  Congress,  I  think, 
in  April  of  1954. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  took  the  time  to  analyze  with  him  the  possi- 
bilities in  this  regard,  that  is  the  possible  consequences  of  his  giving 
the  affidavit? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  To  what  extent  was  Matusow  briefed  on  how  to  act 
on  the  witness  stand  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Just  one  word  on  the  last  question.  Again  I  do  this 
almost  by  rote  now,  Mr.  Sourwine.  I  am  sorry.  It  is  important  for 
me  to  say  when  I  first  discussed  the  question  with  Matusow,  he  didn't 
say  to  me  directly  or  indirectly  or  by  implication  or  in  any  other  way 
that  if  he  faced  the  possibility  of  perjury,  he  would  not  tell  the  truth. 

He  said  he  was  determined  to  tell  the  truth,  no  matter  what  the  con- 
sequences, but  he  wanted  to  know  what  the  consequences  might  be.  All 
right,  now  I  lost  your  last  question. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  question  is  to  what  extent  was  Matusow  briefed 
as  to  how  to  act  on  the  witness  stand  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  By  me?    Witness  stand  where ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  take  this  question  to  mean  to  your  knowledge; 
and  then  I  will  ask  you  how  much  of  it  was  by  you. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  know. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Or  the  witness  stand  before  this  committee  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  He  has  counsel  and  I  have  no  knowledge.  I  talked  to 
his  counsel  from  time  to  time,  but  I  haven't  been  in  on  those  discus- 
sions and  I  don't  know  the  details. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  781 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  To  what  extent  was  Matusow  briefed  by  you  as  to 
how  to  act  on  the  witness  stand  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  I  don't  know  what  you  mean  by  "how  to  act,"  but 
we  did  discuss  problems  from  time  to  time.  He  discussed  the  perjury 
problem  and  the  only  other  general  problem  I  remember  his  ever  dis- 
cussing with  me  is  the  problem  of  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  What  advice  or  instructions,  if  any,  did  you  give 
Matusow  about  how  to  act  on  the  witness  stand  ? 

Mr.  WiiT.  I  never  gave  Matusow  any  instructions  because  I  have 
never  represented  him,  and  that  has  not  been  my  relationship  to  him. 

Since  I  first  met  him,  we,  of  course,  have  been  friendly.  After  all, 
a  lawyer  who  is  trying  to  secure  a  new  trial  for  his  client,  based  on  an 
affidavit  of  recantation,  has  a  friendly  feeling  toward  the  witness  who 
is  recanting.  So  it  has  been  that  kind  of  talk.  But  it  has  not  been 
instruction. 

As  I  say,  the  only  two  objects  that  I  remember  discussing  generally, 
there  might  have  been  some  side  issues,  subjects  of  possible  perjury. 
Oh,  also  contempt,  especially  since  Judge  Thomason  did  what  he  did, 
and  the  q.uestion  of  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  use  the  alternatives  "instructions  or  advice."  You 
ruled  out  instructions.  "Wliat  advice,  if  any,  did  you  give  him  as  to 
how  to  act  on  the  witness  stand  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  wouldn't  even  call  it  advice  because  I  haven't  rep- 
resented him  as  his  counsel.  He  got  to  know  me  as  a  lawyer,  and  he 
dicussed  these  questions  with  me. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Using  the  word  "advice"  not  as  connoting  a  rela- 
tionship between  counsel  and  client,  which  you  said  did  not  exist, 
using  it  in  the  ordinary  sense,  what  advice,  if  any,  did  you  give 
Matusow  about  how  to  act  on  the  witness  stand  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  didn't  give  him  specific  advice.  I  explained  the  perjury 
statute  with  him,  on  which  I  wasn't  an  expert  when  he  first  came  to 
me,  but  after  I  got  Mr.  Brownell's  message  to  Congress  on  his  proposed 
bill,  I  discussed  that  with  him. 

I  discussed  the  fifth  amendment  with  him  on  1  or  2  occasions  along 
the  lines  that  you  would  be  as  familiar  with  as  I  am,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  SouRwiisTE.  Did  you  give  him  advice  on  when  and  how  to  claim 
the  fifth  amendment  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  think  so.  As  is  natural  when  you  are  talking  to 
a  layman,  any  time  during  this  period,  especially  in  that  position,  you 
might  get  into  a  question  of  waiver  and  all  the  rest  of  the  business 
that  has  been  built  up  in  the  fifth  amendment  field,  so  I  may  have 
touched  on  it  from  time  to  time. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  give  him  any  advice  or  instructions  as  to 
how  to  destroy  his  previous  testimony  without  actually  lying  on  the 
witness  stand  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  discuss  with  him  such  matters  as  to  when 
not  to  give  a  "yes"  or  "no"  answer? 

Mr.  Witt.  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  discuss  with  him  such  matters  as  when  to 
expand  the  question  and  when  to  contract  the  question  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Now  you  are  getting  into  an  area  where  he  is  much  more 
of  an  expert  than  I  am,  Mr.  Sourwine. 


782  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  The  question  is  whether  you  discussed  with  him  such 
matters  as  to  when  to  expand  the  question  and  when  to  contract  the 
question. 

Mr.  Witt.  He  discussed  with  me  when  he  was  really  giving  the 
Kind  of  testimony  this  committee  wanted,  the  Department  of  Justice 
wanted,  all  its  techniques,  the  techniques  pursued  by  professional 
witnesses.  I  could  give  him  no  advice  in  that  regard.  I  am  not 
expert  in  that  field. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  gave  him  no  pointers  at  all  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No  ;  I  don't  think  so.  I  may  have  commented  on  some- 
thing he  said.  After  all,  I  am  an  older  man  and  a  lawyer,  but  I  didn't 
try  to  compete  with  him  as  a  lawyer  talking  to  a  professional  witness 
who  had  considerable  experience  under  past  masters. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  familiar,  Mr.  Witt,  with  the  term 
^'distestify"? 

Mr.  Witt.  Pardon  ? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  The  term  "distestif y"  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  D-i-s ;  would  that  be  it  ?  I  don't  think  I  have  ever  heard 
that. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  or  did  you  know  one  Abe  Unger? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes,  I  do. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  know  either  of  his  partners,  Mr.  Friedman 
or  Mr.  Fleischer  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes,  I  have  known  both.  Mr.  Fleischer  has  not  been  his 
partner,  I  believe,  for  a  long  time,  and  I  am  not  sure  Mr.  Friedman  is 
now  his  partner,  but  I  don't  know  one  way  or  the  other. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  know  Abe  Unger  as  section  organizer  of  the 
lawyers'  section  of  the  Communist  Party  of  New  York? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  object  to  the  question  as  being  immaterial  for  the  pur- 
poses of  this  inquiry,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  know  Abe  Unger  as  section  organizer  of  the 
lawyers'  section  of  the  Communist  Party  in  New  York  ? 

The  Chairman.  Yes,  that  is  a  material  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  What  has  that  got  to  do  with  Matusow  or  the  Jencks 
case  or  the  Flynn  case  ? 

The  Chairman.  I  order  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  All  right.  Then  I  object  on  the  ground  that  the  ques- 
tion violates  my  rights  under  the  first  amendment. 

The  Chairman.  That  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  Then  I  refuse  to  answer  on  the  grounds  that  under  the 
fifth  amendment  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  To  facilitate  proceedings,  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I 
suggest  that  it  be  stipulated — incidentally,  the  record  doesn't  show 
the  witness  is  attended  by  counsel.     That  is  my  oversight. 

Will  counsel  give  his  name? 

Mr.  FoRER.  Joseph  Forer. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Of  Washington,  D.  C.  ? 

Mr.  FoRER.  Washington,  D.  C. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  May  it  be  stipulated  that  at  any  time  when  the 
witness  claims  his  right  to  refuse  to  answer  a  question  on  grounds 
that  it  will  incriminate  him,  he  desires  first  to  claim  an  asserted 
privilege  not  to  answer  because  of  immateriality  and,  second,  because 
of  a  claimed  right  under  the  first  amendment,  and  that  in  each  case 
the  Chair  has  overruled  those  objections. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  783 

Mr.  Witt.  So  it  is  iniderstood  that  no  matter  what  I  am  asked  by 
\oii  or  the  committee,  that  any  objection  as  to  materiaky  and  the 
iirst  amendment  is  not  well  taken.  Well,  we  will  save  time  that  way. 
1  think  I  understand  that  to  be  the  position  of  the  committee  anyway. 
I  will  a<ri"fp  to  that. 

Mr.  SouKWiNE.  You  overlook  the  fact,  Mr.  Witt,  that  it  is  within 
the  power  of  the  Chair  at  any  time  to  permit  your  claim,  to  allow 
\'()ur  objection.     I  am  simi)lv  attempting  to  save  time  here. 

I  am  assumin<r  that  your  :future  objections  will  be  the  same  as  the 
ones  you  have  already' made,  and  would  get  the  same  rulin«^  of  the 
( 'hair. 

If  you  don't  desire  that  stipulation,  I  will  be  very  <rlad  to  have 
vou  <ro  ahead.     I  am  savin<r  time  for  you,  sir,  and  not  the  committee. 

Mr.  Witt.  IJitrht:  I  appreciate  that,  Mr.  Sourwine,  but  I  would 
lather  not  save  time  in  this  area. 

Mr.  SoiTRWixE.  There  will  be  no  stipulation. 

Did  you  know  the  firm  of  T'nfrer.  Friedman  &  Fleischer  as  the 
i  'ommunist  Party  law  office  durino;  the  i)eriod  1945  to  1049? 

Mr.  AVirr.  If  by  that  you  mean  that  they  represented  the  Com- 
munist Party  from  time  to  time,  I  did  know  that. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  Did  you  know  that  this  law  office  had  supplied 
Communist  Party  leaders  with  mimeographed  instructions  on  the 
first  and  fifth  amendments  as  far  back  as  1948? 

Mr.  Witt.  Senator  McClellan,  are  you  acting  as  chairman? 

Well,  Senator  McClellan,  I  want  to  object  to  that  on  the  grounds 
of  materiality. 

These  are  lawyers  Mr.  Sourwine  is  talking  about,  giving  advice 
about  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  to  their  clients.  Here 
I  am,  as  attorney  for  Clinton  Jencks,  and  I  am  being  asked  a  question 
about  some  other  lawyers  who  advised  their  clients.  Now,  Senator 
^McClellan,  there  are  some  limits  to  this. 

Mr.  SouRw^iNE.  You  are  not  claiming  any  privilege  regarding  com- 
munications between  another  lawyer  and  client,  are  you,  Mr.  Witt  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Xo;  I  am  just  outraged,  as  a  lawyer,  that  I  should  be 
asked  by  another  lawyer,  especially  in  this  context,  when  1  am  here 
only  because  I  have  been  doing  my  job  as  a  lawyer,  to  conmient  on 
the  fact  that  other  lawyers  gave  advice  to  their  clients  about  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  specifically,  the  Bill  of  Rights. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  question  is;  did  you  know? 

Mr.  Witt.  What  is  the  relevance  if  I  knew  or  didn't  know  whether 
he  did  or  didn't? 

Senator  McClellan.  I^t's  not  argue  about  it.  You  can  make 
any  objection  you  care  to.  If  j^ou  wish  to  object  to  it,  the  Chair  will 
take  the  appropriate  action. 

Objection  is  overruled.     Answer  the  question.     Proceed. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  object  on  the  grounds  of  the  first  amendment  that  I 
may  not  be  asked  about  other  lawyers  giving  advice  to  their  clients 
about  the  first  amendment. 

Senator  McClellan.  Objection  is  overi'uled. 

Mr.  Witt.  Or  about  the  fifth  amendment. 

Ml-.  Sol  rwine.  Do  you  decline  to  answer,  claiming  your  privilege 
under  the  fifth  amendment,  Mr.  Witt  ? 

59886— 55— pt.  9 6 


784  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes,  but  I  call  it  the  privilege  not  to  be  a  witness  against 
myself,  Mr.  Sourwine- — not  the  privilege  against  self-incrimination. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  have  any  connection  with  the  lawyers 
section  of  the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  May  I  adopt  Mr.  Sourwine's  suggestion  about  a  stipula 
tion  on  this? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  declined  stipulation,  sir.     Go  ahead. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  object  on  the  grounds  of  materiality. 

Senator  McClellan.  Objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Wiur.  I  object  on  the  grounds  that  it  violates  my  rights  imder 
the  first  amendment. 

Senator  McClellan.  Objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  refuse  to  answer  on  the  grounds  that  under  the  fifth 
amendment  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be  a  witness  against  myself, 
either  about  my  political  beliefs  or  affiliations  or  whether  my  name 
is  Jewish  or  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Witt,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  you  may  not  be  re- 
quired to  be  a  witness  against  yourself,  about  anything. 

Mr.  Witt.  But  in  this  context  these  are  the  things  I  am  objecting 
to.  You  are  not  asking  me  about  what  I  had  for  breakfast,  but  at 
this  rate  you  will  be  asking  me  what  some  lawyer  who  is  alleged  to 
be  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  had  for  breakfast  and  whom 
he  had  breakfast  with  yesterday. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  connected  with  the  Lawyers  Commission 
or  Law  Commission  of  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Ml-.  WiTF.  I  object  on  the  grounds  of  materiality. 

Senator  McClellan.  Objection  is  overruled. 

Ml'.  WiTr.  T  object  on  the  grounds  that  it  violates  my  rights  under 
the  first  amendment. 

Senator  McClellan.  Objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  refuse  to  answer  on  the  grounds  that  under  the  fifth 
amendment  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Mr.  SoiRWiNE.  Are  you  connected  at  the  present  time  with  any 
group  designated  for  the  purpose  of  planning  legal  strategy  and 
tactics  for  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  ]Mr.  Sourwine,  I  am  getting  to  the  point  of  compliment- 
ing you  on  avoiding  the  kind  of  questions  you  asked  in  Salt  Lake 
Citv  in  October  1952,  but  that  is  the  kind  of  question  I  object  to,  it 
is  so  general  and  so  meaningless. 

Eeally,  Mr.  Sourwine,  you  are  talking  to  a  lawyer.  Does  that 
mean,  do  I  ever  talk  to  Communists  ?  Certainly  I  talk  to  Communists. 
I  talk  to  anybody  who  comes  into  my  office  for  legal  advice. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  now  or  have  you  ever  been  a  member  of 
the  Xational  Committee  of  the  Communist  Party? 

Mr.  Witt.  Why,  you  are  promoting  me,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

No,  I  am  sorry,  I  don't  mean  to  be  facetious.  I  am  not.  I  have 
never  been. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  now  or  have  you  ever  been  a  member  of 
tlie  National  Board  of  the  Communist  Party? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  not.     I  have  never  been. 

Mr.  SotTRwiNE.  Are  you  now  or  have  you  ever  been  a  member  of 
the  legal  commission  or  any  other  legal  body  of  the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  thought  you  asked  me  that,  but  maybe  you  didn't.  I 
object  on  the  grounds  of  materiality. 


.STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COJVCVIUNISM  785 

Senator  McClellan.  Objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  object  on  the  grounds  that  the  question  violates  my 
rights  under  tlie  first  amendment. 

Senator  Mc(^lkllax.  Objection  overruled. 

i\Ir.  AViTT.  1  refuse  to  answer  on  the  grounds  that  under  the  fifth 
aniendment  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Senator  McClellan.  All  right.     Proceed. 

Mr.  SoiHwiNE.  Are  you  a  member  of  any  committee  or  group  in 
tlie  (^onununist  Party,  together  with  Harry  Sacher  or  5lary  M. 
Kaufman  t 

Ml-.  AA'iTT.  No. 

Mr.  SoiHwiNE.  Were  you  present  at  the  Communist  Party  con- 
vention in  11)45? 

Mr.  Witt.  Where  Avas  that  held,  Mr.  Sourwine? 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  I  wasn't  there,  Mr,  Witt. 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  I  have  no  recollection  as  to  whether  I  was  there 
or  where  it  was  held  or  anything  else  about  it. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Have  you  ever  been  present  at  a  convention  of  the 
Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  As  a  delegate,  as  an  observer,  as  adviser,  as  a  newspaper- 
man, a  lawyer? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  didn't  ask  you  to  specify.  I  just  asked  you  if  you 
were  present.     If  the  answer  is  "No,"  it  will  save  time. 

Mr.  Witt.  In  any  capacity? 

Mr.  SouRwixE.   Yes. 

Mr.  WiTr.  I  object  to  it  on  the  ground  of  immateriality. 

Senator  McCi.ell-\n.  Objection  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  object  on  the  grounds  the  question  violates  my  rights 
under  tlie  first  amendment. 

Senator  McClellan.  Overruled. 

Mr.  WiTr.  I  refuse  to  answer  on  the  grounds  that,  under  the  fifth 
aniendment  to  the  Constitution,  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be  a  wit- 
ness against  myself. 

Senator  McClellan.  Proceed. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  attend  a  Communist  plenum? 

Aren't  you  familiar  with  that  term? 

Mr.  Wrrr.  As  a  lawyer  I  am  familiar  with  the  materials  where  the 
term  is  used,  but  I  don't  know  how  you  use  it;  I  really  don't. 

Mi\  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  how  the  Communist  Party  uses  the 
term  ''j^lenum"  ? 

Mr.  AYrn\  I  do  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  attend  a  plenary  session  of  officials  of 
tlie  Communist  Party? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  know  what  a  plenary  session  is,  except  when 
treaties  of  peace  are  signed  and  that  kind  of  business,  so  I  just  don't 
understand  the  question. 

]Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  attend  a  closed  meeting  of  officials 
of  the  Communist  Party  for  the  discussion  and  transaction  of  high 
level  party  business? 

Mr.  Witt.  May  I  have  that  question  repeated? 

(Question  read.) 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  now,  I  am  afraid  we  are  getting  into  the  defini- 
tions which  tlie  late  Senator  McCarran  left  behind  him.  I  must 
object  on  the  grounds  of  materiality.. 


786  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Senator  McClfxlan.  Objection  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  object  on  the  g:rounds  that  the  question  viohites  my 
rights  under  tlie  first  amendment. 

Senator  McClellan.  Objection  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  1  refuse  to  answer  on  the  grounds  that  under  the  tifth 
amendment  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Senator  McO.kixan.  iVll  right,  proceed. 

Mr.  SouHwixE.  Mr,  Witt,  what  have  been  your  dealings  with  J. 
Peters,  former  head  of  the  underground  group  of  the  Connnunist 
Party  in  Washington,  D.  C.  ? 

Ml'.  Witt.  I  object  on  the  grounds  of  materiality. 

Senator  McClellax.  Objection  overruled. 

]\Ir.  WriT.  I  object  on  the  grounds  that  the  question  violates  my 
rights  under  the  first  amendment. 

Senator  McC'lellax.  Tliat  objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  refuse  to  answer  on  the  grounds  that  under  the  fifth 
amendment  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Senator  McClellax.  Proceed. 

Mr.  SoTTRwixE.  Mr.  Witt,  were  you  ever  a  member  of  a  group  or 
organization  which  included  among  its  other  members  Lee  Pressman, 
Whittaker  Chambers,  Harold  Ware,  Victor  Perlo,  Charles  Kramer, 
and  Henry  Collins? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  object  on  the  grounds  of  materiality. 

Senator  McCLELLA^^  Objection  overruled. 

Mr,  Witt.  I  object  on  the  grounds  that  the  question  violates  my 
rights  under  the  first  amendment. 

Senator  McClellax\  Objection  overruled. 

jNIr.  Witt.  I  refuse  to  answer  on  the  grounds  that  under  the  fifth 
amendment  I  may  not  be  com))elled  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Senator  McCLELLAX^  Proceed. 

Mr.  SoFRWix'E.  When  you  were  with  the  National  Labor  Relations 
Board  did  you  have  the  responsibility  for  the  staff  hiring  and  firing 
during  the  period  when  you  were  Secretary? 

Mr.  Witt,  I  had  responsibility  as  Secretary  for  recommending  hir- 
ing and  firing  of  all  excejit  the  legal  staff. 

Mr.  SoiHwixE.  Were  you  ies])onsible  during  that  period  for  the 
em])loyment  by  the  National  Labor  Relations  Board  of  any  ])erson 
or  persons  known  to  you  at  the  time  to  be  Connnunists? 

^fr.  Witt.  At  the  time,  I  was  responsible  for  helping  build  up  one 
of  tlie  finest  (xovernment  staffs  that  Washington  ever  saw.  and  neither 
I  nor  the  members  of  the  Board  were  concerned  with  the  political 
affiliations  of  the  peojjle  on  tlie  staff.  All  we  were  concerned  with  was 
theii'  (hnotion  to  an  act  ]iassed  by  the  Congress  of  the  Ignited  States, 
and  with  their  com])etency. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  Would  you  answer  the  question,  please? 

Mr.  WiTa\  History  records  that  that  was  a  wise  policy,  and  the 
policies  which  have  been  ]nnsued  since  then  have  been  most  un- 
fortunate. 

Mr.  SouRWixE.  Now,  will  you  answer  the  question,  please. 

Have  you  forgotten  it? 

Mr.  Witt.  No;  T  think  I  remember. 

Mr.  SoiKwix^E.  Would  you  answer  it,  please. 

Mr,  Witt,  If  you  want  it  answered  in  your  form,  Mr,  Sourwine, 
I  object  on  the  grounds  of  materiality. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  787 

Senator  McClellan.  Objection  overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  object  on  the  grounds  that  the  question  violates  my 
rights  under  the  first  amendment. 

Senator  McClelLu\n.  Overruled. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  refuse  to  answer  the  question  on  the  grounds  that  un- 
der the  fifth  amendment  I  may  not  be  compelled  to  be  a  witness 
against  myself. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  ask  that  there  be  inserted  in  the 
record  at  this  point  a  short  excerpt  from  the  testimony  of  David  J. 
Saposs  before  the  Internal  Security  Subcommittee  in  our  Govern- 
ment hearings  on  June  4,  1953.  It  is  less  than  two  pages,  and  bears 
on  this  subject. 

Senator  McClellan.  Without  objection  that  will  be  ordered. 

(The  material  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  53"  and  appears 
below :) 

Exhibit  No.  53 

Testimony  of  David  J.  Saposs  Before  Senate  Internal  Security  Subcommittee 
EE  Government  He.\rings,  June  4,  1953 

Mr.  Saposs.  Well,  Nathan  Witt,  first,  as  I  mentioned,  was  the  attorney  of  the 
Review  Board,  which  was  the  unit  which  reviewed  all  cases  and,  of  course,  in 
reviewing  cases,  it  was  possible  to  interpret  and  analyze  data. 

Later  on  when  he  became  secretary,  he  was,  of  course,  the  executive  officer  of 
the  Board,  which  gave  him  full  responsibility  for  the  staff  in  the  National  Labor 
Relations  Board,  except  the  attorneys,  and  it  gave  him  responsibility  for  the 
staff  in  the  regions,  the  hiring  of  the  regional  directors,  the  hiring  of  the  field 
examiners ;  again,  everyone  in  the  regional  offices,  except  the  attorneys. 

In  addition  thereto,  of  course,  all  the  routine  work  of  the  Board,  such  as,  for 
instance,  the  assigning  of  the  order  in  which  cases  were  to  be  heard,  the  citing 
of  how  the  material  pertaining  to  particular  cases  was  to  be  presented  to  the 
Board  in  executive  session — all  of  that  gravitated  and  was  carried  through  the 
Secretary  of  the  Board,  and  therefore,  Nathan  Witt,  as  Secretary  of  the  Board, 
was  undoubtedly  the  most  influential  person  in  the  conduct  of  the  affairs  of  the 
Board. 

Mr.  Saposs.  *  *  *  Mr.  INIadden,  the  Chairman  of  the  Board,  seemed  to  be 
always  preoccupied  with  the  legal  problems  and  legal  principles  of  the  Board, 
and  paid  very  little  attention  to  the  administrative  problems ;  so  that  in  that 
case  both  Nathan  Witt  and  Edwin  Smith  were  in  the  position  to  actually  run 
the  Board. 

******* 

Mr.  Morris.  I  wonder  if  you  would  just  amplify  a  little  more  about  the  powers 
that  Nathan  Witt  had  at  that  time? 

Mr.  Saposs.  Well,  as  I  mentioned,  he  was  able  if  any  case  came  in — any  case 
that  came  in,  of  course,  came  to  him  directly.  He  was  able  to  decide  the  order 
in  which  it  was  to  appear.  He  was  the  one  that  presented  a  digest  to  the  Board 
as  to  the  issues  in  the  case.  He  recommended  to  the  Board  what  particular 
action  should  be  taken,  and  so  on,  and  in  that  way,  of  course,  he  had  a  tremendous 
influence ;  and  also  by  appointing.  You  see,  the  civil  service  did  not  apply  to 
the  employees  of  the  NLRB,  and  by  appointing  field  examiners  who  were  the 
ones,  of  course,  who  made  the  investigations,  by  appointing  the  regional  direc- 
tors, by  controlling  the  staff  at  the  National  Headquarters,  he  was,  of  course, 
in  a  position  to  exercise  the  greatest  influence  of  anybody  connected  with  the 
Board  including  the  Board  members. 

Mr.  Morris.  So  the  solicitations  of  these  various  organizations  (League  for 
Peace  and  Democracy  and  League  of  Women  Shoppers,  the  Washington  Book 
Shop)  which  have  been  listed  by  the  Attorney  General  to  be  Communist  organi- 
zations went  on  during  office  hours? 

Mr.  Saposs.  Yes. 

Mr.  Morris.  Was  that  done  very  frequently,  Mr.  Saposs? 

Mr.  Saposs.  It  was  routine,  I  should  say. 


788  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Morris.  Do  you  think  Mr.  Witt  and  Mr.  Smith,  about  whom  we  have  been 
talking,  knew  about  that? 

Mr.  Saposs.  Oh,  it  was  pretty  generally  understood  that  it  was  being  done  with 
their  approval  and  support. 

Mr.  Morris.  When  you  say  it  was  generally  understood,  sir,  you  mean  that 
there  were  conversations  to  that  effect? 

Mr.  Saposs.  The  staff  people  knew  that  it  was  done  with  their  support  and 
approval,  and  were  undoubtedly  influenced  in  signing  petitions  and  making 
donations,  were  influenced  because  of  the  fact  that  these  two  people,  who  were 
influential  people,  approved  of  these  activities. 

♦  *****• 

Mr.  Morris.  Now,  did  he  (Thomas  I.  Emerson)  generally  share  the  outlook 
and  the  position  that  was  held  by  Smith  and  Witt? 

Mr.  Saposs.  Yes ;  he  was  pretty  sympathetic  to  that  role.  He  was,  of  course 
a  key  member  of  the  National  Lawyers'  Guild  and  was  very  active  in  it,  and  it 
was  commonly  understood  insofar  as  the  National  Labor  Relations  Board  was 
concerned,  that  he  was  of  sort  of  a  triumvirate ;  that  it  was  Ed  Smith  and  Nate 
Witt  and  Tom  Emerson  who  were  the  triumvirate  and  the  key  people  who 
influenced  the  direction  and  activities  and  the  hiring  of  staff  within  the  Board. 

Mr.  Morris.  What  was  Allan  Rosenberg's  position? 

Mr.  Saposs.  He  was  Nathan  Witt's  assistant,  and  a  very  energetic,  dynamic, 
keen  individual,  who  was  sort  of  regarded  as  Nathan  Witt's  hatchetman. 

Mr.  Witt.  Mr.  Chairman,  we  went  through  7  years  of  Labor  Board 
history  with  extensive  hearings  held  by  different  committees  of  the 
Congress  of  the  United  States,  running  to  tens  of  thousands  of  pages, 
and  to  select  an  excerpt  from  the  testimony  of  some  disgruntled 
employee  years  later,  without  throwing  the  whole  subject  wide  open — 
Senator  McClellan,  you  tried  to  improve  the  procedures  of  investi- 
gating committees  during  the  McCarthy  hearings.  Look  what  you 
are  doing.    How  can  you  justify  that  as  a  lawyer? 

Senator  McClellan.  Let's  save  our  compliments,  and  we  are  going 
to  save  time.    It  will  be  made  a  part  of  the  record.    Period. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  there  be  inserted  in  the  record 
at  this  point  the  testimony  of  Nathan  Witt  in  our  hearings  on  Inter- 
locking Subversion  in  Government,  testimony  given  before  this  com- 
mittee on  May  26, 1953. 

Senator  McClellan.  It  may  be  inserted  in  the  record,  without 
objection. 

(The  material  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  54"  and  appears 
below:) 

Exhibit  No.  54 

Mr.  Morris  (Robert  Morris,  subcommittee  counsel).  Mr.  Nathan  Witt. 

The  Chairman  (Senator  Jenner).  Will  you  be  sworn,  Mr.  Witt?  Do  you  sol- 
emnly swear  that  the  testimony  you  will  give  in  this  hearing  will  be  the  truth, 
the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help  you  God? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  do. 

Testimony  of  Nathan  Witt,  New  York,  N.  Y.,  Accompanied  by  His  Counsel, 

Joseph  Forer,  Washington,  D.  C. 

The  Chairman.  State  your  name  to  the  committee. 
Mr.  Witt.  I  am  sorry.  Senator,  Nathan  Witt. 
The  Chairman.  Where  do  you  reside,  Mr.  Witt? 
Mr.  Witt.  160  West  77th  Street,  New  York  City. 
The  Chairman.  What  is  your  business  or  profession? 
Mr.  Witt.  I  am  a  lawyer. 

The  Chairman.  Let  the  record  show  that  Mr.  Witt  is  present  here  with  his 
counsel,  Mr.  Forer. 
Proceed,  Mr.  Morris. 
Mr.  Morris.  Mr.  Witt,  what  degrees  do  you  hold? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  789 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  a  bachelor  of  science  degi-ee  from  Washington  Square  Col- 
lege of  New  York  University,  and  I  hold  a  law  degree  from  the  Harvard  Law 
School. 

Mr.  Morris.  What  years  did  you  obtain  those  degrees? 

Mr.  Witt.  In  1927  my  college  decree  ;  in  1932  my  law  degree. 

Mr.  MoRKis.  Mr.  Witt,  what  has  been  your  Government  employment? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  entered  the  service  of  the  Agricultural  Adjustment  Administra- 
tion of  the  Department  of  Agriculture  in  July,  I  think  it  was,  of  1933.  I  was  a 
member  of  the  legal  staff  of  the  AAA.  In  February  1934  I  joined  the  legal 
staff  of  the  old  National  Labor  Relations  Board  set  up  pursuant  to  Public  Reso- 
lution 44  under  the  National  Industrial  Recovery  Act. 

In  July  1935  when  the  Wagner  Act  became  effective,  I,  together  with  the  rest 
of  the  staff  of  the  old  Board,  was  taken  over  by  the  Board  appointed  pursuant 
to  the  Wagner  Act.    I  was  on  the  legal  staff  of  that  Board. 

In  December  193.5,  I  believe  it  was,  I  was  appointed  Assistant  General  Coun- 
sel of  the  Board,  and  in  November  1937  I  was  appointed  Secretary  of  the  Board, 
and  I  remained  Secretary  in  active  service  until  some  time  toward  the  end  of 
1940,  although  I  may  have  continued  on  the  payroll  because  of  accrued  annual 
leave  until  some  time  early  in  1941. 

Mr.  Morris.  What  was  your  salary  as  Secretary  of  the  National  Labor  Rela- 
tions Board? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  believe  it  was  $7,500  a  year,  Mr.  Morris,  at  least  at  the  time  I 
resigned.    It  may  have  been  somewhat  lower  when  I  took  the  post. 

]Mr.  Morris.  Were  you  associated  with  Edwin  S.  Smith?  You  served  as  Secre- 
tary when  he  was  a  member  of  the  Board,  did  you  not? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  did,  Mr.  Morris. 

Mr.  Morris.  Mr.  Witt,  you  have  had  no  more  Government  employment  since 
that  time,  is  that  your  testimony? 

Mr.  Witt.  That  is  my  testimony. 

The  Chairman.  Gentlemen,  take  your  pictures,  and  while  the  witness  is  tes- 
tifying do  not  take  a  picture. 

Senator  Smith.  Do  you  have  any  objection? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  no  objection  except  that  I  want  that  light  to  go  out :  it 
bothers  my  eyes. 

The  Chairman.  Now  then,  will  you  turn  the  light  out,  please? 

Mr.  Witt.  Thank  you.  Senator. 

Mr.  Morris.  Mr.  Witt,  you  are  acquainted  with  the  American  Communications 
Association,  are  you  not? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  not  sure  of  the  word  "acquainted,"  Mr.  Morris.  I  know  there 
is  such  an  organization. 

Mr.  Morris.  It  is  a  labor  union,  is  it  not? 

Mr.  Witt.  This  is  the  American  Communications  Association? 

Mr.  Morris.  Yes.    It  is  a  labor  union? 

Mr.  Witt.  Association. 

Mr.  Morris.  When  did  you  first  become  aware  of  the  American  Communica- 
tions Association? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  wouldn't  be  sure,  Mr.  Morris.  My  best  recollection,  although 
I  would  be  reluctant  to  be  held  to  my  oath  on  it,  is  that  it  was  organized  during 
the  early  days  of  the  CIO,  1936,  1937,  perhaps  in  1938,  and  I  think  I  heard  its 
name  at  that  time.  I  was  with  the  Labor  Board  in  the  labor  field,  and  I  would 
know  about  labor  organizations  operating  in  this  country. 

Mr.  Morris.  I  see.  The  Columbia  Broadcasting  System,  the  RCA  Communi- 
cations. Inc.,  Postal  Telegraph,  RCA  Communications,  Inc.,  Western  Union  Tele- 
graph, Postal  Telegraph,  those  organizations  were  all  up  before  you  while  you 
were  secretary  of  the  Board,  were  they  not?  I  have  the  dates  here,  October  11, 
1938,  for  the  Columbia  Broadcasting  System ;  November  27,  1938,  for  the  RCA 
Communications;  November  22,  1938,  for  the  Postal  Telegraph?  You  remember 
that  the  organizing  of  the  workers  of  these  various  communications  corporations 
was  a  consideration  before  you  while  you  were  secretary  of  the  Board? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  now  recollect,  ]\Ir.  Morris,  that  before  the  organization  became 
known  as  the  ACA,  it  was  known  as  the  ARTA,  the  American  Radio  Telegraphers 
Association.  As  far  as  the  names  of  those  companies  are  concerned,  I  have  no 
present  recollection  of  all  of  them.  I  have  a  recollection  of  the  Western  Union 
case  because  that  was  an  important  case  in  which  the  Board  disestablished  the 
important  and  long-standing  company  union  which  Western  Union  organized  at 
the  same  time  the  other  big  American  employers  organized  their  unions. 


790  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

I  remember  that  one,  and  I  remember  the  Postal  Telegraph  case.  I  think  that 
was  a  significant  and  difficult  case  because  it  involved  a  national  election  with  all 
kinds  of  problems.  I  have  a  vague  recollection  of  a  case  involving  CBS.  I  have 
a  good  recollection  of  a  case  involving  RCA. 

Mr.  Morris.  Well,  now 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  recall  the  other  names. 

•Mr.  Morris.  So  that  this  hearing  can  be  put  in  its  proper  perspective,  we  have 
had  Nathaniel  Weyl  testify  before  this  committee  and  Whittaker  Chambers 
testify  before  this  committee  to  the  effect  that  you  were  a  member  of  the  original 
Harold  Ware  cell  that  operated  in  Washington  in  the  early  thirties. 

The  question  is,  were  you  a  member  of  the  Harold  Ware  cell  of  the  Communist 
Party  at  that  time? 

Mr.  Witt.  Mr.  Morris,  I  think  you  are  familiar  with  testimony  I  have  given 
before  congressional  committees  before? 

Mr.  Morris.  Yes. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  think  this  is  the  fourth  time  I  have  appeared  before  a  congressional 
committee,  and  I  think  for  the  fourth  time  I  will  have  to  decline  to  answer  that 
question  on  the  grounds  that  under  the  fifth  amendment  I  may  not  be  compelled 
to  bear  witness  against  myself. 

Mr.  Morris.  And  your  answer  to  all  such  questions  put  to  you  you  would  refuse 
to  answer 

Mr.  Witt.  I  would  on  the  same  grounds. 

Mr.  Morris.  Including  the  time  that  you  were  secretary  of  the  National  Labor 
Relations  Board? 

Mr.  Witt.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Morris.  Would  you  tell  us  whether  or  not  you  were  attending  secret  meet- 
ings of  the  Communist  Party  while  you  were  secretary  of  the  National  Labor 
Relations  Board? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  refuse  to  answer  that,  and  may  it  be  understood,  Mr.  Chairman, 
when  I  say  on  the  same  grounds  it  will  be  understood  that  I  am  taking  the  privi- 
lege under  the  fifth  amendment. 

The  Chairman.  That  you  are  not  compelled  to  testify  against  yourself? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  Morris.  Are  you  a  present  member  of  the  Communist  Party,  Mr.  Witt? 

Mr.  Witt.  Same  refusal. 

Mr.  Morris.  The  National  Labor  Relations  Board  which  you  served  on  set  up 
the  framework  whereby  all  these  various  unions  are  now  being  certified,  did  it 
not,  Mr.  Witt?    The  framework  is  essentially  the  same? 

Mr.  Witt.  You  mean  the  election  procedure  or  the  representation? 

Mr.  Morris.  Yes. 

Mr.  Witt.  Essentially  the  same.  It  has  been  modified  and  seriously  weakened 
by  the  Taft-Hartley  Act  in  ways  which  I  do  not  approve,  but  I  don't  think  you 
are  interested  in  that.  Essentially  the  procedure  of  conducting  elections  and 
certifying  unions  is  the  same. 

Mr.  Morris.  I  see.  You  have  represented  the  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers 
Union? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  do,  and  I  represent  the  International  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter 
Workers  Union. 

Mr.  Morris.  From  time  to  time  you  have  done  work  for  the  individual  com- 
munications unions,  and  you  have  been  amicus  curiae,  you  have  told  us  today 
in  executive  session,  in  cases  involving  the  ACA.  Now  both  of  those  unions  have 
been  expelled  from  the  CIO,  have  they  not,  Mr.  Witt? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes ;  that  is  correct.  Mr.  Morris,  I  have  no  recollection ;  I  didn't 
intend  in  my  testimony  in  the  executive  session  to  indicate  filing  an  amicus 
curiae  brief  in  behalf  of  the  ACA,  but  I  said  I  might  have;  I  wouldn't  be  sur- 
prised to  find  that  I  had. 

The  Chairman.  For  our  record  I  want  to  state  at  this  time  that  in  1951  the 
Internal  Security  Subcommittee  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  held 
extensive  hearings  on  the  American  Communications  Association.  In  those  hear- 
ings the  Communist  control  over  that  organization  was  amply  established.  This 
American  Communications  Association  is  now  the  certified  bargaining  agent  for 
some  approximately  5,000  employees  of  Western  Union  Telegraph  Co.  in  the 
metropolitan  area  of  New  York  City  and  some  200  employees  of  the  Western 
Union  Cable  Co.  in  New  York  City,  for  RCA  Communications  on  the  east  and 
west  coasts  and  for  employees  in  certain  broadcasting  stations,  mostly  in  New 
York  and  in  Philadelphia. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  791 

Recently  a  National  Labor  Relations  Board  secret  ballot  election  among  the 
Western  Union  employees  in  New  York  City  was  held  on  May  19,  1953,  when 
the  employees  voted  2,421  to  1,619  in  favor  of  the  American  Communications 
Association  as  against  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 

Another  National  Labor  Relations  Board  election  is  now  being  held  among 
approximately  1,800  employees  of  the  American  Cable  &  Radio  Co.  and  the 
American  Communications  Association  is  on  the  ballot.  The  results  of  this 
election  are  to  be  announced  on  the  2Sth  day  of  May.  This  Internal  Security 
Sul»committee  has  taken  cognizance  of  the  situation  at  this  time. 

In  view  of  the  following  facts  found  after  preliminary  survey  by  the  staff  of 
this  subcommittee,  the  main  office  of  the  Western  Union  Telegraph  Co.  is  located 
in  the  Western  Union  Building  at  60  Hudson  Street,  New  York  City,  N.  Y,  Tele- 
graph circuits  to  all  major  cities  in  the  United  States  terminate  in  or  are  relayed 
through  this  building.  Telegraph  messages  of  all  kinds  are  handled  by  the 
employees,  the  majority  of  whom  are  members  and  under  the  control  of  the 
American  Communications  Association. 

Many  of  the  messages  are  Government  messages.  For  example,  the  following 
Government  agencies  are  served  by  telegraph  circuits,  tie-lines,  connecting  the 
main  Western  Union  ofiice  and  the  agency  offices.  The  following  is  a  partial  list 
of  these  circuits :  The  United  States  Defense  Department  Signal  Center  of  the 
First  Army,  headquarters  at  Fort  Wadsworth ;  the  United  States  Naval  Air 
Station,  Floyd  Bennett  Field,  Brooklyn ;  the  New  York  Port  of  Embarkation  in 
Brooklyn;  the  United  States  Naval  Shipyards,  Brooklyn;  Sea  Transport 
Station,  Atlantic  Division,  Army's  piers  1,  2,  3,  and  4 ;  the  United  States  Naval 
Communications  Service,  90  Church  Street,  New  York;  Governors  Island  and 
Fort  Jay,  the  Second  Service  Command. 

The  importance  of  the  Western  Union  Telegraph  Co.  and  the  Western  Union 
Cable  Co.  in  our  country's  defense  program  can  be  judged  by  the  following  which 
appeared  in  the  company's  annual  report  for  1952  : 

"More  deep-sea  amplifiers  were  placed  in  service,  further  increasing  interna- 
tional cable  capacity,  increased  service  requirements  of  the  Armed  Forces,  other 
governmental  departments  and  defense  industries  were  fully  met.  Of  special 
importance  was  the  expansion  of  the  extensive  leased  communications  system 
furnished  by  Western  Union  for  governmental  and  other  large  customers.  The 
company  was  awarded  Government  contracts  by  the  Air  Force,  the  Navy,  and  the 
Signal  Corps  for  the  development  of  special  electronic  equipment  and  for  other 
projects  involving  a  total  of  $6  million." 

The  Senate  Internal  Security  Subcommittee  takes  cognizance  of  that  situation 
as  possessing  a  threat  to  the  internal  security  of  this  country. 

Ml-.  Morris.  Mr.  Witt,  you  understand  the  situation  the  Senator  just  described? 
You  understand  that  the  election  of  the  ACA  was  just  held? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  saw  that  in  the  press. 

Mr.  Morris.  You  know  that  as  a  practical  fact? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  know  what  you  mean  by  "a  practical  fact."  I  know  it  from 
the  press  ;  that  is  all  I  know  it  from. 

Mr.  Morris.  You  do  not  know  it  from  any  of  your  associate  lawyers? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  heard  it  mentioned  in  passing  the  other  day  by  somebody  in  the 
labor  union  the  way  you  mention  developments,  but  that  is  all  I  know.  I  saw 
from  the  press  that  ACA  won  by  a  larger  majority  this  year  than  they  won  last 
year  or  2  years  ago. 

Mr.  Morris.  Yes.  And  you  know  from  your  experience  as  Secretary  of  the 
National  Labor  Relations  Board  that  when  that  election  is  held  that  it  will 
be  followed  up  by  a  certification  by  the  NLRB? 

Mr.  Witt.  So  the  law  provides,  Mr.  Morris.  That  is  what  the  election  is  held 
for,  to  determine  whether  the  employees,  the  majority  of  them,  vote  for  one  of 
the  labor  unions.     If  they  do,  that  union  is  certified. 

Mr.  Morris.  And  you  recognize  that  there  is  very  little,  there  is  nothing,  that 
the  Western  Union  Co.  or  those  other  companies  involved  here  can  do  about  this 
situation? 

Mr.  Witt.  Mr.  Morris,  I  am  not  appearing  as  counsel  for  Western  Union.  Do 
you  want  me  to  talk  as  an  expert  on  the  labor  situation? 

Mr.  Morris.  I  do. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  reluctant  to  do  it  because  I  might  be  in  the  position  to  give 
advice  to  Western  Union  if  I  were  representing  them,  but  I  am  reluctant  to  do 
that  under  subpena. 

Mr.  Morms.  Senator  Jenner  made  a  statement  that  the  situation  exists  in  the 
communications  industry  in  New  York  that  possesses  a  threat  to  the  internal 


792  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

security  of  this  country-    You  were  the  secretary  of  the  Board  that  set  up  this 
framework,  and  it  is  on  tliat  basis  that  we  are  asliing  you  these  questions. 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  I  still  object  to  it,  Mr.  Morris.  I  would  like  a  ruling  from 
the  Chair,  Senator  Jenner.  I  am  in  an  awkward  iwsition.  Please  bear  in  mind 
that  I  am  a  member  of  the  bar ;  that  I  represent  the  International  Union  of  Mine, 
Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers,  and  now  Mr.  Morris  is  asking  me  a  question  which  I 
would  be  delighte<l  to  answer  if  Mr.  Morris  sets  me  up  as  a  labor  expert  in  a 
different  context,  but  in  this  context  he  is  in  effect  asking  me  to  give  advice  to 
the  Western  Union  Telegraph  Co. 

The  Chairman.  Certainly  you  are  considered  as  a  labor  expert.  You  spent 
many  years  down  here  with  the  NLRB,  you  helped  organize  and  set  it  up  as 
secretary.  You  were  the  secretary  when  that  apparatus  was  set  up  of  which 
I  just  talked  about. 

Mr.  Witt.  If  you  believe  from  all  that  that  I  am  expert,  I  am  delighted  to 
accept  the  characterization. 

The  Chairman.  Give  us  your  opinion. 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  as  a  member  of  the  bar  I  still  insist  in  all  sincerity  that  I  am 
caught  on  the  horns  of  this  dilemma.  If  you  ask  me  as  an  exi>ert,  I  would  want 
to  give  you  an  honest  answer,  and  my  record  shows  that  I  have  been  in  the  labor 
field  for  many  years,  and  I  always  try  to  give  the  right  answers. 

At  the  moment  the  question  involves  necessarily  by  its  very  nature  giving 
advice  to  the  Western  Union  Telegraph  Co. 

Mr.  Morris.  Mr.  Chairman,  there  is  one  thing  I  would  like  to  have  understood, 
that  in  trying  to  solve  the  situation — our  staff  has  been  working  on  the  problem — 
and  the  NLRB  is  of  the  opinion  that  they  themselves  can  do  nothing  about  it 
because  of  the  framework  which  has  been  existing  for  many  years  and  which  was 
set  up  at  the  time  Mr.  Witt  was  secretary  of  the  Board.  So  that  is  why  you  are 
being  asked  these  questions. 

Mr.  Witt.  Mr.  Morris,  the  field  of  Federal  regulations  didn't  begin  with  Nathan 
Witt  as  secretary  of  the  Board.  It  began  with  Congress  and  many  other  de- 
velopments many,  many  years  ago.  In  fact,  I  never  would  have  become  secretary 
of  the  Labor  Board  unless  Congress  had  passed  the  Wagner  Act.  So  it  is  the 
Congress  that  set  up  this  machinery  and  not  Nathan  Witt,  or  Edwin  Smith,  or 
anybody  else.  We  were  appointed  to  carry  out  the  congressional  will  as  ex- 
pres.sed  in  the  Wagner  Act,  and  that  is  what  we  were  doing,  and  that  is  what  this 
Board  is  doing  when  it  conducts  elections  like  it  did  the  other  day  among  the 
employees  of  the  Western  Union. 

Mr.  Morris.  Mr.  Witt,  did  you  aid  in  the  formulation  of  the  Wagner  Act? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  have  no  clear  recollection  that  I  played  any  significant  role  in  that, 
Mr.  Morris.  The  old  Board  then  had  a  very,  very  small  staff,  and  my  best  recol- 
lection would  be  that  the  bill  or  the  drafts  of  the  bill  were  passed  around  and  all 
of  us  may  have  made  some  comments  and  that  kind  of  thing,  but  my  recollection 
is  quite  clear  that  I  can't  be  honored  by  being  regarded  as  the  principal  draftsman 
or  one  of  the  principal  draftsmen  of  the  Wagner  Act. 

Mr.  Morris.  Did  you  not  testify  this  morning  that  you  aided  in  a  small  way  in 
the  formulation  of  the  Labor  Act? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  tried  to  say  that  now ;  if  I  misspoke  myself,  Mr.  Morris,  I  was 
trying  to  say  the  same  thing.  In  a  small  way.  I  just  indicated  that  my  recol- 
lection is  we  saw  drafts  of  bills,  and  we  may  have  made  comments  to  other 
people  who  had  the  principal  responsibility. 

Mr.  Morris.  The  bill  was  influenced  largely  by  the  recommendations  of  the 
NLRB  at  that  time? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  wouldn't  say  that,  Mr.  Morris. 

Mr.  MoEEis.  Give  us  your  views. 

Mr.  Witt.  My  recollection,  as  you  know  and  as  I  have  indicated  already  by 
my  testimony,  the  National  Labor  Relations  Act  is  also  called  the  Wagner  Act 
for  obvious  reasons.  My  recollection  is  that  Senator  Wagner,  the  late  Senator 
Wagner,  and  his  staff  were  responsible  for  drafting  that  bill  and  putting  it  in 
shape. 

As  I  have  tried  to  say,  insofar  as  I  and  other  people  at  the  Labor  Board  played 
a  role,  it  was  a  minor  role.  Maybe  some  of  the  others  on  the  Labor  Board  played 
a  more  important  role  than  I  did,  but  I  don't  have  too  clear  a  recollection. 

Mr.  iMoRRis.  Mr.  Chairman,  at  another  session  this  committee  has  gone  into 
Mr.  Witt's  role  with  the  International  Union  of  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Work- 
ers. I  think  that  that  is  amply  covered  in  other  hearings,  and  we  will  not  ask 
Mr.  Witt  that  but  relate  that  testimony  to  this  part  of  the  particular  session. 

The  Chairman.  It  will  be  related. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  793 

Mr.  Witt.  Mr.  Chairman,  in  view  of  tliat  statement  of  Mr.  Morris,  may  I 
asl£  for  one  ruling  from  the  Chair? 

The  Chairman.  Yes. 

Mr.  Witt.  As  Mr.  Morris  just  said,  this  committee  under  the  chairmanship 
of  Chairman  McCarran  conducted  hearings  on  the  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Work- 
ers Union  at  Salt  Lake  City  in  October  1952.  I  appeared  there  representing  the 
witnesses  and  also  as  a  witness  in  my  own  right.  There  had  been  testimony 
there  by  one  J.  B.  Matthews  that  testimony  had  been  given  before  a  congres- 
sional committee  that  I  had  engaged  in  espionage. 

When  I  took  the  witness  stand  before  Senator  McCarran  in  Salt  Lake  City  I 
denied  that,  and  I  asked  Senator  McCarran  to  require  such  testimony,  if  this 
existed,  to  be  made  a  part  of  the  record.     He  denied  my  request. 

Since  this  is  the  same  committee  I  would  like  to  make  the  request  to  this 
committee  that  the  testimony  which  Mr.  Matthews  gave,  if  it  does  exist,  be  made 
a  part  of  this  record. 

The  Chairman.  I  will  take  the  matter  up  with  Senator  McCarran.  I  was  not 
present  at  those  hearings. 

Senator  Smith  (Willis  Smith).  Mr.  Chairman? 

The  Chairman.  Senator  Smith. 

Senator  S^rixH.  Mr.  Witt's  statement  is  in  the  record  here,  and  I  do  not  know 
what  he  means  by  making  it  a  part  of  this  hearing. 

The  Chairman.  Relating  it. 

Senator  Smith.  Whatever  has  been  said  has  been  said,  and  Mr.  Witt  has  had 
a  chance  to  say  just  what  he  said  now,  and  it  is  all  right  with  me. 

The  Chairman.  It  will  only  be  related  to  this  hearing.  Senator. 

Mr.  Morris.  I  have  no  more  questions. 

Senator  Smith.  I  have  a  question  or  two. 

The  Chairman.  Senator  Smith. 

Senator  Smith.  Mr.  Witt,  I  believe  you  refused  to  answer  the  questions  as  to 
whether  or  not  you  are  or  have  been  a  Communist,  relying  on  the  rights  under  the 
fifth  amendment  not  to  testify  against  yourself.     That  is  correct,  is  it  not? 

Mr.  Witt.  That  is  correct,  Senator  Smith. 

Senator  Smith.  And  you  still  decline  to  answer  the  question  as  to  whether 
you  were  or  are  a  Communist? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  do.  Senator. 

Senator  Smith.  And  upon  the  same  grounds  that  for  you  to  answer  that  ques- 
tion would  tend  to  incriminate  you? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  prefer  the  language  of  the  Constitution,  Senator  Smith,  if  you 
don't  mind.  You  are  a  lawyer  ;  I  am  a  lawyer,  and  despite  the  fact  I  am  here  in 
my  capacity  as  a  layman,  as  a  witness,  I  still  can't  disengage  my  personality 
from  my  profession.  I  know  the  language  of  the  fifth  amendment,  and  I  prefer, 
as  I  have  indicated,  to  use  the  language  of  the  fifth  amendment,  which  confers 
upon  me  the  right  not  to  be  witness  against  himself. 

Senator  Smith.  I  thought  that  is  the  way  you  said  it,  and  I  want  to  get  it 
clear  in  the  record. 

Mr.  AVitt.  Yes. 

Senator  Smith.  Now,  Mr.  Witt,  if  you  were  not  a  Communist  or  had  not  been 
a  Communist  and  so  stated  to  this  committee  this  morning,  there  would  be  no 
way  that  such  a  statement  by  you  would  tend  to  incriminate  you  or  would  con- 
stitute testimony  against  you,  would  it? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  not  sure  of  that,  Mr.  Smith,  and  I  would  be  delighted  to  argue 
that  point  with  you  if  we  were  both  standing  on  an  equal  basis  before  an  appel- 
late court.  I  don't  think  this  is  the  forum  for  that  kind  of  debate.  I  have  gone 
through  it  before.  Senator  Smith.  I  think  I  know  my  rights,  as  I  have  stated, 
under  the  fifth  amendment.  I  have  advised  clients  on  the  fifth  amendment,  and 
no  matter  how  you  care  to  phrase  it,  Senator  Smith,  I  know  on  the  basis  of  de- 
cisions of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  and  other  Federal  Courts,  I  know 
it  is  sufficient  if  I  claim  my  rights  and  the  language,  and  I  have  done  so. 

Senator  Smith.  Mr.  Witt,  it  is  entirely  all  right  for  me  so  far  as  I  am  con- 
cerned for  you  to  display  your  knowledge  of  law.  I  was  asking  you  as  a  simple 
fact  that  if  as  a  matter  of  fact  you  had  not  been  a  Communist  and  were  not  a 
Communist  and  you  so  stated,  if  in  your  opinion  there  was  any  way  that  that 
can  incriminate  you  or  constitute  giving  testimony  against  yourself? 

Mr.  Witt.  If  you  want  me  to  answer  that,  Mr.  Smith 

Senator  Smith.  As  a  fact. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  think  you  can  call  that  a  fact  question.  I  think  that  ques- 
tion calls  for  a  legal  conclusion.     I  heard  Mr.  Joseph  give  you  his  answer,  he  is  a 


794  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

layman,  but  I  -will  give  you  the  answer  Mr.  Joseph  gave  you.  I  shall  remind 
you,  too.  Senator  Smith,  if  it  takes  a  reminder,  that  the  Supreme  Court  said  that 
the  fifth  amendnu'iit,  the  clause  providing  that  you  may  not  be  a  witness  against 
yourself,  is  a  protection  to  the  innocent,  not  only  to  the  guilty. 

The  Supreme  Court  has  said  that  on  several  occasions.  So  I  think  that  the 
practice  of  this  committee  and  other  committees  to  draw  unfavorable  inferences 
for  the  purpose  of  the  committee  is  a  practice  which  is  not  consistent  with  the 
decisions  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court. 

Senator  Smith.  Well  now,  up  to  the  present  time,  Mr.  Witt,  do  you  think  that 
this  committee  has  been  unfair  to  you  this  morning? 

Mr.  Witt.  No  ;  I  have  no  complaint  against  the  manner  of  the  committee,  the 
manner  in  which  the  questions  have  been  put  to  me.  I  am  familiar  with  the  way 
that  the  committee  operates,  and  I  have  not  been  surprised.  I  think  the  entire 
premise  on  which  this  committee  is  operating  is  unfair,  I  don't  agree  with  it, 
and  I  will  continue  to  disagree  with  it  as  long  as  this  committee  and  similar 
committees  continue  to  function  as  they  have  been  functioning. 

Senator  Smith.  You  said  something  about  the  union  just  now  when  you  were 
answering  a  question  of  Mr.  Morris.  You  recognize,  do  you  not,  that  there  are 
good  unions  and  bad  unions ;  that  there  may  be  unions  that  have  Communist 
members  that  want  to  get  them  out,  and  there  may  be  unions  that  have  Com- 
munist members  that  do  not  want  to  get  them  out? 

Mr.  Witt.  There  are  good  Senators  and  bad  Senators,  good  banks  and  bad 
banks,  good  employers  and  bad  employers,  good  unions  and  bad  unions. 

Senator  Smith.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  American  Communications  Asso- 
ciation is  a  good  or  bad  union? 

Mr.  Witt.  In  my  opinion  it  is  a  good  union. 

Senator  Smith.  You  know  it  is  Communist-dominated,  do  you  not? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  know  it  has  been  called  that. 

Senator  Smith.  Well,  do  you  not  know  that  there  has  been  proof  to  that  effect? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  know  that.     I  know  there  has  been  testimony. 

Senator  Smith.  What? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  know  there  has  been  testimony. 

Senator  Smith.  You  know  there  has  been  testimony  to  the  effect  that  it  was 
Communist  dominated? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  remember  the  phrase.  Communist-dominated,  Communist- 
supported,  Communist-influenced,  but  I  know  there  has  been  testimony  along 
such  lines. 

Senator  Smith.  Do  you  know  Mr.  E.  S.  Smith,  who  was  a  member  of  the 
Labor  Board? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes ;  I  do. 

Senator  Smith.  At  the  same  time  you  were  Secretary,  I  believe? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes ;  I  do. 

Senator  Smith.  Did  you  accompany  Mr.  Smith  on  a  visit  to  Mexico  City  while 
he  was  on  the  Board  and  you  were  Secretary? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  don't  recollect  that  Mr.  Smith  made  a  trip  to  iMexico  City.  I  have 
some  vague  recollection  of  that.  Senator  Smith,  but  in  any  event  whether  he  did 
or  didn't  I  did  not  accompany  him. 

Senator  Smith.  You  did  not  accompany  him? 

Mr.  Witt.  No  ;  I  did  not. 

Senator  Smith.  I  believe  that  is  all  then. 

The  Chairman.  I  want  the  staff  to  take  up  with  the  Chairman  of  the  National 
Labor  Relations  Board  the  present  situation  I  have  just  described  to  see  if 
anything  can  be  done  or  what  should  be  done  about  the  situation. 

Mr.  Morris.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  would  like  to  point  out  in  that  connection  that 
the  testimony  taken  to  date  showed  that  if  somebody,  one  of  the  employees, 
were  shown  to  be  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  monitoring  these  various 
channels,  there  is  nothing  the  Western  Union  could  do  under  the  existing  labor 
legislation,  nor  could  they  dismiss  the  employee  because  he  is  a  Communist. 

One  other  thing,  Mr.  Witt.  When  you  testified  before  the  Smith  committee 
back  in  1940,  you  denied  Communist  Party  membership,  did  you  not,  or  at  least 
you  submitted  a  letter?  You  submitted  a  letter  to  that  board,  to  that  committee, 
investigating  the  National  Labor  Relations  Board  under  the  chairmanship  of 
Congressman  Howard  Smith  of  Virginia? 

The  Chairman.  The  record  will  show  that  the  witness  is  conferring  with 
counsel  before  responding  to  the  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  If  you  have  it  there,  Mr.  Morris,  may  I  see  it? 

Mr.  Morris.  Yes.    Why  not  read  the  letter,  Mr.  Witt? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  795 

Mr.  Witt  (after  conferring  with  counsel).  You  want  me  to  read  the  letter 
dated  October  16,  1940,  signed  by  myself? 

Mr.  MoKRis.  Yes;  particularly  the  part  that  is  annotated  there. 

Mr.  Witt.  All  right ;  I  think  I  know  where  you  mean. 

"However,  I  do  wish  to  go  on  record  that  I  am  not  now,  nor  have  I  ever  been, 
a  member  of  the  Communist  Party,  a  Communist  sympathizer,  or  one  who  hews 
to  the  Communist  Party  line." 

Mr.  Morris.  Mr.  Witt,  would  you  deny  today  that  that  statement  that  you 
gave  at  that  time  was  true? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  refuse  to  answer  on  the  same  grounds. 

"I  wish  to  comment  on  certain  other  matters  developed  in  the  course  of  Con- 
gressman Keefe's  testimony. 

"(1)  Congressman  Keefe  testified  that  the  Dies  committee  listed  my  name  as 
a  member  of  the  American  League  for  Peace  and  Democracy.  It  is  true  that 
I  was  so  listed.  At  the  time  the  list  was  published  I  publicly  denied  that  I  was 
a  member  of  the  American  League  for  Peace  and  Democracy.  My  denial  was 
published  in  the  Washington  Post  and  in  the  New  York  Times  for  October  26, 
1939,  in  stories,  photostatic  copies  of  which  I  attach  hereto.  Efforts  by  Chair- 
man Madden  and  myself  to  discover  through  the  Dies  committee  how  my  name 
came  to  appear  on  the  list  were  fruitless.  I  now  reiterate  my  denial  that  I  was 
at  any  time  a  member  of  the  American  League  for  Peace  and  Democracy. 

"(2)  Congressman  Keefe  testified  that  in  his  conversation  with  Mr.  Brooks, 
Mr.  Brooks,  'in  a  rather  nebulous  manner,  said  something  about  a  meeting'  I 
was  supposed  to  have  had  in  a  Washington  apartment  with  Messrs.  Browder, 
Amter,  and  Bridges.  Congressman  Keefe  himself  testified  that  he  paid  no  atten- 
tion to  the  story,  because  it  was  based  on  vague  rumor.  I  deny  that  any  such 
meeting  took  place. 

"(3)  While  Congressman  Keefe  was  testifying,  Mr.  Shaughnessy,  of  the  com- 
mittee staff,  put  in  evidence  a  copy  of  the  column  the  Capital  Parade  from  the 
Washington  Star  for  October  19,  1939,  and  copies  of  my  subsequent  correspond- 
ence with  Robert  Kintner,  one  of  the  authors  of  the  column,  relative  to  the 
statement  in  the  column  that  I  was  'an  active  opponent'  of  Judge  Pecora  and 
Mr.  Jerome  Frank  'when  they  sought  to  have  the  Lawyers'  Guild  condemn  Com- 
munist as  well  as  Fascist  dictatorship.'  I  am  a  member  of  the  National  Lawyers' 
Guild.  However,  I  wish  to  reiterate  what  I  said  in  my  correspondence  with 
Mr.  Kintner — that  the  statement  in  his  column  is  utterly  without  foundation. 

"I  hereby  request  that  this  letter  be  printed  in  the  proceedings  of  your  com- 
mittee. I  am  also  willing  to  appear  before  your  committee  to  testify  concerning 
these  matters." 

Mr.  Morris.  Did  you  ever  meet  with  Earl  Browder,  Israel  Amter,  or  Harry 
Bridges? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  decline  to  answer  that  question  on  the  same  ground. 

Mr.  Morris.  I  mean,  was  your  denial  at  that  time  predicated  on  the  fact  that 
these  Congressmen  conducting  this  investgiation  did  not  have  conclusive  evidence 
of  your  Communist  Party  membership? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  decline  to  answer  that  question  on  the  same  ground. 

Mr.  Morris.  I  have  no  more  questions. 

The  Chairman.  Are  there  any  further  questions? 

Senator  Smith.  Yes. 

The  Chairman.  Senator  Smith. 

Senator  Smith.  Mr.  Witt,  I  asked  you  just  now  if  you  accompanied  Mr.  E.  S. 
Smith  while  he  was  a  member  of  the  Labor  Board  and  you  were  Secretary  on  a 
trip  to  Mexico,  and  I  understand  you  to  say  you  did  not? 

Mr.  Witt.  That  is  right,  that  was  my  answer. 

Senator  Smith.  Now  did  you  at  any  time  accompany  Mr.  Smith  to  any  Commu- 
nist meeting? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  decline  to  answer  that  question.  Senator,  on  the  same  ground. 

Senator  Smith.  Did  you  and  he  belong  to  the  same  Communist  cell? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  decline  to  answer  that  question  on  the  same  ground. 

Senator  Smith.  I  believe  that  is  all. 

The  Chairman.  Are  there  any  further  questions? 

Mr.  Morris.  I  would  like  to  put  in  the  record  a  press  release  from  the  National 
Labor  Relations  Board,  dated  October  22,  1937,  which  describes  various  changes 
taking  place  iii  the  National  Labor  Relations  Board,  changes  which  affected  Mr. 
Witt  and  Mr.  Smith. 

The  Chairman.  It  may  become  a  part  of  the  record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  216"  and  filed  for  the 
record.) 


796  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

"Exhibit  No.  216 

"National  Labor  Relations  Board,  Washington,  D.  C. 

"(Release  for  morning  papers,  Friday,  October  22,  1937  (R-382) ) 

"benedict  wolf  resigns  as  nlrb  secretary 

"The  National  Labor  Relations  Board  has  announced  the  resignation  of  its 
Secretary,  Benedict  Wolf,  who  on  November  15  will  leave  the  Board  to  resume 
the  practice  of  law  in  New  York  City.  In  accepting  Mr.  Wolf's  resi^^nation  the 
Board  said : 

"  'The  National  Labor  Relations  Board  wishes  to  express  its  keen  appreciation 
of  Mr.  Wolf's  unusual  devotion  and  ability  in  performance  of  the  arduous  duties 
of  his  office.' 

"When  Senator  Robert  F.  Warmer  became  Chairman  of  the  National  Labor 
Board  in  September  1933,  Mr.  Wolf  served  as  his  legal  assistant  and  secretary 
and  subsequently  as  executive  officer  of  that  Board.  When  that  Board  was 
replaced  by  the  first  National  Labor  Relations  Board  in  July  1934,  Mr.  Wolf 
became  its  Executive  Secretary  and  Assistant  General  Counsel,  servins  in  that 
capacity  until  passage  of  the  National  Labor  Relations  Act  in  July  1935  when  he 
becan)e  Secretary  of  the  present  Board.  He  has  thus  served  as  an  important  link 
between  the  three  successive  agencies  established  successfully  [successively] 
under  NIRA,  congressional  resolution  and  act  of  Congress,  which  have  been  en- 
trusted by  Congress  with  implementing  the  rights  of  employees  to  self-organiza- 
tion for  the  purposes  of  collective  bargaining. 

"The  Board  also  announced  the  appointment  of  Nathan  Witt,  at  present  Assist- 
ant General  Counsel  of  the  Board,  to  succeed  Mr.  Wolf  as  Secretary.  Mr.  Witt's 
duties  as  Assistant  General  Counsel  will  be  assumed  by  Thomas  I.  Emerson, 
of  the  Board's  legal  staff. 

"Mr.  Wolf  was  born  at  Woodridge,  N.  Y.,  on  December  22,  1904.  He  graduated 
in  1924  from  the  College  of  the  City  of  New  York  and  in  1928  simultaneously 
took  his  master  of  arts  degree  and  his  law  degree  from  Columbia  University. 
He  practiced  law  in  New  York  for  5  years,  3  of  these  with  his  own  firm,  before 
coming  to  Washington  as  Senator  Wagner's  legal  assistant  and  secretary. 

"Mr.  Witt  was  born  in  New  York  City  on  February  11,  1903.  He  graduated 
from  New  York  University  in  1927  and  from  Harvard  Law  School  in  1U32.  His 
schooling  was  interrupted  several  times,  sometimes  for  years  at  a  stretch,  by  the 
necessity  to  earn  his  own  living.  At  Harvard  Law  School  he  specialized  in  labor 
law  and  during  his  last  year  assisted  Prof.  Joseph  A.  Beale  with  the  latter's 
treatise  on  the  conflict  of  laws.  After  taking  his  law  degree  he  practiced  in  New 
York  with  the  firm  of  Donovan  &  Raichle.  In  August  1933  he  came  to  Washing- 
ton as  Assistant  Chief  of  the  License  and  Agreement  Section  in  the  General 
Counsel's  Office  of  the  Agricultural  Adjustment  Administration.  He  came  to  the 
first  NLRB,  then  under  the  chairmanship  of  Lloyd  K.  Garrison,  in  July  1934. 
His  service  with  that  Board  and  with  the  present  Board  has  been  continuous. 
On  December  1,  1935,  he  was  made  Assistant  General  Counsel  in  charge  of  the 
stafC  of  review  lawyers.  Mr.  Witt  is  the  editor  of  the  supplement  to  James  M. 
Landis'  case-book  on  labor  law  which  has  just  appeared. 

"Mr.  Emerson  was  born  in  Passaic,  N.  J.,  on  July  12,  1907.  He  was  graduated 
from  Yale  in  1928  and  from  Yale  Law  School  in  1931,  subsequently  practicing  law 
in  New  York  for  2  years.  He  came  to  Washington  in  1933  as  Assistant  Counsel, 
NRA.  Upon  the  organization  of  the  first  National  Labor  Relations  Board  under 
Chairman  Garrison  he  transferred  to  the  legal  staff  of  that  Board.  Mr.  Emerson 
continued  on  the  staff  of  the  present  Board  until  August  1936,  when  he  resigned 
to  join  the  legal  staff  of  the  Social  Security  Board.  After  a  year's  service  with 
the  Social  Security  Board  he  returned  to  the  National  Labor  Relations  Board. 

"Mr.  Witt  and  Mr.  Emerson  will  assume  their  new  duties  on  November  15  when 
Mr.  Wolf  leaves." 

Senator  Smith.  Did  Mr.  Witt  hear  that? 

Mr.  Morris.  This  is  a  press  release,  Mr.  Witt,  which  announces  various  changes 
and  makes  the  announcement  of  your  appointment  as  Secretary  of  the  Labor 
Board.     I  would  like  to  make  that  a  part  of  the  record  and  let  it  speak  for  itself. 

Senator  Smith.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  concerns  you,  Mr.  Witt,  but  I  want 
you  have  a  chance  to  say  whether  or  not  it  does. 

Mr.  Morris.  It  is  just  a  press  release  saying  who  your  predecessor  was. 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  797 

Mr.  Witt.  Just  one  word  if  I  may  be  permitted,  Mr.  Chairman?  Mr.  Morris, 
in  connection  witli  that  letter  signed  by  me  to  the  Smith  committee,  referred 
to  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Smith  committee,  if  you  have  examined  those  you 
will  have  noticed  that  there  is  a  good  deal  concerning  myself  and  my  work  with 
the  Labor  Board. 

As  I  fear  with  respect  to  many  of  the  activities  of  this  committee  and  many 
similar  committees,  I  think  you  build  up  an  unfair  record  by  selecting  this  and 
not  selecting  that.  It  happens  that  there  are  letters  in  that  same  Smith  com- 
mittee record  written  concerning  my  work  for  the  Board  as  Assistant  General 
Counsel  and  Secretary  signed  by  every  person  who  was  a  member  of  the  Board 
or  the  predecessor  Board,  and  of  course  I  was  supported  by  the  then  members  of 
the  Board  also  in  connection  with  my  work  and  activities  with  the  exception  of 
one  newly  appointed  member. 

I  think  it  is  only  fair  since  so  many  references  have  been  made  to  my  tenure 
with  the  National  Labor  Relations  Board  that  some  effort  be  made  to  secure  a 
record  which  reflects  history  and  not  the  distortions  that  some  people  would 
like  to  put  on  history. 

I  ask  that  those  letters  written  on  my  behalf  by  the  members  of  the  NLRB 
be  made  a  part  of  this  record. 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Witt,  would  you  care  to  pick  out  3  or  4  of  these  letters, 
and  we  will  make  them  a  part  of  the  record. 
Mr.  Witt.  I  do ;  I  have  them  here. 
;Mr.  MoRRTS.  They  are  letters  from  whom? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  will  tell  you  in  a  moment.  These  are  letters,  as  I  said,  signed 
by  every  person  who  had  been  a  member  of  the  old  NliRB  or  the  NLRB  under 
the  Wagner  Act,  and  I  have  the  page  references  to  the  Smith  committee  record. 
They  are  written  in  response  to  a  letter  of  the  then  chairman,  Mr.  Madden, 
who  had  expected  that  the  Smith  committee  would  go  into  this  record  because 
of  the  gossip  about  the  Board  and  the  widespread  attacks. 

Mr.  Madden  wrote  this  letter  to  all  the  ex-members  of  the  Board  to  write 
him  letters  which  he  could  use.  These  letters  by  the  ex-members  were  written 
in  response  to  that  letter. 

Senator  Smith.  Mr.  Madden  asking  for  letters  that  he  could  use  in  your  behalf? 
Mr.  Witt.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  Smith.  Did  the  Labor  Board  conduct  any  investigation  into  your 
activities? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes;  they  did.  That  is  a  long  story;  I  am  not  sure  that  you  want 
to  take  the  time. 

The  Chairman.  Edwin  Smith  was  a  member  of  that  Board  at  that  time? 
]\Ir.  Witt.  He  was. 

The  Chairman.  He  was  before  this  committee,  and  he  refused  to  answer 
whether  he  was  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party. 

Mr.  Witt.  .T.  Warren  Madden  is  now  a  highly  respected  judge  of  the  Court 
of  Claims,  and  he  was  thoroughly  familiar  with  my  activities  for  a  period  rang- 
ing from  1935  to  the  end  of  1940. 

Mr.  Morris.  .Just  one  thing,  Mr.  Witt.  Did  Mr.  Madden  know  at  that  time 
that  vou  were  a  Communist? 

Mr.  Wttt.  I  do  not  know  one  way  or  the  other,  Mr.  Morris,  hut  Mr.  Madden 
knew  what  I  was  like  on  the  basis  of  my  day-to-day  activities  of  a  very  intensive 
kind.  The  Board  had  one  of  the  most  heroic  jobs  ever  undertaken  by  a  Gov- 
ernment organization  in  view  of  the  widespread  attacks,  including  the  Western 
Union,  the  National  Association  of  Manufacturers,  every  organization  of  em- 
ployers in  America  was  fighting  the  Board. 

Mr.  Morris.  Mr.  Witt,  you  understand 

Mr.  Witt.  I  worked  10  and  12  hours  a  day,  6  and  7  days  a  week,  and  he  knew 
of  my  activities,  and  he  knew  what  I  believed,  and  he  knew  what  a  faithful 
Government  employee  I  was  on  the  basis  of  year  after  year  of  such  intimate 
work  tocrether.    His  testimony  about  me  in  the  Smith  committee  record  reflects 

all  that.  ^  ,.,.,. 

Senator  Smith.  IMr.  Chairman,   there  is  one  question  I  would  like  to  ask 

Mr.  Witt  since  he  opened  up  a  field  there. 

The  Chairman.  Senator   Smith. 

Senator  Smith.  You  say  that  there  were  groups  fighting  the  Labor  Board. 
The  Communist  Party  was  not  fighting  the  Labor  Board,  was  it? 

Mr.  Witt.  No.  it  was  not,  Senator  Smith.  Senator  Johnston  was  in  the  Senate 
during  that  period :  he  knows  what  was  going  on ;  he  knows  what  was  going  on 
in  the  textile  mills  of  the  South  when  the  textile  workers  were  being  shot  down 


798  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

in  cold  blood  when  they  were  trying  to  organize.  He  knows  that  all  the  Labor 
Board  was  trying  to  do  was  to  organize  them  and  to  prevent  their  cold-blooded 
murder. 

Senator  Smith.  I  asked  you  a  simple  question,  whether  or  not  the  Communist 
Party  was  fighting  the  Labor  Board,  and  your  answer  was  no,  it  was  not,  as  I 
understand  it? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  will  say  this,  that  the  mere  fact  that  the  Communist  Party  is  for 
or  against  anything  does  not  determine  my  views.  I  am  a  grown  man ;  I  am  a 
citizen  of  this  country.  I  will  make  up  my  mind  on  the  basis  of  my  own  study,  my 
own  experience,  and  I  will  not  be  influenced  by  what  your  views  happen  to  be, 
Senator  Smith.  On  the  whole  I  think  I  am  opposed  to  your  views  on  labor 
matters. 

Nor  will  I  be  influenced  by  the  Communist  Party.  I  will  take  yours  into  con- 
sideration, and  I  will  take  theirs  into  consideration. 

Senator  Smith.  You  will  not  tell  us  whether  or  not  you  are  a  Communist  today. 
You  sit  there  and  refuse  to  say  whether  you  are  a  Communist.  You  expect  us 
to  believe  what  you  say. 

The  Chatbman.  You  have  just  testified  a  moment  ago  that  you  are  a  free  man 
and  a  grown  man  and  so  forth? 

Mr.  Witt.  That  is  right. 

The  Chaibman.  Yet  you  know  that  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  is  not 
a  free  man.  He  is  under  discipline,  under  orders,  and  you  will  not  testify  when 
you  were  down  there  at  that  Board  as  secretary  whether  or  not  you  were  a 
Communist.  We  had  a  member  of  the  Board  before  this  committee,  Edwin 
Smith,  and  he  refused  to  testify  whether  or  not  he  was  a  Communist.  We  have 
heard  enough  from  you.  You  can  put  in  the  record  those  letters,  and  you  are 
excused.    I  have  all  I  want  to  hear  from  you. 

Mr.  Witt.  Do  you  want  these  letters? 

Mr.  Morris.  Yes,  I  will  take  them. 

(The  letters  referred  to  were  marked  as  "Exhibit  No.  219"  and  are  as  follows  :) 

"Exhibit  No.  219 

"Hearings  Before  the  Special  Committee  To  Investigate  National  Labor  Rela- 
tions Board,  House  of  Representatives,  76th  Congress,  3d  Session,  Pursu- 
ant to  House  Resolutions  258  (76th  Cong.) 

[NLKB  exhibit  No.  113,  p.  2708] 

"Letter  from  J.  Warren  Madden,  Chairman,  NLRB  to  all  of  the  ex-members  of 
the  NLRB : 

"  'I  wish  you  would  write  me  your  opinion  of  the  ability,  integi'ity,  and  useful- 
ness to  the  Board  in  your  time,  of  Nathan  Witt.     With  all  of  the  things  that 
are  going  on  I  may  have  occasion  to  make  use  of  your  statement  as  evidence, 
"  'With  best  regards,  I  am, 
"  'Very  truly  yours, 

,  Chairman'." 

"Answers : 

[NLRB  exhibit  No.  108.  p.  2706] 

"  'Shortly  after  I  was  made  Chairman  of  the  T^.RB — the  Board  which  pre- 
ceded yours — I  appointed  Nathan  Witt  a  member  of  our  legal  staff.  He  was  then, 
as  I  remember,  on  the  legal  staff  of  the  AAA.  We  were  in  urgent  need  of  build- 
ing up  our  staff,  and  sought  the  best  we  could  find  in  Washington.  Witt  was  one 
of  these,  and  we  persuaded  him  to  shift  over  to  us.  His  work,  while  I  was 
with  the  Board,  consisted  of  analyzing  records  and  writing  drafts  of  opinions. 
He  impressed  all  of  us  then  with  his  high  intelligence,  accuracy,  thoroughness, 
and  single-minded  devotion  to  his  task.  We  placed  great  confidence  in  him — a 
confidence  which  he  amply  deserved  and  fully  repaid. 
"  'Sincerely, 

"'(Signed)     Lloyd  K.  Garrison'." 

[NLRB  exhibit  No.  109,  p.  2706] 

"  'Dear  Warren  :  You  ask  my  opinion  of  the  ability,  integrity,  and  usefulness 
to  the  Board  in  my  time,  of  Nathan  Witt. 

"  'I  consider  Witt  by  far  one  of  the  ablest  men  connected  with  the  work.  He 
was  an  indefatigable  worker,  with  a  keen  intelligence  and  a  real  understanding 
of  the  intricate  problems  presented. 


STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  799 

•'  'Use  this  letter  any  way  you  want,  and  use  it  emphatically, 

"  'Sincerely  yours, 

"'(Signed)  Fbancis  Biddle.'  " 

[NLRB  exhibit  No.  110,  p.  2706] 

"  'My  Dear  Mr.  Madden  :  Nathan  Witt  was  a  member  of  the  legal  staff  as- 
sembled by  the  first  Labor  Relations  Board,  of  which  I  was  a  member.  It  is 
chiefly  as  a  member  of  that  staff  during  1934-35  that  I  have  known  him.  He  was 
one  of  the  ablest  and  most  meritorious  of  the  group.  He  showed  unsually  good 
ability,  was  very  industrious,  and  exceedingly  helpful.  He  knew  the  Board's 
job  accurately  and  in  his  work  displayed  a  keen  sense  of  justice  and  good 
judgment. 

"  'I  think  that  Witt  was  the  logical  choice  for  the  secretaryship  when  Benedict 
Wolf  resigned,  but  I  have  too  little  knowledge  of  his  work  as  secretary  to  express 
a  judgment  of  his  performance  in  his  present  capacity, 
"  'Sincerely  yours, 

"  '(Signed)  H.  A.  Mnxis.'  " 

[NLRB  exhibit  No.  Ill,  pp.  2706-2707], 

"  'My  Dear  Mk.  Madden  :  Apropos  of  your  inquiry  about  my  opinion  of  Mr, 
Nathan  Witt's  ability,  integrity,  and  usefulness  to  the  Board  during  my  time, 
I  think  you  will  recall  that,  while  I  was  a  member  of  the  Board,  Mr.  Witt,  with 
the  title  of  Assistant  General  Counsel,  served  as  head  of  the  Case  Review  Section, 
As  I  recall  it  now,  he  had  been  a  member  of  the  legal  staff  of  the  preceding 
Board.  The  constitutionality  of  the  act  had  been  challenged  formally  in  almost 
every  case  that  came  before  the  Board,  and  informally  by  a  considerable  group 
of  lawyers  in  a  pamphlet  that  got  wide  circulation  in  industry.  This  gratuitous 
legal  advice  to  a  widespread  group  of  businessmen  that  they  need  pay  no  atten- 
tion to  a  law  they  didn't  like  made  the  work  of  the  Board  increasingly  diflBeult. 
The  Board  had  the  choice  of  accepting  the  views  of  these  lawyers  and  quitting, 
or  going  ahead  with  cases  brought  by  aggrieved  working  men  and  women  with 
full  knowledge  that  every  decision  would  be  reviewed  by  the  courts,  and  every 
action  checked  by  those  who  had  fought  the  passage  of  the  law  when  it  was  before 
the  Congress. 

"  'It  was  in  this  atmosphere  that  we  held  our  hearings  and  reviewed  the  testi- 
mony as  the  cases  came  through. 

"  'As  head  of  the  Review  Section,  you  will  recall  we  had  daily  conferences  with 
Mr.  Witt  and  his  assistants  to  check  and  recheck  testimony  that  had  a  bearing  on 
the  cases  that  came  before  the  Board.  I  can  recall  no  case  with  which  Mr.  Witt 
was  not  thoroughly  familiar  as  a  result  of  careful  study.  I  found  him  thoroughly 
acquainted  with  the  law  and  with  debates  on  the  hearings  that  preceded  the 
passage  of  the  law. 

"  'I  never  had  occasion  to  question  Mr.  Witt's  genuine  devotion  to  his  job  or 
to  the  purposes  of  the  law.  In  the  development  of  young  men  and  in  the  train- 
ing of  older  men  in  special  administrative  law,  he  displayed  inspiring  leadership. 
His  usefulness  to  the  Board  and  to  the  objectives  of  the  law  was  demonstrated 
day  after  day. 

"  'I  thought  when  the  Supreme  Court  sustained  the  Board  in  so  many  of  those 
early  cases  over  which  you,  he,  and  Ed  Smith,  Charles  Fahy,  Bob  Watts,  and  I 
sweated  through  so  many  months,  the  opponents  of  the  law  would  accept  the 
judgment  of  the  Supreme  Court  and  leave  the  Board  free  to  function  under  the 
law.  Apparently  I  was  mistaken. 
"  'Sincerely, 

"'(Signed)     John  M.  Carmody,  Administrator.'" 

[NLRB  exhibit  No.  112,  p.  2707] 

"  'My  Dear  Chairman  Madden  :  Reference  is  made  to  your  inquiry  regarding 
my  opinion  of  Nathan  Witt,  who  served  as  Assistant  General  Counsel  and  secre- 
tary of  the  Board  during  my  tenure  in  oflBce. 

"  'Mr.  Witt,  in  my  opinion,  has  demonstrated  that  he  is  a  person  of  exceptional 
ability  and  reliability.  His  has  been  an  arduous  task  under  most  trying  circum- 
stances, requiring  keen  judgment,  resourcefulness,  and  energy.  I  believe  that 
he  is  possessed  of,  and  has  applied,  all  of  these  necessary  attributes  to  the  many 


800  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

complex  problems  with  which  he  has  been  confronted.     I  firmly  believe  that  he 
has  rendered  an  invaluable  service  to  the  Board. 

"  'Kindest  personal  regards  to  you  and  your  colleagues. 
"  'Very  sincerely, 

"'(Signed)     Donald  Wakefield  Smith.'" 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Witt,  did  you  ever  order  white  lilies  sent  to 
Wliittaker  Chambers? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  am  really  shocked  that  a  committee  of  the  United 
States  has  descended  to  this.  The  answer,  of  course,  is,  "No,"  Mr. 
Sourwine ;  and  I  am  delighted  to  have  this  in  the  record  to  display  to 
the  people  I  will  continue  to  talk  to  about  the  functioning  of  commit- 
tees, that  the  committee  has  permitted  its  counsel  to  descend  to  this 
level.  It  makes  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  a  laughingstock,  but 
go  ahead,  if  you  want  to. 

Senator  McClellan.  May  the  Chair  say  to  you  that  the  committee 
is  not  particularly  interested  in  your  opinions  when  you  fail  and  refuse 
to  answer  questions  that  might  help  this  committee  perform  its  func- 
tions to  guard  the  internal  security  of  this  country. 

I  am  not  going  to  countenance  a  lecture.  You  were  asked  a  question 
by  counsel.  If  there  is  any  objection,  the  Chair  will  rule.  I  don't 
propose  to  have  a  lecture. 

Proceed. 

Mr.  Witt.  Well,  just  so  because  the  question  has  what  lawyers  used 
to  call  a  negative  pregnant,  Mr.  Sourwine ;  let  there  be  no  misunder- 
standing. 

I  never  ordered  or  paid  for  either  white  lilies  or  yellow  lilies  or 
Easter  lilies  or  water  lilies  or  any  kind  of  flower  sent  to  Wliittaker 
Chambers.  All  I  have  ever  had  to  do  with  flowers  is  that  I  have  sent 
them  occasionally  to  my  wife  and  other  ladies  over  the  years,  whom  I 
have  felt  like  sending  flowers  to. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Just  so  there  can  be  no  misunderstanding  in  the 
record,  I  do  not  mean  the  word  "order"  in  that  question  in  the  sense 
of  you  yourself  giving  any  order  to  a  store. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  know  what  you  are  talking  about. 

Mr.  SouEWiNE.  Suggesting  or  requiring  or  instructing  that  white 
lilies  be  sent  to  Whittaker  Chambers. 

Mr.  Witt.  I  never  gave,  Mr.  Sourwine — just  let's  be  explicit,  I 
never  gave — John  Lautner  or  John  Smith  or  Bob  Jones  or  anybody 
in  the  world  either  $100  or  $200  or  $5  to  see  that  Whittaker  Chambers 
had  flowers  which  he  would  not  be  able  to  appreciate.  I  never  did 
that.    I  just  never  did  that.    I  just  never  did  it,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Now,  let's  go  to  something  else. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Well,  let's  get  some  answers  on  the  record  here  that 
it  will  be  perfectly  clear. 

Mr.  Witt.  You  ask  that  in  as  many  ways  as  you  want  to  ask  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  invalidated  your  denial  a  moment  ago  by  the 
last  few  words  that  you  added. 

Mr.  Witt.  Go  ahead. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now,  let  me  ask  you,  so  that  it  will  be  clear  on  the 
record.  Did  you  in  late  August  or  early  September  1945  instruct 
a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  to  locate  Chambers  at  the  offices 
of  Time  magazine  and  have  sent  to  him  a  big  bunch  of  white  lilies  to 
intimidate  him? 

Mr.  Wrrr.  I  guess  I've  run  out  of  indignation.  I  am  just  sad  now, 
Mr.  Sourwine,  just  sad. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  801 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  All  you  have  to  do  is  say,  "No,"  and  we  will  go  on 
with  the  next  question. 

Mr.  Witt.  It  is  hard  for  me  to  say  "No"  as  an  American  citizen  and 
as  a  lawyer.  You  don't  even  have  the  date  of  the  alleged  incident 
straight. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  know  that. 

Mr.  Witt.  No,  no. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  What  is  the  correct  date  of  the  alleged  incident,. 

Mr.  Witt? 

Mr.  Witt.  As  testified  to,  as  was  reported  to  me  ? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  It  is  your  term,  "the  alleged  incident." 

Mr.  Witt.  The  incident  as  reported  to  me,  as  testified  to  by  one 
John  Lautner  in  the  hearing  before  the  Subversive  Activities  Com- 
trol  Board,  is  that  I  gave  him  some  money  to  send  flowers  to  AVliittaker 
Chambers.  That  is  the  way  I  have  known  it  in  these  last  2  or  3  years 
since  I  have  heard  about  it. 

"VVlien  it  was  reported  to  me,  I  felt  sad  that  America  had  come  to 
such  a  pass.  I  feel  even  sadder  now,  but  that  is  because  I  am  older 
and  a  little  tired. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  The  question  is,  "Wliat  was  the  date,  Mr.  Witt  ?  ^ 

Mr.  Witt.  The  date  that  Lautner  gave  I  thought  related  to  the  time 
Chambers  first  came  out  from  under  the  woodwork  or  from  out  of  the 
pumpkin  in  1948,  sometime. 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  Well,  now,  answer  this  question :  Did  you  in  late 
August  or  early  September  1948,  instruct  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party  to  locate  Chambers  at  the  offices  of  Time  magazine  and  have 
sent  to  him  a  big  bunch  of  white  lilies  to  intimidate  him? 

Mr.  Witt.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  at  or  about  that  time  give  the  sum  of  $100 
to  any  person  for  expenses  in  arranging  to  have  lilies  sent  to  Whittaker 
Chambers  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  present  when  John  Lautner  testified  with 
regard  to  this  matter  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  whether  he  was  under  oath  at  the 
time? 

Mr.  Witt.  Matusow  was  under  oath  when  he  testified  against  Clin- 
ton Jencks  in  January  1954.  He  was  under  oath  on  these  dozens  of 
other  occasions  when  he  told  the  lie  he  has  now  admitted  to,  so  I  am 
not  impressed  by  the  fact  that  one  John  Lautner  was  under  oath. 

Mr.  SoTJRwiNE.  Are  you  stating  he  was  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  was  told  he  testified  about  it.  I  wasn't  there,  I  didn't 
look  at  the  transcript,  I  just  wasn't  interested.  It  just  made  me  too 
sad  and  I  just  have  too  much  to  do  to  fuss  with  that  kind  of  nonsense. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you,  Mr.  Witt,  thereafter,  and  after  the  pump- 
kin paper  story  had  broken  in  the  public  press,  order  the  sending  of 
the  lilies  stopped? 

Mr.  Witt.  No. 

No  matter  how  many  ways  you  put  this  lilies  business,  the  answer 
is  going  to  be  "No."    We  can  save  time,  or  you  can  make  them  roses. 

Mr.  SouRWTNE.  I  have  one  more  question  about  the  lilies. 

Mr.  WiTi'.  You  are  in  control  of  it. 


802  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  thereafter  meet  the  man  to  whom  you  had 
given  the  $100  and  receive  back  from  him  $90  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No.  That  is  for  the  lilies  we  are  talking  about,  Mr. 
Sourwine ;  that  is  for  the  lilies,  for  the  alleged  lilies. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you,  Mr.  Witt,  cooperated  in  a  legal  capacity 
with  the  Civil  Rights  Congress  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  National  Federation  for  Constitutional  Liber- 
ties? 

Mr.  Witt.  I  thought  I  answered  that.  I  was  one  of  their  counsel, 
and  member  of  their  board. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  New  York  Conference  for  Inalienable  Rights? 

Mr.  Witt.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Getting  back  to  the  lilies,  Mr.  Witt;  is  there  any 
difference  in  your  answers  whether  you  were  talking  about  red  lilies 
or  white  lilies,  or  any  other  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No.  I  tried  to  make  that  clear,  not  only  lilies  but  any 
other  species  of  flowers. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  are  making  a  categorical  denial  of  ever  having 
had  anything  to  do  with  the  sending  of  any  lilies  or  instructions  to 
send  any  lilies  to  Whittaker  Chambers  for  any  purpose,  at  any  time  ? 

Mr.  Witt.  No  matter  how  liars  and  degenerates  so  testify  under 
oath. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  have  no  more  questions  of  this  witness,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  witness  is  excused. 

Mr.  Witt.  Thank  you,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  Call  your  next  witness. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Mandel  Terman. 

Senator  McClellan.  Will  you  stand  and  be  sworn,  please,  sir? 

You  do  solemnly  swear  that  the  evidence  you  shall  give  before  this 
Senate  investigating  subcommittee  will  be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth, 
and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help  you  God  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  do,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  Have  a  seat. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MANDEL  A.  TERMAN,  ACCOMPANIED  BY  JOSEPH 

POEER,  HIS  ATTORNEY 

Senator  McClellan.  Mr.  Terman,  is  it  your  wish  that  the  lights 
and  television  be  kept  off  during  your  testimony  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  would  appreciate  it  very  much,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  photographers  will  observe  the  request. 

Mr.  Terman.  And  I  would  also  like,  Mr.  Senator  McClellan,  to 
read  a  statement  which  I  have  prepared  here  for  this  committee. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Was  this  statement  transmitted  to  the  committee 
24  hours  in  advance  of  your  testimony  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  No ;  it  was  not,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  committee  rule  requires  that,  sir.  May  I  ask 
if  you  have  a  statement,  you  send  it  forward  now.  The  committee 
will  determine  in  executive  session  whether  to  put  it  in  the  record. 

Mr.  Terman,  will  you  give  your  full  name  and  your  address,  please, 
sir? 

Mr.  Terman.  Mandel  A.  Terman.  My  address  is  660  Irving  Park 
Boulevard,  Chicago,  111. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  803 

Mr,  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Terman,  you  have  been  given  a  record  of  your 
affiliations  with  organizations  cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney 
General  or  the  House  Committee  on  Un-American  Activities  with 
references  for  the  same  and  it  was  indicated  to  you  that  you  would 
be  asked  to  produce  it  and  to  record  during  your  testimony  in  what 
specific  instances,  if  any,  you  questioned  the  accuracy  of  the  record. 

Would  you  do  that  now,  please  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  This  memorandum  that  is  attached  to  it  says : 

In  the  interests  of  saving  time  the  attached  memorandum  is  being  furnished 
to  you  in  advance  of  your  testimony. 

You  will  be  asked  whether  there  are  any  statements  in  it  that  you  wish  to 
testify  are  false  or  inaccurate. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  That's  right. 

Mr.  Terman.  And,  Mr.  Sourwine,  I  do  not  wish  to  testify  either 
way,  sir. 

Mr.  SoTJRwiNE.  Very  good,  sir.  I  might  state,  Mr.  Chairman,  that 
this  procedure  was  suggested  by  Mr.  Witt  as  a  possible  method  of 
saving  time  in  his  own  case. 

It  seemed  like  a  good  suggestion  and  the  committee  has  adopted  it 
with  other  witnesses.  May  I  ask  that  this  statement  may  be  put  in 
the  record  at  this  time  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  Does  the  Chair  understand  that  the  witness 
has  a  copy  of  this  statement  before  him  ? 

Mr.  Ter3Han.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  This  is  the  statement  concerning  which  the  witness 
just  said  he  had  no  desire  to  testify  concerning  anything  in  the  state- 
ment. This  is  a  statement  prepared  under  my  direction  from  sources 
available  to  the  committee. 

Senator  McClellan.  It  may  be  incorporated  in  the  record. 

I  perhaps  misunderstood.  You  said  you  had  no  desire  to  deny  any 
of  this  statement  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  To  testify  either  way,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  That  is  what  I  understood  you  to  say  that 
you  did  not  care  to  testify  either  way.     All  right. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  55"  and  ap- 
pears below :) 

Exhibit  No.  55 

Mandel  Allen  Teeman 

Financial  contributor,  Abraham  Lincoln  School  in  1943,  1944,  and  1946  (cited 
as  subversive  by  the  Attorney  General,  December  4,  1947). 

Supporter,  American  Committee  for  the  Settlement  of  Jews  in  Birobidjan,  Inc. 
(cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney  General,  April  1,  1954). 

Financial  contributor,  American  Committee  for  Spanish  Freedom  (cited  as 
subversive  by  the  Attox-ney  General,  April  27,  1949). 

Financial  contributor,  American  Peace  Crasade  in  1954  (cited  as  subversive  by 
the  Attorney  General,  April  1,  1954). 

Supporter,  American  Slav  Congress  (cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney 
General,  June  1  and  September  21, 1948). 

Chairman  of  board  of  directors,  Chicago  Council  of  American-Soviet  Friend- 
ship, affiliated  with  the  National  Council  of  American-Soviet  Friendship  (cited 
as  subversive  by  the  Attorney  General,  December  4,  1947,  and  September  21. 
1948). 

Supporter,  Civil  Rights  Congress  (cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney  General, 
December  4,  1947,  and  September  21,  1948). 

Supporter,  Chicago  Council  of  the  Arts,  Sciences,  and  Professions,  affiliated 
with  the  National  Council  of  the  Arts,  Sciences,  and  Professions  (cited  as  sub- 


804  STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

versive  by  the  House  Committee  on  Un-American  Activities  in  its  report  of 
April  19,  1949). 

Member,  International  Worlcers  Order  (cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney 
General,  December  4,  1947,  and  September  21,  1948). 

Supporter,  Midwest  Conference  To  Repeal  the  McCarran  Act. 

Supporter,  Midwest  Committee  for  Protection  of  Foreisn  B;)rn,  aflSliated  with 
the  American  Committee  for  Protection  of  Foreign  Born  (cited  as  subversive 
by  the  Attorney  General,  June  1,  1948,  and  September  21, 1948). 

Supporter,  National  Federation  for  Constitutional  Liberties  (cited  as  subversive 
by  the  Attorney  General,  December  4,  1947,  and  September  21,  1948). 

Supporter,  Russian  War  Relief. 

Member,  American  Youth  for  Democracy  in  1945  (cited  as  subversive  by  the 
Attorney  General,  December  4,  1947,  and  September  21,  1948). 

Supporter,  Chicago  Committee  To  Secure  Justice  for  the  Rosenbergs  in  1952 
and  1953. 

Supporter,  Progressive  Citizens  of  America,  aflBliated  with  the  National 
Council  of  the  Arts,  Sciences,  and  Professions. 

Financial  Contributor,  Communist  Party,  USA,  in  1941  and  1945  (cited  as 
subversive  by  the  Attorney  General,  December  4,  1947,  and  September  21,  1948). 

Subscriber  to  The  Worker  (cited  as  subversive  by  the  House  Committee  on 
Un-American  Activities  on  March  29,  1944). 

Member,  Joint  Anti-Fascist  Refugee  Committee  (cited  as  subversive  by  the 
Attorney  General,  December  4,  1947,  and  September  21,  1948). 

U.  S.  S.  R.  Information  Bureau,  on  mailing  list. 

Writer  of  letter  to  the  Secretary  of  State  protesting  against  travel  restrictions 
to  Communist  countries  of  Eastern  Europe  (Daily  Worker,  May  22,  1952,  p.  8). 

Sponsor,  Conference  for  World  Peace  Through  Negotiations  in  1953,  affiliated 
with  the  American  Peace  Crusade. 

Supporter,  Jewish  Life  (cited  as  a  subversive  publication  by  the  California 
Committee  on  Un-American  Activities  Report,  1948). 

American  Peace  Crusade  (Illinois  assembly)  :  Sponsor  (cited  as  subversive  by 
the  Attorney  General).  Photostat  of  letterhead  dated  June  21,  1952;  also  letter- 
head dated  April  12,  1951. 

American  Peace  Crusade :  Signer  of  call  for  meeting  to  be  held  September  12  at 
UE  Hall,  Chicago,  to  launch  national  referendum  for  a  ceasefire  in  Korea.  Daily 
Worker,  September  3,  1952,  page  2. 

Chicago  welcoming  committee  for  the  delegates  to  the  World  Peace  Congress 
(cited  as  subversive  by  the  House  Committee  on  Un-American  Activities)  :  Ini- 
tiating sponsor.  Handbill:  Destination  Peace,  dated  January  12,  1951,  also 
mimeographed  literature  of  the  Destination  Peace  Meeting,  January  12,  1951, 

Civil  Rights  Congress  of  Illinois  mass  meeting,  Orchestra  Hall,  November  21, 
1947,  Chicago:  Financial  contributor  (cited  as  subversive  by  tlie  Attorney 
Oeneral ) . 

Civil  Rights  Congress,  Illinois :  Sponsor.  Photostat  of  letterhead  dated  Decem- 
ber 18, 1948  (cited  as  subversive  by  the  Attorney  General). 

Midwest  Committee  for  Protection  of  Foreign  Born:  Sponsor.  Call  to  a 
midwest  conference  to  defend  the  Bill  of  Rights  and  for  the  defense  of  foreign 
born.  May  18,  1952,  Chicago. 

Midwest  Committee  for  Protection  of  Foreign  Born :  Sponsor.  Letterhead  of 
sixth  annual  conference,  Midwest  Committee  *  *  *  May  16,  1954,  Chicago. 

Midwest  Committee  for  Protection  of  Foreign  Born  :  Sponsor.  Undated  letter- 
head announcing  a  public  meeting  on  the  McCarran-Walter  law,  January  30, 
19.53,  United  Electrical  Workers  Hall,  Chicago. 

National  Council  of  American-Soviet  Friendship,  Cliicago  Council  (cited  as 
subversive  by  the  Attorney  General)  :  Chairman,  board  of  directors.  Photostat 
of  letterhead  March  1952. 

Chicago  Council  of  American-Soviet  Friendship:  Member  of  board  of  directors. 
Photostat  of  letterhead  September  17,  1951. 

Chicago  Council  of  American-Soviet  Friendship:  To  lecture  June  18  on  the 
Moscow  International  Economic  Conference.  Printed  circular  concerning  a 
series  of  eight  lectures  on  the  Soviet  Union  Today,  April  30-June  18,  1952,  at  the 
ASP  Hall. 

Currently  resides  in  Chicago,  111.,  and  has  business  interests  in  the  Granville 
Manor  Convalescent  Home  and  Waveland  Manor  Convalescent  Home,  and  the 
Cinema  Annex  Theater,  which  serves  as  an  outlet  for  Russian  and  Polish  films 
in  the  Chicago  area.  He  liquidated  his  interest  in  the  Terman  Tire  &  Supply 
Co.  in  1951. 


STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  805 

His  wife  Gean  and  his  brothers  Jacob,  Sidney,  and  Louis  have  all  been  identi- 
fied as  members  or  contacts  of  the  Communist  Party.  Terman  has  also  been 
a  contributor  to  the  Communist  Party  in  1941  and  1945. 

Connected  with  the  Washington  Park  Forum. 

Reported  to  have  been  a  subscriber  to  the  National  Guardian. 

Is  known  to  have  contacted  Russian  officials.  Gave  his  automobile  to  Russia 
in  1945. 

In  1952  he  attempted  to  secure  the  attendance  of  a  delegate  to  a  peace  confer- 
ence in  Russia. 

On  June  26,  1954,  honored  by  a  testimonial  dinner  in  Chicago  for  fighting  for 
peace  and  the  defense  of  civil  rights  of  the  foreign  born. 

Attended  the  American  Peace  Crusade  Conference  in  Chicago  in  1951,  according 
to  a  report  published  by  the  American  Legion  in  August  1951. 

In  1950  he  is  reported  to  have  said  he  would  "gladly  die  for  Russia." 

In  1944  loaned  $5,000  to  the  Abraham  Lincoln  School. 

In  1954  canceled  a  $150  debt  owed  him  by  the  American  Peace  Crusade. 

Senator  Daniel.  Are  we  to  take  it  that  these  statements  are  correct? 

Mr.  Terjmak.  I  have  made  no  admissions,  Senator. 

Senator  McClellan.  That  was  the  Chair's  understanding,  that  you 
said  you  did  not  desire  to  testify  regarding  tlie  statements  either  way. 

Mr.  Termax.  According  to  this  memorandum  that  is  attached  here, 
they  said,  "Do  you  wish  to  testify  ?"  and  I  said  "I  do  not  wish  to  testify 
either  way." 

Senator  McClellan.  All  right;  you  may  proceed. 

Mr.  SoiTR^\aisrE.  Do  you  know  Harvey  Matusow? 

Mr.  Terman.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  Albert  E.  Kahn? 

Mr.  Terjnian.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  contribute  money  to  Cameron  &  Kahn,  the 
publishing  firm? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  did  not  contribute  money  to  Cameron  &  Kahn  but  I 
made  a  loan  to  Cameron  &  Kahn. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Wlien  was  that? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  don't  know  the  exact  date,  but  I  would  say  approxi- 
mately 2  years  ago. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Has  that  money  been  returned  to  you  or  repaid  in 
whole  or  in  part? 

Mr.  Terman.  No,  sir ;  but  I  received  notes  for  it,  bearing  4  percent 
interest. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  TVliat  was  the  amount  of  that  loan  ? 

Mr.  Tertian.  It  was  two  separate  loans.  The  first  one  was  $500 
and  the  next  one  I  believe  was  $500. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  For  a  total  of  $1,000? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  did  you  receive  separate  notes,  2  notes  for 
$500  each? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  thought  I  did,  but  when  I  went  to  look  for  them 
I  found  four  $100  notes  which  I  have  with  me;  if  you  want  me  to 
produce  them  in  evidence,  I  will  be  glad  to. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  is  all  you  have  in  the  way  of  notes  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  how  are  those  notes  dated,  sir,  and  what  is  the 
maturity  on  them  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Well,  I  will  look.  It  will  take  a  minute.  They  are 
dated  September  23, 1953,  and  the  first  one  says,  "One  year,  payable  to 
Mandel  Terman,  1  year  after  date  of  the  undersigned  promise" — 


806  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

pardon  me,  "1  year  after  date  the  undersigned  promises  to  pay  to  the 
order  of  Mandel  Terman  $100  at  an  interest  of  4  percent  per  annmn, 
signed  by  Angus  Cameron  and  Albert  Kalm,"  and  their  corporate 
seal  is  on  here,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Are  the  other  notes  all  the  same  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes,  sir.  Well,  they  are  not  the  same  maturity 
date.    This  one  is  1  year  and  a  half  after  date. 

You  can  tell  they  are  not  lawyers.  And  1  year  and  a  quarter  after 
date  and  1  year  and  three-quarters. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  have  any  of  those  notes  been  paid? 

Mr.  Terman.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Has  the  interest  been  paid  on  any  of  those  four 
notes  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  No,  sir ;  for  the  simple  reason  that  they  claimed  they 
were  not  able  to  pay  them.     I  have  asked  for  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  have  asked  for  it? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  How  many  times  have  you  asked  them  to  pay  the 
notes? 

Mr.  Terman.  Every  time  I  have  an  opportunity. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  United  States  mails  are  always  available  to 
you.    Have  you  ever  asked  for  it  by  mail  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  No.  I  frankly  was  not  too  much  concerned  about  it 
because  at  the  time  I  did  not  need  the  money  and  I  loaned  it  actually 
because  Albert  Kahn  was  a  friend  of  mine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You,  as  a  matter  of  fact  then,  have  never  made 
formal  demand  for  the  payment  of  these  notes ;  have  you  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  have  never  turned  them  over  to  an  attorney  for 
collection. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  have  any  other  notes  from  these 
gentlemen  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  assume  I  did,  but,  as  I  said,  I  tried  to  find  them 
in  my  records  and  I  was  not  able  to  find  them. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Where  did  you  find  these  notes  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  have  a  little  box  at  home  and  I  throw  my  stuff  in 
there  and  I  found  these  4  notes — I  don't  know,  there  should  have  been 
5  anyway,  in  any  case,  because  I  never  loaned  him  $400  at  a  time. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  gave  Cameron  &  Kahn  $500  as  a  loan  about  the 
1st  of  August  1953,  is  that  right? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  would  not  be  a  bit  surprised  because  these  notes  are 
dated  September  23,  so  it  is  around  that  date. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  also  gave  or  loaned  Cameron  &  Kahn  $500  in 
September  1953,  is  that  right  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  It  is  very  possible,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  help  to  raise  money  from  other  persons  for 
the  firm  of  Cameron  &  Kahn  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  that  question  under  the  privilege 
granted  me  by  the  fifth  amendment  as  a  free  American  not  to  be  a 
witness  against  myself. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  feel  that  there  is  anything  criminal  in  at- 
tempting to  raise  money  from  others  for  a  publishing  firm  to  which 
you  yourself  are  freely  willing  to  testify  respecting  your  own  contribu- 
tion? 


STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  807 

Mr.  Terjvian.  Frankly,  gentlemen,  I  am  very  much  baffled  by  this 
procedure.  I  have  been  a  businessman  all  my  life,  and  for  32  years  I 
have  made  loans  and  I  have  given  credit  and  I  have  never  been  chal- 
lenged by  any  committee  before,  so  I  am  really  shocked  and  I  can't 
understand  it. 

Mr.  SouR"vviNE.  Well,  that  doesn't  answer  my  question.  I  want  to 
know  if  you  anticipate  any  prosecution  of  yourself,  criminal  prosecu- 
tion, because  of  anything  you  might  tell  us  about  raising  money  for 
the  publishing  firm  of  Cameron  &  Kahn  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Pardon  me,  sir ;  I  have  to  take  a  pill. 

(The  witness  consulted  with  his  attorney.) 

Mr.  Terman.  As  I  said  before,  Mr.  Sourwine,  this  is  my  first  ex- 
perience before  a  committee  of  this  kind  and  as  a  businessman  I  really 
never  anticipated  ever  getting  into  troublemaking  loans,  and  I  feel 
that  I  must  exercise  my  rights  as  an  American  to  take  my  privilege 
imder  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  am  not  challenging  j^our  right  at  all.  I  am  only 
making  the  inquiry  which  it  is  the  right  of  this  forum  to  make  as  to 
whether  in  refusing  to  answer  that  question,  you  honestly  fear  that 
a  truthful  answer  to  it  would  form  at  least  a  link  in  a  chain. 

Mr.  Terman.  I  really  don't  know.  I  frankly  don't  know — I  have 
been  reading  an  awful  lot  of  stuff  in  the  papers  about  these  hearings, 
and  believe  me,  it  is  not  a  good  experience  to  appear  here.  I  would 
rather  be  working. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  It  is  clear  you  are  not  ashamed  of  having  loaned 
money  to  Cameron  &  Kahn. 

Mr.  Terman.  I  certainly  am  not.    In  fact  I  am  proud  of  the  fact. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  ashamed  of  having  had  anything  to  do  with 
raising  money  from  other  persons  for  Cameron  &  Kahn  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  reasons  I  stated  before. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  have  anything  to  do  with  the  giving  of  $200 
to  Cameron  &  Kahn  by  Elmer  C.  Segal  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  reasons  I  have  stated 
before. 

Mr.  Sour^vine.  Do  you  know  Elmer  C.  Segal  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  reasons  I  have  stated 
before. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  have  anything  to  do  with  the  giving  of 
money  to  Cameron  &  Kahn  in  the  amount  of  $250  more  or  less  by 
Walter  Kaplan,  of  Chicago  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons,  Mr.  Chair- 
man. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  have  anything  to  do  with  the  giving  of 
money  to  Cameron  &  Kahn  on  September  25,  1953,  in  the  amount 
of  $300  more  or  less  by  S.  Levinson,  of  Chicago? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  reasons  I  have  stated 
before. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  Mr.  Kaplan  and  Mr.  Levinson? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  "\'\nien  you  say  for  the  same  reasons,  you  mean 
because  you  are  claiming  your  privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment 
not  to  be  required  to  testify  against  yourself  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Correct,  sir. 


808  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  have  anything  to  do  with  the  giving  of  a 
sum  of  money,  $250  more  or  less,  to  Cameron  &  Kahn  on  September 
25,  1953,  by  Boris  A.  Brail? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Do  you  have  anything  to  do  with  the  giving  of  a 
sum  of  money,  $300  more  or  less,  by  Peter  A.  Levine  to  the  firm  of 
Cameron  &  Kahn  or  for  its  behalf  on  September  25,  1953  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  have  anything  to  do  with  this  same  Boris 
Brail  giving  Cameron  &  Kahn  $297.54  on  October  13,  1953  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Senator  McClexlan.  The  Chair  would  like  to  ask  one  question. 

Were  these  sums  or  any  others  that  you  may  have  raised  and  given 
to  them  raised  and  given  to  them  for  the  purpose  of  publishing 
Communist  literature? 

Mr.  Terman.  First  of  all,  I  did  not  admit  that  I  have  raised  money 
for  Cameron  &  Kahn.  I  have  only  admitted  that  I  made  a  loan  to 
Cameron  &  Kahn,  and  as  far  as  I  know  the  books  that  they  have 
published  were  not  Communist  literature. 

Senator  McClellan.  Proceed. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  know,  sir,  that  the  books  of  Cameron  & 
Kahn  showed,  in  their  receipts  column,  2  items  of  $500  as  received 
from  you  on  the  dates  indicated  by  my  previous  questions,  in  August 
and  September? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  am  sorry,  sir,  I  missed  that. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  asked  you  whether  you  knew  that  the  books  of 
Cameron  &  Kahn  showed  receipts  of  two  $500  items  from  you  on  the 
dates  indicated  by  my  previous  questions  respectively  August  and 
September  1953. 

Mr.  Terman.  I  have  never  seen  their  books,  sir.    - 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Are  you,  sir,  interested  in  Granville  Manor  Con- 
valescent Home  and  Waveland  Manor  Convalescent  Home  and  the 
Cinema  Annex  Theater  ?  -,  ^         i 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes;  the  Granville  Manor  and  Waveland  Convales- 
cent Home  are  my  business.  I  am  director  of  the  convalescent  home. 
The  Cinema  Annex  is  a  theater  of  mine.  I  have  loaned  money  to- 
them.    I  am  a  creditor. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  They  owe  you  money  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Large  amounts  of  money  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  $2,000  that  I  know  of. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  a  mortgagee  of  the  Cinema  Annex  Theater? 

Mr.  Terman.  No  ;  but  I  have  notes  from  them. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  have  any  interest  in  the  management  of  that 
theater  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  dictate  policies  or  practices  of  that 

theater  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  No,  sir. 

I  don't  know  what  you  mean  by  dictate  policies  or  practices. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  instruct  what  should  be  done  by  the 
thenter  in  any  wav,  by  the  management  of  the  theater?  _ 

Mr.  Terman.  Well,  I  am  consulted  once  in  a  great  while.  I  am  not 
active  in  the  theater. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  809 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Wlio  owns  the  Cinema  Annex  Theater  in  Chicago? 

Mr.  Terman.  Well,  it  is  a  corporation. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  who  the  principal  stockholders  are? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  know  or — pardon  me — one  moment. 

Could  I  consult  my  counsel  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  You  may. 

(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes ;  I  know  who  the  stockholders  are,  sir. 

Mr,  SouRwiNE.  Will  you  tell  the  committee  who  the  stockholders 
of  the  Cinema  Annex  Theater  are  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  One,  Emil  Marjotta. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Can  you  spell  it  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  believe  it  is  spelled  M-a-r-j-o-t-t-a.  And  one  my 
wife,  Gean  Terman,  and  the  other  one  I  am  not  sure  of,  whether  it  is 
Mrs.  Rosen  or  John  Rosen,  I  don't  know  which  one. 

Mr.  SoTTR^viNE.  How  do  you  spell  that  name  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  R-o-s-e-n. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  he  a  Chicago  man  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  percentage  of  the  stock  does  your  wife  own? 

Mr.  Terman.  A  third. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  the  other  two  own  equally  one-third  each  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes ;  but  wait  Mr.  Sourwine,  what,  did  you  ask  me, 
was  the  name  of  the  corporation  ?    You  mentioned  the  name  of  that  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  We  are  talking  about  the  corporation  which  owns 
the  Cinema  Annex  Theater.  The  name  of  the  corporation  has  never 
been  put  in  the  record.  I  will  be  glad  to  do  so  if  you  want  it.  This 
is  the  corporation  which  owns  the  Cinema  Theater. 

Mr.  Terman.  That  is  right,  yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  formerly  interested  in  the  Terman  Tire 
&  Supply  Co.,  liquidating  your  interests  in  1951? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes ;  I  spent  the  best  part  of  my  life  in  Terman  Tire 
&  Supply  Co. 

In  fact  25  years. 

Mr.  SouRAviNE.  Is  the  Cinema  Annex  Theater  an  outlet  for  Russian 
and  Polish  films  in  the  Chicago  area  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  It  is  an  outlet  for  all  kinds  of  foreign  pictures  and 
musicals. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Does  it  show  Russian  and  Polish  films  primarily? 

Mr.  Terman.  Among  others.     I  would  not  say  primarily ;  no. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  a  member  of  or  otherwise  affiliated 
with  the  Abraham  Lincoln  School  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  my  privileges  as  a  free 
American  not  to  be  a  witness  against  myself  under  the  fifth  amend- 
ment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  a  member  of  or  otherwise  affiliated 
with  the  American  Committee  for  Settlement  of  Jews  in  Birobidzhan  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  a  member  or  affiliated  with  the 
American  Committee  for  Spanish  Freedom  ? 

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

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  a  member  of  or  otherwise  affiliated 
with  any  of  the  following  organizations,  the  American  Peace  Crusade? 

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


810  STRATEGY   AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  The  American  Slav  Congress? 
Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reason. 
Mr.  SouRwiNE.  The  Chicago  Council  of  American  Soviet  Friend- 
ship? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  am  a  member  of  the  Chicago  Council  of  American 
Soviet  Friendship. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  an  officer  of  that  organization  ? 
Mr.  Terman.  I  am  the  chairman. 
Mr.  SouRwiNE.  How  long  have  you  held  that  position  ? 
Mr.  Terman.  I  might  say  that  I  have  been  chairmaai  perhaps  for 
the  past  3  yeai^  and  I  might  say  in  that  connection  that  Gen.  Dwight 
D.  Eisenhower  agreed  with  me  that  the  work  of  the  American  Soviet 
Friendship  was  a  very  important  function  in  a  letter  that  I  presented 
to  your  desk.     You  have  a  letter  from  him  in  connection  with  a  rally 
we  were  going  to  hold  in  Chicago. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  have  presented  no  letter  to  me  on  my  desk. 
Mr.  Terman.  Well,  when  I  handed  that  statement  up  there  was  a 
letter  from  Gen.  Dwight  D.  Eisenhower. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  gave  that  statement  to  the  chairman  of  the 
committee.     I  do  not  have  it  and  have  not  seen  it. 
Mr.  Terman.  Would  you  like  to  see  it,  sir  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Not  at  this  time.     It  is  for  the  committee  to  pass 
upon  and  not  me. 

Mr.  Terman.  I  see,  O.  K. 

Mr.  Souravine.  Is  the  Chicago  Council  of  American  Soviet  Friend- 
ship, to  your  knowledge,  controlled  in  whole  or  in  part  by  the  Com- 
munist Party,  USA  ? 
Mr.  Terman.  No,  sir. 
Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  a  member  of  or  otherwise  affiliated  with 

any  of  the  following  organizations 

Mr.  Terman.  Pardon  me,  Mr.  Sourwine.     Could  I  amplify  that  a 
little  bit? 

The  Chicago  Council  of  American  Soviet  Friendship  is  not  even  a 
part  of  the  National  Council  of  American  Soviet  Friendship.  I  want 
to  get  that  quite  clear.  We  are  an  Illinois  corporation  and  it  was 
founded,  I  believe,  in  1942  by  Prof.  Samuel  Harper,  of  the  University 
of  Chicago. 
Mr.  Sourwine.  '\'\niat  is  its  purpose  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Its  purpose  is  to  promote  peace  and  friendship  be- 
tween the  United  States  and  the  Soviet  Union. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  have  been  associated  with  it  since  its  forma- 
tion? 

Mr.  Terman.  No  ;  I  have  not.     I  was  invited  to  join  the  board  about 
1945. 
Mr.  Sourwine.  Who  invited  you  ? 
Mr.  Terman.  I  believe  it  was  a  Mr.  Leo  Nellis. 
Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  a  member  of  or  otherwise  affiliated 
with  any  of  the  following  organizations:  Chicago  Council  of  Arts 
and  Sciences  and  Professions  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  reasons  I  stated  before. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  Civil  Rights  Congress  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  International  Workers  Order  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMIMUNISM  811 

Mr,  SouRWiNE.  The  Joint  anti-Fascist  Eef  ugee  Committee  5 

Mr.  Terman.  Pardon  me,  sir. 

(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  Terman.  Mr.  Sourwine,  as  all  of  these  organizations  are  on  this 
list,  I  thought  the  purpose  of  this  list  was  to  save  time.  ^VhJ  are  you 
asking  me  all  these  questions  ? 

Mr.  SouRwiXE.  That  is  a  question  which  concerns  the  purposes  of 
the  committee,  sir.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  I  am  being  permitted  by  the 
committee  to  ask  these  questions. 

Continuing  with  the  question  as  to  whether  you  were  ever  a  member 
of  or  otherwise  affiliated  with  the  following  organizations :  The  Joint 
Anti-Fascist  Eef  ugee  Committee  ? 

Mr.  Termax.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  reasons  I  have  stated  before. 

Mr.  SouRwiXE.  That  is,  that  you  are  claiming  your  privilege  under 
the  fifth  amendment  ? 

Mr.  Terjniax.  Under  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  a  witness  against 
myself. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  The  Midwest  Conference  to  repeal  the  McCarran 
Act? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  The  Midwest  Committee  for  the  Protection  of  the 
Foreign  Born  ? 

Mr.  Termax.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  reasons  I  previously  stated. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  The  National  Federation  for  Constitutional  Lib- 
erties ? 

Mr.  Termax^.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  reasons  stated  before. 

Mr.  SouRWiXE.  The  Eussian  War  Eelief  ? 

Mr.  Termax.  Eussian  War  Eelief,  I  was  a  participant. 

Mr.  SouRwix'E.  The  Washington  Park  Forum  ? 

Mr.  Termax.  And  I  might  say  that,  in  a  salute  to  our  Eussian  ally 
in  1945, 1  participated  and  spoke  on  the  same  platform  at  the  Chicago 
Stadium  with  Wintlirop  Aklrich,  who  is  the  present  Ambassador  to 
England,  and  the  mayor  of  the  city  of  Chicago,  the  Postmaster  General 
of  tlie  United  States,  Mr.  Walker,  and  representatives  from  every 
branch  of  the  Armed  Forces  of  the  United  States. 

Mr.  SouRWixE.  You  are  to  be  congratulated  with  regard  to  your 
prominence,  Mr.  Terman.  Were  you  ever  a  member  of,  or  otherwise 
affiliated  with  the  Washington  Park  Forima  ? 

Mr.  Termax.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  my  privilege,  under  the  fifth 
amendment  not  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  With  the  World  Peace  Congress  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  Now,  Mr.  Terman,  is  there  any  significance  in  the 
fact  that  two  organizations  out  of  this  group,  with  which  you  admitted 
affiliation,  are  organizations  concerning  which  you  have  been  able  to 
say  they  were  not  communistically  controlled  ? 

Mr.  Termax.  I  refuse  to  answer  that  question  under  my  privileges 
under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwix-^e.  Are  there  any  of  the  organizations,  concerning 
affiliation  with  which  you  have  refused  to  answer,  which  j^ou  can  say 
are  not  communistically  controlled? 

Mr.  Termax.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  my  privileges  as  stated 
before. 


812  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUlSnSM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  A  moment  ago  j'^ou  volunteered  that  your  wife's 
name  is  Gean.     How  do  you  spell  it  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  G-e-a-n.  And  incidentally,  gentlemen,  I  certainly 
expected  the  Senator  from  Mississippi,  a  Southern  gentleman  who 
respects  a  man's  private  life — my  wife's  name  is  being  badgered 
around  here  and  I  really  resent  that,  gentlemen,  because  I  don't  think 
she  has  any  part  to  play  in  this  picture. 

Mr.  SoTJRwiNE.  Earlier  today  a  few  moments  ago  the  witness  volun- 
teered the  fact  that  his  wife's  name  was  Gean.  I  just  asked  him  how 
to  spell  it. 

Mr.  Teeman.  Well,  I  probably  made  a  mistake  answering  that 
question  because  I  think  that  my  wife's  name  should  not  be  dragged 
into  this  committee  hearing  or  any  other  hearing. 

Mr.  SoTjRWiNE.  Is  your  wife  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  that  and  I  am  very  much  put  out 
about  it  and  I  will  take  the  fifth  amendment  on  that. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  have  any  brothers,  Mr,  Terman? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes,  t  do. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  How  many  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  There  are  four  brothers. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  You  have  three  brothers? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  have  4 ;  there  is  5  boys. 

]\Ir.  SouRwiNE.  What  are  their  names? 

Mr.  Terman.  Jack,  Louis,  Sid,  and  Myer. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Is  your  brother  Myer  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  will  take  the  fifth  amendment  on  that  and  I  think 
this  is  an  awful  thing  to  ask  a  man  to  go  through,  and  because  of  so 
many  matters  running  around  loose  I  have  to  take  this  kind  of  an 
answer. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Is  your  brother  Jacob  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  on  the  privileges  that  I  am  entitled 
to  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Is  your  brother  Sid  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  the  same  privileges. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Is  your  brother  Louis  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  the  same  privileges. 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  Have  you  ever  contributed  to  the  Communist 
Party  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  the  same  privileges. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  subscribe  to  the  Daily  Worker? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  the  privileges  granted  me 
under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  subscribe  to  the  Worker  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  the  privileges  granted  me 
under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  subscribe  to  the  U.  S.  S.  R.  Informa- 
tion Bureau? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  the  privileges  granted  me 
under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  subscribe  to  the  National  Guardian  ? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  813 

^Mr.  Terman".  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  contact  Russian  oflicials? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

]Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  give  your  automobile  to  Russia  in  1945  ? 

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

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  a  sponsor  of  the  Midwest  Committee  for 
Protection  of  the  Foreign  Born  ? 

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

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  chairman  of  the  board  of  directors  of  the 
Chicago  Council  of  American  Soviet  Friendship  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  answered  that  before,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRAviNE.  Did  you  ever  lend  any  money  to  the  Abraham 
Lincoln  School  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  my  privileges  as  a  free  Amer- 
ican under  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

]Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you,  in  fact,  lend  that  school  $5,000  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you,  in  fact,  contribute  to  the  Abraham  Lincoln 
School  in  1943,  1944,  and  1946? 

Mr.  Tertian.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  isn't  it  true  that  the  money  you  loaned  the 
Abraham  Lincoln  School  in  1944  has  never  been  repaid  ? 

Mr.  Terman,  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  a  member  of  the  Progressive  Citizens 
of  America  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  a  member  of  the  American  Youth 
for  Democracy  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons, 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  attend  an  organization  banquet  of  the 
American  Youth  for  Democracy  in  1945? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  a  member  of  the  Joint  Anti-Fascist  Ref- 
ugee Committee? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

^Ir.  Sourwine.  Did  you  attend  the  American  Peace  Crusade  Con- 
ference in  Chicago  in  1951? 

]Mr.  Tfrman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  SouR^\^:NE.  Did  you  give  monev  to  the  Communist  Party  in 
1951  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  contribute  to  the  American  Committee  for 
Spanish  Freedom  in  1951  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  for  the  same  reasons. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you,  Mr.  Terman,  have  any  knowledge  of  a  peace 
conference  held  in  Russia  in  1952  ? 

( The  witness  consulted  with  counsel. ) 

Mr.  Terman,  I  don't  even  know  what  you  are  talking  about. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Terman,  you  are  chairman  and  have  been  for 
3  year?  of  an  organization  devoted  to  peace  and  friendly  relations 
between  the  United  States  and  the  Soviet  Union;  are  you  not? 

Mr.  Terman.  Right. 

Mr.  SouRw^iNE.  I  have  asked  you  if  you  have  any  knowledge  of  a 
peace  conference  held  in  Russia  in  1952. 


814  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Tekman.  I  have  never  heard  of  it. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  attempt  to  get  any  person  to  attend 
a  peace  conference  in  Kussia  in  1952  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  my  privileges  as  a  free 
American  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouKwiNE.  Mr.  Terman,  if  you  never  heard  of  a  peace  con- 
ference held  in  Kussia  in  1952,  you  could  not  possibly  have  tried  to 
get  anyone  to  attend  such  a  peace  conference,  could  you  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  my  privileges  under  the  fifth 
amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  respectfully  suggest  that  the  wit- 
ness by  having  stated  that  he  had  never  heard  of  any  peace  conference 
held  in  Russia  in  1952  has  waived  his  privilege,  his  right  to  claim 
privilege  with  respect  to  the  question  as  to  whether  he  attempted 
to  get  a  person  to  attend  that  peace  conference,  and  I  ask  that  he  be 
ordered  to  answer  that  question. 

The  Chairman.  He  will  be  ordered  to  answer  the  question.  Repeat 
the  question. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  attempt  to  get  any  person  to  attend 
a  peace  conference  held  in  1952  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  will  abide  by  my  refusal. 

The  Chairman.  I  will  order  and  direct  you  to  answer  the  question, 
sir. 

Mr.  Terman.  I  will  take  the  fifth  amendment,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you,  Mr.  Terman,  send  a  letter  to  the  Secretary 
of  State  denouncing  the  State  Department  restriction  on  travel  to 
Eastern  Europe  as  reported  in  the  Daily  Worker  of  May  22,  1952, 
page  8  ? 

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

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  attend  functions  of  the  Chicago  com- 
mittee to  secure  justice  in  the  Rosenberg  case? 

Mr.  Terman  .  I  refuse  to  answer  under  the  same  reason. 

Mr.  Sourwine,  Were  you  a  sponsor  of  the  Conference  for  World 
Peace  through  negotiations  in  1953? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  the  same  reason. 
_Mr.  Sourwine,  Were  you,  Mr.  Terman,  honored  at  a  testimonial 
dinner  in  Chicago  on  June  26, 1954? 

Mr.  Terman.  Yes,  I  was. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  For  what  were  you  honored? 

Mr.  Terman.  For  my  long  work  toward  peace,  friendship,  and 
understanding  between  all  peoples  and  all  races. 

Mr.  Sourwine,  Under  what  auspices  was  that  testimonial  dinner 
held? 

Mr,  Terman,  There  were  no  auspices,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Who  promoted  the  dinner? 

Mr.  Terman.  A  group  of  my  friends. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  who  organized  the  dinner? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  refuse  to  answer  under  my  privileges  under  the  fifth 
amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  honestly  afraid  that  if  vou  name  those  of 
your  friends  who  organized  this  dinner  it  will  form  at  least  a  link 
in  a  chain  to  convict  you  of  something? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  815 

Mr.  Terman.  No;  I  don't  think  it  would  form  a  link  in  a  chain  but 
I  think  my  friends  may  be  badgered  like  I  am  before  this  conmiittee 
if  I  named  them  and  I  don't  want  to  put  my  friends  through  an  ordeal 
that  I  have  to  go  through. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  Mr.  Chairman,  that  is  not  a  proper  reason  for  refus- 
insf  to  answer.  I  ask  that  the  witness  be  directed  to  answer  the 
question. 

The  Chairman.  Repeat  the  question. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  The  question  is :  "Who  are  your  friends  who  organ- 
ized this  dinner? 

The  Chairman,  I  order  you  to  answer  the  question. 

]Mr.  FoRER.  May  we  have  an  explanation  of  just  what  relevancy  that 
has  with  anything  to  do  with  this  hearing  ? 

The  Chairman.  That  is  a  matter  for  determination  of  the  commit- 
tee.   I  order  the  question  to  be  answered. 

Mr.  Terman.  JMr.  Chairman,  no  doubt  you  have  been  honored  by 
dinners  in  the  past.  I  am  sure  for  your  long-distinguished  service  in 
the  Senate  your  friends  have  given  dimiers.  I  don't  see  why  that 
becomes  a  matter  for  this  committee. 

The  Chairman.  I  am  ordering  you  to  answer  the  question,  sir. 

Mr.  Terman.  Well,  I  think  it  is  a  shame  that  a  man's  private  life 
has  to  be  brought  into  this  kind  of  a  hearing. 

The  Chairman.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Terman.  But,  nevertheless,  if  you  want  to  know  who  organized 
the  dinner,  it  was  my  wife  with  a  group  of  her  friends,  and  again 
I  resent  the  fact  that  my  wife  has  to  be  brought  into  this  kind  of  a 
hearing. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  "Wlio  were  the  friends,  Mr.  Terman  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Now,  look,  I  don't  know  who  my  wife's  friends  are. 
There  was  a  group  of  women  that  met.  This  was  a  surprise  party  to 
me.    How  should  I  Iniow  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  If  you  don't  know,  all  you  have  to  do  is  say  so. 

Mr.  Terman.  I  don't  know. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  stating  you  do  not  know  any  of  the  organ- 
izers of  this  dinner  except  that  your  wife  was  one  of  them  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  This  was  a  surprise  party  for  me,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRw^NE.  Are  you  stating  that  you  do  not  know  who  were  any 
of  the  organizers  of  this  dinner  except  that  vour  wife  was  one  of 
them? 

Mr.  Terman.  That  is  a  very  difficult  question.  It  might  have  been 
my  aunts,  my  uncles,  my  brothers,  my  sisters.  I  don't  know,  I  frankly 
don't  know. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Well,  that  is  all?  You  do  not  know  who  any  of 
them  were? 

Mr.  Terman.  Look,  now,  after  they  came  to  the  dinner  I  met  all  my 
friends  there,  so  I  don't  know  who  they  were. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  know  which  ones  of  the  ones  you  met  at  the 
dinner  were  the  organizers  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  No  ;  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you,  Mr.  Terman,  ever  state  that  you  would 
gladly  die  for  Russia  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Positively  and  emphatically  no. 


816  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  a  card-carrying  member  of  the  Commu- 
nist Party  in  1942, 1943, 1944,  and  1945  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  Because  of  the  fact  there  are  too  many  professional 
informers  around  I  will  take  my  privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment 
not  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Does  the  existence  or  nonexistence  of  anyone  cate- 
gorized by  you  as  professional  informer  have  anything  to  do  with  the 
fact  as  to  whether  you  were  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  in 
1942,  1943,  1944,  and  1945? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  don't  understand  that  question. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Does  the  question  of  whether  you  were  a  member 
of  the  Communist  Party  have  anything  to  do  with  the  existence  of 
any  person  who  may  or  may  not  be  an  informer  ? 

Mr.  Terman.  I  still  don't  understand  the  question,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  a  concealed  member  of  the  Communist 
Party  in  1950? 

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

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  planning  to  attend  the  April  30  Conference 
of  the  Midwest  Committee  for  Protection  of  the  Foreign  Born  ? 

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

Mr.  SounwiNE.  I  have  no  more  questions  of  this  witness  but  I  ask 
that  there  be  inserted  in  the  record  at  this  point  an  article  from  the 
Daily  Worker  regarding  the  conference  concerning  which  I  just  asked 
the  witness. 

The  Chairman.  It  will  be  admitted  into  the  record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  56"  and  is  as 
follows:) 

[Daily  Worker,  New  York,  April  14,  1955] 
Cai-l  Midwest  Rally  April  30  on  Foreign  Born 

Chicago,  April  13. — The  Midwest  Committee  for  Protection  of  Foreign  Born 
has  issued  a  call  to  its  annual  conference,  which  will  be  held  in  Chicago  April  30 
at  the  Milda  Hall,  3142  South  Halsted  Street. 

Signed  by  Dr.  Anton  J.  Carlson  and  Prof.  Robert  Morss  Lovett,  conference 
cochairmen,  the  call  states  that  the  purpose  of  the  conference  is  "to  discuss  and 
develop  ways  to  promote  adequate  defense  of  the  rights  of  noncitizens  and 
naturalized  American  citizens,  as  well  as  to  seek  a  speedy  repeal  of  the  Walter- 
McCarran  law  and  its  replacement  by  a  democratic  and  humane  immigi-ation 
and  citizenship  policy." 

The  Midwest  Committee  is  aiding  in  the  defense  of  39  residents  of  4  Midwest 
States  in  deportation  and  denaturalization  proceedings  initiated  on  charges  of 
political  belief  or  affiliation  under  the  Walter-McCarran  law. 

The  Chairman.  Any  questions  ? 

Then  Mr.  Shapiro  is  your  next  witness  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Shapiro,  sir.     He  is  here. 

The  Chairman.  Raise  your  hand.  Do  you  solemnly  swear  the 
testimony  you  are  about  to  give  the  Internal  Security  Subcommittee  of 
the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  of  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  is 
the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help  you  God  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  do. 

The  Chairman.  I  would  like  to  wait  until  Mr.  Forer  returns.  He 
just  stepped  out  for  a  moment. 

( Short  recess. ) 

Senator  Daniel.  The  committee  will  be  in  order.  Mr.  Sourwine, 
proceed. 


STRATEGY    AXD    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  817 

TESTIMONY  OF  EALPH  N.  SHAPIRO,  ACCOMPANIED  BY  JOSEPH 

FORER,  HIS  ATTORNEY 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Will  you  give  your  full  name  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Kalpli  Shapiro. 

Mr.  SoTjRwiNE.  Do  you  have  a  middle  initial  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  N,  as  in  Nathan. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  does  that  stand  for  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Noah,  N-o-a-h. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  What  is  your  address? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  9  East  40th  Street,  New  York  16,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  SoTjRwiNE.  That  is  your  business  address ;  isn't  it  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Yes ;  home  address,  160-07  17th  Avenue,  Whitestone, 
Queens,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  You  are  a  lawyer  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  That's  right. 

Mr,  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  a  member  of  a  law  firm  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  am  associated  with  another  lawyer ;  yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Who  is  he  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Harold  I.  Cammer. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Is  that  the  same  Mr.  Cammer  who  is  a  member  of 
the  firm  of  Cammer  &  Witt  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Is  Nathan  Witt  a  member  of  that  firm? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No  ;  that  firm  has  not  been  in  existence  since,  I  believe, 
the  beginning  of  1951. 

Mr.  SonRWiNE.  Has  its  name  gone  off  the  doors  and  off  the  letter- 
heads ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Off  the  letterheads.  There  is  no  door ;  off  the  letter- 
heads. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Then  you  have  a  partnership  with  Mr.  Cammer 
which  no  other  attorney  shares  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  prefer  to  call  it  an  association. 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  Is  it  in  fact  a  partnership  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  It  is  an  association. 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  Is  it  in  fact  a  partnership  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No  ;  it  is  not  in  fact  a  partnership. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  just  wanted  to  make  the  record  clear  on  that. 

Your  office  is  the  same  as  the  suite  used  by  Mr.  Witt? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  That's  correct. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  What  other  attorneys  share  that  office  space? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  there  is  a  whole  floor  there,  Mr.  Sourwine,  and 
there  are  other  lawyers  on  that  floor  who  have  absolutely  no  relation- 
ship with  Mr.  Cammer  or  myself.  They  are  in  the  nature  of  ten- 
ants paying  rent  and  so  on. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  To  whom  do  they  pay  their  rent  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  They  pay  it  to  Mr.  Cammer. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  These  individuals. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Wlio  are  those  lawyers  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Stanley  Faulkner,  Henry  Rubin,  and  Joseph  Dia- 
mond. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  there  any  other  persons  or  organizations  which 
share  that  office  space  ? 


818  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SHAriRO.  Well,  Mr.  Diamond  lias  a  couple  of  his  own  corpora- 
tions that  use  it  as  a  mailing  address  but  beyond  that,  no. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Does  the  firm  of  Cameron  &  Kahn  use  that  office 
space  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  they  have  desk  space  there  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Does  their  telephone  ring  in  that  office? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  are  sure  about  that? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  It  does  not  ring  on  the  phone  that  I  am  familiar  with, 
namely  my  phone  and  Mr.  Gammer's  phone  number  which  is  the 
same  phone  number. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  asked  if  their  telephone  rang  in  that  same  office, 
the  suit  of  offices  on  this  floor? 

Mr.  Shaipro.  To  my  knowledge  it  does  not,  sir.  Each  of  the  in- 
dividual attorneys  has  his  own  phone. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Does  the  Liberty  Book  Club  have  office  space  or  desk 
space  on  this  floor  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  they  have  a  telephone  which  rings  on  this  floor 
to  your  laiowledge? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  To  my  knowledge,  no. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  the  Ralph  Shapiro  who  attested  an  affi- 
davit by  Harvey  Matusow  in  connection  with  the  Jencks  case? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  am. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Wlien  did  you  first  see  that  affidavit? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  there  were  two  affidavits,  Mr.  Sourwine.  There 
was  an  affidavit. 

Mr.  Shapiro.     Did  you  attest  to  both  of  them? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  attested  to  both  of  them. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  When  did  you  first  see  the  first  one  you  attested  to  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  The  one  that  was  attested  to  January  17.  I  saw 
Mr.  Matusow  sign  for  the  first  time  was  on  October  17  to  the  best 
of  my  knowledge. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  When  did  you  first  see  the  second  one  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Again  the  second  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  on  the 
20th  of  January  or  maybe  a  day  before  because  that  was  the  recast 
affidavit,  and  I  think  perhaps  Mr.  Witt  may  have  shown  it  to  me 
just  informally. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  sure  that  the  first  affidavit  was  not  in 
your  possession  before  Mr.  Matusow  came  to  your  office  to  sign  it? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  You  mean  the  affidavit  that  was  executed  on  Janu- 
ary 17? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  don't  believe  it  was  in  was  in  my  possession ;  no,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  If  I  told  you  that  Mr.  Matusow  had  said  that  the 
affidavit  was  at  your  office  and  that  he  went  there  and  signed  it, 
would  that  make  any  difference  in  your  answer  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Does  he  mean  my  office  or  Mr.  Witt's  office?  We 
have  offices  on  the  space.  Did  he  mean  in  Mr.  Witt's  room  or  in 
my  room  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Let's  get  that  straight.  In  what  room  was  it 
signed  ? 


STRATEGY    AXD    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COJvlkUNlSM  819 

Mr.  Shapiro.  It  was  signed  in  Mr.  Witt's  room  on  January  IT. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  whether  it  was  there  before  Mr. 
Matusow  came  to  sign  it  ? 

JNIr.  Shapiro.  I  really,  Mr.  Sourwine,  have  no  recollection  of  that. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  All  right,  sir.  Now  do  you  know  who  typed  the 
affidavit  that  was  executed  on  the  I7th  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  don't  know  who  typed  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  where  it  was  typed  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No  ;  I  do  not  know  where  it  was  typed. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  who  prepared  it  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Matusow  signed  it  and  you  attested  it  in  Mr. 
Witt's  office? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  That's  correct. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  is  the  fact  in  this  regard  with  respect  to  the 
second  affidavit,  the  one  that  was  attested  on  the  20th  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  That  was  attested  in  Mr.  Witt's  room  on  the  date 
indicated  in  the  affidavits. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  know  Harvey  Matusow  before  you  nota- 
rized his  affidavit  in  the  Jencks  case  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  met  him  for  the  first  time  on  January  17,  after 
meeting  him  I  realized  that  I  had  seen  him  in  the  office  before  then, 
but  the  first  time  I  met  him  was  on  the  17th  of  January. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  never  consulted  with  him  on  his  business  or 
the  business  of  any  of  your  clients  before  that  time  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you,  sir,  sign  a  nominating  petition  for  one 
Simon  Gerson  in  1948  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  may  I  say  on  that,  Mr.  Sourwine  and  chairman 
of  the  committee,  that  I  fail  to  see  the  materiality  or  relevance  of  that 
question  for  the  purposes  which  I  have  been  subpenaed,  namely,  the 
execution  of  the  affidavit  by  Mr.  Matusow. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  can't  define  the  purposes  for  which  you  have 
been  subpenaed.     That  is  for  the  committee. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well  then,  may  I  request  that  the  committee  there- 
fore define  the  purposes  for  which  I  have  been  subpenaed  ?  Appar- 
ently my  sole  connection  with  this  matter  is  the  fact  that  I  witnessed, 
and  there  has  been  no  question  of  it,  witnessed  or  rather  took,  as  we 
say,  Mr.  Matusow's  signature. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Shapiro,  you  have  been  subpenaed  by  the  com- 
mittee to  answer  questions  respecting  matters  which  the  committee 
is  investigating. 

One  of  those  questions  was  just  asked  you.  Did  you  sign  a  nomi- 
nating petition  for  Simon  Gerson  in  1948  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  May  I  request  the  Chair  to  rule  on  the  objection,  so  to 
speak,  that  I  have  raised? 

Senator  Daniel.  You  have  been  here  during  the  testimony  of  the 
previous  witnesses  today,  haven't  you? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Some  of  them;  yes. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  know  the  ruling  that  has  been  made  to  sug- 
gestions or  objections  before  and  the  Chair  will  make  the  same  ruling. 
Your  objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  The  ruling,  sir,  may  I  suggest  respectfully  should 
not  be  blanket  rulings  on  all  questions  of  materiality  or  relevancy  ? 


820  STRATECfr    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Senator  Daniel.  I  ruled  strictly  on  your  objection  now  and  you 
will  proceed  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  You  are  therefore  overruling  my  objection  as  to  ma- 
teriality or  relevancy,  sir? 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  May  I  therefore  raise  this  objection  ?  Under  my  rights 
under  the  first  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
with  regard  to  whether  or  not  I  signed  a  nominating  petition,  it  is  an 
act  of  electoral  privilege  which  is  given  to  all  citizens  and  I  think  one 
that  should  be  respected  by  this  committee,  sir. 

Senator  Daniel,  That  objection  is  overruled.  You  will  proceed 
to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Having  overruled  these  objections,  sir,  then  I  must 
avail  myself  of  the  privilege  afforded  me  under  the  fifth  amendment 
not  to  be  compelled  to  bear  witness  against  myself. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  that  Simon  Gerson,  in  1948,  ran  on  the 
Communist  Party  ticket? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  if  your  records  show  it,  sir,  I  would  take  it. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  understand  he  was  asking :  Do  you  know  he 
ran  on  the  Communist  Party  ticket  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  It  might  help  if  you  gave  the  office  for  which  he  ran 
then. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  have  just  asked  if  you  knew  that  he  ran  on  the 
Communist  ticket. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  heard  testimony  earlier  today  to  the  effect  that 
Simon  Gerson  is  an  employee,  or  whatever  you  want  to  call  it,  of 
the  Communist  Party,  and  I  assume  then  that  he  may  have  at  times 
run.  I  have  no  recollection  of  whether  or  not  he  ran  in  1948  for 
public  office. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  As  a  matter  of  fact  wasn't  it  your  knowledge  that 
he  ran  on  the  Communist  Party  ticket  that  led  you  to  refuse  to  answer 
the  question  whether  you  signed  a  nominating  petition  for  him  that 
year  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  think  you  should  know,  Mr.  Sourwine,  that  you  have 
no  right  to  inquire  as  to  the  reasons  why  a  witness  avails  himself  of 
the  privileges  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

And  secondly  I  have  already  answered  the  question. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Well,  answer  it  now  if  you  have  already  answered 
it. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  What  is  the  question,  sir? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  question  is  whether  it  is  not  true  as  a  matter 
of  fact  that  it  was  your  knowledge  that  Simon  Gerson  ran  on  the 
Communist  Party  ticket  which  led  you  to  claim  the  refusal  as  to 
whether  you  signed  the  nominating  petition  for  him. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  I  must  refuse  to  decline  to  answer  that  question, 
sir,  under  the  fifth  amendment  I  am  not  required  to  bear  witness 
against  myself  and  also  that  it  is  a  rather  vague  and  generalized 
question. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  witness 
had  previously  testified  that  he  did  not  know  on  what  ticket  Mr.  Ger- 
son ran,  I  submit  he  has  waived  his  privilege  to  claim  the  fifth  amend- 
ment and  therefore  refuse  to  answer  the  question  as  to  whether  his 
knowledge  of  that  was  not  a  factor  in  his  refusal  to  answer  the  prior 
question. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  821 

Senator  Daniel.  I  instruct  the  witness  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I'd 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  The  question  is : 

Was  it  not  a  fact  that  your  knowledge  of  Mr.  Gerson's  having  run  on  the  Com- 
munist Party  ticket  was  the  basis  for  your  refusal  to  answer  the  question  as  to 
whether  you  had  signed  a  nominating  petition  for  him. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  would  be  willing  to  debate  at  the  proper  time  and 
forum  the  question  of  waiver  which  is  a  wholly  technical  one  as  you 
gentleman  well  know,  but  under  the  circumstances  I  must  avail  my- 
self of  the  privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  required  to 
be  a  witness  against  myself. 

]Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  ask  that  the  witness  be  ordered  to  answer  the 
question. 

Mr.  FoRER.  You  just  did. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  Chair  just  ordered  the  witness  to  answer  the 
question  and  the  Chair  orders  again. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  understand  that,  sir,  that  I  have  been  ordered  and 
I  again  make  my  declination. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  active  in  the  American  Labor  Party  rally 
in  Peekskill,  September  13,  1949  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  was  not  active  in  it,  sir.    I  attended  it. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  or  have  you  ever  been  a  member  of  the 
Lawyers  Guild? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  was  and  I  am. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  the  Ralph  Shapiro  who  once  lived  at  3154 
Fairmont  Street  in  Los  Angeles,  Calif.  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  May  I  say  I  do  not  mean  by  these  questions  to  imply 
that  you  were.  There  are  several  Ralph  Shapiros  in  records  in  var- 
ious places  and  I'm  trying  to  get  them  straightened  out  for  your 
benefit  as  well  as  the  committee. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  have  never  lived  in  that  address  that  you  have  just 
stated. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  the  Ralph  Shapiro  who  subscribed  to 
the  People's  Daily  World  in  September  1939  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Have  you  ever  subscribed  to  the  Peoples  Daily 
World. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  the  Ralph  Shapiro  who  subscribed  to 
the  Daily  Worker  in  1948  and '49  ?  _ 

Mr.  Shapiro.  You  mean  the  one  in  California? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  No;  the  Daily  Worker,  a  New  York  publication. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  again  I  must  raise  an  objection  based  upon 
materiality  and  relevancy,  sir. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  For  all  the  reasons  I  have  stated  before. 

Senator  Daniel.  It  is  overruled.     Proceed  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  must  also  raise  an  objection  on  the  rights  given 
me  under  the  first  amendment,  too. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  overruled.  You  will  proceed  to  answer 
the  question. 


822  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr,  Shapiro.  I  must  respectfully  decline  to  answer  the  question  on 
the  grounds  that  I  am  not  required  to  be  a  witness  against  myself 
under  the  fifth  amendment  to  the  United  States  Constitution. 

Mr,  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  now  a  subscriber  to  the  Daily  Worker  ? 

Mr,  Shapiro.  I  wish  to  avail  myself  of  the  same  answer  I  gave  in 
resiDonse  to  the  previous  question  in  order  to  shorten  this  hearing,  sir. 

Senator  Daniel.  It  will  be  understood  you  object  because  of  materi- 
ality and  because  of  the  first  amendment.  They  are  overruled.  Now 
you  will  proceed  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  must  respectfully  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds 
that  I  am  not  required  to  be  a  witness  against  myself  under  the  fifth 
amendment  to  the  United  States  Constitution. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  the  same  Ralph  Shapiro  who  graduated 
from  Michigan  Law  School  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  am. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  in  what  year  did  you  graduate  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Michigan  Law  School  in  1910. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you,  sir,  at  the  time  you  attended  Michigan 
Law  School,  a  member  of  any  Communist  group  or  faction? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  must  raise  again  the  objection  as  to  materiality  and 
relevancy  as  well  as  to  objection  under  the  first  amendment  to  the 
Constitution  of  the  LTnited  States. 

Senator  Daniel.  Those  objections  are  overruled. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  must  therefore  respectfully  decline  to  answer  on 
the  grounds  afforded  me  not  to  be  a  witness  against  myself  by  the 
fifth  amendment  to  the  United  States  Constitution. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  the  same  Ralph  Shapiro  who  represented 
Joseph  Silverstein,  arrested  and  charged  with  assault  on  an  officer  in 
Union  Square,  August  2, 1950  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro,  Yes;  I  represented  him,  I  don't  recall  the  dates, 
but  I'll  take  what  you  say,  sir,  on  that, 

Mr,  Sourwine.  Are  you  the  same  Ralph  Shapiro  who  was  a  lawyer 
on  the  committee  handling  arrangements  for  the  peace  rally  held  at 
Union  Square,  December  11.  1951,  under  the  auspices  of  the  New 
York  Labor  Conference  for  Peace  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  don't  think  that  I  handled  the  arrangements.  I  do 
believe  that  I  was  asked  by  the  committee  to  make  representations  in 
their  behalf  to  the  Police  Department  for  a  permit,  and  I  believe  I 
did  accompany  them  and  speak  to  some  commissioner  or  deputy  com- 
missioner there  and  that  was  the  end  of  my  association  with  them. 
It  was  a  client-attorney  relationship,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  the  same  Ralph  Shapiro  who  signed  an 
American  Labor  Party  nominating  petition  for  Clifford  T.  McAvoy 
for  president  of  the  city  council  in  1951  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  again  I  must  raise  the  objections  I  raised  be- 
fore as  to  materiality  and  relevancy  particularly  under  the  first  amend- 
raent,  it  is  an  exercise  of  an  electoral  privilege  which  every  citizen  of 
the  United  States  has  and  I  fail  to  see  what  bearing  it  has  whether  I 
did  or  did  not  sign  on  certain  dates 

Senator  Daniel.  Objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Might  I  state  for  the  record  the  question  does  not  go 
to  whether  Mr.  Shapiro  did  or  did  not  do  it.  The  question  is  one  of 
identification  as  to  whether  he  is  a  particular  Shapiro. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COIMMTJNISM  823 

Mr.  Shapiro.  ^Vliat  bearing  does  that  have  on  this? 

Senator  Daniel.  Overrule  the  objection.     Proceed  to  answer  the 

question.  ,  •      •  x 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  have  identified  myself  sufficiently  by  this  time,     in 

1950  Avas  this.  Mr.  Sourwine? 
Mr.  SouRwixE.  1951. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  probably  was.  The  reason  I  say  probably  was  be- 
cause I  have  no  independent  recollection  of  it,  but  if  it  shows  a  Ralph 
Shapiro  too,  it  may  have  well  have  been  me.  As  you  indicated  there 
is  more  than  one  Ralph  Shapiro. 

Senator  Daniel.  Did  you  si^n  an  American  Labor  Party  petition 
for  the  nomination  of  Clifford  T.  McAvoy  for  president  of  the  city 
council  at  an}'  time? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  probably  did.  The  reason  I  say  probably  is  I  have 
510  independent  recollection  of  having  signed  for  that  person  in  that 
year. 

If  you  could  be  more  precise  or  if  you  have  a  photostatic  copy  and 
I  could  see  my  signature  I'd  be  glad  to  confirm  or  deny. 

Mr.  SouRwiXE.  Are  you  the  same  Ralph  Shapiro  who  was  19th 
assembly  district  candictate  for  council  on  the  American  Labor  Party 
ticket  at  one  time? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  think  by  this  time  you  have  identified  me  sufficiently 
and  I  see  no  point  or  purpose  to  these  questions  on  the  issue  upon 
which  I  have  been  subpenaed  before  this  committee,  namely,  whether 
Matusow  signed  an  affidavit  and  I  must  respectfully  object;  I  know  I 
may  object  to  this  question. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  "Well,  in  that  event  the  answer  is  "Yes,"  I  did  run  for 
that  office  at  the  time  indicated,  on  the  American  Labor  Party  ticket. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  "V^Hiat  was  that  year  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Was  that  councilman,  did  you  say?  Because  I  have 
I'un  more  than  once. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  City  council. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  City  council,  that  was  probably  1949. 

Mr.  SouRAViNE.  What  other  offices  have  you  run  for  and  when? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  tlie  when  is  a  different  thing.  I  think  the  fol- 
lowing year,  that  would  be  1950,  which  would  be  a  national  election 
year  I  think  I  ran  for  Congress,  and  1951 

Senator  Daniel.  On  what  ticket? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  On  the  American  Labor  Party  ticket,  sir,  and  I  did 
not  get  elected.  And  the  following  year,  ancl  this  I  may  be  wrong 
on  because  I  think  the  following  year  we  have  State,  judicial  elections, 
in  Xew  York  State  and  I  believe  I  ran  for  supreme  court  judge  in 
Kings  County  in  1951. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you,  sir  ? 

Are  you  the  same  Ralph  Shapiro  who  spoke  at  a  meeting  sponsored 
by  the  American  Labor  Party  at  Minoral  Temple,  50th  Street  and 
lith  Avenue,  Brooklyn,  to  protest  the  Peekskill  riot? 

Mr,  Shapiro.  Say  that  date  again,  Mr.  Sourwine,  please,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  did  not  give  a  date, 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  I  have  spoken,  and  this  is  the  only  answer  I 
can  give  you,  in  the  capacity  as  a  candidate  for  the  American  Labor 
Party,  at  very  many  rallies  and  functions,  and  if  your  records  indi- 


824  STRATEGY    AND    T/ 


3  Qaa9L05445  J3608 


cate  that  I  spoke  under  the  auspices  of  the  American  Labor  Party 
then  I  probably  did.     I  have  no  independent  recollection. 

I  spoke  at  this  Minoral  Temple  more  than  one  time,  too. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  remember  ever  specifically  speaking  at 
meetings  called  to  protest  the  Peekskill  riot  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  ^Hiy,  yes,  I  have  a  recollection  of  that.  There  is  a 
great  deal  of  indignation  in  the  community.  A  meeting  was  arranged 
and  I  spoke  p/  it  to  protest  what  had  happened  when  the  hoodlums 
who  assaulted  the  people  who  went  to  Peekskill. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Wliere  was  the  meeting  held  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  don't  know.  I  have  absolutely  no  recollection  of 
where  it  was  held. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  But  you  did  speak  somewhere,  to  protest  that. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  have  that  recollection,  but  I  don't  recall  where  or 
when. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  the  same  Ralph  Shapiro  who  sent  May  Day 
greetings  to  the  Daily  Worker  on  May  1,  1946  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Well,  again  I  must  respectfully  raise  the  objections 
I  raised  before.  I  see  no  purpose  to  bringing  out  all  these  indicia  of 
identification  after  my  identity  has  been  established  particularly  with 
respect  to  the  matters  of  which  we  are  concerned  here  this  afternoon. 

I  don't  see  just  what  it  has  to  do  with  this,  sir,  any  more. 

Senator  Daniel.  We  disagree  on  that  and  I  overrule  the  objection. 
If  you  want  to  continue  to  repeat  them,  I  will  continue  to  rule  on 
them. 

You  may  actually  offer  some  objection  that  the  Chair  will  agree 
with  you  on,  but  things  like  we  have  had  we  will  save  time  if  you 
should  see  fit  not  to  continually  offer  the  objection  as  to  materiality 
because  the  committee  has  already  decided  that  they  believe  these 
questions  are  material. 

The  witness  will  proceed. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  can't  probe  into  your  minds  as  to  the  basis  for  ruling 
but  I  just  don't  see  it  at  all. 

I  will  therefore,  and  I  assume  your  ruling  will  be  the  same  as  to 
the  first  amendment  objection,  I  will  therefore  respectfully  decline  to 
answer  under  the  privileges  afforded  me  not  to  be  a  witness  against 
myself. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Shapiro,  are  you  now  a  member  of  the  Com- 
munist Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Again  I  must  raise  the  question  of  materiality  and 
relevancy  of  that  question  to  the  issues  developed  in  this  proceeding 
as  well  as  my  rights  under  the  first  amendment.  Having  anticipated 
if  I  may,  sir,  your  adverse  ruling  on  this  objection,  which  I  take  it 
there  will  be,  I  don't  want  to  jump  ahead  of  you,  sir. 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes,  indeed.  That  will  be  the  ruling,  and  on  this 
occasion  I  will  tell  you  something  about  the  materiality.  This  com- 
mittee has  been  led  to  believe  that  Mr.  Matusow  is  under  the  influence 
of  the  Communist  Party  and  the  Communist  Party  members  in  chang- 
ing his  testimony  and  that  they  have  prevailed  on  him  to  do  so  and 
therefore  every  one  who  has  had  any  connection  with  Mr.  Matusow's 
changing,  in  testimony,  his  affidavits  and  so  forth,  we  want  to  talk 
with  and  to  get  answers,  and  especially  answers  as  to  whether  or  not 
they  are  members  of  the  Communist  Party. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMIMUNISM  825 

Now  that  is  why  the  question  has  been  asked  to  you  and  you  will 
proceed  to  answer  it. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  But,  sir,  if  I  may  just  take  a  moment,  I  have  already 
answered  all,  giving  complete  disclosures  as  to  my  connection,  which 
was  nil  with  Mr.  Matusow's  change  of  testimony.  It  was  nil,  nothing 
at  all.  All  I  did  in  this  situation  was  to  take  his  signature  and  there 
has  been  no  contradiction  of  that  either  here  or  in  a  court  proceeding 
so  far  as  I  understand  it. 

Senator  Daniel,  Of  course,  that  is  your  conclusion. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  That  is  the  fact,  sir. 

Senator  Daniel.  We  will  not  have  any  further  argument  about  the 
ruling. 

The  ruling  has  been  made  and  you  will  answer  the  question  whether 
or  not  you're  now  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  Again  I  wish  to  assert  my  rights  under  the  first 
amendment  in  addition  to  the  various  objections  I  have  heretofore 
made  to  this  particular  question. 

And  having  anticipated  that  the  Chair's  ruling  will  be  adverse  to 
that. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  Chair  has  already  ruled. 

You  need  not  anticipate  further  on  that. 

I  ask  you  now  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Shapiro.  I  must  respectfully  decline  to  answer  by  reason  of 
the  rights  given  to  me  not  to  be  a  witness  against  myself  under  the 
fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE,  I  have  no  more  questions  of  this  witness. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  witness  is  excused. 

The  committee  will  meet  at  10 :  30  in  the  morning. 

(Wliereupon  at  5 :  50  p.  m,  an  adjournment  was  taken,  to  reconvene 
at  10 :  30  a.  m.,  Tuesday,  April  19, 1955.) 


■         f 

/strategy  and  tactics  of  world  communism 

THE  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  THE  MATUSOW  CASE 

HEARING 

BEFORE  THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE  TO  INVESTIGATE  THE 

ADMINISTEATION  OF  THE  INTERNAL  SECURITY 

ACT  AND  OTHER  INTERNAL  SECURITY  LAWS 

OF  THE 

COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 

UNITED  STATES  SENATE 

EIGHTY-FOURTH  CONGRESS 

FIRST  SESSION 
PURSUANT  TO 

S.  Res.  58 


APRIL  19,  1955 


PART  10 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary 


UNITED  STATES 
GOVERNMENT  PRINTING  OFFICE 
59886  WASHINGTON  :  1955 


Coston  Public  Library 
Superintendent  of  Documents 

JUN28I955 


-f.H 


COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 
HARI.EY  M.  KILGORE,  West  Virginia,  Chairman 
JAMES  O.  EASTLAND,  Mississippi  ALEXANDER  WILEY   Wisconsin 

ESTES  KEl^MUVER,  Tennessee  WILLIAM  LAXGKR.  Nortl,  Dakota 

OLIN  D.  .lOHNSTON.  South  Carolina  WILLIAM  E.  .TENNER    Indiana 

THOMAS  C.  HENNINGS.  Jr.,  Missouri  ARTHUR  V.  WATKINS,  Utah 

JOHN  L.  McCLELLAN,  Arkansas  EVERETT  McKINLEY  DIRKSEN   II     lois 

PRICE  DANIEL,  Texas  HERMAN  WELKER,  Idaho 

JOSEPH  C.  O'MAHONEY,  Wyoming  JOHN  MARSHALL  BUTLER   Maryl      J 


Subcommittee  To  Investigate  the  Administration  of  the  Internai,  Seodbitt 
Act  and  Other  Internal  Security  Laws 
JAMES  O.  EASTLAND,  Mississippi,  Chairman 
OLIN  D.  JOHNSTON.  South  Carolina  WILLIAM  E.  JENNER,  Indiana 

JOHN  L.  McCLELLAN,  Arkansas  ARTHUR  V.  WATKINS    Utah 

THOMAS  C.  HENNINGS,  JB.,  Missouri  HERMAN  WELKER.  Idaho 

PKICE  DANIEL,  Texas  JOHN  MARSHALL  BUTLER,  Maryland 

J.  G.  SOURWiNE,  ChieJ  Counsel 
RICHARD  Arens  and  Alva  C.  Caki'e.njter,  Associate  Counsel 
Benjamin  Mandel,  Director  of  Research 
II 


CONTENTS 


Testimony  of—  P*«* 

John  Lautner 890 

Robert  Z.  Lewis 895 

James  H.  Morrow,  Jr 964 

Victor  O.  Overcash 955 

Harry  Sacher 829 

Joseph  Starobin 911 

Anita  Willcox 845 

ni 


STRATEGY  AND  TACTICS  OF  WORLD  COMMUNISM 


TUESDAY,   APRIL   19,   1955 

Uniit-^d  States  Senate,  Subcommittee  To 
In\\estigate  the  Administration  of  the  In- 
ternal Security  Act  and  Other  Internal- 
Security  Laws,  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 

Washington^  D.  C. 

The  subcommittee  met,  pursuant  to  recess,  at  10 :  35  a.  m.  in  room 
318,  Senate  Office  Building,  Senator  John  L.  McClellan  presiding. 

Present:   Senators  McClellan  and  Jenner. 

Also  present:  J.  G.  Sourwine,  chief  counsel,  Alva  C.  Carpenter, 
associate  counsel ;  Benjamin  Mandel,  director  of  research;  and  Robert 
C.  McManus,  professional  staff  member. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  committee  will  come  to  order.  Proceed, 
Mr.  Counsel. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  Angus  Cameron  here?      (No  response.) 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  Avas  not  sure  that  Mr.  Cameron  would  be  here  this 
morning.  My  advice  is  that  we  have  not  yet  been  able  to  reach  him 
with  a  subpena.  We  have  advised  his  attorney  that  we  desired  him 
here.  Mr.  Cameron  knows  that  we  want  him  to  furnish  some  records 
which  he  had  previously  promised  the  committee  he  would  make  avail- 
able but  which  have  not  yet  been  made  available  to  the  committee. 
We  will  continue  our  efforts  to  reach  him  with  a  subpena  or  otherwise. 

Senator  McCi^llan.  Is  he  not  under  subpena? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Cameron  appeared  before  the  committee.  He 
was  not  released  from  his  subpena.  He  agreed  to  produce  this  mate- 
rial.    He  has  substantial  records  of  Cameron  and  Kahn. 

Senator  McClellan.  Do  I  understand  the  committee  is  trying  to 
serve  him  again  Avith  a  subpena? 

Mr.  Sourwine,  Yes,  sir;  with  a  subpena  duces  tecum  specifying 
these  particular  records.  I  do  not  believe  there  would  be  really  any 
additional  force  in  such  a  subpena,  but  if  we  reach  him  with  such  a 
subpena,  it  is  clear  evidence  of  the  notice  to  him,  at  that  time,  of  the 
time  and  place  of  hearing. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  committee  then  will  defer  further  action 
on  it  until  we  get  another  report.     Proceed  with  the  next  witness. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  David  Ratner.  Is  Mr.  Ratner  represented  by  coun- 
sel here?     (No  response.) 

Mr.  Ratner  was  served  with  a  subpena.  Mr.  Scribner,  his  counsel, 
forwarded  a  letter  with  what  purported  to  be  a  doctor's  certificate 
that  Mr.  Ratner  was  too  ill  to  appear.  Mr.  Scribner  has  been  unavail- 
able in  person  and  by  telephone,  but  we  have  left  word  for  Mr.  Scrib- 
ner at  his  office  that,  if  Mr.  Ratner  desired  to  be  excused  because  of 
illness,  he  should  arrange  to  submit  to  an  examination  by  a  doctor 

827 


828  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

appointed  by  the  committee.    We  will  attempt  to  proceed  further 
with  that  matter. 

(The  followin^i;  documents  were  later  marked  "Exhibits  56,  56-A, 
and  56-B"  and  ordered  into  the  record  at  this  point:) 

Exhibit  No.  56 

New  Tobk,  N.  Y.,  April  15,  1955. 
Hon.  James  O.  Eastland, 

Chairman,  Subcommittee  on  Internal  Security, 
Senate  Office  Building,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Dear  Senator  Eastland  :  Mr.  David  Ratner,  to  whom  a  snbpena  of  your  com- 
mittee was  addressed  calling  for  his  appearance  in  Washington  on  Monday  April 
18,  has  asked  me  to  advise  you  as  follows : 

He  has  recently  returned  from  confinement  in  a  hospital  as  a  result  of  a  serious 
ulcer  hemorrhage  condition  and  is  now  confined  to  his  home.  At  the  same  time 
he  is  suffering  from  a  spinal  arthritic  condition  which  requires  him  to  wear  a 
neck  brace.  It  would  be  impossible  for  him  to  leave  his  home  for  a  considerable 
period. 

Tomorrow  I  shall  send  you  under  separate  cover  a  certificate  from  the  physi- 
cian who  is  attending  him,  which  will  more  specifically  advise  you  of  Mr.  Ratner's 
physical  condition. 
Respectfully, 

David  Scribneb, 
Counselor  at  Law. 


Exhibit  No.  56-A 

New  York,  N.  Y.,  April  16,  1955. 
Hon.  James  O.  Eastland, 

Chairman,  Subcommittee  on  Internal  Security, 
Senate  Office  Building,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Dear  Senator  Eastland  :  In  accordance  with  the  letter  I  sent  you  yesterday, 
I  enclose  a  certificate  of  the  physician  attending  Mr.  David  Ratner. 
Resi)ectfully, 

David  Scribner, 
Counselor  at  Law. 
Exhibit  No.  56-B 

Forest  HnxB,  Long  Island,  April  15, 1955. 
To  Whom  It  May  Concern: 

This  is  to  certify  that  Mr.  David  Ratner  of  111-55  77th  Avenue,  Forest  Hills, 
N.  Y.,  is  under  my  care  for  the  treatment  of  a  bleeding  duodenal  ulcer. 

He  was  admitted  to  the  hospital  for  surgery  on  March  18,  1955.     During  this 

time  he  received  8  pints  of  blood.     He  was  discharged  on  April  4,  1955,  and  is 

confined  to  bed  at  this  time.     He  is  also  being  treated  for  arthritis  of  the  spine. 

Under  these  circumstances,  I  feel  it  wiU  be  inadvisable  to  allow  Mr.  Ratner 

to  travel  for  the  next  few  months. 

Very  truly  yours, 

Herman   Schildkbout,  M.   D. 

Senator  McClellan.  All  right.     Call  the  next  witness. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Robert  Z.  Lewis. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  requested  an  afternoon  appearance  and  Mr.  Haaser  of 
your  committee  indicated  that  was  going  to  happen. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Lewis,  I  believe  the  Chair  will  probably  be 
willing  to  grant  you  an  appearance  this  afternoon. 

Senator  McClellan.  Are  you  waiting  on  your  counsel  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  He  is  taking  a  noon  plane  from  the  New  York  airfield 
and  will  be  here  at  1 :  30. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Who  is  your  counsel  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Morton  Stavis. 

Senator  McClellan.  You  be  back  here  this  afternoon  at  1 :  30  then. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  829 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Harry  Sacher. 

Senator  McClellan.  All  right,  Mr.  Sacher,  will  you  be  sworn? 
Do  you  solemnly  swear  that  the  evidence  you  shall  give  before  this 
Internal  Security  Subcommittee  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary 
in  the  course  of  this  investigation  shall  be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth, 
and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help  you  God  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do. 

Senator  McClellan.  Proceed. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HARRY  SACHER,  ATTORNEY,  NEW  ROCHELLE,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Will  you  give  your  name  and  your  present  home 
address,  please  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Harry  Sacher,  111  Taymil  Road,  New  Rochelle,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  are  a  lawyer,  are  you  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  am. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  where  are  your  legal  offices? 

Mr.  Sacher.  My  law  offices  are  at  342  Madison  Avenue,  New  York 
City. 

Mr.  SouR\\^NE.  Do  you  practice  alone  or  in  partnership  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  practice  alone. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  have  any  associates  in  your  office? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Well,  there  are  lawyers  in  the  suite.  They  are  not  my 
associates  in  the  practice  of  the  law.  They  occupy  space  in  the  same 
suite  where  I  have  my  offices. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Who  are  those  attorneys,  sir? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Frank  Donner 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Pardon  my  interruption.  Do  you  object  to  having 
pictures  taken  during  your  testimony  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  No,  provided  they  are  good  looking.  I  have  no  objec- 
tion to  them. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  would  prefer  that  the  pictures  if 
you  want  to  take  them,  get  them  over  with  right  away,  because  it  does 
interfere  with  our  concentration  here.    Proceed  to  make  a  few  and 

Mr.  Sacher.  Do  you  want  me  to  continue  with  the  list?  I  have 
given  you  the  first. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Please. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Frank  Donner,  Mr.  Marshall  Perlm,  Mr.  Arthur 
Kinoy,  Mr.  Milton  Friedman. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Are  any  of  those  lawyers  hired  by  you,  employed 
by  you? 

Mr.  Sacher.  No,  they  are  not. 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  In  what  way,  Mr.  Sacher,  have  you  been  associated 
with  the  defense  of  Communist  cases? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do  not  understand  your  question. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  what  I  mean  by  Communist  cases? 

Mr.  Sacher.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not  know  what  you  mean. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  been  associated  in  the  defense  of  promi- 
nent members  of  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  inquire  as  to  the  purpose  of  this 
type  of  inquiry?  I  have  no  desire  to  invoke  any  privileges  of  any 
land,  but  it  does  seem  to  me  that  unless  these  inquiries  are  related  to 


830  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

some  legislative  purpose,  that  the  inquiry  is  improper.  I  am  a  mem- 
ber of  the  bar  of  tlie  State  of  New  York  and  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States  in  good  standing  and  I  defend  and  prosecute  cases 
which  are  brought  to  me  and  which  I  clioose  to  defend  or  prosecute. 
Now  it  seems  to  me  that  it  can  hardly  be  of  national  importance  whom 
I  defend  or  whom  I  represent,  and  certainly  it  hardly  seems  related  to 
a  legislative  purpose,  and  I  would,  therefore,  object  to  that  question 
on  the  gound  that  it  is  not  a  pertinent  inquiry  in  regard  to  any  mat- 
ters that  appear  at  the  moment  at  least  to  be  within  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  subcommittee  or  the  committee. 

Senator  McClellan.  Restate  the  question,  Mr.  Counsel. 

Mr.  SouKwiNE.  In  what  way  have  you  been  associated  with  the 
defense  of  Communist  cases? 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  thinks  you  can  answer  that.  It 
would  seem  that  either  you  have  been  associated  with  them  or  you 
have  not,  as  counsel. 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do  not  know  what  Communist  cases  are. 

Senator  McClellan.  You  have  the  right,  of  course,  to  practice 
law. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Of  course  I  have  and  I  think  I  have  a  right  not  to  be 
called  to  account  anywhere  for  the  cases  that  I  have  participated  in, 
and  I  think  that  it  is  impertinent  in  the  legal  sense — of  couree,  I  am 
not  speaking  in  any  other  sense — in  the  sense  of  not  being  pertinent 
to  any  legislative  purpose  to  inquire  whom  or  where  I  have  defended 
or  participated  in  cases. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Sacher,  the  primary  purpose  of  the  question  is 
to  identify  you — if  it  is  true — as  of  counsel  in  certain  prominent  cases 
which  have  involved  leaders  of  the  Communist  Party. 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  object  to  the  question  on  the  ground  that  no  lawyer 
is  identified  on  the  basis  of  the  cases  in  which  he  appears  profession- 
ally. If  that  is  the  basis  of  the  inquiry,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  respectfully 
submit  it  is  not  relevant  or  pertinent. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  In  what  other  way  does  an  attorney  acquire  a 
reputation  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do  not  know  what  you  are  talking  about,  and  now 
you  are  debating  with  me,  and  I  submit  I  do  not  want  to  debate  with 
counsel  for  the  committee. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  will  rephrase  the  question. 

Senator  McClellan.  Let  us  see  if  we  can  work  this  out,  Mr.  Coun- 
sel. You  ask  him  regarding  specific  cases  in  which  he  may  have  ap- 
peared in  court  in  a  particular  given  case. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  appear  in  Judge  Medina's  court  in  a  trial 
which  involved  certain  leaders  of  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.,  as 
counsel  for  the  defense? 

Senator  McClellan.  Now  you  may  answer  that. 

Mr.  SouEWiNE.  That  is  a  matter  of  record. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Of  course,  it  is  a  matter  of  record,  and  that  is  an 
added  ground  on  which  I  decline  to  answer,  Mr.  Chairman. 

There  is  no  occasion  for  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  to  call  a 
lawyer  before  it  to  inquire  in  what  cases  he  has  participated,  particu- 
larly when  it  is  a  matter  of  public  record  as  to  what  case  he  participates 
in. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  will  order  you  to  answer  it.  There 
is  no  reason  why  we  have  to  send  up  there  and  get  the  public  record 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  831 

and  have  it  certified  to  when  you  are  available  and  can  testify.  Cer- 
tainly there  would  be  no  objection  from  the  standpoint  of  background. 
You  are  not  ashamed  of  it? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman 

Senator  McClellan.  There  is  no  reason  why  you  cannot  answer 
the  question.    The  Chair  orders  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  ashamed  of  nothing  I  have  done, 
either  professionally  or  in  my  private  life,  but  that  is  no  reason  why 
I  should  be  brought  to  Washington  to  testify  about  it.  Unless  it  is 
relevant  and  pertinent  to  some  legislative  purpose,  I  must  respect- 
fully decline  to  answer  the  question,  and  I  should  like  to  ask  of  the 
Chair  what  legislative  purpose  do  you  state  is  being  served  by  my 
answer  to  this  inquiry? 

Senator  McClellan.  Well,  the  Chair  does  not  necessarily  feel 
called  upon  to  give  you  all  the  information  that  you  may  desire.  This 
committee  is  constituted  to  perform  a  function  for  the  Congress  and 
for  the  country,  primarily  with  respect  to  national  security,  and  the 
Chair  hold  that  any  question  which  may  be  asked  you  regarding  any- 
thing associated  with  the  subversive  elements  in  this  country,  if  there 
are  such,  is  a  pertinent  question,  and  it  is  pertinent  to  this  inquiry.  It 
is  the  duty  of  every  American  citizen  to  answer  such  questions  when 
so  interrogated  under  oath  before  this  committee  unless  he  wants  to 
avail  himself  of  the  privilege  of  the  fifth  amendment  of  the  Consti- 
tution.   So  the  Chair  will  direct  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  permit  me  to  say  this:  That  I  think 
that  an  inquiry  to  any  member  of  the  bar  concerning  cases  in  which 
he  has  participated  carries  with  it  implicitly  the  notion  that  attorneys 
are  accountable  to  the  legislative  branch  of  the  Government  for  the 
cases  they  handle,  and  I  respectfully  submit,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  if 
T  decline  to  answer,  you  will  realize  that  I  decline  not  out  of  any 
disrespect  to  this  committee  or  any  wish  to  subvert  its  process,  be- 
cause a  declination  on  my  part  will  not  subvert  anything  that  this 
committee  aims  to  do  because,  as  both  of  us  have  observed,  my  partici- 
pation in  the  cases,  or  at  least  the  case  that  is  being  spoken  of,  is  a 
matter  of  public  record.  But  I  do  feel,  and  I  appeal  to  you  as  a 
lawyer,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  give  thought  to  the  proposition  that  this 
may  create  a  bad  precedent  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  freedom 
of  advocacies  in  our  country.  In  other  words,  I  submit  to  you,  Mr. 
Chairman,  that  I  think  you  should  take  under  advisement  the  wisdom 
of  calling  a  lawyer  before  you  to  state  whether  or  not  he  has  partici- 
pated in  certain  cases.  I  do  not  think  it  is  wise  to  do  it.  I  do  not 
think  it  is  in  consonance  with  our  notions  of  an  independent  bar, 
and  I  respectfully  submit  that  a  lawyer  ought  to  be  as  immune  from 
accountability  for  the  cases  in  which  he  participates  as  a  Member 
of  Congress  is  for  his  utterances  on  the  floor  of  the  House,  either  of 
the  Senate  or  of  the  House  of  Representatives. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  question  that  has  been  propounded  to 
you  is  a  preliminary  question  as  a  matter  of  background  leading  into 
further  inquiry.  The  Chair  has  already  stated  his  position.  The 
Chair  orders  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Sacher.  All  right.  I  will  answer  the  question  and  state  that 
I  did  participate  in  the  case  in  question. 

Senator  McClellan.  All  right,  proceed,  Mr.  Counsel. 


832  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Sacher,  do  you  know  Harvey  Matusow? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  know  him  in  the  sense  that  I  met  him  for  the  first 
time  in  my  life  2  days  before  he  took  the  stand  as  a  witness  in  sup- 
port of  a  motion  for  a  new  trial  which  I  was  to  try  in  the  case  of 
United  States  against  Flynn,  and  others,  before  Judge  Dimock  in 
the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  New 
York. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  What  contact  have  you  had  with  him  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  My  contacts  consisted,  as  I  recall  it,  of  the  following : 
I  think  that  I  first  met  him  on  February  8,  1955.  I  believe  that  is 
the  day.  I  think  I  saw  him  on  the  8th  of  February  and  on  the  9th 
of  February,  and  then  I  saw  him  on  succeeding  days  during  which 
the  hearing  was  being  conducted  before  Judge  Dimock,  my  recol- 
lection being  that  the  first  date  of  open  court  hearing  on  the  motion 
I  am  speaking  of  was  February  10,  1955. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  ever  give  him  any  documents? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Did  I  ever  give  him  documents? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sacher.  No ;  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  give  him  any  papers  or  other  material  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  No.    Not  a  thing. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  he  ever  give  you  any  docmnents  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  He  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  documents  did  he  give  you  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  He  gave  me  a  75-page  report,  that  is  a  copy  of  a  75- 
page  report,  that  he  had  given  to  various  agencies  of  Government, 
including  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation  and  the  House  Com- 
mittee on  Un-American  Activities  in  the  fall  of  1951  or  the  winter 
of  1951.  The  report  I  refer  to  bore  the  date  of  October  19,  I  believe, 
1951.  It  was  offered  in  evidence,  the  report  I  speak  of  was  offered 
in  evidence  by  me  as  "Defendant's  Exhibit  B"  before  Judge  Dimock. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  may  say  this  document  is  in  our 
record.     Proceed. 

Mr.  Sacher.  May  I  interrupt  myself? 

Senator  McClellan.  Has  it  been  made  a  part  of  the  hearing  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  It  has  been. 

Mr.  Sacher.  May  I  interrupt  myself  at  this  point,  Mr.  Chairman, 
to  say  the  following :  That  it  occurs  to  me  again  that  this  is  an  im- 
propriety, how  gross  I  do  not  intend  to  say,  but  I  submit  there  is  an 
impropriety  in  calling  me,  calling  counsel  in  the  case  which  Mr.  Sour- 
wine mentions  which  is  pending,  undetermined,  under  Judge  Dimock 
at  the  present  time,  to  testify  concerning  that  case  here.  Now  it  seems 
to  me  that  if  there  is  any  matter  in  connection  with  the  prosecution  of 
that  motion  which  is  deserving  of  scrutiny,  that  it  ought  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  Judge  Dimock  in  the  first  instance.  This  seems  to  me  like 
a  flagrant  disregard  of  the  separation  of  powers.  After  all,  this 
motion  for  a  new  trial  is  of  primary  concern  to  Judge  Dimock.  He 
now  has  that  under  consideration  before  him.  He  has  my  briefs  and 
the  United  States  attorneys'  briefs. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  may  say  to  the  witness  we  are  not 
going  into  that  case  as  such,  of  course.  The  primary  purpose  of  this 
testimony  is  to  establish  a  relationship  or  contacts  you  have  had  with 
Mr.  Matusow,  whom  this  committee  is  investigating  as  to  the  ques- 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  833 

tioiis  relating  to  that,  not  necessarily  to  a  case  in  which  you  are  ap- 
pearing as  counsel. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  my  sole  relationship  with  Matusow  is 
limited  to  the  case  in  question.  United  States  against  Flynn  et  al,  and 
I  submit  that  anything  else  you  may  ask  me  about  I  would  not  know 
anything  about. 

Senator  McClellan.  That  is  your  statement. 

Mr.  Sacher.  And  I  am  making  it  under  oath. 

Senator  ISIcClellan.  That  is  your  statement  and  you  are  making 
it  under  oath  but  you  are  subject  to  cross-examination  on  it,  and  that 
is  what  the  committee  is  proceeding  to  do.     Proceed,  Mr.  Counsel. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Well,  then,  I  submit,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  I  think  a 
foundation  should  be  laid,  if  I  may  be  so  bold  as  to  use  a  bit  of  legal 
terminology  here,  a  foundation  ought  to  be  laid  here  for  the  propriety 
of  the  inquiry  that  is  being  made. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  foundation  has  already  been  laid  in  pre- 
vious hearings  for  the  testimony  that  we  are  seeking  to  adduce  this 
morning,  and  if  you  will  be  a  little  more  cooperative,  we  can  get  this 
disposed  of  pretty  soon.  The  question,  as  I  told  you  a  moment  ago, 
was  primarily  for  background  information  and  you  are  going  to  be 
asked  now  some  specific  questions. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  say  this :  I  do  not  think  that  you 
intended  to  imply  that  I  was  uncooperative,  but  I  have  no  desire  to  do 
anything  but  two  things  here :  One  is  to  answer  what  I  honestly  believe 
is  properly  asked  of  me,  and  second,  to  see  to  it  that  so  far  at  least  as 
I  am  concerned,  that  nothing  of  the  rights,  privileges  or  immunities 
of  attorneys  and  counselors  at  law  are  violated  in  this  hearing. 

Now  certainly  you  cannot  regard  that  as  obstructive. 

Senator  McClellax.  We  will  try  to  not  violate  that.  You  have 
not  been  asked  any  questions  regarding  your  case  except  that  which 
is  a  matter  of  record,  public  record. 

Mr.  Sacher.  No,  he  is  asking  me  about  things  which  are  not  of 
public  record. 

Senator  McClellan.  He  is  asking  you  about  associations  and  con- 
tacts with  Mr.  Matusow.  You  may  proceed,  Mr.  Counsel.  I  think  it 
is  quite  proper. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Sacher,  I  may  suggest  that  your  suggestion 
that  the  proceedings  here  would  prejudice  the  case  in  Judge  Dimock's 
court  constitute  an  unjustified  reflection  upon 

]Mr.  Sacher.  Now  that  is  not  true.  I  did  not  say  anything  about 
the  proceedings  here  affecting  Judge  Dimock's  judgment.  I  think 
that  judge  is  independent  enough  not  to  be  troubled  by  what  happens 
here  and  that  was  not  the  basis  of  my  objection  at  all. 

Senator  McClellan.  We  are  not  trying  to  try  the  case. 

Mr.  Sacher.  All  right,  but  I  do  not  think  it  is  fair  to  say  that  I  sug- 
gested here  in  any  way  that  the  proceedings  before  Judge  Dimock 
would  be  prejudiced  by  virtue  of  anything  that  was  interrogated  about 
here. 

Senator  McClellan.  If  that  interference  was  drawn  and  you  say 
that  was  not  the  intention,  you  did  not  intend  to  imply  that,  we  will 
proceed  with  that  understanding. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Sacher,  the  question  is  with  regard  to  docu- 
ments which  you  gave  Matusow  or  he  gave  you.  You  said  you  had 
given  him  none,  that  he  had  given  you  some  and  you  named  one. 


834  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Saciier.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  he  give  you  any  others? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Yes,  he  did. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Will  you  tell  us  about  them  ? 

Mr.  Saciier.  He  gave  me,  in  addition  to  this  defendant's  exhibit  B, 
some  sheets  of  paper  which  bore  the  names  of  a  number  of  people.  I 
do  not  know  the  exact  number.  But  these  sheets  of  paper  were  part 
of,  maybe  28  sheets  which  he  turned  in  to  the  FBI,  and  which  I  think 
were  received  in  evidence  before  Judge  Dimock  as  defendant's  ex- 
hibit M. 

Mr.  SoTjRwiNE.  These  documents,  Mr.  Chairman,  will  be  offered  for 
our  record  at  a  later  time. 

Go  ahead.    Any  others  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  In  addition,  he  also  gave  me  a  diary,  that  is,  these  were 
loose  sheets,  the  first  sheet  of  which  was  dated,  I  believe,  some  time 
in  1948,  and  my  present  recollection  is  that  the  next  sheet  in  this  group 
of  sheets  was  dated  some  time  in  1950,  and  then  there  was  a  group  of 
sheets  running  fairly  consecutive  from,  I  believe  it  was  some  time 
in  December,  1951,  to  the  end  of  April,  1952. 

Now  that  is  this  diary  that  I  am  speaking  of,  and  portions  of  it  were 
introduced  into  evidence  before  Judge  Dimock  as  defendant's  exliibit 
A-1  to,  I  believe,  something  like  3, 4,  or  5.    I  do  not  recall. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  This  document,  Mr.  Chairman,  will  be  identified 
b}'^  Mr.  Matusow  for  our  record  when  he  appears  before  us. 

Any  others,  sir  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Well,  there  were  other  pieces  of  paper  that  he  gave 
me.  There  were,  what  he  called  Q  and  A  sheets  used  in  the  prepara- 
tion of  his  testimony  before  the  SACB  in  one  or  more  cases  that  he 
was  a  witness  in  before  that  body,  and  my  recollection  is  that  those 
sheets  were  offered  in  evidence  but  not  received.  They  were  marked 
for  identification.  My  recollection  is  those  were  defendant's  exhibits 
E,  F  and  G  for  identification. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Any  others  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  In  addition  there  was  a  list  of  books  or  pamphlets 
which  I  think  was  exhibit  H,  defendant's  exhibit  H,  either  for  iden- 
tification or  in  evidence,  which  he  had,  he  said,  furnished  to  the 
United  States  attorney  in  the  course  of  his  preparation  as  a  witness 
in  the  Flynn  case.  Now  there  may  have  been  other  pieces  of  paper 
which,  at  the  moment,  I  do  not  recall. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  is  all  you  remember? 

Mr.  Sacher.  But  I  think  those  are  the  main  papers  in  any  event. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Those  are  all  you  know  of  now,  all  that  you  now 
recall  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Those  are  all  I  presently  recall. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  Mr.  Matusow  give  you  an  affidavit  made  by 
him? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Not  me.     Not  me. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  to  whom  he  gave  that  affidavit? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do  not.  I  was  here  in  Washington  at  the  time  that 
affidavit  was  executed  and  delivered,  and  I  do  not  know  of  my  own 
knowledge,  nor  do  I  even  know  by  hearsay,  as  to  whom  precisely  he 
delivered  it  to. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  835 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  Now,  by  that  affidavit,  do  you  mean  an  affidavit 
which  he  gave  recanting  certain  testimony  he  had  given  in  the  Flynn 

case  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  That  is  what  I  understood  you  to  refer  to. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  ever  at  any  time  discuss  with  Mr.  Witt 
the  matters  of  that  affidavit  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  At  no  time? 

Mr.  Sacher.  No,  sir,  not  prior  to  its  execution.  I  may  have  spoken 
to  him  subsequently  in  the  course  of  the  hearing  of  the  motion  because 
he  was  interested  in  the  hearing  before  Judge  Dimock  as  counsel  for 
Jencks,  and  he  was  in  court  and  I  may  have  had  conversations  with 
him  about  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine,  Did  you  have  anything  to  do  with  the  phrasing  or 
writing  of  the  affidavit,  Mr.  Sacher? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Nothing.     I  had  nothing  to  do  with  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  have  anything  to  do  with  the  procuring 
of  the  affidavit  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  had  not  a  thing  to  do  with  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  with  whom,  among  defense  counsel, 
that  matter  was  discussed  on  behalf  of  Mr.  Matusow  or  by  Mr. 
Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do  not.  I  should  say  by  way  of  explanation  that  I 
was  engaged  in  a  trial  right  here  in  the  District  of  Columbia  before 
Judge  Schweinhaut  from  January  10  to  February  3,  inclusive,  and  only 
got  to  my  home  on  weekends  and  so  that  I  had  my  hands  full  here 
in  the  District  and  other  people  took  care  of  what  had  to  be  done  in 
New  York. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Sacher,  have  you  defended  Gus  Hall,  a  Com- 
munist leader  and  bail  jumper? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  defended  Gus  Hall,  period. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Sacher,  have  you  ever  served  a  prison  sentence? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chainnan,  is  that  question  related  to  some  legis- 
lative purpose  ?  I  wonder. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  will  hear  counsel.  I  was  not  just 
certain  what  the  purpose  of  it  was. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  among  the  measures  under  consid- 
eration by  this  committee  is  proposed  legislation  for  the  purpose  of 
fixing  additional  standards  with  respect  to  the  practice  of  law  in  the 
Federal  courts.  Among  the  suggestions  for  inclusion  in  such  legisla- 
tion is  one  which  would  prohibit  members  of  the  Communist  Party 
from  practicing  in  Federal  courts.  It  is  germane  to  the  consideration 
of  such  legislation  to  inquire  into  the  circumstances  involving  the 
practice  of  law  in  Federal  court  by  persons  who  are  Communists  and 
by  persons  who  are  defending  Communists.  I  believe  that  the  in- 
quiries made  here  and  other  inquiries  which  have  been  made  and 
which  will  be  made  in  this  Matusow  case  have  bearing  upon  that  legis- 
lative problem  now  pending  before  the  committee. 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  would  like  to  be  heard,  Mr.  Chairman,  if  I  may. 
Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  thinks  that  you  should  lay  a  foun- 
dation for  that  first  by  asking  the  witness  if  he  is  a  member  of  the 
Communist  Party,  if  he  has  ever  been,  and  so  forth. 
Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  be  heard,  please? 
Senator  McClellan.  Briefly. 


836  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  my  understanding,  when  I  came  here, 
was,  as  given  to  me  by  those  who  served  the  subpena  to  me,  that  I  was 
going  to  be  interrogated  concerning  the  Matusow  recantation.  I  be- 
lieve, and  I  say  this  with  as  much  of  a  sense  of  responsibility  as  30 
years  of  practice  at  the  bar  have  given  me,  that  I  have  established 
rather  conclusively  by  evidence  other  than  Matusow's  own  recantation 
before  Judge  Dimock,  that  he  lied  and  lied  outrageously''  at  the  Flynn 
trial,  and  I  should  like  the  opportunity  before  I  leave  the  stand  today 
to  file  with  your  committee,  Mr.  Chairman,  copies  of  the  briefs  that 
I  filed  with  Judge  Dimock  and  copies  of  some  13  exhibits  that  I  pre- 
pared to  demonstrate  the  falsity  of  Matusow's  testimony  at  the  Flynn 
trial. 

The  suggestion  that  my  political  beliefs  or  associations  are  to  be  in- 
quired into  seems  to  me  to  be  diversionary  in  character.  I  maintain 
that  Matusow  lied  and  that,  if  this  committee  wants  to  know  how  our 
judicial  procedures  may  be  improved,  let  them  wait  until  Judge 
Dimock  passes  judgment  on  everything  that  transpired  before  him. 
Let  there  not  be  here  made  an  attempt  to  prejudice  the  determination 
not  only  by  Judge  Dimock,  but  by  the  people  of  the  United  States  as 
to  whetlier  or  not  Matusow  lied  when  he  testified  at  the  Flynn  trial. 
Now  I  submit,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  this — if  I  may  say  so — that  this  is 
doing  a  disservice  to  the  administration  of  justice. 

Senator  McClellan.  That  is  what  we  are  trying  to  find  out.  Now 
let  us  proceed,  Mr.  Counsel,  and  ask  the  proper  questions  to  lay  the 
foundation  for  this. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you,  Mr.  Sacher,  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party,  USA? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  been  called  here  because  of  my 
representation  of  the  defendants  in  United  States  against  Flynn  on 
a  motion  for  a  new  trial  on  the  ground  that  Harvey  Matusow  com- 
mitted perjury  in  their  trial.  I  have  answered  and  am  prepared  to 
answer  all  questions  concerning  my  participation  in  that  case.  I 
refuse.  I  refuse  categorically,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  discuss  my  beliefs, 
religious,  political,  economic,  or  social.  I  do  not  do  so  on  the  ground 
of  the  fifth  amendment.  I  do  so  because  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  dig- 
nity of  any  man  to  be  compelled  to  disclose  his  political,  religious,  eco- 
nomic, social,  or  any  other  views.  And  I  respectfully  submit  that  an 
inquiry  to  me  concerning  this  matter  is  not  pertinent  to  anything  with 
which  this  committee  is  concerned,  and  is  not  relevant  to  any  inquiry 
that  may  properly  be  made  of  me.  And  I  therefore  decline  on  the 
ground  that  I  cannot  with  any  regard  for  my  own  self-respect,  do 
otherwise,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  McClellan.  Well,  the  Chair  does  not  think  that  it  is  be- 
neath the  dignity  of  a  goad  citizen  of  the  United  States  to  answer  a 
^question  as  to  whether  he  is  a  member  of  an  organization  that  seeks 
the  overthrow  of  this  Government  by  force  and  violence  and  there- 
fore, the  Chair  propounds  to  you  now  the  question,  Are  you  now  a 
member  of  the  Communist  Party  of  the  United  States  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  medieval  inquisitors  also  thought  there 
was  no  impropriety  in  asking  those  whom  they  regarded  as  heretics 
to  answer  the  question. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  does  not  care  for  a  lecture.  The 
Chair  asked  you  a  question. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  837 

Mr.  Sacher.  And  I  decline  to  answer  that  question,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  orders  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  decline  to  answer  that  question  on  the  grounds  I 
have  already  stated. 

Senator  McClellats".  The  Chair  asks  you  another  question.  Have 
j'ou  ever  been  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  of  the  United  States? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  respectfully  submit,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  my  con- 
science dictates  to  me  that  I  shall  not,  under  your  compulsion  or  any- 
body else's  compulsion,  make  any  disclosure  of  any  of  my  beliefs, 
political,  religious,  economic,  or  social,  past  or  present,  and  I  decline 
to  answer  your  question. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  orders  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  respectfully  decline  to  answer  it. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  asks  you  another  question.  Have 
5^ou  ever  been  a  member  of  any  organization,  Communist  Party  or  by 
any  other  name,  that  advocates  and  seeks  the  overthrow  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States  by  force  and  violence  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  will  state  to  the  Chair  that  I  have  never  been  a  mem- 
ber of  any  organization  which  I  believed  to  be  a  teacher  or  advocate 
of  the  forcible  or  violent  overthrow  of  the  Government  of  the  United 
States. 

Senator  McClellan.  All  right.     You  may  proceed. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Have  you  ever  served  a  prison  sentence? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  have,  sir.  I  am  sure  that  that  will  be  most  illumi- 
nating for  the  legislative  purposes  that  the  committee  has  in  mind. 

Mr,  SouRwiNE.  What  was  that  sentence  for  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  was  sentenced  for  contempt  of  court. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  ever  been  disbarred  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  ever  been  ordered  disbarred  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  An  order  was  made  but  was  reversed  by  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States.  You  see,  Mr.  Chairman,  counsel  is  not 
interested  in  eliciting  the  truth.  He  is  interested  in  smearing  me, 
and  so  although  he  knows  that  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  reversed  my  disbarment,  he  asks  me  only  whether  I  was  dis- 
barred, and  I  respectfully  submit  it  is  unworthy  of  the  great  functions 
of  a  Senate  investigating  committee  to  do  that. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  thinks  you  have  a  perfect  right 
to  make  that  explanation. 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  beg  your  pardon  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  thinks  you  have  a  perfect  right  to 
make  that  explanation,  sir. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.    Thank  you. 
•   Senator  McClellan.  Proceed, 

■    Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you,  Mr.  Sacher,  ever  attend  a  gathering  of 
leaders  of  the  Communist  Party.  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Well,  I  defended  leaders  of  the  Communist  Party  of 
the  United  States  of  America  in  United  States  against  Dennis,  and 
I  imagine  I  must  have  attended  such  meetings,  certainly.  That  is 
what  you  do  when  you  defend  clients,  Mr.  Counsel.  You  meet  with 
them  occasionally, 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  attend  a  gathering  of  leaders  of  the 
Communist  Party  who  were  not  your  clients  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  am  not  aware  of  it. 


838  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  attend  a  birthday  party  for  Alex  Bittel- 
man  in  January  1950  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do  not  remember. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  attend  a  birthday  party  for  Alex  Bittel- 
man  in  January  1950  in  the  board  room  at  the  Communist  headquar- 
ters on  the  ninth  floor  in  New  York  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  don't  remember.  I  should  say  to  you,  Mr.  Counsel, 
that  you  are  speaking  of  a  period  when  the  Dennis  case  was  in  full 
progress,  and  I  cannot  say  whether  I  was  in  a  building  where  a  birth- 
day party  may  or  may  not  have  been  taking  place  at  the  time. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  attend  a  birthday  party  for  Alex  Bittel- 
man  at  which  Henry  Winston  proposed  a  toast,  "Comrades,  let's  drink 
a  toast  to  Alex"  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  have  no  recollection  of  that. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  have  any  connection  with  the  legal  commis- 
sion or  law  commission  of  the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do  not  know  of  any  such  organization  so  I  cannot 
say  anything  about  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  now  or  have  you  ever  been  a  member  of 
the  Lawyers'  Section  of  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  declined  before  and  I  decline 
again 

Senator  McClellan.  You  are  ordered  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Sacher.  On  the  grounds  that  I  have  already  stated  so  I  need 
not  take  the  time  of  the  committee,  and  I  reemphasize  that  there  is 
nothing  in  the  purposes  of  the  committee  or  the  Congress  which  com- 
prehends the  validity,  the  pertinence,  or  the  relevance  of  an  inquiry 
to  me  concerning  my  political  beliefs  or  affiliations.  I  respectfully 
decline  to  answer  that  question. 

Senator  McClellan.  May  I  say  to  you  I  have  great  respect  for  the 
law  profession.  I  have  tried  to  practice  a  little  law  myself.  But 
when  we  come  to  the  security  of  our  country,  an  organization  that  is 
dedicated  obviously  to  subversive  purposes  as  an  objective,  I  think 
it  becomes  the  duty  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  and  also  the 
duty  of  the  executive  branch  of  the  Government  to  try  to  ferret  these 
things  out  and  expose  them  if  they  relate  directly  to  the  national  se- 
curity— associations,  at  some  time,  and  the  knowledge  of  them,  may 
hel])  the  Congress  or  help  other  officials  of  the  Government  to  preserve 
national  security.  For  that  reason  the  Chair  thinks  that  the  question 
is  proper  and  directs  you  to  answer  it. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  respectfully  say  to  you  that,  without 
any  desire  to  be  immodest,  I  think  that  in  the  defense  of  those  that 
have  been  cliarged  under  the  Smith  Act  or  under  the  Internal  Secu- 
rity Act  of  1950,  I  have  acted  in  the  best  traditions  of  the  profession 
by  defending  the  rights  of  people  to  speak,  to  publish,  to  meet  under 
the  first  amendment. 

Senator  McClellan.  This  question  was  not  related  to  your  defend- 
ing anyone  in  court.  The  question  was  related  to  your  being  present 
or  being  a  member  of  a  group  of  lawyers,  presumably,  ostensibly  from 
the  question — I  do  not  know  what  the  answer  is — dedicated  to  the 
Communist  Party. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  for  30  years  I  have  practiced  law  in 
the  State  of  New  York  and  elsewhere  in  the  United  States,  and  I  think 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COJSCMUNISM  839 

again,  without  being  subject  to  the  charge  of  being  immodest,  that 
I  have  done  a  yeoman's  share  of  the  work  that  had  to  be  done  on 
behalf  of  the  working  men  and  women  of  our  country.  And  I  feel 
that  my  life  is  a  living  testimonial  to  what  I  am  and  to  what  I  have 
done  for  my  country,  and  I  respectfully  submit  it  is  a  late  time  of  the 
day  for  me  to  have  to  appear  before  anybody,  after  30  years  of 
honorable  practice,  to  testify  to  my  loyalty  to  the  democratic  institu- 
tions of  the  United  States,  and  I  unswervingly  and  unhesitatingly 
tell  you  my  devotion  is  to  the  best  interests  of  my  country.  And  I 
believe  that  I  am  serving  those  interests  when  I  refuse  to  bend  the 
knee  to  an  inquiry  concerning  my  innermost  thoughts  and  beliefs, 
whether  they  be  on  politics,  religion  or  anything  else.  My  conscience 
dictates  to  me  that  I  shall  not,  under  compulsion,  answer  today  any 
more  than  John  Freeborn  Lilliburne  answered  in  the  164:0's  to  the 
Court  of  Star  Chamber  and  on  the  same  grounds,  Mr.  Chairman,  on 
the  grounds  that  it  is  incompatible  with  the  dignity  of  the  individual 
to  make  compulsory  disclosure  of  his  thoughts  and  his  ideas  and  his 
beliefs,  I  must  respectfully  decline  to  answer  that  question. 

Senator  McClellan.  You  have  a  right  to  decline,  of  course,  if  you 
wish  to  invoke  your  constitutional  privilege. 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  am  invoking  my  rights  as  a  man  and  my  dignity  as 
a  man  and  I  am  not  invoking  any  privileges  against  self  incrimina- 
tion. I  have  never  done  anything  and  I  pledge  you,  Mr.  Chairman, 
I  shall  never  do  anything  which,  so  far  as  I  can  help,  will  expose  me 
to  any  criminal  charges. 

And  I  say  to  you  that  I  speak,  not  from  fear  of  incrimination  or 
prosecution,  I  speak  only  from  the  dictates  of  conscience.  And  I 
ask  all  Americans  to  join  me  in  resisting  inquiries  of  this  kind,  for 
when  the  day  comes  when  x\mericans  will  resist  inquiries  of  this  kind, 
we  shall  once  again  witness  a  restoration  of  those  liberties  which  we 
so  long  enjoyed  prior  to  the  advent  of  the  suppression  of  them. 

Senator  McClellan.  Now  you  have  made  your  speech.  You  are 
ordered  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  respectfully  decline,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  McClellan.  All  right,  proceed,  Mr.  Counsel. 

]Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  ask  that  the  witness  be 
ordered  to  answer  that  question  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  I  ordered  the  witness  to  answer  the  question. 
He  declined.     The  record  so  shows.     Proceed. 

Mr.  SoTjRWiNE.  Did  you  ever  attend  a  Communist  meeting  at  the 
home  of  Angus  Cameron  ? 

IMr.  Sacher.  I  don't  think  I  have  ever  been  at  the  home  of  Angus 
Cameron,  that  is,  at  least  I  have  no  recollection  of  having  been  at  his 
home. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you,  on  November  22, 1947,  attend  a  Communist 
meeting  at  the  home  of  Angus  Cameron  at  which  time  there  was 
present  besides  yourself,  one  Ann  Burlak,  B-u-r-l-a-k,  a  district  or- 
ganizer for  the  Communist  Party? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do  not  think  I  know  who  Ann  Burlak  is.  I  really 
don't. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now,  answer  the  question,  please. 

IMr.  Sacher.  I  can't.  I  don't  know  who  you  are  talking  about. 
How  can  I  answer  it  ? 

59886 — 55— pt.  10 2 


840  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouKwiNE.  Did  you  on  November  22,  1947,  attend  a  Commu- 
nist meeting  at  the  home  of  Angus  Cameron? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  do  not  know.  I  certainly  did  not  attend  any  Com- 
munist meeting,  but  I  do  not  know  whether  I  was  ever  at  Mr.  Cam- 
eron's home.     tVliere  was  that  ? 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  In  Boston,  sir. 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  have  a  recollection  of  being  at  Mr.  Cameron's  home 
once,  I  think  in  Boston. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.   Was  that  on  or  about  November  22,  1947? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  have  no  recollection,  not  only  of  the  month  or  the 
day,  but  even  the  year.     I  have  no  recollection. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  say  categorically  that  you  never  attended  a 
Communist  meeting  at  Mr.  Cameron's  home? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  was  at  Mr.  Cameron's  home.  I  don't  know  what 
meeting  took  place  there,  whether  it  was  Communist  or  not. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  to  save  time  I  ask  that  there  may 
be  inserted  in  the  record  at  this  point  a  tabulation  prepared  by  the 
Legislative  Reference  Service  of  the  Library  of  CongTess  of  citations 
to  Harry  Sacher  appearing  in  the  New  York  Times  Index. 

Mr.  Sacher.  May  I  see  a  copy  of  that  before  you  act  on.it,  Mr. 
Chairman? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  have  no  other  questions  of  this  witness. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  will  take  this  document  under 
advisement  for  the  present.  I  do  not  know  what  the  document  con- 
tains, myself. 

( The  document  in  question,  after  consideration,  was  ordered  printed 
in  the  record  at  this  point  as  exhibit  No.  57.) 

Exhibit  No.  57 

New  York  Times  Index  Citations  to  Harry  Sacher 

1955  (to  March  1) 
None 

1954 

Communists'  2d  group  of  leaders,  prosecution  of  (NYC)  :  argument  on  appeal, 

Appeals  Ct ;  H.  Sacher  denies  clear  and  present  danger  from  Communist  party 

...  My  11,  18 :  4 
ALP  rally,  NYC;  C  Lamont,  H  Sacher,  CT  McAvoy  S[peeches]  acting  chmn  Ross 

says  ALP  will  run  full  slate  in  effort  to  retain  status  as  legally  recognized  pol 

party.    My  7,  14  :  4 
US  Sup  Ct,  6-2,  overrules  permanent  disbarment  from  Fed  cts ;  remands  case  to 

lower  ct  for  rev ;  Sacher  'grateful,'  Ap  6,  24  :  2 
Regis  Under  Internal  Security  Act :  US  completes  case  against  Labor  Youth 

League  (LYL)  ;  defense  asks  dismissal;  NYS  Chmn  Bucholt  testifies;  Govt 

rests  case  against  Jefferson  School ;  H  Sacher  asks  dismissal ;  hearing  to  be 

moved  to  NYC,  F  17, 19 : 1, 5 

1953 

SACB  hears  arguments  on  IWO  legal  status ;  Sacher  charges  Lautner  lied  on 

Miss  Adams  ;  charges  slur  against  Presidents,  D  17, 28  : 1 
SACB  hearing  on  Jefferson  School  continues  .  .  .  Sacher  charges  hearsay,  D  16, 

26 :  3,  5 
SACB  [hearing]   .  .  .  Sacher  cross-examines  Budenz,  D  15,  25 :  2 
.  .  .  Dr.  Dodd  continues  testimony  on  Jefferson  School ;  nam&s  its  counsel  H 

Sacher,  faculty  members  LR  Bradley.     FV  Field,  AA  Heller,  L  Merrill,  M 

Schlauch,  A  Trachtenberg,  R  Young  and  H  Collins  as  Communists,  D  1,  2 :  4 
SACB  hearing  on  Jefferson  School  .  .  .  counsel  H  Sacher  opposes  regis,  N  26, 

39 : 1 
US  Appeals  Ct  Stays  Sacher  disbarment  to  permit  Sup  Ct  Rev  Je  21,  8  :  5 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  841 

Appeals  Ct  upholds  disbarment  from  Fed  practice  in  NY  Southern  Dist. ;  por  Jl  7, 

1:  1 

1952 

.  .  .  [W  Z  Foster's]  atty  H  Sacher,  Govt  Arguments  revd.  O  28, 11 :  4 

He  starts  prison  sentence,  Ap  25,  8 :  4,  7 

Attys  ordered  to  surrender  to  begin  sentences.     Ap  23,  7 :  2 

US  Supt  Ct  rejects  Communists'  attys  plea  to  rev  decision  upholding  contempt- 

of-ct  sentences;  refuses  to  stay  mandate  informing  NY  trial  ct  of  decision, 

Ap  22,  11 :  2 
Sup  Ct  upholds  '49  contempt  sentence,  Mr.  11, 11 : 1 
Ct  denies  H  Sacher  plea  for  stay  of  disbarment  pending  G  Hall  appeal,  Ja  31, 

6:4 
Stay  granted  pending  final  decision  of  appeal,  Ja  29, 11 :  4 
Decision  reserved  on  H  Sacher  request  for  stay  of  disbarment;  NY  County 

Lawyers  Assn  and  NYC  Bar  Assn  Atty  argue  against  stay,  Ja  19,  8  :  2 
Solicitor  Gen  asks  Sup  Ct  uphold  contempt  sentences  meted  out  to   [defense 

attys],  Ja  10, 14:  2 
Disbarred  from  Fed  ct  practice,  Ja  5, 1 :  6 
Illus.  Ja  5,  5 :  3 

1951 

Sacher  unsuccessfully  moves  for  new  trial ;  illus,  D  28,  4 :  4 

Sacher  files  brief  to  show  ct  lacks  power,  D  8,  3  :  8 

Sacher  offers  hosp  evidence  on  mole  removal  in  '50,  N  29,  18 :  2 

Judge  Ryan  examines  Hall's  scars;  prosecution  asks  punishment  for  willful 

disobedience  of  surrender  order ;   Sacher  replies,   citing  lack  of  precedent, 

N27, 18:  1 
Sacher  moves  for  in-oceedings  dismissal ;  says  ct  lacks  power  to  impose  contempt 

penalty  for  bail-jumping,  N  22,  21 :  1 
Hall  contempt  trial  set ;  Sacher  to  be  atty,  N  14,  19  :  5 

Ct  denies  H  Sacher  plea  for  more  time  for  Hall  to  retain  counsel;  Sacher, 

I  Jofte  and  E  N  Jackson  to  be  witnesses  .  .  .,  N  3,  6  :  6,  8 
Sup  Ct  Grants  rev  of  contempt-of-ct  convictions  of  Communist  leaders'  attys 

tSacher,    Isserman,   McCabe,    Gladstein   and    Crockett,    and   of   Dennis,    own 

atty  ...  O  23,  1 :  6 
Grand  jury  hearing ;  .  .  .  Sacher  .  .  .  questioned,  Ag  10,  6 :  5 
.  ,  .  Ryon  denies  Stachel  attys  Sacher  and  Isserman  motion  for  his  release  on 

ground  imprisonment  aggravates  heart  condition,  Ag  9,  4  :  3,  7 
Jones,  Garrett,  Flynn,  Bachrach  and  atty  H  Sacher  illus,  Jl  4,  5 :  2 
...  St  scene ;  defense  motions  denied  .  .  .  Jl  3, 1 :  1,  2 
Sacher  to  seek  sentence  suspension,  Je  30,  5 :  8 

Ct  curbs  defense  atty  H  Sacher  efforts  to  delay  surrender,  Je  28, 1 :  2 
Communist  leaders  defense  attys  and  E  Dennis  ask  US  Sup  Ct  to  reconsider 

refusal  to  rev  their  case;  ask  for  stay  of  jail  sentence  pending  ct  ruling  on 

their  appeal  on  behalf  of  convicted  Communist  leaders,  Je  17,  39 :  2 
.".  get  wk"s  stay,  Je  13,  32  :  6 
Ct  reverses  decision,  Je  12,  16 :  4 
5  Attys  and  Dennis  petition  Appeals  Ct  in  NY  for  stay  of  sentence  in  order  to 

apply  for  rehearing  .  .  .  Je  8, 17 :  2 
Editorial,  Je  6,  30:  3 
H  Sacher  resigns  as  Local  306  [motion  pictures  machine  operators  Union  AFL] 

counsel,  H.  E  Cooper  succeeds,  Je  6,  22 :  5 
U  S  Sup  Ct  refuses  to  rev  contempt-of-ct  conviction,  Je  5,  1 : 1 ;  Je  5,  27 :  6 
Sacher  and  A  J  Isserman  file  briefs  in  reply  to  bar  assns  motion  for  disbarment, 

Mr  10,  13  :  1 
Amer  Bar  Assn  com  rept  urges  Communists  and  sympathizers  be  expelled  from 

bar  assns  and  disbarred  ;  recommends  querying  future  and  present  members  on 

Communist  ties;  H  Sacher  scores  rept  as  terrorism  move,  F  25,  44:  1 

1950 

Fed  Dist  Ct,  Conn,  hearing  on  NYC  Bar  Assn  and  NY  County  Lawyers  Assn 

petition  to  disbar  Sacher  and  Isserman,  D  22,  1 :  2 
Sup  Ct  delays  decision  on  revg  contempt  convictions  of  Communist  lawyers, 

O  24,  1 :  2 
H  Sacher  and  A.  J  Isserman  file  brief  with  US  Dist  Ct  to  dismiss  NYC  Bar 

Assn  iind   NY   County  Lawyers  Assn  petition  to  bar  them  from  practicing 

in  IT  S  Cts  in  dist,  O  17,  24 :  4 


842  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Hearing  to  bar  H  Saclier  and  A  J  Isserman  from  practicing  in  Fed  Ct  adjourned 

until  Nov  15,  S7,  33 :  1 
Sacher  and  Isserman  win  13-day  delay  to  reply  to  disbarment  motion ;  bar  assns 

opposed,  As;  30,  13 :  3 
Fed  ct  preliminary  hearings  on  NYC  Bar  Assn  disbarment  proceedings  against 

Sacher  and  Isserman.     Jl  12,  52  :7 
NYC  Bar  Assn  to  probe  15  attys  for  'misconduct'  in  circulating  petition   in 

behalf  of  Isserman  and  Sacher,  who  face  disbarment  proceedings,  My  17, 

26:  6 
Appeals  ct  denies  petition  of  5  Communist  leaders  attys  and  E  Dennis  for  re- 
hearing on  contempt  convictions  .  .  .  My  16,  13  :5 
Disbarment  motions  on  Sacher  and  Isserman  adjourned  until  June  27,  My  13,. 

9:  8 
Nat'l  Lawyers  Guild  pledges  aid  to  convicted  attys  .  . .,  My  8,  6  :  4 
Judge  PO'Brien  warns  right  of  attys  to  handle  unpopular  cases  will  be  ended 

if  conviction  of  Communists  attys  is  upheld,  s,  Natl  Lawyers  Guild,  My  7, 

85:3 
Attys  for  Communist  leaders  win  stay  of  execution  on  contempt-of-ct  sentences,. 

My2,  8:  5 
With  E  Dennis  file  brief  asking  for  convictions  rehearing.  Appeals  Ct,  My  3, 

2:2 
NYC  Bar  Assn  and  NY  County  Lawyers  Assn  ask  disbarment  of  H  Sacher  and 

A  J  Isserman  ;  they  comment,  Ap  15,  8 :  8 
US  Appeals  Ct  upholds,  2-1,  Judge  Medina  contempt-of-ct  sentencing  of  5  attya 

for  convicted  Communist  leaders,  and  E  Dennis,  who  acted  as  own  counsel ; 

opinions  quoted,  Ap  6,  1 :  6 
Prof  I  Emerson  sees  pattern  of  harassment  of  lawyers  appearing  for  'left  wing' 

defendants,  s,  Civil  Liberties  Union;   says  Judge  Medina  should  have  left 

to  another  judge  task  of  contempt  sentence  for  Communist  leaders  attys,  E 

23.  30 :  7 
Attys  for  11  convicted  Communists  file  reply  brief  on  appeal  from  contempt  con-^ 

victions,  F  18,  6 :  3 
Stay  of  execution  of  sentences  until  May  2  granted,  F  8,  14 : 2 
Defense  case  argued,  F  7,  16 : 1 
Goot  files  brief  to  uphold  Judge  Medina  sentences,  US  Circuit  Ct  of  Appeals,. 

F  5,  4  :  1 
Natl  Lawyers  Defense  Com  sponsors  rally  for  convicted  attys ;  Prof  Emerson  s 

read,  F  3,  20  :  4 
16 . . .  sign   statement  protesting  censure   of   attys   who   defend   minority  and 

labor  groups  ;  score  contempt  conviction  of  Communists  defense  attys,  F  1, 19  :  5 

1949 

Communist  defense  attys  hon  at  Civil  Rights  Cong  dinner,  NYC ;  s  on  their 

sentences,  D  19,  21 :  4 
Communist  defense  attys  win  2  mo  postponement  on  hearing  of  appeal  against 

contempt  of  ct  convictions ;  sentences  stayed,  D  6,  4 :  4 
Communist  defense  attys  to  seek  postponement  of  their  appeal  from  contempt 

charges,  N  26,  28 :  8 
Defense  attvs  for  convicted  top  Communists  win  stay  of  contempt  sentences  until 

Dec  12,  N  2,  5 :  1 
Attys  file  notice  of  appeal  from  sentences,  O  22,  1 :  8 

NY  County  Lawyers  Assn  names  subcom  to  weigh  disbarment,  O  18,  21 :  1 
Communist  party  members  urged  to  protest  to  Pres  Truman  against  Communist 

defense  attys  contempt  sentences,  O  16,  1 :  7 
Attys  who  defended  US  Communist  leaders  in  conspiracy  trial  sentenced  by  Fed 

Judge  Medina  for  contempt  of  ct,  O  15,  1:  8 
Medina  statement,  O  15.  3 :  2 

Scene  described ;  NYC  Bar  Assn  plans  action  against  H  Sacher  and  A  J  Isser- 
man;  speculation  on  disbarment  of  all;  comment  by  PL  Ross,  O  15,  4:  3, 

6,  7 ;  by  convicted  attys,  O  15,  5 :  2 ;  ed.  O  15,  14 :  1 
Local  306  meeting  [Motion  Picture  Machine  Operators  Union] ;  vote  to  retain 

counsel  H  Sacher,  Jl  15,  3 :  8 
.  .  .  H  Sacher  dropped  as  gen  counsel  [of  Shoe  Workers  of  America,  United 

(CIO)],  My  10,  15:  2 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  843 

1948 

Left-wing  locals  pledge  to  support  Quill  policies ;  Sacher,  W  Quaytmen,  H  Poritz 
and  F  Joffe  fired  ...  D  8,  26 :  3 

Quill  bars  speaking  invs  to  P  Robeson  and  H  Sacher  .  .  .  D  4,  28  :  1 

Hogan  resumes  full  duties ;  to  ignore  cliarges  [of  leftists  draining  international 
treas,  etc.]  ;  Sacher  comments,  N  25,  63 :  4 

H  Sacher  and  3  officers  offer  data  to  US  Atty  on  alleged  fraud  in  recent  Local  100 
referendum,  N  20,  7 :  5 

Quill  demands  left-wing  com  observe  Armistice  Day ;  walks  out  after  denouncing 
com  as  brain-child  of  Communist  party  in  TWU ;  scores  Hogan  and  H  Sacher, 
N  16,  34 :  5 

D  L  MacMahon  and  H  Sacher  charge  voting  fraud  in  recent  Local  100  in  referen- 
dum ;  ask  U  S  Atty  action ;  sec-treas  G  Faber  denies  charge,  O  22,  22 :  5 

M  Quill  repts  Communists  and  H  Sacher  eiforts  to  get  him  to  back  Wallace  in 
Dec  '47   s  12  ■  41 :  2 

Local  802'[of  American  Federation  of  Musicians  (AFL)  (AFM)]  exec  bd  mem- 
bers vote  to  dismiss  H  Sacher  as  gen  counsel;  Sacher  statement,  S  11,  2 :  2 

Quill  predicts  anti-Communist  victory  at  Chicago  Conv ;  revs  fight  against  left- 
wing,  statement  following  Local  100  exec  bd  approval  of  Sacher  ouster ;  Sacher 
comments,  S  9,  18 :  3 

Local  100  exec  bd  meets ;  votes  to  dismiss  Sacher  .  .  .  Hogan  comments  on  Sacher 
dismissal,  S  8,  1 :  2 

Internatl  exec  bd  meeting,  NYO  .  .  .  MacMahon,  Santo  and  Sacher  get  confi- 
dence vote ;  Quill  calls  Local  100  meeting  for  Sacher  dismissal  action ;  Sacher 
comments ;  Quill  warns  MacMahon,  Santo  and  Sacher  not  to  attend,  S  7,  1 :  6 

O'Dwyer  names  TWU  officers  A  Hogan,  D  L  MacMahon,  J  Santo  and  H  Sacher 
as  leaders  in  Communist-directed  scheme  to  strike  on  transit  lines  in  preference 
to  accepting  pay  rise  .  .  .  My  21,  1:5 

Citizens  Budget  Comm  counsel  Riegelman  supports  O'Dwyer  legal  right  to  use 
funds  for  deficit,  reply  to  Sacher  .  .  .  Ap  24,  1 :  4 

TWU  challenges  bd  right  to  use  revenue  increase  for  debt;  counsel  H.  Sacher 
interprets  Rapid  Transit  Law  .  .  .  Ap  23,  25  :  8 

1947 

US  drops  fight  to  force  Santo  to  testify;  Sacher  hails  action;  claims  move  foils 

alleged  perjury  attempt ;  to  seek  delay  on  hearings,  O  11, 15 : 4, 6 
Ct  orders  Santo  to  testify  ;  Sacher  plans  appeal,  O  4, 1 :  6 
J.  Santo  refuses  to  testify  at  deportation  hearing;  US  gets  show  cause  order; 

hearing  adjourns  pending  Ct  action;  atty  H  Sacher  charges  Govt  suborns 

perjury,  O  2,  3 :  1 
Johnson  again  testifies;  describes  G  Eisler  connection;  incriminates  Sacher,  S 

19,  1 :  2 
L  F  Budenz  charges  Communist  tie,  hearing ;  Sacher  assails  slurs  against  himself 

and  Quill,  S  13,  1 :  6 
US  charges  Communist  tie  in  amended  complaint ;  hearing ;  illus ;  defense  counsels 

score  hearing ;  Sacher  Attacks  Govt  witnesses,  S  12,  3  :  2 
TWU  counsel  Sacher  links  union  conflict;  to  seek  delay  [in  Santo  case] ;  cites 

Santo  war  record,  S  7,  1 :  6 ;  wins  3-day  delay,  S  9, 1 : 1 
Sacher  sees  TWU  as  victor,  Je  26,  15  : 1 
Ed,  Mr  Sacher's  Discoveries,  Je  21,  16  :  2 
4  workers  go  on  trial ;  charged  described ;  denied  by  men ;  Sacher  charges  bd 

is  putting  TWU  on  trial,  not  men ;  says  other  workers  resent  action,  Je  20, 1 :  2 
Bd  refuses  to  drop  suspensions ;  Sacher  scores  bd.  Je  11, 1 :  8 
TWU  counsel  Sacher  and  bd  estimate  pay  rise  costs,  Je  10, 1 :  8 
TWU  atty  H  Sacher  takes  issue  with  ed  No  Fare  Rise,  No  Pay  Rise,  [My  6,  26:  2] 

My  8. 1 :  3 ;  16 :  2 ;  ed  on  issues.  My  9,  20 :  4 

1946 

Lr  on  arbitration  award  in  TWU  local  100-5th  Av  Coach  Co  dispute,  Jl  16,  22: 

7 ;  reply,  Jl  17,  22  :  8 
.  .  .  ALP  designates  H  Sacher  for  Repr  in  28th  Dist.  Je  20,  24 :  3 
Testifies,  Transit  Advisory  Com.  hearing.  May  21,  17  :  7 
Testifies,  Transit  Advisory  Com  hearing,  Mr  13,  31 :  5 ;  Mr  14,  31 :  5 
Comments  on  TWU  demands  for  sole  bargaining  rights,  radio  S,  F  26, 13  :  6 


844  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

1945 
Testifies,  WLB  hearing  on  NYO  Omnibus  Corp  dispute  with  TWU,  Jl  25,  24 :  S 

1944 

.  None^  . 

19-13 

None 

This  list  does  not  include  the  many  pages  of  citations  to  the  Communist  trials 
before  Judge  Medina. 

[Joan  Rapaich,  History  and  General  Research  Division,  April  11,  1955.] 

Mr.  Sacher.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  ask  you  to  be  good  enough  to 
receive  in  evidence  copies  of  the  brief  which  I  filed  with  Judge  Dimock 
and  copies  of  exhibits  which  I  submitted  with  the  brief  to  demonstrate 
that  Matusow  testified  falsely  in  the  Flynn  trial  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  You  may  submit  your  documents.  They  will 
be  referred  to  the  committee  for  inspection  and  for  such  proper  use  of 
them  as  the  committee  thinks  is  advisable. 

Mr.  Sacher.  Thank  you.    May  I  hand  them  to  you,  Mr.  Chairman  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  You  may ;  yes,  sir.  Lay  them  right  down  on 
the  table.  We  will  get  them,  all  right.  All  right.  Are  there  any 
other  questions,  Mr.  Sourwine  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  have  no  more  questions  of  this  witness. 

Senator  McClellan.  You  are  excused,  Mr.  Sacher. 

Call  your  next  witness. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Anita  Willcox. 

Senator  McClellan.  Mrs.  Willcox,  will  you  stand  and  be  sWom^ 
please? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  requested  of  Mr,  Sourwine  2  days 
ago  there  be  no  pictures  taken  and  that  request  was  made  by  telephone 
and  the  request  was  made  specifically  with  respect  to  pictures  being 
taken  before  Mrs.  Willcox  testified. 

Senator  McClellan.  Just  a  moment,  gentlemen.  No  more  pic- 
tures. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Needless  to  say,  the  request  that  way  is  hardly  honored. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  did  not  quite  get  your  remark, 
Counsel. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  say,  when  I  made  a  request  of  Mr.  Sourwine  of  the 
kind  I  did  several  days  ago  and  pictures  are  taken  here  after  he  knew 
my  request  and  told  me  he  was  going  to  give  it  to  the  committee,  the 
request  is  worthless.  Either  the  committee  is  going  to  give  a  degree 
of  privacy  to  witnesses  or  it  isn't. 

Senator  McClellan.  If  you  will  have  a  seat  now,  we  will  try  to 
proceed.    Will  you  be  sworn,  please  ? 

Do  you  solemnly  swear  that  the  evidence  you  shall  give  before  the 
Internal  Security  Subcommittee  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary 
of  the  United  States  Senate  in  the  course  of  this  investigation  shall 
be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help  you 
God? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  do. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  845 

TESTIMONY  OP  MRS.  ANITA  WILICOX,  ACCOMPANIED  BY  LEONARD 

B.  BOUDIN,  HER  ATTORNEY 

Senator  McCiiELLAN.  I  think  the  record  should  show— Will  you 
state  your  name,  please,  sir. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  am  Leonard  B.  Boudin,  25  Broad  Street,  New  York 
City. 

Senator  McGlellan.  You  may  proceed,  Mr.  Counsel. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Will  you  give  the  committee  your  full  name  and 
home  address,  please. 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  Anita  Willcox,  38  Dock  Road,  South  Norwalk, 
Conn. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  have  an  address  in  New  York  City? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  do. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  What  is  it  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  280  West  11th  Street. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Are  you  the  same  Anita  Willcox  who  was  bom  in 
Chicago  on  the  11th  of  December? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  11th  of  November. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  11th  of  November. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  SouRTNT^NE.  Did  you,  Mrs.  Willcox 

Mrs.  Willcox.  May  I  ask,  you  see  I  have  never  appeared  before  a 
committee  before  and  I  have  a  statement  about  making  this  bail  for 
Harvey  Matusow.     Could  I  read  it  ?     It  is  very  short. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  offer  this  statement  to  the  committee  24 
hours  in  advance  of  your  appearance  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  don't  know.     I  talked  to  Mr.  Boudin. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  There  is  a  committee  rule  requiring 

Mr.  Boudin.  The  statement  is  a  very  short  one.  I  think  the  com- 
mittee can  see  it  in  a  minute. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  There  is  a  committee  rule  requiring  that  statements 
to  be  presented  by  witnesses  be  submitted  24  hours  in  advance.  I  be- 
lieve this  statement  should  be  submitted  to  the  committee.  The  com- 
mittee will  consider,  v»^hen  it  has  an  opportunity,  whether  this  state- 
ment, as  such,  is  to  be  admitted  into  the  record. 

Mr.  Boudin.  Can  we  not  have  the  committee  look  into  it  now  ?  It  is 
two  pages. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  You  will  only  be  questioned  on  the  subject 

Mr.  Boudin.  May  I  address  the  chairman  for  a  second  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  will  hear  you.     Proceed. 

Mr.  Boudin.  Mrs.  Willcox  prepared  a  statement  which  she  gave 
me  over  the  weekend  which  is  very  short  and  is  a  statement  as  to  why 
she  put  up  bail  for  Mr.  Matusow.  I  think  the  committee  will  see 
that  it  is  a  perfectly  proper  nonlitigious  one  and  I  think  she  should 
be  given  the  opportunity  to  make  the  statement  and  I  would  like  the 
committee  to  take  this  now  from  me  if  I  may. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Chair  will  receive  your  statement  for  the 
present.     Send  it  up. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Boudin,  you  are  familiar,  are  you  not,  with  the 
24-hour  rule  of  the  committee  ? 

Mr.  Boudin.  I  am  familiar  with  the  fact  that  regularly  the  com- 
mittee does  not  require  the  24-hour  rule  in  practice,  as  are  you,  Mr. 
Sourwine. 


846  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Senator  McClellan.  Tliat  has  eluded  the  committee.  I  am  not 
chairman  of  this  committee.  I  am  only  acting  chairman  today.  It 
has  not  been  my  privilege  and  opportunity  to  be  present  at  all  of  these 
proceedings.  We  have  the  same  rule  for  the  Permanent  Investigating 
Subcommittee  and  we  are  adhering  to  the  rule  there  in  these  matters 
where  we  have  something  under  investigation,  unless  it  is  purely  re- 
lating to  some  bill  that  is  pending.  In  fact,  this,  as  a  general  rule, 
I  think,  applies  to  all  of  the  committees  of  the  Congress.  ^Hiere  it 
is  related  to  some  bill  that  is  pending  and  where  the  testimony  is  not 
under  oath  sometimes  these  statement  are  permitted  to  be  read,  but 
where  witnesses  are  subpenaed  and  brought  in  to  testify  under  oath 
in  a  proceeding  of  this  nature,  an  investigative  proceeding,  if  the  Chair 
and  committee  do  not  observe  the  rule,  if  they  go  to  breaking  it,  what- 
ever the  circumstance  may  be,  then  we  are  going  to  subject  ourselves 
to  a  procedure  that  would  not  be  orderly  and  that  might  well  bring 
about  a  great  deal  of  disorder  and  chaos,  so  for  the  present,  the  wit- 
ness may  testify.  This  statement  will  be  inspected  and  if  it  is  all 
right,  there  will  be  no  objection  to  placing  it  in  the  record  or  letting 
the  witness  read  it.  You  may  proceed  with  the  questioning  for  the 
present,  Mr.  Counsel. 

Mr.  SoTJRWiNE.  Did  you,  Mrs.  Willcox,  sign  a  check  for  $10,000  dated 
March  30, 1955,  on  the  South  Norwalk  Trust  Co.,  drawn  to  the  United 
States  Trust  Co.,  45  Wall  Street,  in  payment  for  cashier's  check  No. 
34310  on  the  United  States  Trust  Co.  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  did. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  That  cashier's  check  was  drawn  payable  to  the  clerk 
of  the  United  States  District  Court,  El  Paso,  Tex.  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Right. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  It  was  turned  over  by  Joe  Calamica,  attorney  for 
Harvey  Matusow,  to  meet  Matusow's  bond  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Well,  I  don't  know  who  turned  it  over  but  I  sent  it 
for  that  purpose. 

Mr.  SoTTRwiNE.  To  whom  did  you  send  it  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Well,  I  gave  it  to  Mr.  Faulkner. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Stanley  Faulkner?  • 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Attorney  for  Mr.  Matusow? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Had  Mr.  Faulkner  asked  you  to  do  this? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Well,  now,  I  mean  he  didn't  ask  me  to  do  it. 

Mr.  SoTiRwiNE.  Who  asked  you  to  do  it  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Albert  Kahn. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  Mr.  Kahn  ask  you  to  send  the  check  to  Mr. 
Faulkner? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Well,  we  discussed  it.  He  asked  me  if  I  would  put 
up  bail  for  Harvey  Matusow  and  I  agreed  to  do  so. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  offer  for  the  record  at  this  time 
a  photostat  of  the  cashier's  check  and  a  letter  from  the  bank  with 
which  the  photostat  was  transmitted  in  response  to  this  committee's 
subpena. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  witness  has  admitted  the  check.  This 
check  may  be  made  an  exhibit  and  also  the  letter,  transmitting  it  to 
counsel  of  the  committee,  may  be  admitted. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  847 

(A  photostat  of  the  cashier's  check  and  letter  of  transmittal  were 
marked  "Exhibits  58  and  58A,"  respectively,  and  will  be  found  in  the 
subcommittee  files.) 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  see  the  check,  Mr.  Chairman  ? 

Mr,  SouRwiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  has  anyone  returned  or  repaid  you 
that  $10,000  or  any  part  of  it  or  offered  to  return  or  repay  it  or  any 
part  of  it? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Well,  I  don't  quite  undei-stand  the  question.  No 
one  has  paid  me.  There  has  been  no  repayment.  I  expect  to  get  that 
after  this  appeal  has  been  cleared  up. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Has  anyone  furnished  you  any  portion  of  the 
money  you  put  up  for  this  check  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  habitually  carry  in  your  personal  account, 
the  account  on  which  this  $10,000  check  was  drawn,  a  balance  in  excess 
of  $10,000? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  It  varies  from  time  to  time.  Sometimes  it  is  more 
and  sometimes  it  is  less,  depending  on  what  investments  I  am  making. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  raise  a  question  with  you  and 
then  if  your  ruling  is  against  me,  I  will  merely  state  an  objection. 
Apparently  the  inquiry  here  relates,  as  indicated,  to  the  fact  that  Mrs. 
Willcox  put  up  bail  in  the  United  States  district  court  for  Mr.  Matu- 
sow.  His  legal  right,  his  constitutional  right  to  bail,  is  something 
that  I  am  not  directly  involved  in  because  we  do  not  represent  him. 
But  he  clearly  has  such  a  right.  The  right  of  any  citizen  likewise  to 
put  up  bail  for  someone  who  needs  it  would  seem  to  be  unquestioned. 

Is  it  the  ruling  of  the  Chair  that  an  inquiry  into  Mrs.  Willcox 
putting  up  bail  in  accordance  with  the  Constitution  is  a  proper  inquiry 
of  this  committee  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  Yes ;  it  is  a  proper  inquiry  of  the  committee. 
People  do  many  things  that  they  have  a  real  right  to  do  that  may 
become  a  subject  of  inquiry,  and  it  is  her  right  to  furnish  the  bail 
or  furnish  the  money,  the  cash  bail.  Her  right  to  do  that  is  not 
questioned.  The  circumstances  under  which  it  is  done  sometimes  may 
be  a  matter  of-inquiry  and  that  is  the  purpose  of  this. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Then  may  I  simply  state  for  the  record  now  that  I 
deny  the  jurisdiction  of  this  committee  to  make  this  inquiry  and  that 
I  do  regard  it  as  an  infringement  of  the  constitutional  right  to  bail 
and  the  legal  right  of  a  citizen  to  put  up  bail. 

Senator  McClellan.  Yes,  sir;  you  may  make  that  statement  and 
that  statement  will  stay  in  the  record.  You  have  a  right  to  object. 
The  committee  will  proceed.  The  Chair  overrules  the  objection. 
Counsel  will  proceed  with  the  interrogation. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  have  you  ever  contributed  financially 
to  the  support  of  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  have  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  contributed  money  for  the  Communist 
Party  or  its  defense  ? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  What  was  that? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  contributed  money  for  the  Communist 
Party  or  for  its  defense  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Mr.  Boudin  says  what  do  you  mean  by  "defense"? 
I  don't  know. 


848  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  BouDiN".  In  other  words,  there  can  be  a  broad  ramification  of 
meaning  as  I  understand  the  way 

Senator  McClellan.  Just  a  moment.  The  Chair  will  clear  it  up. 
As  I  understand,  Counsel,  you  are  asking  the  witness  if  she  has  con- 
tributed money  for  the  defense  of  the  Communist  Party.  I  assume 
you  refer  to  its  Communist  leaders  who  have  been  charged  with  crime 
and  brought  to  trial  ? 

Mr.  SoTjRwiNE.  Yes,  sir. 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.  No ;  I  haven't.     I  never  have.     So  that  is  that. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Have  you  contributed  money  for  use  otherwise  for 
the  benefit  of  the  Communist  Party  or  its  leaders? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  No. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Well,  now,  just  a  moment.  That  is  exactly  the 
question 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  don't  let  the  counsel  testify  for  the 
witness. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  am  not  testifying.  That  is  exactly  the  testimony 
you  remember,  Mr.  Chairman,  you  got  an  elucidation  from  counsel 
on.  Now  he  has  reverted  to  a  broad  question  which  has  no  meaning 
at  all  and  I  would  like  the  question  to  be  repeated  so  that  you  can 
hear  it. 

Senator  McClellan.  Repeat  the  question  and  the  Chair  will  try 
to  rule  on  it. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Will  you  read  the  question,  please,  Mr.  Reporter? 

(The  reporter  read  the  pending  question  as  above  recorded.) 

Mr.  BouDiN.  You  will  understand  my  point,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  McClei.lan.  I  understand  your  point.  Your  objection  is 
overruled.  The  witness  will  be  ordered  to  answer  the  question.  You 
may  answer  the  question. 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  Well,  I  mean  I  have  not  ever  given  any  money  to 
the  Communist  Party  at  all,  period. 

Mr.  SouKwiXE.  Are  you  acquainted  with  any  of  the  following  Com- 
munist leaders :  Ella  Reeve  Bloor  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Elizabeth  Gurley  Flynn? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  No. 

Mr.  SoTTRwiNE.  Grace  Hutchins? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOX.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Claire  Bodian  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Anna  Rochester? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  No,  sir. 

Mrs.  SouRWiNE.  Clarina  Michaelson  ? 

Mrs,  WiLLCOx.  I  think  I  met  her  a  long  time  ago,  but  I  did  not  even 
know  she  was  a  Communist,  I  mean  now  or  then.  I  haven't  seen  her 
for  years. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Are  you,  Mrs.  Willcox,  opposed  to  the  Communist 
Party,!!.  S.  A.? 

(The  witness  consults  her  counsel.) 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Well,  my  counsel  says  he  thinks  that  he  doesn't 
know  what  that  means  and  maybe  this  is  a  matter  of  opinion  that 
I  should  not  go  into.    I  mean,  I  really  do  not  know. 

Senator  McClellan.  Do  you  want  to  state  whether  you  oppose  the 
Communist  Party,  having  in  mind  that  it  is  an  organization  termed  a 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  849 

conspiracy  to  overthrow  this  Government  by  force  and  violence «    Tho 

question  is— the  Chair  makes  that  explanation  so  that  you  may 'better 

understand  the  purpose  of  the  question— whether  you  oppose  it 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  Well,  now,  look,  I  would  certainly  be  opposed  to 

any  organization  which  really  and  in  fact  conspired  to  overthrow  this 

(jovernment  by  force  and  violence,  but  I  am  opposed  to  all  violence 

and  1  certainly  would  be  opposed  to  any  violence  on  the  part  of  the 

Communist  Party  or  any  other  organization. 

Senator  McClellan.  Thank  you  very  much.    Proceed,  Mr.  Coun- 
sel. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Have  you,  Mrs.  Willcox,  ever  taken  any  action  in 
opposition  to  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Listen,  I  am  an  artist.    I  don't  do  anything  political. 

tJJ'^^c?^  political— I  don't  take  any  political  action  at  all. 

Mr  SouRwiNE.  Have  you  ever,  Mrs.  Willcox,  by  any  action  other 
than  hnancial,  given  aid  to  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  have  never  given  any  aid  to  the  Communist  Party. 

benator  McClellan.  The  witness  has  testified  that  she  has  given  no 
aid  to  the  Communist  Party. 

nT^  o  ^*^^^^N-  ^^^y  I  appeal  to  the  chairman,  when  counsel  such  as 
Mr.  bourwme  asks  questions  of  that  kind  of  breadth,  and  I  think 
meaningless,  I  think  it  puts  any  witness  in  an  unfair  position.  What 
IS  this  aid  and  comfort  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  If  you  will  permit  the  Chair,  he  will  try  to 
keep  it  on  the  track. 

Mr.  BoupiN.  I  hope  the  Chair  will,  but  how  can  I  call  the  attention 
of  the  Chair  to  the  breadth  of  a  question  which  I  think  is  improper 
except  by  objection  ? 

^u^^^^^^^  McClellan.  All  right,  the  question  carried  an  implication 
that  she  had  contributed  whereas  she  has  testified  that  she  did  not. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Yes. 

Senator  McClellan.  Now,  then,  the  question  should  be  so  worded 
as  to  elicit  the  further  fact  if  she  contributed  to  any  other  organiza- 

Proceed,  Mr.  Counsel. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  did  you  know  that  vour  husband  had 
contributed  to  the  United  May  Day  Committee  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  He  doesn't  ask  me  about  his  contributions.  He 
makes  a  great  many  contributions,  and  whether  he  has  contributed 
to  that  particular  committee  or  not,  I  am  not  prepared  to  answer,  be- 
cause I  really  do  not  follow  his  contributions. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Is  it  your  answer  that  you  do  not  know  ? 
know^*      ^^^^^^'  ^  *^'^^  *^^^  ^^  ^^^^  I  ^"st  say.     I  really  do  not 

^P*u^?'?r??-  ^^^  "^^'^-  ^^^  y«"  kno^  that  your  husband  had 
contributed  to  the  campaign  of  Henry  Wallace  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes,  I  did.  I  was  at  a  dinner  where  he  offered  it 
quite  in  public. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  That  is  one  contribution  you  know« 
Mrs.  Willcox.  That  I  do. 

,^^^^'  -S^^tTT^'  ^j,^  y^^  ^^ow  your  husband  had  contributed  to 
the  JJuBois  Defense  Committee  in  the  sum  of  $1,000 « 
Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes.    I  knew  about  that. 


850  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  know  your  husband  had  contributed  to  the 
Civil  Rights  Congress  in  various  amounts? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  I  have  heard  discussion  of  it  but  there,  again,  I  do 
not  know  enough  about  that  to  testify. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  know  that  your  husband  had  contributed 
to  tlie  Civil  Rights  Congress  for  the  defense  of  the  Trenton  Six  ? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  ask  the  chairman  again  whether  this  line  of 
examination  is  deemed  proper  ? 

Senator  McClellan.  She  can  answer  whether  she  knows  or  not. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Yes ;  but  we  are  here  to  discuss  a  bail  situation. 

Senator  McClellan.  We  may  want  to  bring  her  husband,  too.  We 
may  want  to  inquire  further,  so  she  is  permitted  to  answer  the  simple 
question  of  whether  she  knows. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  All  I  can  do  is  appeal  to  the  chairman's  sense  of  fair- 
ness in  this  kind  of  an  inquiry  where  somebody  has  put  up  bail  and 
Mr.  Sourwine  uses  the  occasion  to  discuss  the  Henry  Wallace  cam- 
paign, the  DuBois  trial,  and  the  whole  world.  Now,  I  think  that  is 
unfair  and  I  think  the  chairman,  who  is  a  very  able  lawyer  and  has 
watched  these  committees  and  participated  in  them,  knows  that  this 
kind  of  an  operation  on  the  part  of  Mr.  Sourwine  is  improper,  and  I 
appeal  to  the  chairman  not  to  let  it  continue. 

Senator  McClellan.  Proceed,  Mr.  Counsel.  The  Chair  will  be 
alert  to  the  questions.     If  I  think  they  are  improper,  I  will  stop  them. 

Proceed. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  know,  Mrs.  Willcox,  that  your  husband 
contributed  to  the  Civil  Rights  Congress  for  the  defense  of  the  Trenton 
Six? 

Mr.  Willcox.  Well,  I  cannot  be  sure  about  that.  I  heard  dis- 
cussion of  it  but  I  really  cannot  answer  that  "yes"  or  "no." 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  know  that  your  husband  had  contributed 
to  the  Civil  Rights  Congress  for  the  Negro  Civil  Rights  Congress? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Mr.  Sourwine,  let  me  explain  something.  I  was  in 
India  for  a  great  many  months  at  the  time  that  the  Civil  Rights  Con- 
gi-ess  was  operated.  I  think  it  was  at  the  time  of  the  Trenton  Six  and 
I  really  do  not  know  about  these  things. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  only  answer  you  need  to  give  is  that  you  don't 
know. 

Mrs.  W1L1.COX.  O.  K. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  know  that  your  husband  had  contributed 
$1,500  for  the  Committee  for  Peaceful  Alternatives? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes.     I  knew  about  that. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  your  husband,  Henrv  Willcox,  contribute 
$1,000  to  the  Communist  Party  in  January  of  1949  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  have  no  such  knowledge  at  all. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  your  husband,  Henry  Willcox,  register  as  a 
Communist  in  the  1936  general  election  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  haven't  any  idea  what  he  had  done. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  a  member  of  the  New  York  Council  of  the 
Arts  and  Sciences  and  Professions? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  am. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  in  1953  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Well,  now,  look.  I  will  tell  you  about  that  so  far  as 
I  can  remember.     During  the  Henry  Wallace  campaign,  I  believe, 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  851 

because  the  Arts  and  Sciences  Professions  were  supporting  Henry 
Wallace,  I  joined  them. 

I  have  never  been  near  a  meeting  but  I  believe  I  have  sent  them  their 
$2  or  $3  for  membership  ever  since. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  a  member  of  the  Connecticut  Peace  Coun- 
cil? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouR^VIXE.  Were  you  in  1951  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  I  don't  remember  that. 

Mr.  SotJRWiNE.  Did  you  attend  the  meeting  of  the  Connecticut  Peace 
Council  in  September  1954  at  which  the  principal  speaker  was  Aldo 
Carl  Marzani  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  I  do  not  recall. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Do  you  know  Marzani  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  I  have  met  him ;  yes. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Do  you  know  of  Mr.  Marzani's  connection  with  Mr. 
Kahn? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  I  believe  he  is  with  Cameron  &  Kahn ;  yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  Imow  of  Mr.  Marzani's  connection  with  the 
United  Electrical  and  Machine  Workers  Union? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  No,  I  don't. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Is  Elsie  Willcox  the  wife  of  your  son,  Roger  AVill- 
cox,  executive  secretary  of  the  Connecticut  Peace  Council  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiXE.  Do  you  have  any  knowledge  of  any  contacts  be- 
tween Albert  Kahn  and  your  son  Roger  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  do  not ;  not  any.     I  don't  think  he  knows  him,  even. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  ever  receive  a  message  from  Mr.  Kahn 
through  Roger? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  Roger  ever  discuss  Mr.  Marzani  with  you? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  No. 

Mr.  BouDix.  Mr.  Chairman,  you  have  heard  the  witness'  negative 
answer  but  I  want  to  again  point  out  to  you  the  impropriety  of  asking 
a  mother  about  her  son.  Now  the  history  is  familiar  to  the  chairman 
as  to  what  happens  when  this  kind  of  examination  is  going  on,  and 
whatever  may  be  said,  about  the  prior  examination,  I  think  counsel 
should  be  adjured  to  keep  within  the  lines  of  propriety.  As  I  say, 
Mrs.  Willcox  has  nothing  to  conceal. 

Senator  McClellan^.  Counsel  must  realize  that  while  this  is  not  a 
court,  we  are  not  here  to  try  an  issue  as  to  whether  someone  has  com- 
mitted a  crime  as  such,  we  are  undertaking  to  protect  the  security  of 
our  country.  We  are  undertaking  to  ferret  out  those  elements,  those 
organizations  that  obviously  are  designed  to  promote  a  conspiracy 
that  would  overthrow  this  Government  by  force  and  violence,  and 
therefore,  in  making  these  inquiries,  those  who  are  in  such  a  conspiracy 
are  not  voluntarily  going  to  expose  it.  It  is  necessary  to  proceed  to 
make  inquiries  to  get  leads  for  further  testimony. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Mr.  Chairman,  are  you  suggesting  that  my  son  or 
my  daughter-in-law  are  in  any  such  conspiracy  ? 

Senator  McCleli.ax.  Nobody  has  expressed  that. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  What  are  you  bringing  it  in  for,  then  ? 

Senator  McClellax.  We  have  a  duty  to  perform  for  this  country. 
I  don't  know  wlio  is  in  it  or  who  is  not  and  the  pui-pose  of  this  inquiry 


852  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

is  to  try  to  find  how  this  mechanism  is  operating  in  this  country  and 
so  that  this  Government,  those  of  us  wlio  have  the  responsibility,  can 
enact  the  necessary  legislation  and  take  such  steps  as  circmnstances 
indicate  are  necessary  to  preserve  our  country. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  could  I  make  one  observation  now?  I 
do  not  want  to  raise  the  issue  upon  which  I  know  you  and  I  will  differ 
substantially  as  to  the  right  of  a  congressional  coimnittee.  I  say  I 
do  not  want  to  raise  that  issue,  to  look  into  crime  or  subversion,  since 
I  think  that  is  a  grand  jury  fimction,  but  I  do  know  the  chairman's 
position  on  that. 

I  have  limited  myself  to  this  point,  to  the  narrow  issue  of  the  right 
of  counsel  to  inquire  even  if  we  assume  the  propriety  of  the  total  in- 
vestigation of  the  mother,  with  respect  to  her  son  and  her  daughter-in- 
law. 

That,  I  think,  goes  beyond  propriety  and  I  merely  limit  my  point 
to  that,  and  I  hope  that  counsel  will  not  pursue  that  kind  of  line  with 
this  or  any  other  witness  in  the  future. 

Senator  McClellan.  Proceed,  Mr.  Counsel. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you,  Mrs.  Willcox,  have  a  daughter,  Mrs.  Ann 
Willcox  Seidman  ? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  raise  the  same  objection.  I  think  the  chairman  is 
aware  of  the  impropriety  of  this  kind  of  a  question.  The  whole  his- 
tory of  the  inquisition,  as  the  chairman  knows — I  am  not  making  a 
political  but  a  legal  argument— was  in  which  children  were  required  to 
testify  against  their  parents,  parents  against  their  children,  and  I 
do  not  think  we  should  carry  that  forward  in  the  year  1955  when  there 
are  some  rays  of  sunshine  under  our  great  Constitution. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  This  was  a  foundation  question,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  McClellan.  If  you  are  inquiring — the  Chair  will  state 
this.  If  you  are  inquiring,  if  the  purpose  of  it  is  to  establish  mem- 
bership in  an  organization,  the  Chair  will  permit  it. 

Mr.  SoTTRWiNE.  That  is  the  purpose  of  it. 
■  Senator  McClellan.  I  think  we  have  a  right  to  inquire  into  these 
organizations,  who  are  members  of  them  or  who  are  not,  so  you  may 
ask  the  question  for  that  purpose  and  direct  the  question  so  that  it 
will  elicit  that  kind  of  answer. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  The  preliminary  questions  I  had  intended  to  aslc 
were  only  to  establish  that  the  witness  has  a  daughter,  Mrs.  Ann 
Willcox  Seidman.  whose  husband  is  Robert  Benjamin  Seidman.  I 
then  propose  to  ask  Mrs.  Willcox  whether  your  daughter  and  Robert 
Benjamin  Seidman,  now  your  son-in-law,  were  members  of  the  Ran- 
dolph Bourne  Party  of  Columbia  University  while  students  there? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  haven't  any  idea. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  The  witness  is  going  to  answer  this  question  under 
objection.     Our  objection  was  a  moral  one  here. 

Senator  McClellan.  She  says  she  does  not  know.     Proceed. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Are  Ann  Willcox  Seidman  and  Robert.  Benjamin 
Seidman,  your  daughter  and  son-in-law,  members  of  the  Communist 
Party,  U.S.  A.? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Look,  now,  I  want  to  tell  you  a  blanket  statement 
on  all  of  my  children.  I  have  five  children.  They  are  all  married; 
they  are  all  of  age,  and  so  far  as  I  know,  not  one  of  them  is  now  or 
ever  has  been  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party. 

Senator  McClellan.  That  is  the  right  answer. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMJVIUNISM  853 

]Mrs.  WiLLcox.  "Well,  now,  that  is  that.  Now  can  you  finish  that 
one? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Surely.  Is  your  husband,  Henry  Willcox,  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Communist  Party,  U.  S.  A.  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Mr.  Willcox  and  I,  and  you  probably  know  that, 
both  signed  an  affidavit  in  applying  for  passports  and  reapplying, 
applying  for  extension  of  our  passports,  that  we  are  not  now  and 
never  have  been  members  of  the  Communist  Party.  That  is  on  the 
record.     You  know  it. 

Mr.  SouRWiKE.  In  the  statement  you  made  a  moment  ago  about 
your  children,  did  you  mean  to  include  vour  daughter-in-law,  Elsie 
Willcox? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  did.  I  said  I  liave  five  children;  they  are  all 
married.  I  have  got  nine  grandchildren.  Not  even  the  grandchil- 
dren.  They  are  all  under  5. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  obtain  a  passport  to  go  to  Communist 
China? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  ask  for  the  relevance  of  that  to  Mr.  Matusow's 
getting  out  of  jail  after  a  conviction  for  contempt  in  Texas?  I  know 
they  are  both  distant  from  Wasliington,  but  it  does  seem  to  me  that 
we  are  going  into  the  whole  world  now,  and  I  therefore  object  to  the 
question. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  May  I  say  on  this,  I  prefer  not  to  talk  about  this 
whole  business  of  China  because  this  thing  is  in  litigation  with  the 
State  Department,  and  I  feel  that  any  discussion  of  this  problem,  which 
will  come  out  thoroughly  in  the  State  Department  investigation,  is 
prejudicial  to  that  investigation,  and  therefore,  I  would  prefer  not  to 
discuss  it. 

Senator  McClellan.  Thank  you  very  much.  That  will  be  all  for 
the  present.  One  member  of  the  committee  is  compelled  to  leave  at 
this  time,  and  under  the  rules  of  the  committee,  two  should  be  present 
to  constitute  a  quorum.  Therefore,  we  will  have  to  recess  over  until 
1 :  30.     You  will  be  back  then,  Mrs.  Willcox. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  1 :  30. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  wish  you  would  read  the  statement  then  and  let 
me  read  it  this  afternoon. 

Senator  McClellax.  I  will. 

(At  11:50  a.  m.,  the  hearing  was  recessed  until  1:30  p.  m.) 

ATTERNOON   SESSION 

Present:  Senators  Daniel  (presiding),  Eastland,  McClellan,  and 
Jenner. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  committee  will  come  to  order.    Mrs.  Willcox. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MES.  ANITA  WILLCOX— Resumed 

Mr.  BouDiK.  I  am  ashamed  to  admit  my  unfamiliarity  with  the 
Senate  but  may  I  ask  for  the  name  of  the  chairman  in  this  session? 

Senator  Daniel.  Senator  Daniel. 

Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  question  pending  at  the  recess  this  morning, 
Mrs.  Willcox,  was:  Did  you  ever  obtain  a  passport  to  go  to  Com- 
munist China  ? 


854  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mrs.  WiLiiCOx.  May  I  just  interrupt  a  minute  ?  Before  we  recessed 
I  asked  if  I  might  read  my  statement  after  the  committee  had  had  ai 
opportunity  to  look  it  over.     Is  that  not  possible  now  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  Well,  the  committee  has  not  had  an  opportunity  to 
study  your  statement,  Mrs.  Willcox.  As  soon  as  we  have  had  and 
make  a  decision,  we  will  inform  you. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Thank  you.     Now  the  question  again. 

Mr.  SouKwiNE.  Did  you  ever  obtain  a  passport  to  go  to  Communist 
China? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  want  to  explain  that,  at  this  time,  we  are  in 
process  of  litigation  with  the  State  Department  over  the  whole  busi- 
nes,  this  whole  passport  business,  and  the  trip  to  China,  and  I  wotild 
prefer  not  to  get  into  this  area  because  it  would  seem  to  be  prejudicial 
to  that  case  with  the  State  Department. 

Senator  Daniel.  Did  you  ever  obtain  a  passport,  that  is  what  Mr. 
Sourwine  asked.  Have  you  obtained  a  passport  to  go  to  Communist 
China? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  ]May  I  say  to  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  there  is  a  case  pend- 
ing before  the  Board  of  Passport  Appeals  involving  Mrs.  Willcox's 
passport  rights,  and  this  is  a  preliminary  question  to  others  that  are 
necessarily  involved,  and  I  think  that  because  another  branch  of  the 
Government  is  now  investigating  that  aspect  with  charges  and  counter- 
charges, that  it  should  not  be  gone  into.  Obviously,  the  committee 
knows  whatever  it  knows  and  will  draw  whatever  conclusion  it  wishes. 

Senator  Daniel.  Do  you  make  that  in  the  form  of  an  objection? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Yes,  I  do,  sir. 

Senator  Daniel.  It  is  overruled.     Go  ahead. 

Mr.  Willcox.  I  was  just  wondering  whether  the  committee  would 
recognize  my  preference  not  to  go  into  this  area  at  the  present  time 
for  these  reasons. 

Senator  Daniel.  No,  the  question  has  been  asked.  If  you  will 
proceed  to  answer  it.  You  probably  have  already  answered  the 
question  partially.  The  question  is :  Have  you  ever  obtained  a  pass- 
port to  go  to  Communist  China  ? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  consult  with  the  witness  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  The  witness  may  consult  with  you. 

(Mrs.  Willcox  consulted  with  her  counsel.) 

Mrs.  Willcox.  This  was  just  discussing  with  my  counsel  whether 
I  should  decline  at  this  point  to  answer,  what  to  do  on  account  of 
privilege. 
,.  Mr.  BouDiN.  On  the  constitutional  privilege. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  really  did  not  want  to  call  in  the  constitutional 
privilege  because  there  has  been  so  much  misunderstanding  about 
the  use  of  the  fifth  amendment.  I  mean,  the  assumption  by  the 
public  is  that  you  have  something  to  hide.  Well,  I  have  done  nothing 
wrong,  and  I  don't  like  to  have  this  assumption  about  me.  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  at  this  point  and  because  of  this  pending  litigation, 
I  really  prefer  to  stay  out  of  the  whole  question  of  China  and  the 
passport. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  committee  has  understood  your  preference 
but  the  committee  has  asked  the  question  in  spite  of  your  preference. 
The  objection  has  been  overruled. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  So  then  my  only  recourse,  in  spite  of  my  not  want- 
ing to  do  it,  is  to  claim  the  privilege ;  is  that  right  ? 


.stratb:gy  and  tactics  of  wokld  communism  855 

Senator  Daniel.  No,  it  certainly  is  not,  and  if  that  is  the  reason 
you  chiini  the  privilege  under  the  tifth  amendment  not  to  give  this 
testimony,  I  would  say  that  I  think  you  would  be  in  contempt  of  this 
committee.  You  have  told  us  what  your  real  reason  for  claiming 
the  fifth  amendment  might  be,  and  that  is  not  a  reason  under  our 
Constitution  and  laws  for  claiming  the  privilege,  and  I  believe,  if  I 
may  express  an  opinion,  that  you  would  be  in  contempt  of  the  com- 
mittee if  you  refuse  for  that  reason  to  give  an  answer  to  this  question. 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  Even  though  I  believe  that  to  answer  any  of  these 
questions  would  be  prejudicial  to  my  case  with  the  State  Department? 

Senator  Daxiel.  Yes,  if  that  is  the  reason  that  you  would  claim 
your  privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment,  that  it  would  not  be  valid. 
You  may  consult  with  your  attorney  on  that. 

(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  BouDix.  May  I  say,  Mr.  Chairman 

Senator  Daniel.  She  may  consult  with  you  on  it,  but  I  would  like 
to  have  the  answer  from  her. 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.  I  am  not  sure  this  is  all  so  legal.  I  decline  to  answer 
because  of  the  reasons  previously  given  and  because  of  my  privilege 
under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  stating  now  to  the  committee  that  you  feel 
that  under  the  fifth  amendment  you  are  not  required  to  give  evidence 
against  yourself.  Is  that  the  reason  now  why  you  will  not  answer  this 
question  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  Yes. 

Senator  Daniel.  Or  is  it  the  one  that  you  gave  previously  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.  Both. 

Senator  Daniel.  Both?  Well,  now,  the  Chair  will  respect  the 
latter,  but  not  the  one  that  you  gave  previously.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
I  am  going  to  instruct  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.   Then  I  must  plead  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  should  like  to  ask  another  question' 
of  the  witness  in  line  with  the  committee's  right  to  inquire  into  her 
bona  fides  in  claiming  the  fifth-amendment  privilege.  Do  you,  Mrs. 
Willcox,  honestly  fear  that  if  you  give  a  truthful  answer  to  this 
question,  it  will  form  at  least  a  link  in  a  chain  to  connect  you  with  a 
criminal  offense  or  to  subject  you  to  prosecution? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  object  on  the  ground  that  it  is  an 
miproper  question.  That  is  a  question  which  comes  before  a  court, 
not  the  committee.  Mr.  Sourwine  is  assuming  not  only  the  legislative 
function  but  the  judicial  one.  May  I  suggest  that  that  is  a  conclusion 
^vhich  may  have  to  be  proved  before  a  court  although  I  trust  not,  but 
he  certainly  has  no  right  to  ask  that  kind  of  a  question.  The  rule 
about  the  privilege  as  the  chairman  knows  and  the  other  members 
of  the  committee  know,  is  that  you  may  not  go  into  the  reasons  why 
the  witness  is  asserting  the  privilege. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  dislike,  Mr.  Chairman,  arguing  with  counsel,  but 
counsel  has  forced  this.  I  do  not  believe  counsel  should  presume  to 
advise  this  committee.  I  desire  to  state  that  my  understanding  of 
tiie  matter  is  that  the  forum  before  whom  the  privilege  is  claimed  has 
a  right  to  inquire  into  the  bona  fides  of  the  witness  for  the  purpose 
of  determining  whether  the  claim  of  privilege  will  be  allowed  or 

59886— 55— pt.  10 3 


856  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

whether,  notwithstanding  the  claim  of  privilege,  the  witness  will  be 
ordered  to  answer. 

It  is  perfectly  proper  to  make  the  inquiry  which  has  been  made 
and  I  would  like  to  have  an  answer  to  the  question. 

Senator  Daniel,  Senator  McClellan? 

Senator  McClellan.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  take  the  position,  I  think  I 
am  correct  in  it,  that  a  witness  who  invokes  the  fifth  amendment,  must 
also  state  under  oath  that  they  invoke  it  in  good  faith  and  because  of 
an  honest  belief  that,  if  they  answered  the  question  truthfully,  it 
would  tend  to  incriminate  them. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  has  been  the  acting  chairman's  understand- 
ing and  the  objection  is  overruled. 

You  will  proceed  to  answer  the  question. 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.  Now  I  must  stand 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Can  we  go  off  the  record  for  a  moment  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  No. 

Mrs,  WiLLCox.  I  am  just  trying  to  see  how  to  say  this.  I  mean, 
if  this  is  the  interpretation  to  put  on  it,  then  I  claim  the  privilege  of 
the  fifth  amendment. 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Sourwine's  question  was  whether  you  honestly 
believed  that  a  truthful  answer  to  the  question  as  to  whether  you  ever 
obtained  a  passport  to  go  to  Communist  China  would  form  a  link 
in  a  chain  of  circumstances  which  may  tend  to  incriminate  you? 

(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mrs,  WiLLCox,  Well,  I  mean  "Yes."  While  I  have  done  nothing 
wrong,  I  think  it  might  tend  to.  This  may  be  a  link  in  a  chain  that 
may  tend  to  incriminate  me. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  do  not  know  whether  Mr.  Sourwine  is  satisfied. 

Senator  Daniel,  Just  a  moment,  please. 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  I  mean,  this  is  really  so. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  what  we  want. 
•     Mrs.  WiLLcox.  That  is  what  I  am  trying  to  say.     If  this  is  the  first 
question  of  a  chain  then  I  do  not  want  to  answer  because  I  do  not 
know  what  we  will  get  into. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  counsel  to  Mrs.  Willcox,  and  I 
do  not  think  that  a  lay  witness  has  a  right  to  be  examined  by  com- 
mittee lawyers  and  by  committee  members  on  as  technical  a  problem 
as  the  fifth  amendment.  I  know  probably  more  about  the  fifth  amend- 
ment than  anybody  in  this  room,  having  written  about  it  and  spoken 
about  it.  At  the  same  time,  there  are  many  areas  that  I  do  not  know 
and  that  the  judges  say  they  do  not  know,  so  how  can  you  cross- 
examine  a  witness  on  her  interpretation  of  the  fifth  amendment?  It 
is  positively  unfair. 

Senator  McClellan.  Mr.  Chairman,  this  is  not  examining  her  on 
her  interpretation  of  the  fifth  amendment.  This  is  asking  a  simple 
question  to  determine  whether  she  is  invoking  the  privilege  in  good 
faith. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Senator,  the  link  theory — 1  am  sorry,  I  did  not  mean 
to  interrupt  the  Senator.     I  want  to  hear  him,  as  a  matter  of  fact. 

Senator  Daniel.  Let  us  not  interrupt  him.  And  let  me  say  this  to 
you.  That  you  are  the  first  counsel  I  have  seen  interrupt  the  witness, 
place  his  hand  upon  the  witness  and  stop  the  witness  when  the  witness 
is  testifying.    Let  us  not  interrupt,  either  the  committee  members,  the 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  857 

counsel,  or  the  witness.  If  we  follow  that,  I  think  we  can  run  the 
committee  in  an  orderly  manner, 

Mr,  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  will  follow  your  instructions,  of 
course.     I  just  want  to  say 

Senator  Daniel,  Just  a  minute.  You  are  not  following  them. 
Senator  McClellan  is  making  a  statement. 

Mr.  BouDix.  I  defer  to  Senator  McClellan. 

Senator  McClellax,  I  want  to  say  just  this :  I  think  this  committee, 
as  well  as  a  court,  has  the  right  to  inquire  of  the  good  faith,  honesty, 
and  sincerity  of  anj'one  who  invokes  the  fifth  amendment.  It  is  a 
privilege  accorded  under  the  Constitution,  If  they  honestly  believe 
that  by  answering  the  questions  truthfully,  it  would  tend  to  incrim- 
inate them,  or  it  would  tend  to  be  giving  testimony  against  themselves 
in  some  situation  that  may  later  result  in  a  prosecution,  they  have  a 
perfect  right  to  decline  and  to  invoke  the  fifth  amendment. 

But  just  to  be  anxious  about  it  and  every  time  you  are  asked  a  ques- 
tion, say,  "I  invoke  the  fifth  amendment,"  without  good  reason,  I 
think  would  be  a  fraud  upon  the  court  and  a  fraud  upon  this  com- 
mittee. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  just  make  one  observation  to  Senator  Mc- 
Clellan, merely  to  state  what  my  legal  position  is,  not  on  the  facts  of 
this  matter. 

Senator  Daniel,  Now  just  a  minute,  I  understand  that  you  may 
make  any  objection  that  you  may  want  to  make,  but  as  far  as  making 
observations  and  comments,  this  could  go  on  forever.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  this  is  the  longest  I  believe  since  I  have  been  on  this  committee 
that  we  have  spent  in  trying  to  get  an  answer  to  a  question. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  do  not  want  to  prolong  the  hearing.  I  want  to  get 
back  to  New  York,  too.   All  I  wanted  to  say 

Senator  McClellan.  Mr.  Chairman,  let  him  proceed. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  As  a  matter  of  law,  you  can  consider  this  an  objection, 
the  link  theory  is  only  one  of  the  reasons  why  one  may  assert  the  priv- 
ilege. There  are  many  others  and  it  was  a  limitation  by  Mr.  Sour- 
wine  to  a  specific  point  where  the  fifth  may  be  raised  which  is  one  of 
my  reasons  for  raising  the  objection. 

The  other  is,  I  do  not  think  it  is  proper  to  cross-examine  the  witness 
on  this  subject.  However,  the  witness  has  answered  the  question 
finally  and  so  I  am  not  going  to  press  the  point. 

Senator  Daniel.  She  was  answering  it. 

Mr.  Botjdin.  She  did  answer  it. 

Senator  Daniel.  And  quite  frankly  until  you  interrupted  her. 
Will  you  complete  your  answer,  please,  madam?  Complete  the  an- 
swer you  were  giving  as  to  your  sincerity  and  honesty  in  feeling  that 
the  truthful  answer  might  incriminate  you. 

Just  proceed. 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  I  think  at  this  point,  all  I  can  do  is  to  claim  the  fifth 
amendment  on  the  ground  that  if  we  get  into  this  subject,  I  may  be 
forced  to  make  some  sort  of  thing,  to  say  something  that  would 
incriminate  me. 

Senator  Daniel.  And  you  honestly  and  sincerely  believe  that  it  may 
do  that? 

Mrs.  WiLLc:ox.  Yes,  I  do.  I  mean  on  this  link  theory.  I  do.  It  is  on 
this  whole  business.    I  want  to  stay  out  of  this  area  because  I  do  not 


858  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

know  what  I  might  be  forced  to  say  which  would  incriminate  me. 
Now  is  that  clear? 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes,  it  is.    Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mrs.  Willcox,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  isn't  it  the  truth 
that  you  never  did  obtain  a  passport  to  go  to  Communist  China? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Same  answer. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  By  "same  answer,"  do  you  mean 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  meant  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  decline  to  answer  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Claiming  your  privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox,  Right. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  traveled  under  an  official  passport  of  the 
Communist  Government  of  Poland? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Same  answer. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Counsel,  I  will  tell  you 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Please  do. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  witness  has  a  right  to  counsel  but  I  am  not 
going  to  sit  here  and  see  you  comment  before  the  witness  ever  turns 
to  you  and  asks  for  counsel.  You  comment  audibly  as  in  this  in- 
stance, and  I  am  not  going  to  permit  it  as  long  as  I  have  the  gavel 
here.    Now  let  the  witness  answer  or  seek  advice  from  you,  sir. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  did  not  say  a  word.  I  must  have 
given  an  expression  of  disdain  for  the  question  being  put  that  way 
but  I  did  not  say  anything. 

Senator  Daniel.  Well,  whatever  you  did,  it  was  audible  here,  sir. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  would  be  glad  to  have  it  stated  on  the  record. 

Senator  Daniel.  Let  me  say  to  the  witness,  proceed.  Answer  the 
question. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Privilege  on  this  one.  I  mean,  I  claim  the  privilege 
on  this,  also. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  decline  to  answer  the  question  as  to  whether 
you  have  traveled  under  an  official  passport  of  the  Communist  Gov- 
ernment of  Poland? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  traveled  under  an  official  passport  of  the 
Communist  Government  of  the  Union  of  Soviet  Socialist  Eepublics? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer. 

Senator  Daniel.  Give  us  the  reason  each  time  in  order  that  the 
record  may  be  complete. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  claim  this  privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment  be- 
cause I  think  this  question  may  lead  to  something  else  that  would  tend 
to  incriminate  me. 

Senator  Daniel.  Do  you  feel  that  the  truthful  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion itself  may  tend  to  incriminate  you  or  be  giving  testimony  against 
yourself  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  May  I  speak  to  my  counsel  on  that  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes. 

(Counsel  and  witness  confer.) 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  ask  the  chairman  a  question  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  No,  sir. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Then  I  take  the  privilege  and  answer  "yes." 

Senator  Daniel.  Answer  yes  ? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  859 

Mrs.  WiLLCOX.  I  answer  that  I  am  declining  to  answer  the  question. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  refuse  to  answer  because  you  honestly  feel 
that  a  truthful  answer  to  this  question  may  tend  to  incnmmate  you 
or  be  giving  evidence  against  yourself ;  is  that  correct? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  Yes.  ^    r  .1 

Mr.  SoTJRwiNE.  Have  you  traveled  under  an  official  passport  ot  the 
Communist  government  of  China  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  Same  answer. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  mean  the  same  refusal? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  I  am  claiming  the  privilege  on  this. 

Senator  Daniel.  Your  answer,  then,  will  be  that  you  refuse  to 

answer?  ,      •        -r       j? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  Yes.     Should  I  say  that  each  time  I  refuse  to 

answer  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes ;  you  refuse  to  answer,  or  words  to  that  eti'eet. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  All  right.    I  decline  to  answer. 

Senator  Daniel.  Under  your  privilege  of  the  fifth  amendment? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Right. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Do  you,  Mrs.  Willcox,  have  any  official  contact  with 
the  Communist  Party  ? 

(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mrs.  Willcox.  What  does  that  mean  ? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  that  there  is  a  Communist  Party  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Why,  yes. 

Mr.  SoL-RwiNE.  Do  you  know  what  the  word  "contact"  means  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  In  a  legal  sense,  no,  I  don't. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  In  the  ordinary  sense,  do  you  know  what  it  means 
to  contact  a  person  or  to  have  a  contact  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  do  you  know  what  the  word  "official"  means? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes ;  of  course. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Can  you  understand  what  an  official  contact  with 
the  Communist  Party  would  be  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  May  I  consult  my  counsel  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  If  you  don't  understand,  say  so. 

(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Actually,  I  do  not  know  anything  about  the  Com- 
munist Party. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Let  me  define  it  this  way :  Defining  "contact"  with 
a  person  with  whom  you  are  instructed  to  deal,  defining  "official"  as 
meaning  officially  designated  by  the  Communist  Party.  Do  you  have 
any  official  contact  with  the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  May  I  ask  you  this,  Mr.  Sourwine?  In  all  sincerity, 
if  I  come  through  the  United  States  customs  and  I  see  a"  customs  official 
that  goes  through  my  luggage,  am  I  having  a  contact  with  the  United 
States  Government  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  are  not  having  an  official  contact  within  the 
definition  that  I  have  just  given  you. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  All  right,  then,  no ;  I  haven't.  I  haven't  any  contact 
with  any  Communist  government,  any  official  contact  of  any  kind 
whatsoever. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  did  not  say  with  the  Communist  government,  I 
said  with  the  Communist  Party. 


860  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  With  the  Communist  Party,  either. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  preliminary  to  some  questions  I 
shall  now  ask,  I  should  like  to  offer  for  inclusion  in  the  record  a  release 
from  the  Department  of  State  with  regard  to  the  recent  Peiping 
so-called  Peace  Conference. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  release  will  be  made  a  part  of  the  record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  59"  and  ap- 
pears below :) 

Exhibit  No.  59 

Department  op  State — for  the  Press 

No.  771,  October  1,  1952 

Peiping  "Peace  Ck)NFERENCE" 

Asked  for  comment  on  the  so-called  Peiping  Peace  Conference  and  reports  that 
a  number  of  Americans  are  allegedly  attending  as  delegates,  Secretary  of  State 
Dean  Acheson  at  his  news  conference  today  made  the  following  extemporaneous 
reply : 

"This  conference  is,  of  course,  an  obvious  propaganda  operation  in  which  the 
Chinese  Communists,  while  taking  an  active  part  in  defying  the  United  Nations 
and  carrying  the  war  into  Korea  and  while  they  are  joining  with  the  Soviet 
Government  in  its  violent  'hate  campaign,'  are  continuing  to  hold  'peace  confer- 
ences.'    I  think  this  deceives  nobody. 

"In  regard  to  your  other  question  about  the  Americans,  we  have  heard  reports 
that  certain  American  citizens  were  attending.  P>om  the  reports  that  we  have 
gotten,  we  think  we  have  about  15  of  these  Americans  identified.  Now,  some 
of  them  were  in  China  already.  However,  no  persons  have  been  issued  passports 
to  attend  this  conference  or  have  asked  for  passports  to  attend  the  conference. 

"All  passports  have  been  stamped  since  May  1,  'Not  valid  for  travel  to  ♦  *  • 
China  *  *  *.'  We  are  now  making  efforts  to  find  out  whether  any  of  the  people 
that  we  have  identified  have  obtained  passports  on  false  information  furnished 
to  the  Department  or  whether  they  have  violated  the  instruction  which  is  on 
the  passport.  That  is  stamped  on  it,  as  I  have  said,  and  there  are  appropriate 
statutes  which  cover  both  of  these  cases." 

Mr.  SouKwiNE.  I  should  also  at  this  time  like  to  put  into  the  record 
a  memorandum  from  the  Library  of  Congress  with  regard  to  certain 
articles  published  in  Moscow  in  advance  of  the  Peiping  Peace  Con- 
ference. I  would  like  to  point  out  that  two  of  these  articles  have 
been  translated  into  English.  One  of  them  is  from  Izvestia  and  is 
in  Russian,  and  I  should  like  to  ask  that  not  the  Russian  but  the  Eng- 
lish translation  be  ordered  in  the  record. 

Senator  Daniel.  They  will  be  made  a  part  of  the  record. 

(The  documents  referred  to  were  marked  "Exhibits  60,  60 A,  60B, 
and  60C."  Exhibit  60B  was  not  translated  into  English  but  a  copy 
of  the  original  is  in  the  subcommittee  files.  The  others  appear  be- 
low:) 

Exhibit  No.  60 

The  Library  of  Congress, 
Legislati^-e  Reference  Service. 
Wasliinciton.  D.  C,  October  S,  195k. 

To:  Mr.  Benjamin  Mandel,  Senate  .Judiciary  Subcommittee  on  Internal  Security. 

From :  Sergius  Yakobson. 

Subject :   Information  on  Peace  Conference  in  Asian  and  Pacific  Regions  In 
October  1952. 

Please  find  attached  photostats  of  the  following  three  articles  published  in 
Moscow  in  advance  of  the  Peking  Congress  of  Adherents  of  Peace  in  Asia  and  the 
Pacific  Region  which  was  held  between  October  2  and  12,  1952. 

1.  Pravda,  September  23,  1952 :  The  Forces  of  the  Adherents  of  Peace  Grow 
(editorial).     A  translation  of  the  Pravda  editorial  is  enclosed. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  861 

2.  Izvestia,  September  26,  19.'>2 :  Before  the  Congress  of  Adherents  of  Peace 
of  the  Countries  of  Asia  and  the  Pacitio  (editorial). 

3.  Trnd,  September  10,  1952 :  l\r.  Kotov,  The  Forthcoming  Congress  in  Peking. 
Translation  appeared  in  Soviet  Press  Translations  (a  publication  of  the  Far 
Eastern  and  Russian  Institute  of  the  University  of  Washington  in  Seattle, 
vol.  7,  No.  17,  Oct.  1, 1952.    Pp.  379-381 ) . 

All  the  Soviet  "peace"  propaganda  connected  with  the  Peking  Congress  shows 
a  strong  anti-America  slant.  Since  the  Peking  Congress  coincided  after  October 
5  with  the  19th  Congress  of  the  All-Union  Communist  Party  in  IVIoscow,  space 
in  Pravda  and  Izvestia  available  for  news  from  abroad  was  very  limited,  par- 
ticularly in  the  issues  of  the  second  week  of  October.  In  spite  of  this  Tass  re- 
ports on  the  Congre.ss  were  published  in  Izvestia  of  October  1,  2.  3,  4,  9,  11,  and 
16  and  in  Pravda  of  September  23,  26  (declaration  of  the  American  delegates, 
no  names  mentioned),  October  1,  2,  4,  6,  7,  8,  9,  10,  11,  13,  and  15;  full  text  of 
resolutions  published  at  Materialy  Kongressa  are  to  be  found  in  the  Pravda 
issues  of  October  16.  17,  IS,  and  21. 

On  September  28  Izvestia  carried  a  Tass  dispatch  from  New  York  dated  Sep- 
tember 27  stating  that  according  to  an  AP  Washington  correspondent.  State  De- 
partment officials  had  announced  that  passports  would  be  taken  from  participants 
in  the  Peking  Congress  and  that  they  would  be  prosecuted. 

According  to  the  Soviet  press  reports  15  Americans  participated  in  the  con- 
gress. Names  mentioned  in  Pravda  of  October  2,  are  Luis  U.  Uiton  (Hinton?) .  as 
the  head  of  the  American  delegates ;  Joan  Hinton,  an  American  atomic  scientist 
(Daily  Worker,  Oct.  19),  Henry  Willcox,  and  Anita  Willcox, 

Isabel  Cerney,  a  delegate,  is  quoted  as  follows  : 

"We  are  keenly  aware  of  the  immense  responsibility  that  rests  upon  us,  Ameri- 
cans, for  the  atrocities  committed  by  the  United  States  imperialists  in  Korea,  and 
of  the  danger  that  threatens  humanity  if  America's  disgraceful  war  against 
Korea  is  not  brought  to  an  end. 

"The  American  delegation  fully  associated  itself  with  the  demand  of  other 
representatives  for  a  cease-fire  in  Korea  and  withdrawal  of  all  foreign  troops 
so  that  the  Korean  people  could  themselves  arrange  their  domestic  affairs"  (New 
Times,  (Moscow)  1952.  No.  42,  p.  7) . 

In  News  (Mo.scow),  No.  21  of  November  1,  1952,  page  18,  the  following  incident 
is  reported : 

"United  States  delegates  present  flowers  and  a  small  tree  to  the  Korean  delega- 
tion with  this  message :  'We  of  the  American  people  who  admire  bravery  and 
hate  cruelty,  ask  that  you  will  plant  in  the  soil  of  Korea,  soil  made  holy  by  the 
blood  of  a  heroic  i)eopie,  this  small  tree.  May  it  grow  as  the  friendship  of  our 
peoples  grow  :  may  it  be  green  with  the  green  leaves  of  life  nourished  by  sunlight 
and  the  rain  of  heaven,  until  it  shelters  under  its  green  boughs,  in  safety  and 
beauty  and  peace,  the  children  of  your  children.'  " 

According  to  a  Tass  report  published  in  Izvestia  of  September  27,  a  "New 
York-Peking"  meeting  was  held  in  New  York  on  September  25  by  "progressives" 
under  the  chairmanship  of  Dr.  John  Kingsbury ;  Paul  Robeson  and  Albert  Kahn 
are  mentioned  as  participants. 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing,  materials  on  the  congress  are  to  be  found  in  the 
following  publications : 

1.  Soviet  Press  Translations,  volume  VII,  No.  14  of  July  15,  1952,  page  319 
(from  Pravda,  June  8, 1952) . 

2.  New  Times,  published  by  Trud  (Moscow),  1952,  No.  41  (Oct.  8)  page  13. 
No.  42  (Oct.  15)  pages  6-9 :  A.  Markov,  The  Asian  and  Pacific  Peace  Congress. 
No.  43  ( Oct.  22 ) ,  page  1  (pictures  only ) . 

3.  News,  a  review  of  world  events,  published  by  Trud  (Moscow),  1952,  No.  21 
(32),  November  1,  pages  15-18:  A.  Popov,  The  Peoples  of  Asia  Speak  Out  for 
Peace. 

Exhibit  No.  60-A 

[Editorial,  Pravda,  September  23,  1952] 

The  Forces  of  the  Partisans  of  Peace  Grow 

Within  a  short  time  in  the  capital  of  the  Chinese  People's  Republic  at  Peking, 
rhe  Congress  of  Partisans  of  Peace  of  the  countries  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  will 
be  opened.  The  convening  of  this  Congress  is  an  event  of  enormous  international 
significance. 


862  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

The  conveuing  of  the  Congress  in  Peking,  as  well  as  the  preparations  underway 
In  all  countries  for  the  Congress  of  Nations  for  the  Defense  of  l*eace  which  will 
be  held  in  Vienna  in  December,  clearly  demonstrates  the  great  and  insuperable 
force  of  the  movement  of  the  nations  for  the  defense  of  peace. 

The  Partisans  of  Peace  in  all  countries  are  inspired  by  the  wise  words  of  Com- 
rade Stalin :  "Peace  will  be  preserved  and  consolidated  if  the  peoples  take  the 
preservation  of  peace  in  their  hands  and  stick  to  it  to  the  end." 

For  the  first  time  in  history  the  Peking  Congress  will  bring  together  repre- 
sentatives of  nations  which  for  centuries  have  experienced  and  the  majority  of 
which  still  experience  colonial  suppression.  At  the  Congress  the  most  important 
questions  will  be  discussed  which  disturb  the  nations  of  the  countries  of  Asia 
and  the  Pacific,  and  measures  will  be  worked  out  for  the  defense  of  peace  in 
that  part  of  the  globe. 

"Our  Congress,"  declares  the  chairman  of  the  All-Chinese  Committee  for  the 
Defense  of  Peace,  Go  Mo-Zho,  "is  the  Congress  of  representatives  of  the  nations. 
It  has  an  open  and  honest  aim — to  safeguard  the  peace.  We  ask  for  the  democ- 
ratization of  Japan  and  protest  against  its  militarization.  We  ask  for  general 
reduction  of  armaments  and  we  protest  against  the  application  of  atomic,  bac- 
teriological, and  chemical  weapons  of  mass  destruction  *  *  *.  We  ask  for  a 
speedy,  peaceful  solution  of  the  Korean  question  and  of  the  problems  of  the  coun- 
tries of  southeastern  Asia,  and  we  protest  against  the  interference  by  force  in  the 
internal  affairs  of  other  countries.  These  open  and  honest  aims  express  the  gen- 
eral aspirations  not  only  of  the  peoples  of  the  countries  of  .\sia  and  the  Pacific, 
but  of  all  the  nations  of  the  globe  which  love  peace  and  justice." 

The  peoples  of  Asia  and  of  the  Pacific  region  will  demonstrate  at  the  Congress 
their  growing  strength,  their  firm  determination  to  preserve  peace,  to  resist  the 
instigators  of  a  new  world  war. 

For  a  long  time  the  American  imperialism  has  followed  a  policy  of  conquest 
in  Asia  and  the  Pacific  region.  After  the  destruction  of  Japanese  militarism 
the  American  monopolists  have  promoted  the  program  of  converting  this  part 
of  the  world  into  a  colony  of  the  United  States.  However,  the  expectations  of 
the  American  imperialists  regarding  the  complete  enslavement  of  Asia  have  been 
defeated.  In  the  countries  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  the  national  liberation  move- 
ment has  assumed  very  large  proportions.  The  heaviest  blow  to  the  colonial 
system  of  imperialism  was  the  victory  of  the  -Chinese  revolution  which  resulted 
in  the  setting  up  of  the  Chinese  People's  Republic. 

After  they  had  suffered  defeat  in  China,  the  American  imi>erialists  increased 
their  aggressive  actions.  They  started  the  rapacious  war  of  conquest  in  Korea, 
in  the  course  of  which  they  apply  the  most  cruel  methods  of  extinction  of  the 
peaceful  population.  But  their  efforts  to  bring  to  their  knees  the  courageous 
Korean  people  and  to  intimidate  all  the  nations  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  failed 
because  of  the  barbarian  methods  of  warfare.  The  Korean  nation  which  loves 
liberty  courageously  defends  itself,  with  the  support  of  the  heroic  Chinese  volun- 
teers, against  all  attacks  of  the  interventionists.  The  shining  example  of  the 
Korean  people  inspires  all  the  other  peoples  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  who  fight 
against  the  colonizers  for  their  national  independence. 

The  American  imperialists  try  to  find  support  in  Asia  in  the  now  completely  de- 
feated Japanese  militarists.  The  separate  peace  treaty  imposed  by  Washington 
on  Japan  has  as  its  purpose  the  conversion  of  this  country  into  an  American 
colony,  into  a  military  base  of  the  United  States.  The  policy  of  American 
diplomacy  in  organizing  the  so-called  Pacific  pact  aims  at  acceleration  and  broad- 
ening of  the  preparations  for  an  aggressive  war. 

The  nations  of  Asia,  of  the  Pacific  region,  and  of  Latin  America  are  clear 
in  their  minds  that  these  efforts  of  the  ruling  circles  of  the  United  States  bring 
about  a  new  increased  tension  in  international  relations.  The  consciousness  of 
the  growing  danger  of  war  leads  them  to  increase  tenfold  their  efforts  in  the 
struggle  for  peace  against  the  instigators  of  war. 

The  population  of  the  countries  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  region  comprises  more 
than  two-thirds  of  the  human  race.  Here  live  1,600  million  persons.  They  have 
experienced  all  the  burdens  of  war.  They  deeply  hate  imperialistic  slavery. 
They  all  recognize  that  on  their  activity  in  the  struggle  against  the  imperialist 
instigators  of  war  depends  to  a  considerable  degree  the  success  of  the  work  of 
preserving  peace  and  the  success  of  the  liberation  movement. 

A  characteristic  feature  of  the  movement  of  the  Partisans  of  Peace  in  the 
countries  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  is  its  considerable  growth.  The  broadest  masses 
of  the  people  are  engaged  in  the  active  struggle  against  the  instigators  of  a  new 
world  war. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  863 

The  preparation  for  the  Peking  Congress,  where  the  representatives  of  more 
than  30  countries  will  meet,  is  a  new  step  In  the  struggle  for  peace  which  can  be 
seen  in  all  the  countries  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  region.  In  many  countries 
national  congresses  of  the  Partisans  of  Peace  have  been  held  which  demonstrated 
the  determination  of  the  nations  to  defend  the  peace  in  an  even  more  active  man- 
ner. The  delegates  to  the  Congress  have  been  elected  at  thousands  of  meetings 
of  workers,  peasants,  and  members  of  the  intelligentsia. 

A  short  time  ago  the  third  All-Indian  Congress  of  Partisans  of  Peace  was  held. 
The  Congress  solemnly  proclaimed  tliat  India  has  always  been  a  peace-loving 
nation  and  hates  war.  In  the  name  of  hundreds  of  millions  of  Indians  the  Con- 
gress asked :  not  to  permit,  in  wars  of  aggression,  the  use  of  Indian  resources, 
manpower,  harbors ;  and  not  to  participate  in  agreements,  in  pacts  which  can 
involve  India  in  the  aggressive  plans  of  foreign  powers  and  violate  its  sovereignty. 
In  a  special  resolution  "about  the  peace  in  Korea"  the  Congress  proclaimed  that 
the  Indian  nation  declares  "its  absolute  nonparticipation  in  deeds  which  are 
directed  against  humanity  and  are  committed  in  Korea  in  the  name  of  the  United 
Nations,  and  joins  the  public  conscience  of  the  world  which  condemns  these 
actions." 

The  powerful  support  given  in  Japan  to  the  movement  for  defense  of  peace  is 
remarkable.  Thousands  of  protest  demonstrations  against  the  remilitarization 
of  Japan  promoted  by  the  American  imperialists,  meetings  and  gatherings  for 
the  defense  of  the  independence  of  the  country  against  the  American  occupation, 
and  against  converting  Japan  into  an  American  military  base  have  taken  place 
in  many  cities  and  villages. 

In  Pakistan  and  Burma,  Indonesia  and  Thailand,  in  Vietnam  and  Malaya — 
in  all  countries  of  Asia  the  preparation  for  the  Congress  represents  a  powerful 
support  of  the  struggle  for  peace.  The  peoples  of  Latin  America — Mexico, 
Colombia,  Chile,  Peru,  Ecuador,  and  Guatemala,  have  sent  their  representatives 
to  Peking. 

The  Chinese  people  welcome  the  Congress  with  the  great  successes  they  have 
achieved  in  the  building  of  a  new  life.  China  has  not  only  reached  the  prewar 
level  of  production  but  has  exceeded  it  in  its  industry  as  well  as  in  its  agriculture. 
The  foundation  has  been  laid  for  transition  to  economic  construction  on  a  broad 
scale.  The  achievements  of  the  Chinese  People's  Republic  have  a  tremendous 
international  significance  because  they  heighten  the  confidence  of  all  the  nations 
of  the  East  in  their  own  strength  and  capabilities,  because  they  are  exemplary 
in  the  fight  for  peace,  national  independence,  and  liberty. 

The  appeal  of  the  recent  All-Korean  Conference  for  the  defense  of  peace  has 
reached  the  heart  of  every  simple  man.  In  a  fervent  declaration  adopted  at  the 
conference  the  Korean  nation  has  declared  that  the  victory  of  peace  over  the 
forces  of  aggression  who  fight  the  war  in  Korea,  means  an  enormous  contribution 
to  the  cause  of  defending  peace  in  Asia  as  well  as  in  the  whole  world. 

The  Soviet  nation  has  sent  its  delegates  to  the  Peking  Congress.  Occupied 
with  peaceful  and  creative  work,  our  people  with  confidence  and  determination 
fight  for  and  defend  the  cause  of  peace. 

The  peoples  of  the  whole  world  hail  the  convening  of  the  Congress  of  the 
Partisans  of  Peace  of  the  Peoples  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific.  The  powerful  move- 
ment of  the  Partisans  of  Peace  shows  in  a  convincing  manner  that  the  nations 
represent  an  invincible  force  which  is  able  to  restrain  aggressors  and  to  uphold 
peace  in  the  whole  world.  (Translation  prepared  by  Dr.  Fritz  T.  Epstein  of 
the  Slavic  and  East  European  Division  October  7,  1954. ) 


Exhibit  No.  60-C 
[Soviet  Press  Translations,  October  15,  1952] 

The  Forthcoming  Congress  in  Peking  * 

(Trud,  Sept.  10,  1952— M.  Kotov') 

One  day  last  July  the  stage  at  the  International  Motion  Picture  Festival  in  the 
Czechoslovakian  city  of  Karlovy  Vary  was  filled  with  horrible  pictures.  These 
were  documentary  films  on  tlie  atrocities  of  the  American  aggressors  in  Korea. 
The  film  recorded  the  crimes  of  the  American  soldiery.  Before  the  eyes  of  the 
audience  passed  the  incinerated  cities  and  villages  of  long-suffering  Korea,  moun- 


^  Responsible  secretary  of  the  Soviet  Peace  Committee. 


864  STRATEGY    AISID    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMJSIUNISM 

tains  of  corpses — innocent  children  and  old  people  who  had  been  tortured — con- 
flagrations in  peaceful  villages  caused  by  napalm  bombs,  and  bacteriological 
weapons  employed  by  the  interventionists  for  the  mass  destruction  of  human  life. 

Everyone  who  saw  these  showings  could  not  remain  unmoved.  Cries  of  indig- 
nation arose  from  the  aisles  :  "Shame  upon  the  Yankees."  "Down  with  the  Ameri- 
can bandits."    "Peace  to  Korea." 

The  audience  at  the  festival  warmly  applauded  the  Korean  movie  company 
which  had  created  such  brilliant  films  on  the  struggle  of  this  hero-people — fighting 
wholeheartedly  for  happiness,  for  peace,  and  for  freedom.  In  reply,  the  Korean 
delegate  to  the  festival  said  : 

"The  day  will  come — and  it  will  come  soon — when  we  shall  show  the  whole 
world  a  film  on  the  total  victory  of  the  Korean  people,  for  the  American  usui'pers 
can  never  subjugate  our  freedom-loving  people.  Neither  can  they  bring  the  other 
peoples  of  the  East  to  their  knees." 

These  are  words  of  truth.  Today  the  whole  world  witnesses  the  unprecedented 
proportions  of  the  struggle  for  liberation  among  the  peoples  of  the  East,  peoples 
who  have  risen  to  fight  against  the  yoke  of  colonial  oppression,  against  slavery, 
and  for  national  independence. 

It  is  3  years  now  that  the  workers  of  great  China,  who  have  thrown  off  the 
chains  of  imperialism,  have  been  building  up  their  free  republic.  With  admira- 
tion, the  whole  world  watches  the  heroic  struggle  being  waged  by  the  peoples  of 
Korea,  Vietnam,  and  Malaya,  in  repulsing  the  frenzied  onslaught  of  the  interven- 
tionists. 

The  earth  is  burning  under  the  feet  of  the  imperialists.  Their  nefarious  plans 
to  turn  the  peoples  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  into  obedient  slaves  are  falling 
through.  Shameful  failure  awaits  the  policy  of  the  Anglo-American  colonizers, 
who  are  striving  to  use  the  territory,  the  wealth,  and  the  human  resources  of 
these  countries  for  the  unleashing  of  a  new  world  war. 

The  Congress  of  Peace  Partisans  for  Asia  and  the  Pacific  opens  at  Peking  late 
in  September.  Its  tremendous  importance  is  clear  to  all.  It  will  serve  further  to 
activate  the  forces  of  peace  in  this  part  of  the  globe  for  their  noble  struggle  against 
the  monstrous  schemes  of  the  imperialists. 

The  representatives  of  people  totaling  more  than  1,600  million  persons  v/ill 
gather  in  Peking.  Thirty-two  countries  are  sending  their  delegates — people  of 
various  races,  religious  beliefs,  and  political  convictions.  They  are  coming  to 
this  great  assembly  of  peoples  from  Asia  and  the  Pacific,  for  they  know  that  they 
must  give  every  effort  to  the  cause  of  peace. 

The  agenda  of  the  Congress  contains  questions  which  today  are  troubling  all 
people  of  good  will.  These  are  the  defense  of  the  independence,  freedom,  and 
peace  of  the  Asian  and  Pacific  peoples ;  the  prohibition  of  atomic,  bacteriological, 
and  chemical  warfare ;  the  development  of  various  normal  and  mutually  profitable 
economic  relations  and  cultural  exchange;  the  struggle  against  the  remilitariza- 
tion of  Japan ;  and  the  peaceful  settlement  of  the  Korean  question  on  a  just  and 
reasonable  basis,  among  others. 

The  idea  of  convening  the  Congress  was  greeted  with  warm  support  among  all 
the  peoples  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific.  It  is  not  hard  to  comprehend  that  the  adop- 
tion of  such  a  measure,  intended  to  achieve  still  greater  solidarity  among  all  the 
partisans  of  peace,  was  dictated  by  life  itself.  As  formerly,  the  menace  of 
American  aggression  in  Asia  and  Oceania  is  very  great.  The  imperialists  have 
not  renounced  their  criminal  plans. 

For  more  than  2  years  the  American  usurpers  have  been  defiling  the  soil  of 
Korea.  They  are  trying  to  drag  out  and  disrupt  the  armistice  negotiations ;  they 
are  committing  unheard-of  indisrnities  against  Korean  and  Chinese  prisoners  of 
war ;  they  are  mPthodically  carrying  out  their  evil  plan  to  destroy  78  of  the 
Eepublic's  peaceful  cities.  The  imperialists  would  like  to  extend  the  war  to  the 
Far  East  by  their  air  attacks  against  China.  They  have  concluded  a  separate 
treaty  with  Japan  ;  they  are  intensively  remilitarizing  this  country ;  and  they  are 
building  up  a  new  and  aggressive  Japanese  Army.  The  American  aggressors 
are  attempting  to  form  a  Pacific  bloc  modeled  upon  the  North  Atlantic  bloc.  This 
measure  is  designed  to  lay  the  groundwork  for  new  military  adventures  against 
the  peace-loving  peoples  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific.  Washington  is  attempting  to 
subjugate  the  Latin  American  countries  by  saddling  them  with  onerous  mill- 
tar  v  agreements. 

But  today  the  peoples  are  not  deceived. 

No  forces  can  halt  the  mighty  upsurge  in  the  movement  of  national  liberation 
for  Asia  and  the  Pacific.  The  peoples  of  Korea,  Vietnam,  the  Philippines, 
Jtalaya,  and  other  countries  are  fearlessly  defending  their  liberty  and  national 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  865 

independence.  They  are  thirsting  for  peace  and  for  a  better  life.  The  great  ex- 
ample of  the  Soviet  Union,  China,  and  the  people's  democratic  countries  illumi- 
nates their  future  path. 

The  peoples  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  hate  war.  Even  today  it  is  brintrinjr  the 
common  people  of  this  part  of  the  world  incalculable  calainity  and  suffering, 
This  is  why  the  angry  voices  of  Asia's  workers  are  sounding  louder  and  louder, 
callirg  for  an  end  to  the  crimes  of  the  American  interventionists  and  their  ac- 
complices in  aggression,  and  for  peace  for  millions  of  common  people. 

Active  preparations  for  the  Congress  are  being  made  these  days  in  all  the 
countries  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific.  They  are  accompanied  by  a  new  accentua- 
tion of  the  struggle  for  peace.  The  ranks  of  the  peace  partisans  will  grow  with 
each  day  that  passes.  The  minds  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  people  who  only 
yesterday  stord  aloof  from  the  peace  movement  are  being  awakened. 

Here  i.s  a  typical  instance,  related  by  a  guest  from  far-off  Paraguay.  A  young 
woman  textile  worker  in  this  country  was  denounced  to  the  police  because  she 
had  explained  the  purpose  and  mission  of  the  Peking  Congress  to  her  comrades. 
"When  the  police  came  to  arrest  her,  she  calmly  and  firmly  described — in  the 
presence  of  the  factory  owner,  the  secretary  of  the  factory  trade  union,  and  the 
police — the  ob.iectives  of  the  peace  movement  and  the  reasons  which  had  com- 
polled  her  to  take  part  in  it. 

"I  do  not  want  Paraguayans  to  be  sent  to  their  death  in  Korea,"  declared  the 
girl.     "We  are  fighting  to  save  the  lives  of  our  children  and  countrymen." 

The  secretary  of  the  trade  union  who  heard  her  declared :  "If  that  is  the  pur- 
pose of  the  pence  movement,  I  too  agree  with  it."  And  he  thereupon  signed 
the  petition  of  the  movement. 

All  the  factory  workers  came  to  the  defense  of  the  young  peace  partisan.  The 
police  did  not  dare  to  arrest  her,  and  the  proprietor  did  not  dare  to  fire  her. 

Preparatory  committees  for  the  Peace  Congress  have  been  formed  in  all  the 
Asian  and  Pacific  countries.  They  have  done  an  extensive  piece  of  work  in  ex- 
plaining the  purpose  and  objectives  of  the  forthcoming  Congress  among  all  ele- 
ments of  the  population — workers,  peasants,  and  the  intelligentsia.  Thousands 
of  assemblies  and  meetings  have  been  held,  in  which  delegates  to  Peking  were 
elected. 

Active  preparations  for  the  congress  are  underway  in  India.  Here  also  a 
preparatory  committee  was  formed.  Upon  its  insistence,  many  newspapers  in 
various  parts  of  the  country  pviblished  the  complete  text  of  the  petition  of 
the  preparatory  conference,  which  was  held  at  Peking  in  June.  In  August, 
Asia  Week  was  proclaimed  throughout  the  country.  Initiative  meetings  were 
held  in  many  districts.  Many  local  peasant  and  trade-union  organizations, 
among  others,  have  already  chosen  their  delegates  for  the  trip  to  China. 

Despite  the  brutal  persecution  of  the  police,  Peace  Month  was  observed 
throughout  Japan  in  preparation  for  the  congress.  People  of  good  will  are 
demonstrating  in  defense  of  peace  under  slogans  calling  for  opposition  to  the 
conversion  of  the  country  into  an  American  armed  base,  for  an  immediate 
end  to  the  war  in  Korea,  for  the  outlawing  of  bacteriological  weapons,  for  the 
peacetime  development  of  the  Japanese  economy,  and  for  negotiations  between 
the  five  great  powers.  The  election  of  delegates  to  the  congress  was  accom- 
panied by  mass  demonstrations  of  workers  in  defense  of  peace.  The  Japanese 
people's  struggle  against  remilitarization  and  remobilization  of  the  so-called 
police  reserve  reached  an  especially  high  pitch.  The  Yoshida  government's 
refusal  to  allow  the  delegates  visas  for  the  trip  to  Peking  aroused  indignation 
everywhere. 

In  other  countries,  preparations  for  the  congress  are  proceeding  with  great 
success.  In  Australia.  Burma.  Thailand,  Guatemala,  Colombia,  Mexico,  Chile, 
Peru,  and  Ecuador  delegates  have  been  elected  from  the  most  varied  elements 
of  the  population. 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  progressive  elements  of  the  intelligentsia  in  the 
Pacific  countries  have  displayed  great  activity  in  the  preparations  for  the  con- 
gress. This  class  is  speaking  out  boldly  for  peace  and  against  the  threat  of  a 
new  war. 

Large  meetings  were  held  in  Pakistan,  at  which  writers,  professors,  lawyers, 
journalists,  and  trade-union  leaders  expounded  the  resolutions  of  the  World 
Peace  Council,  and  denounced  the  use  of  bacteriological  warfare  by  the  Ameri- 
cans. The  All-Pakistan  Peace  Committee  formed  a  preparatory  committee  and 
sent  its  representatives  to  Peking  for  the  congress. 

The  Mexican  intelligentsia  is  likewise  active  in  its  preparations.  Prominent 
scientific  and  cultural  figures  are  taking  a  firm  stand  against  the  conclusion 


866  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

of  a  military  treaty  with  the  United  States  of  America.  Leading  physicians,  at 
the  behest  of  the  Mexican  Peace  Council,  decided  to  give  a  series  of  lectures 
on  the  signiticance  of  medicine  in  the  struggle  for  peace.  They  denounced 
bacteriological  warfare.  "We  will  win  peace  if  we  fight  for  it" — this  is  the 
Mexican  slogan  in  the  preparations  for  the  congress. 

The  Soviet  people,  together  with  all  people  of  good  will,  stand  firm  for  peace 
in  Asia  and  the  Pacific.  Engrossed  in  their  labors  of  construction,  they  are 
vitally  interested  in  the  preservation  and  consolidation  of  peace.  Soviet  people 
know  what  a  great  threat  is  posed  to  international  security  by  the  American 
aggression  against  the  peoples  of  Korea  and  China.  The  workers  of  the  U.  S.  S.  R. 
stand  firm  against  imperialist  adventures  and  for  the  peaceful  settlement  of 
all  disputed  issues. 

Our  people  raise  a  mighty  voice  of  protest  against  the  American  atrocities 
in  Korea.  It  calls  for  a  peaceful  settlement  of  the  Korean  question,  and  it 
denounces  the  remilitarization  of  Japan.  Soviet  people  are  outraged  by  the 
American  use  of  bacteriological  weapons.  The  Soviet  workers  are  for  unity 
among  the  peoples  of  Asia  and  the  Pacific  in  the  struggle  for  peace.  Our  repre- 
sentatives at  Peking  can  tell  the  congress  of  the  great  feats  of  the  Soviet  Union 
in  peacetime  construction  and  what  prosperity  has  been  attained  by  the  peoples 
in  the  Soviet  republics  of  Central  Asia.  The  inspired  labors  of  Soviet  people 
for  peace  and  communism  serve  as  a  shining  example  to  all  the  peoples  in  their 
noble  struggle  for  freedom  and  independence,  and  against  the  threat  of  a 
new  war. 

The  days  before  the  opening  of  the  Congress  of  Peace  Partisans  for  Asia  and 
the  Pacific  are  numbered.  It  will  be  held  in  Peking — the  capital  of  the  new 
people's  China.  Delegates  will  be  arriving  here  from  dozens  of  countries. 
The  hospitable  Chinese  people  are  ready  for  their  guests.  Each  delegate  will 
have  an  opportunity  to  see  for  himself  the  remarkable  achievements  of  the 
Chinese  people  in  the  reorganization  of  their  country  and  in  their  efforts  to 
perserve  and  strengthen  peace  in  the  Far  East  and  throughout  the  world. 

The  Congress  of  Peace  Partisans  for  Asia  and  the  Pacific  will  be  a  memorable 
event,  when  preparations  are  underway  all  over  the  world  for  the  great  Congress 
of  Peoples  in  Defense  of  Peace,  which  will  be  held  in  Vienna  late  in  the  year. 
The  Peking  congress  is  indissolubly  linked  with  these  historic  events  in  the 
great  peace  front.  The  congress  will  serve  as  a  new  and  powerful  stimulus 
for  the  unification  of  all  the  Asian  and  Pacific  people's  forces  in  the  strussle 
for  peace  and  against  the  threat  of  war. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you,  with  your  husband,  attend  the  Asian 
Pacific  Peace  Conference  in  Peking,  China,  in  October,  1952? 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.  May  I  speak  to  my  counsel  ? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  have  to  talk  to  your  counsel  to  know 
whether  you 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  This  is  the  whole  area  on  which  I  have  asked  to 
exercise  the  privilege  of  the  fifth  amendment,  so  my  answer  on  this, 
loo,  would  be,  I  refuse  to  answer.  This  is  the  whole  area  which  I 
refuse  to  answer. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Have  you  advocated  admission  of  Red  China  to  the 
United  Nations  ? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  did  I  understand  it  to  be  your  ruling 
that  I  could  not  object  or  that  I  could?    I  cannot  remember  now. 

Senator  Daniel.  Oh,  you  may  object. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  object  on  the  ground  that  the  question  is  wholly 
improper  and  impertinent,  more  impertinent — by  which,  of  course, 
I  mean  nonpertinent ;  I  do  not  want  to  accuse  counsel  of  discourtesy — 
than  any  issue  so  far  raised  in  this  case. 

Senator  Daniel.  I  say,  as  far  as  I  am  concerned,  you  may  object 
as  long  as  you  do  not  take  advantage  of  the  committee  through  your 
objections.  That  objection  is  overruled.  You  will  proceed  to  answer 
the  question. 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  The  question  was  whether  I  ever  advocated  the 
admission  of  China  ? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  867 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Have  you  placed  the  Communist  China — I  beg^ 
your  pardon.  The  question  that  did  not  get  answered  was,  Have 
you  advocated  admission  of  Red  China  to  the  United  Nations? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRAViNE.  Have  you  praised  the  Chinese  Communist  Party? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  On  this  again  I  woukl  like  to  exercise  the  privilege. 

Mr.  SouR^^'iNE.  Do  you  now  think  the  Chinese  Communists  are 
praiseworthy? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Objection  on  the  ground  it  goes  into  a  single  issue, 
first  amendment,  opinion  of  the  witness. 

It  has  nothing  to  do  with  associations,  activities,  and  certainly  not 
the  Matusow  bail. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  In  this  connection,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  should  like 
to  point  out  that  the  previous  question  was  not  answered,  claiming 
the  fifth  amendment.  This  question  is  an  effort  to  find  out  whether 
the  area  is  foreclosed  as  of  the  present  time. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  objection  on  this  question 

Mr.  SouEwiNE.  Have  you  criticized  the  United  States  for  conduct- 
ing germ  warfare  in  Korea  ? 

Mrs.  AV1L1.COX.  The  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  while  Mr.  Sourwine  is  looking  through 
his  papers,  may  I  ask  a  question  which  may  be  the  foundation  of  my 
objection  to  any  further  proceedings  here.  Is  this  an  investigation, 
as  we  understood  it  to  be  generally  from  the  press,  into  Mrs.  Willcox 
putting  up  bail  for  Mr.  Matusow  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  It  is  an  investigation  with  that  in  mind  and  other 
matters  that  the  committee  has  in  mind  of  checking  into  subversion 
in  this  country.    All  right,  Mr.  Sourwine,  you  may  proceed. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  should  like  to  offer  for  the  record,  Mr.  Chairman, 
at  this  time,  a  photostat  of  an  article  appearing  in  the  New  York 
Times  of  Thursday,  November  27,  1952.  I  want  to  question  the 
witness  about  it. 

Senator  Daniel.  All  right.  This  article  termed  "Germ  War  Al- 
leged by  Passport  Loser"  will  be  admitted  and  made  a  part  of  the 
record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  61"  and  ap- 
pears below:) 

Exhibit  No.  61 

[The  New  York  Times,  November  27,  1952] 

Germ  War  Alleged  by  Passport  Loser 

new  york  engineer  says  china  puts  up  building  projects  much  faster  than 

united  states 

Henry  Willcox,  whose  passport  was  seized  for  traveling  to  Communist  China, 
said  yesterday  that  he  went  there  "to  stand  up  and  be  counted  for  peace."  The 
New  Yorli  engineer  said  his  observations  indicated  Chinese  Communist  claims 
to  be  improving  living  standards  of  500  million  Chinese  by  15  percent  a  year 
seemed  plausible. 

Mr.  Willcox  and  his  wife,  Anita,  whose  passport  was  also  picked  up  on  their 
return  Tuesday  from  overseas,  were  delegates  to  the  peace  conference  of  the 
Asian  and  Pacific  regions  held  in  Peiping  October  2  to  11.  They  released  a 
separate  statement  by  Hugh  Hardyman  described  as  a  retired  fruitgrower  and 
vice  chairman  of  the  American  delegation,  which  said  all  14  American  delegates 
had  become  convinced  that  the  United  States  Government  had  used  biological 
warfare  on  a  wide  scale  in  Korea  and  northeast  China. 


868  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

The  Hardyman  statement,  which  the  Willcoxes  said  had  been  broadcast  o"— 
the  Peiping  radio,  denied  the  parley  had  been  Communist-run  or  Communist- 
dominated. 

"Careful  study  of  the  report  of  the  International  Scientific  Commission,  a 
wholly  Communist-dominated  group,  and  the  extensive  collection  of  evidence  on 
exhibition  here,  including  the  handwritten  testimony  of  four  of  our  pilots  and 
the  tape  recordings  of  their  voices,  has  left  not  the  slightest  doubt  in  the  mind 
of  any  delegate  to  this  conference,  including  the  14  delegates  from  the  United 
States,  that  our  Government  has  used  this  revolting  method  of  germ  warfare  on 
a  wide  scale,"  the  Hardyman  statement  said. 

The  Willcoxes,  who  live  at  280  West  11th  Street,  reserved  comment  on  a  State 
Department  statement  that  they  might  face  legal  action  for  apparent  use  of  pass- 
ports in  violation  of  stamped  restrictions  banning  travel  to  Communst  countries. 
Mrs.  Willcox  said  they  were  consulting  an  attorney. 

Mr.  Willcox  is  reported  to  be  a  stockholder  in  the  Willcox  Construction  Co.  of 
Long  Island  City,  Queens,  which  recently  built  the  Pomonok  Houses  project 
for  the  New  York  City  Housing  Authority.  He  said  he  had  spent  40  years  in  the 
building  business. 

Senator  Daniel.  Did  you  wish  to  see  it? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Yes;  I  would  like  to  see  exhibits  when  they  are  in- 
troduced.    Thank  you. 

Mr.  SouKWiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  this  news  story  in  the  New  York 
Times  is  not,  of  course,  evidence  as  to  anything  you  have  said.  It  is 
only  evidence  as  to  what  the  New  York  Times  said  you  said.  This 
story  states  that  you  and  Mr.  Willcox  were  delegates  to  the  peace  con- 
ference of  the  Asian  and  Pacitic  regions  held  in  Peiping  October  2  to 
11  and  that  upon  your  return  you  released  a  separate  statement  by 
Hugh  Hardyman,  described  as  a  retired  fruitgrower  and  vice  chair- 
man of  the  American  delegation.     Do  you  know  Hugh  Hardyman  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Fifth  amendment. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  mean  when  you  say  "fifth  amendment"  each 
time  I  will  take  it  that  you  refuse  to  answer. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes;  I  do. 

Senator  Daniel.  Claiming  the  privilege  of  the  lifth  amendment  not 
to  give  testimony  against  yourself. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  That  is  correct.  It  is  my  understanding  that  these 
are  link  questions  and  that  unless  I  claim  it  as  I  go  along,  1  will  not  be 
able  to  claim  it  later. 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  mean  this  is  my  understanding  of  it.  Am  I 
correct  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  correct,  yes.  We  j  ust  want  to  be  sure  when 
you  say  "fifth  amendment,"  that  is  the  effect  and  what  you  mean. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  That  is  it. 

Senator  Daniel.  And  that  each  time  you  use  it,  you  will  sincerely 
and  honestly  believe  that  a  truthful  answer  to  the  question  may  be  used 
against  you  in  some  proceeding? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  With  the  additional  thing,  correct  me  if  I  am  wrong, 
that  if  I  answer  these  questions,  I  will  place  myself  in  a  position  where 
I  will  be  obliged  to  answer  further  questions  or  be  held  in  contempt 
of  this  committee,  is  that  correct? 

Senator  Daniel.  I  think  you  may  be  wrong  in  that  assumption  be- 
cause there  are  many  of  these  questions  that  in  my  opinion,  you  could 
have  answered  without  obliging  yourself  to  answer  other  questions  but 
that  is  something  on  which  you  should  take  the  advice  of  your  counsel. 
I  will  say  to  you  that  I  do  not  believe  that  it  would  necessarily  follow 


stratp:gy  and  tactics  of  world  communism  869 

that  a  truthful  answer  to  some  of  these  questions  would  prohibit  you 
from  taking  the  fifth  amendment  on  subsequent  questions  alonir  the 
same  line. 

Mrs.  WiLLCOX.  Well,  may  I  speak  to  my  counsel  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  You  may. 

(The  witness  conferred  Avith  counsel.) 

Mr.  BouDix.  The  witness  is  prepared  to  go  ahead  with  the  exami- 
nation. That  is,  the  witness  stands  on  the  last  answer.  She  had 
asked  you  a  legal  question  and  you  gave  her  your  view  of  the  law,  you 
remember.  Senator.     There  is  no  pending  question  at  the  moment. 

Senator  Daniel.  No.  I  will  ask  Mr.  Sourwine  to  repeat  the  ques- 
tion. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  last  question  I  asked  was  whether  she  knew 
Hugh  Hardyman. 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.  Well,  I  repeat  the  answer  that  I  gave  before.  1 
(.'laim  the  fifth  amendment  on  this,  too. 

Senator  Daniel.  All  right. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  According  to  this  New  York  Times  article,  the 
separate  statement  released  by  Mr.  and  Mrs.  AYillcox  said  that — 

All  14  American  delegates  to  the  peace  conference  of  the  Asian  and  Pacific 
regions  held  in  Peking,  October  2  to  11,  had  become  convinced  that  the  United 
States  Government  had  used  biological  warfare  on  a  wide  scale  in  Korea  and 
northeast  China 

Did  you  have  anything  to  do  with  the  issuance  of  such  a  statement, 
Mrs.  Willcox? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Again  I  take  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SoLTtwiNE.  Do  you  have  any  information,  Mrs.  Willcox,  as  to 
whether  the  United  States  Government  used  biological  warfare  in 
Korea  and  northeast  China? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  take  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  On  whether  you  have  such  information? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  beg  your  pardon  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  decline  to  answer  the  question  as  to  whether 
you  have  any  information? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  do. 

Senator  Daniel.  Did  you  ever  charge  your  country  with  using  germ 
warfare,  Mrs.  Willcox  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  take  the  fifth  amendment  on  that,  too. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  the  person  who  put  up  the  $10,000  for  the 
Harvey  Matusow  fund  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mrs.  Willcox,  have  you  ever  been  in  Peiping,  China  ? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Could  that  question  be  repeated,  please  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  ever  been  in  Peiping,  China? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  take  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  it  true  that  you  traveled  to  Peiping,  China,  by 
way  of  Warsaw  and  Moscow  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  take  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  know  that  your  husband  had  stated  in  a 
letter  to  the  Passport  Division  that  he  was  undertaking  an  extensive 
housing  project  with  the  Turkish  Government  and  wanted  to  go  to 
Turkey  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  take  the  fifth  amendment. 


870  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  wliether  it  is  true  that  your  husband 
at  any  time  planned  to  undertake  an  extensive  housing  project  for  the 
Turkish  Government  ? 

Mr,  BouDiN.  Just  a  moment.  I  object  on  the  gi'ound  that  I  cannot 
see  the  relevance  of  a  contract  with  the  Turkish  Government  to  build 
houses  to  the  issue  of  whether  Mrs.  Willcox  had  a  right  to  put  up  bail 
for  Mr.  Matusow.  Aside  from  being  improper  constitutionally  it 
seems  to  me  to  be  completely  irrelevant. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  Mr.  Boudin  is  attempting  to  define 
the  issues  here.  That  is  wholly  within  the  committee's  competence, 
and  speaking  of  impertinence,  I  think  it  is  impertinent  of  Mr.  Boudin 
to  do  that. 

Mr.  Boudin.  I  am  not  trying  to  define  the  issues.  I  would  like  to 
know  what  they  are. 

Senator  Daniel.  Let  us  not  have  argument  back  and  forth.  The 
objection  is  overruled. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  will  answer  that  one  if  you  would  like.  Would 
you  repeat  the  question,  again  ? 

Mr.  Boudin.  Have  I  been  overruled  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes ;  you  were  overruled  and  the  witness  was  about 
to  give  us  an  answer. 

Mr.  Boudin.  But  sometimes  I  think  I  would  like  to  have  a  legal 
ruling  even  if  she  is  willing  to  answer. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  The  question  is,  Do  you  know  if  it  is  true  that  your 
husband  wished  to  go  to  Turkey  to  undertake  an  extensive  housing 
project  with  the  Turkish  Government? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Was  that  the  last  question? 

Mr.  Boudin.  No  ;  that  was  not  the  last  question. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  That  was  the  one  before  the  last.  The  last  question 
was  different.    The  last  question  was 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  is  the  question  you  wish  to  answer,  Mrs. 
Willcox  ? 

Mr.  Boudin.  Why  don't  you  ask  the  question  you  want  to  have 
answered  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  Counsel,  I  want  to  caution  you  again  to  quit  inter- 
rupting. 

Mi-s.  Willcox.  Mr.  Sourwine,  I  thought  you  asked  one  question. 
That  was  the  one  preceding  the  last  one.     Am  I  wrong? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  state  of  the  record  will  be  shown  by  the  printed 
record.  I  would  like  now  to  have  an  answer  to  the  question  as  to 
whether  you  know  if  it  is  true  that  your  husband  desired  to  go  to 
Turkey  to  undertake  an  extensive  housing  project  with  the  Turkish 
Government  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Well,  that  is  not  stating  the  fact  the  way  it  really 
was. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  state  it  as  it  really  was.  All  we  want  is  the 
truth. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  It  is  true  that  the  Turkish  Government  wanted  Mr. 
Willcox's  company  to  come  to  Turkey  and  build  some  houses.  Now, 
that  is  true. 

Senator  Daniel.  And  did  he  agree  to  do  so  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  He  was  investigating  this  business.  Actuall}^,  if 
you  want  to  know,  the  Turkish  Govermnent  wanted  him  to  finance 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  871 

this  building.  Well,  I  mean  lie  is  not  in  that  kind  of  a  business,  but 
he  did  not  know  that  at  the  time.    He  was  interested  in  exploring  this. 

Senator  Daniel.  He  was  interested  in  going  to  Turkey  for  that 
purpose  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  He  was  interested  in  exploring  this  business. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  he,  in  fact,  go  to  Turkey  i 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  No. 

Mr.  SouRWixE.  Did  you  and  your  husband  use  American  passports 
to  travel  in  Iron  Curtain  countries  ? 

Mrs.  AViLLCOx.  Fifth  amendment. 

Senator  Daniel.  Did  you  ask  for  passports  to  Turkey  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  May  I  speak  to  my  counsel  on  that? 

Senator  Daniel.  You  may. 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.  You  see,  I  just  want  to  be  sure  I  do  not  get  into  one 
of  these  link  things. 

(The  witness  confers  with  counsel.) 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  Look,  I  will  state  the  privilege  on  that,  too.  It  gets 
too  complicated. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  say  it  is  too  complicated? 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  Yes ;  I  mean  I  do  not  know  wdiere  I  am  on  this.  I 
will  take  the  privilege  on  this,  too. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  should  know  because  you  should  not  take 
the  privilege  as  explained  to  you  a  moment  ago 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  Look,  I  mean 

Senator  Daniel.  Just  a  moment.  Unless  you  sincerely  and  hon- 
estly believe  that  a  truthful  answer  to  this  question  may  be  used  against 
you  or  tend  to  incriminate  you,  form  some  link  in  a  chain  of  evidence 
against  you,  and  if  you  do  not  think  that  a  truthful  answer  to  this 
question  could  ever  be  used  against  you  for  the  purpose  of  incrimina- 
tion, then  you  should  answer  the  question. 

Mrs.  WiLLCox.  Well,  I  cannot  possibly  see  how  this  could  lead  to 
a  link,  but  then  this  is  where  I  am  so  unfamiliar  with  other  people's 
thinking  on  what  constitutes  a  link.  Actually,  I  mean  the  answer 
is  that  in  this  case  of  the  Turks,  we  had  no  idea  whether  this  was,  you 
know — this  was  something  we  went  abroad  to  investigate.  Well, 
then  we  foun.d  out  that  it  was  not  worth  pursuing,  at  which  point 
we  found  out — listen,  I  really  do  not  know  that  part,  Just  when  we 
found  out  the  thing  was  no  longer  good 

Senator  Daniel.  My  question  was  simply  whether  or  not  you 
obtained  passports  to  go  to  Turkey. 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  We  did  not  have  to  in  order  to  investigate  this.  We 
went  as  far  as  Paris,  expecting  to  go  to  Turkey  if  it  proved  a  worth- 
while thing  to  do,  but  it  proved  it  was  not. 

Senator  Daniel,  You  asked  for  passports  to  Turkey;  did  you  not? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  No;  we  did  not  know  whether  it  was  going  to  be 
necessary  to  go  to  Turkey.  We  wanted  to  go  to  Paris  to  talk  to  these 
people  and  at  that  point  we  did  not  ask  for  visas  to  go  to  Turkey.  No ; 
we  did  not. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  did  not  ask  for  authority  to  go  to  Turkey? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  At  that  point ;  no. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Could  I  indicate  you  do  not  have  to  ask  specifically 
for  authority  to  go  to  a  particular  country  ?    Your  passport  will  allow 

59886— 55— pt.  10 4 


872  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COJVIMUNISM 

you  to  go  to  all  countries  with  the  exception  of  Russia  and  those 
related  countries. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  did  not  ask  for  a  visa,  though  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLcox.  Not  at  that  time ;  no. 

Senator  Daniel.  Have  you  ever  asked  for  a  visa  to  go  to  Turkey  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  I  do  not  remember  really.    I  really  do  not  remember. 

Senator  Daniel.  All  right. 

Mr.  Soi:rwine.  Mrs.  Willcox,  did  you  ever  use  American  passports 
to  travel  in  Poland? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  ?    Fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Was  there  not  at  one  time  a  Polish  stamp  on  your 
passport  and  the  passport  of  your  husband  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  it  not  true  that  while  you  were  traveling  in 
countries  behind  the  Iron  Curtain  the  officials  of  those  countries 
inserted  or  caused  to  be  inserted  in  your  American  passports  a  separate 
slip  or  piece  of  paper  on  which  visas  were  stamped  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you,  Mrs.  Willcox,  make  a  speech  at  the  Peiping 
Peace  Conference? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  ask  that  there  be  inserted  in  the 
record  at  this  point  a  copy  of  the  report  on  a  monitored  broadcast 
from  the  Peking  International  Service  in  English  on  October  8,  1952, 
referring  to  a  speech  made  by  Mrs.  Willcox.  Since  she  will  not  testify 
on  til  is  matter,  this  is  the  next  best  evidence. 

Senator  Daniel.  This  docmnent  will  be  admitted  in  the  record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  62"  and 
appears  below:) 

Exhibit  No.  62 

[China:  Communist,  October  9,  1952] 

Anita  Willcox  Statement 

(Peking,  Chinese  International  Service,  in  English,  October  8,  1952 — Abridged 
recording  of  statement  made  by  United  States  delegate  Mrs.  Anita  Willcox  at 
the  October  8  session  of  the  Asian  and  Pacific  Peace  Conference). 

(Text) 

Mr.  Chairman,  fellow  delegates,  and  friends  of  peace,  we  come  as  representa- 
tives of  the  70  i>ercent  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  who  (would  rather 
prefer)  to  express  their  true  opinions  anonymously,  have  (voted  for)  an  im- 
mediate end  to  the  war  in  Korea.  We  know  full  well  that  we,  as  citizens  of 
a  democracy,  insofar  as  we  *  *  *  for  peace  to  the  full  limit  of  our  power,  are 
responsible  for  the  killing  of  millions  of  men,  women,  and  children  in  the  Korean 
war. 

We  come  to  this  conference  seeking  effective  means  to  stop  this  murder,  con- 
scious that  our  planes  are  dropping  napalm  while  we  speak.  We  ask  our  brothers 
and  sisters  in  the  Asian  and  Pacific  regions  to  help  us  stop  the  rearming  of  Japan 
and  Germany,  and  the  colonial  oppression  of  the  peoples  of  southeast  Asia,  be- 
fore new  Koreas  are  set  ablaze. 

We  and  the  majority  of  our  people  have  come  here  to  demand  an  end  to  the 
killing  of  prisoners  of  war  at  Koje  and  Cheju.  On  October  1,  while  we  peace 
delegates  watched  the  (glories)  of  a  free  people  celebrating  their  nati<mal  day 
in  *  *  *  Peking,  4,5  more  men  were  killed  at  Cheju  for  the  "crime"  of  daring  to 
mark  with  joy  tie  same  occasion  *  *  *  and  strengthened  in  our  own  way  by 
their  strength,  we  denounce  the  criminal  attempts  to  exterminate  the  people, 
their  industry,  and  their  culture. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  873 

Our  Armed  Forces  destroy  the  things  people  live  by-&ranaries  and  crops 
ThPv  call  homes  sampans,  schools,  and  horses  -military  targets.'  Our  Air 
llvle  blows  S>  oxcarts.  Our  Navy  sinks  fishing  boats.  For  this  "heroism  " 
narents  of  our  children  have  refused  medals  awarded  by  our  Government  to  their 
Stul  ?ons  r\vmause-Editor.]  To  most  of  our  people  the  horrible  facts  of 
nni^ii  of  nam im  ha^Vonlv  now  become  known.  Of  the  facts  of  germ  warfare 
Zv  are  ^tnrinSva?e  The  findings  of  the  International  Scientific  Commission 
and  the  testL^Ss  of  Lieutenants  F.  B.  O'Neal  and  K.  11.  Kniss  have  not  yet 
Seen  widelfci^^^^^^^^  iu  the  United  States.  The  administration  (beheves)  the 
whole  idla  of  swoadiug  disease  is  so  repugnant  to  our  people  that  the  highest 
civilian  SdmUa?y  authorities  and  our  representatives  to  the  United  Nations 
have  fiatbdenied  anv  such  action.  They  persisted  in  these  denials  even  after 
the  confessions  of  Lieutenants  K.  Enoch  and  J.  Quinn  were  reported  in  the 

^The  peace  organizations  will  give  to  our  people  the  opportunity  to  study  the 
evidence  and  make  up  their  own  minds.  We  believe  that  the  response  will  l>e 
a  de!nand-?n  a  voice'  so  thunderous  it  cannot  be  ig.iored-that  he  newspapers 
publish  the  report  of  the  International  Scientific  Commission  and  that  oui  Gov- 
erament  answer  the  charges  of  the  commission,  ratify  the  Geneva  protocol  of 
1925,  and  renounce  forever  the  use  of  biological  warfare. 

Most  parents  refuse  to  believe  that  our  sons  could  commit  such  acts     But  the 
fact  is  the  *  *  *  denial  of  the  basic  rights  to  our  colored  brothers  at  home 
bv  *  *  *  terror,  police  brutality,  and  social  discrimination,  conditions  are 
for  the  perpetration  of  the  heinous  crimes  that  are  being  committed  in  Korea 

Our  Government  is  conscripting  young  men  who  are  more  easily  led  than 
because  of  the  racist  *  *  *  in  the  United  States     Today,  Japan  is  the  military 
base  for  the  war  in  Korea  and  Southeast  Asia.     Our  Government  *  *  *  is  back- 
inc  the  very  Japanese  war  criminals  who  attacked  Pearl  Harbor. 

If  Japan  is  consolidated  as  a  military  power  we  are  in  danger,  not  only  of 
a  new  Korea  but  of  being  driven  into  a  third  world  war.  Our  occupation  ot 
Taiwan  *  *  *  of  the  cruel  Chiang  Kai-shek,  is  a  fact  of  our  preparation  for  a 

*  *  *  the  raw  material  *  *  *  have  intensified  our  intervention  in  the  c  un- 
tries  of  Latin  America,  where  increased  political  pressure  for  bilateral  military 
pacts  have  been  added  to  our  economic  exploitations.  .    ^    , 

one  of  the  major  ta.^ks  of  the  peace  movement  is  to  make  these  facts  known 
and  spread  by  everybody  at  home  *  *  *  our  press,  the  radio,  screen,  and  tele- 
vision account  for  most  of  the  conclusions  in  the  minds  of  our  people.  But  there 
is  another  verv  important  factor  which  must  he  taken  into  consideration— the 
widespread  belief  that  the  *  *  *  of  our  gigantic  anus  program  would  cause 

""The^Se^Si'STenf  of  (trade)  in  Asia,  as  long  as  *  *  *  could  take  the  whole 
measure  of  our  production  for  the  considerable  future.  Those  (pe^ples)  m 
^sia  *  *  *  in  the  same  direction,  have  *  *  *  rapidly  expanding  market  *  * 
in  the  United  States  of  America.  There  are  specific  demands  for  our  cotton, 
chemical  fertilizers  *  *  *  machine  tools  *  *  *  medical  supplies  and  instru- 
ments, building  materials,  and  paper  *  *  *  could  be  shipped  across  the  Pacific 
in  the  form  of  *  *  *  parts  for  automobiles,  as  easily  as  in  the  form  of  bombs 

^\l  have  recently  become  a  deficit  economy  in  *  *  *  and  in  exports  and  *  *  * 
resources,  become  ever  more  dependent  on  other  lands.  In  India  and  Latin 
America  there  is  need  for  all  *  *  *  market  for  the  products  of  our  farms  * 

There  is  *  *  *  commercial  exchange  and  *  *  *  revival  of  cultural  relations. 
•  *  *  building  a  new  and  better  world.  .^     ^v,     *  *  *  „„^ 

Despite  the  press  and  radio  blackout  on  peace,  despite  the  *  *  *  our  peace 
organizations  now  number  over  3,000.  Many  are  small  but  in  them  are  ijecple 
from  all  the  different  segments  of  our  society:  rich  and  poor,  Catholic  and 
Protestant  and  Jews,  Mexican  and  Negro,  Anglo  and  Japanese,  and  Puerto  Rican 

Americans.  .,.^         .     .   •       *  *  *  „       ^^ 

The  attempt  to  pass  a  law  for  universal  military  training  *  *  *  was  de- 
feated by  the  mass  protests  of  our  *  *  *  our  mothers,  our  women's  organizations 
social  and  professional  workers,  uplifters  for  peace  *  *  *  because  parents  did 
not  want  their  voung  sons  to  be  thrown  *  *  *  taking  to  the  *  -  *  for  peace  *  *  * 
In  New  York  on  August  20,  18,000  people  met  to  condemn  the  war  and  called 
for  immediate  peace  *  *  *  of  all  the  States  are  the  following  points : 

1.  A  cease-fire  in  Korea  now,  with  all  *  *  *  be  settled  in  the  *  *  *  peace 
conference. 


874  STRATEGY    AND    TACTJCS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

2.  Immediate  negotiations  among  the  major  powers  leadinfr  to  settlement  of  all 
outstaiuliiig  differences. 

3.  The  elimination  of  weapons  of  mass  destruction  and  an  agreement  on  *  ♦  * 
and  armaments. 

The  reception  accorded  to  the  peaceworkers  circulating  the  ballots  have  been 
overwhelmingly  *  *  *  for,  in  spite  of  our  continuing  criminal  activities  in  Korea, 
in  spite  of  attacks  on  all  forms  of  organized  protests,  in  spite  of  the  black 
silence  among  us  *  *  *  and  we  want  peace.     [Applause — Editor.] 

Senator  Daniel.  -STow,  Mrs.  Willcox,  the  acting  chairman  of  the 
committee  does  not  like  for  a  witness,  when  he  or  she  refuses  to  an- 
swer a  question  on  the  grounds  of  the  fifth  amendment,  to  merely 
utter  "fifth  amendment."  So  I  am  going  to  ask  that  you  have  your 
counsel  assist  you  there.  If  you  want  something  to  go  by  so  that  you 
can  give  the  full  reply  that  I  think  you  should  give  in  claiming  the 
fifth  amendment  you  may  have  him  write  it  out  for  you,  so  that  the 
record  will  show  that  you  have  given  full  answers  that  should  be 
given  by  a  witness  who  claims  the  fifth  amendment.  I  have  been 
permitting  you  to  just  say  "fifth  amendment"  with  the  understand- 
ing that  you  refuse  to  answer  the  question  because  you  claim  the  priv- 
ilege under  the  fifth  amendment,  not  to  give  evidence  against  your- 
self, but  I  do  want  a  complete  reply  from  here  on  in  the  record  and 
your  counsel  will  assist  you  in  writing  it  down. 

Mr.  SouRwaNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  did  your  husband,  to  your  knowledge, 
ever  receive  or  negotiate  for  foreign-aid  funds  from  the  United  States 
Government  or  an  agency  thereof  to  finance  any  foreign  housing? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  this  at  all. 

jNlr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you,  Mrs.  Willcox,  convey  greetings  to  the  Pei- 
ping  Peace  Conference  from  a  Mr.  Uphaus  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman.  I  offer  for  the  record  a  copy  of  a 
report  with  regard  to  a  monitored  broadcast  from  Peking  in  south- 
east Asia  on  October  7  concerning  this  matter. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  object  to  the  introduction  of  that 
document  in  evidence  on  the  ground  that  whatever  talk  was  given  in 
Peiping,  China,  if  any  was  given,  has  nothing  whatsoever  to  do  with 
this  committee's  investigation  into  whether  Matusow  had  a  right  to 
bail  and  my  client  had  a  right  to  put  it  up. 

Senator  Daniel.  Your  objection  is  overruled.  The  document  will 
be  received  and  made  a  part  of  the  record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  63"  and  appears 
below:) 

Exhibit  No.  63 

[China:  Communist,  October  8,  1952] 
tJ.  S.  "Peace  Crusader"  Sends   Greetings 

(Peking,  NCNA,  in  English  Morse  to  Southeast  Asia,  Europe,  and  North  America, 

October  7,  1952) 

(Text) 

Peking,  October  7. — Willard  Ephaus  [Uphaus?],  leader  of  the  American  Peace 
Crusade,  lias  sent  a  message  of  greetings  to  the  Asian  and  Pacific  Peace  Confer- 
ence. He  supports  the  aims  of  the  conference  to  stop  wars  in  the  East  and  the 
remilitarization  of  Japan  and  to  build  cultural  and  trade  ties  among  nations. 
His  message  reads :  "I  am  delighted  to  be  able  to  send  greetings  and  best  wishes 
to  your  great  conference  through  my  good  American  friends,  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Henry 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  875 

Willcox.  I  profoundly  regret  that  I  cannot  ))e  present  in  person  to  share 
the  ♦  •  *  and  deliberations  that  will  go  far  to  establish  peace  not  only  in  Asian 
and  Pacific  regions  but  throughout  the  world." 

Millions  of  peace-loving  people  in  the  United  States  concur  in  the  noble  aims 
of  the  conference,  including  an  end  of  the  war  in  Korea,  Vietnam,  and  Malaya, 
an  end  to  the  remilitarization  of  Japan,  the  building  of  cultural  ties  between  the 
East  and  West,  and  the  establishment  of  trade  that  will  lead  to  prosperity  and 
friendship.  The  war  in  Korea  is  daily  becoming  more  unpopular  in  the  United 
States.  Petitions,  letters,  telegrams,  and  public  meetings  are  mounting  in 
number,  calling  upon  the  present  Administration  and  candidates  *  *  *  to  work 
for  an  immediate  cease-tire. 

I  am  sending  one  of  the  many  expressions  for  peace  in  my  country.  It  is  a  plea 
for  peace  being  sponsored  by  seven  eminent  clergymen,  calling  upon  Christians 
as  they  worship  on  World  Communion,  Sunday,  October  5,  to  rededicate  them- 
selves to  putting  an  end  to  the  war  in  Korea  and  to  reaffirm  their  faith  in  the 
world  brotherhood  of  God's  children. 

Many  American  Christians  join  me  in  grateful  praise  for  the  vast  improvements 
in  living  conditions  being  made  in  the  new  China.  This  great  program  of  recon- 
struction will  inspire  similar  achievements  for  peace  and  happiness  in  other  parts 
of  the  world. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  the  Worker  of  Sunday,  October  19, 
1952,  refers  to  an  American  delegation  of  15  attending  the  Peiping 
Conference.  You  and  your  husband  were  2  of  the  15.  Will  you  tell 
us  who  the  other  13  were? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  ground  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  Was  Mr.  Joseph  Starobin  1  of  the  15  members  of 
that  delegation? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  mv  constitu- 
tional  privilege  under  that  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwaxE.  Was  Mr.  Starobin  your  superior  in  that  delegation? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SoTJRWixE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  ask  that  thei-  >  may  be  inserted  in 
the  record  at  this  time  the  Daily  Worker  article  to  wliich  I  have  just 
referred. 

Mr.  BouDix.  Objection  for  the  reasons  given. 

Senator  Daniel.  Objection  overruled. 

The  article  will  be  made  part  of  the  record. 

(The  article  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  64,"  and  appears 
below:) 

Exhibit  No.  64 

[The  Worker,  October  19,  1952] 

Asian  Pacific  Peoples  Appeal  to  U.  N.  To  Live  Up  to  Its  Chabtee 

Four  hundred  delegates  and  observers  in  Peiping  closed  the  first  Peace  Con- 
ference of  the  Asian  and  Pacific  peoples  in  history  this  week  with  an  appeal  to 
the  United  Nations  to  live  up  to  its  charter. 

The  Conference  resolution  accused  the  United  Nations  of  having  violated  its 
own  charter  provisions  by  waging  war  in  Korea  and  favoring  the  oppression  of 
national  liberation  movements  in  many  countries. 

The  delegates  and  observers  from  37  countries  urged  the  United  Nations  to  end 
the  Korea  war,  take  effective  measures  for  withdrawing  foreign  troops  from  such 
Asian  countries  as  Malaya  and  Indochina,  and  support  the  principle  of  a  pact  of 
peace  between  the  five  great  powers. 

They  called  on  the  U.  N.  to  stop  the  remilitarization  of  Germany  and  Japan ; 
to  halt  the  dissemination  of  racist  propaganda,  of  racial  discrimination  and  the 
suppression  of  national  independence  movements ;  to  prohibit  all  weapons  of 
mass  destruction  with  ratification  of  the  Geneva  Convention  of  1925 ;  and  to  end 
all  barriers  to  normal  trade  and  cultural  relations  between  countries. 


876  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

The  resolution  appealing  to  the  United  Nations  was  1  of  13  adopted  at  the 
final  session  of  the  10-day  conference  which  had  stii-red  the  Asian  and  Pacific 
peoples  with  never-to-be-forgotten  demonstrations  of  common  hopes  and  goals. 
The  final  session  also  saw  establishment  of  a  permanent  peace  liaison  committee, 
with  headquarters  in  Peiping.  Headed  by  Madam  Sun  Yat-sen,  widow  of  the 
founder  of  modern  China,  the  total  committee  includes  1  to  4  members  from 
each  participating  country. 

Eleven  vice  chairmen  come  from  India,  Pakistan,  Chile,  the  United  States. 
China,  Turkey,  Canada,  Australia,  Japan,  Korea,  and  the  Soviet  Union.  In  their 
absence  Paul  Robeson,  Pal)lo  Neruda,  Dr.  James  Endicott,  and  Madame  Pak 
Den  Ai  were  named  vice  presidents  from  the  United  States,  Chile,  Canada,  and 
Korea,  respectively. 

In  its  10  days  of  spirited  discussion  the  conference  heard  more  than  100 
speeches  in  plenary  sessions,  received  more  than  800  telegrams  of  greeting  from 
all  over  the  world,  and  more  than  23,000  letters  from  every  part  of  China  alone. 

Among  the  truly  spectacular  events  witnessed  by  the  delegates  and  observers 
was  a  joint  declaration  of  the  Indian  and  Pakistan  delegations  in  favor  of  a 
peaceful  settlement  of  the  4-year-old  Kashmir  dispute ;  a  salute  from  Soviet  dele- 
gate Ivan  Anissimov  to  the  rising  American  peace  movement,  and  a  plea  to  the 
delegates  to  bear  in  mind  the  distinction  between  the  American  people  and  their 
ruling  circles ;  the  new  realization  by  the  Latin  Americans  and  the  Asian  dele- 
gates of  their  essential  kinship  in  aim  and  aspiration  ;  the  appeal  of  an  American 
atomic  scientist,  31-year-old  Joan  Hinton,  who  worked  on  the  bombs  which 
destroyed  Hiroshima  and  Nagasaki,  to  all  United  States  scientists  "to  think 
again  what  it  is  you  are  doing"  and  "refuse  to  join  in  the  deadly  work"  of 
preparing  atomic  and  bacterial  warfare. 

Many  of  the  plenary  session  speakers  described  the  havoc  and  sufferings 
brought  to  their  peoples  by  foreign  interests  which  profit  from  war.  Noteworthy 
was  the  speech  of  Manuel  Cruz,  of  the  Philippines,  who  declared  that  the  Filipino 
people  want  complete  independence  unhampered  by  United  States  domination. 
Cruz  said  the  Filipinos  are  especially  determined  to  secure  the  removal  of  United 
States  bases  and  military  installations.  They  want  a  democratic  government 
which  can  guarantee  a  minimum  standard  of  living  for  all,  freedom  of  travel  to 
other  countries,  freedom  to  develop  their  own  culture  and  traditions,  and  freedom 
from  war  or  threats  of  war. 

Chan  Suat  Hoiig  spoke  for  the  people  of  Malaya.  She  charged  that  in  June 
1948  the  British  imperialists,  supported  by  the  American  imperialists,  launched 
an  attack  against  the  6  million  people  of  her  homeland.  She  appealed  for  support 
of  her  people's  fight  for  their  independence.  And  at  this  point  in  her  speech  Mrs. 
Monica  Felton  and  Ivor  Montague,  of  the  British  delegation,  rose  and  presented 
her  with  a  bouquet  (if  llowers — a  token  of  the  British  peace  movement's  solidarity 
with  the  Malayan  people. 

Dr.  Heinrich  Brandweiner,  member  of  the  World  Peace  Council  who  was  presi- 
dent of  the  Commission  of  the  International  Association  of  Democratic  Lawyers 
that  collected  evidence  of  war  crimes  by  United  States  troops  in  Korea,  cited 
article  107  of  the  European  Defense  Community  Pact  as  "tantamount  to  a  con- 
fession" of  guilt  in  planning  to  use  weapons  of  mass  destruction.  He  said  the 
article  contained  a  provision  that  under  certain  special  circumstances,  the 
employment  of  atomic,  chemical,  and  bacterial  weapons  is  permitted. 

One  dramatic  moment  in  the  conference  came  when  the  American  delegation 
of  15  presented  gifts  to  the  Korean  delegation  as  a  token  of  the  American  people's 
abhorrence  of  the  crimes  committed  in  their  name  against  the  Korean  people. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  was  your  husband,  Henry  Willcox,  a 
vice  president  at  the  Peiping  Peace  Conference? 

Mrs.  WiLLcos.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRWiNB.  Did  you  hold  any  office  at  the  Peiping  Peace  Con- 
ference ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  tlie  groimd  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  "Wlio  paid  your  expenses  and  those  of  your  husband 
to  the  Peiping  Peace  Conference  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  ground  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM  877 

Mr.  S(U  uwiNE.  Isn't  it  true  that  your  expenses  to  tliat  conference 
were  paid  by  the  World  Peace  Congress,  an  organization  controlled  by 
tlie  world  Communist  organization  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sour  WINE.  Do  you  know  John  Powell  ? 

Mrs:  WiULCox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Didn't  you  and  your  husband  visit  John  Powell 
in  Peiping,  China  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  did  you  write  an  article  entitled  "A 
Vision  of  Sanity"  for  the  volume  of  What  We  Saw  in  China  published 
by  the  Asian  and  Pacific  Peace  Conference  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  can  I  ask  you  a  question  again  ?  I  may 
be  very  naive,  although  I  have  represented  people  before  these  com- 
mittees before,  but  what  has  this  to  do  with  the  issue  of  the  right  of 
my  client  as  an  American  citizen  to  put  up  bail  and  tlie  right  even  of  a 
convicted  person  such  as  Mr.  JMatiisow  to  have  bail  put  up  '.  And  isn't 
what  Mr.  Sourwine  is  now  doing,  whether  intended  or  not,  going  to 
exercise  and  have  a  deterrent  effect  upon  people  getting  bail  in  the 
Federal  courts  % 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Counsel,  the  majority  of  the  members  of  this 
committee  have  heard  evidence  saying  that  Mr.  Matusow  is  in  the 
hands  of  members  of  the  Communist  Party,  and  that  he  has  been  since 
the  time  that  he  has  been  persuaded  to  change  his  testimony  at  El 
Paso  and  other  testimony  that  he  has  given,  and  that  he  is  under 
the  domination  and  control  today  of  members  of  the  Communist 
Party.  And  if  we  think  it  is  material  to  the  investigation  w^e  have 
here  to  show  who  would  put  up  $10,000  bail  for  Mr.  Matusow  and  if 
Mrs.  Willcox  would  give  us — if  she  is  not  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party,  if  she  has  nothing  to  do  with  it,  if  she  has  no  attachment  to 
Russia  or  the  Communist  Party,  then  we  will  at  least  in  one  respect 
know  that  the  Communist  Party  has  nothing  to  do  with  putting  up 
$10,000  bail  for  Mr.  Matusow.  Now  if  your  client  would  tell  us  all 
that,  we  could  clear  at  least  that  much  of  the  picture  out  of  and  away 
from  the  Communist  Party.  As  I  understand  it,  your  client  will  not 
even  tell  us  whether  she  is  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party ;  is  that 
correct  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  beg  your  pardon. 

Senator  Daniel.  I  will  retract  that  and  ask  that  that  be  stricken. 
I  was  not  here  this  morning  and  I  am  sure  I  was  thinking  of  another 
witness.    Strike  that  from  the  record. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  explained  this  morning  that  when,  in  attempting 
to  get  our  passports  renewed  that  both  Mr.  Willcox  and  I  signed  an 
affidavit,  saying  we  are  not  and  we  never  have  been  members  of  the 
Communist  Party  and  denying  every  kind  of  connection  with  the 
Communist  Party.  I  do  not  even  know  any  Communists.  I  do  not 
say  I  do  not  know  any  Communists,  maj^be  I  do,  but  I  do  not  know- 
any  official  Communists  at  all.  I  really  do  not  and  this  is  ridiculous 
that  I  have  any  connection. 


878  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Senator  Daniel.  I  have  stricken  that  comment  from  the  record, 
and  I  regret  that  I  made  it.    I  was  thinking  about  another  witness. 

Now  the  other  questions  that  have  been  asked  you  concern  your 
dealings  with  Red  China,  with  other  Iron  Curtain  countries  as  to 
whether  you  have  traveled  there,  any  relations  that  you  might  have 
had  with  them,  any  praise  that  you  gave  Red  China,  and  various 
other  items  here  which  would  indicate  whether  or  not  you  have  some 
sympathy  for  what  the  Communist  Party  stands  for,  and  that  is  the 
reason  that  we  are  going  into  these  matters.  Now  I  have  tried  to  give 
you  that  explanation.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  as  you  know,  it  is  not 
necessary  for  the  committee  to  explain  to  you  the  reasons  and  to  tell 
you  just  exactly  why  all  these  questions  are  being  asked,  but  I  have 
tried  to  do  that. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Senator,  I  appreciate  the  fact  that  you  have  tried  to 
do  that  and  I  know  that  your  error  with  respect  to  Mrs.  AVillcox  was 
inadvertent  because  you  were  not  here  this  morning. 

Senator  Daniel.  Right. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  The  point  I  am  making  is  a  more  fundamental  one, 
and  that  is  if  we  grant  the  right  to  put  up  bail  and  the  right  to  have 
bail  put  up  for  one  is  a  statutory  and  a  constitutional  and  a  moral 
right,  then  the  kind  of  liearing  that  we  have  had  this  morning,  with 
all  due  deference  to  the  Senators,  is  the  kind  of  hearing  which  must 
exercise  a  deterrent  effect  upon  people  getting  bail,  and  even  if  Mrs. 
Willcox  liad  said  that  she  had  been  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party  or  even  if  she  was  one  today,  it  should  make  no  difference.  She 
should  not  be  called  here  as  a  witness  because  she  put  up  bail.  All 
of  \\>>  may  some  day — I  hope  not,  certainly  not  the  people  on  that  side 
of  the  table  or  on  this — may  have  to  have  bail  ]3ut  up  for  them  someday. 

Senator  Daniel.  1  can  assure  you  the  fact  she  put  up  bail  for  Mr. 
Matusow  is  not  the  only  reason  she  was  summoned  before  this  com- 
mittee. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  can  assure  you  that  is  the  only  reason  it  was.  She 
was  never  summoned  before  this  committee  in  the  years  she  has  func- 
tioned until  she  put  up  bail  and  that  is  the  real  issue  here.  I  am  talk- 
ing here  to  you  as  a  Member  of  the  greatest  deliberative  body  in  the 
world  that  you  slioukl  iiold  a  hearing  and  subpena  my  client,  a  respect- 
able woman,  grandmother,  and  bring  her  down  here  because  she  has 
put  up  bail. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  the  end  of  the  argument.  Counsel. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  It  is  not  the  end ;  I  have  finished. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  the  end  of  the  argument  and  I  say  to  you 
the  fact  that  she  put  up  bail  for  Mr.  ^Matusow  is  not  the  only  reason 
she  has  been  summoned  before  this  committee.    Proceed,  Mr.  Counsel. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mrs.  Willcox,  I  show  you  the  photostats  of  an  article 
which  appeared  on  pages  61  and  63  of  the  volume,  "What  We  Saw  in 
China,"  published  under  the  auspices  of  the  Asian  and  Pacific  Peace 
Conference  and  I  ask  you  if  you  wrote  that  article. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Senator  Daniel.  What  part  of  the  fifth  amendment  are  you  re- 
ferring to,  Mr.  Counsel?  I  think  we  know  but  would  you  give  that 
to  her? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  879 

Mr.  BouDiN.  The  constitutional  privilege  technically  known  as  only 
the  privilege  that  a  person  need  not  be  a  witness  against  himself.  We 
are  not  referring  to  the  due  process  clause  or  to  the  other  parts. 

Senator  Daniel.  Would  you  give  her  the  complete  answer  there? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  All  right.  * 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  do  you  know  anv  other  Anita 
Willcox? 

Mrs.  Willcox.     No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  an  artist  and  writer? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  am  an  artist. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Are  you  a  writer  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  have  w^ritten  things  once  in  a  while  but  that  is  not 
my  profession. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  are  refusing  to  state  whether  you  are  the  Anita 
Willcox  who  wrote  this  article  entitled,  "A  Vision  of  Sanity,"  carrying 
the  byline,  "Anita  AVillcox,  artist  and  writer"? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Must  I  say  all  this  ? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  No,  no. 

I  take  it  counsel  is  just  asking  a  question. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  am  just  asking  a  question. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Shall  I  answer  the  whole  thing  here  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  Counsel  is  asking  are  you  refusing  to  answer 
whether  you  are  the  Anita  Willcox  who  wrote  this  article? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Yes ;  I  am  declining  to  answer. 

Senator  Daniel.  Now  for  what  reason  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  do  not  want  to  get  myself  into  a  line  of  reasoning 
where  I  have  to  answer  things  that  I  do  not  want  to  answer  because 
they  may  incriminate  me. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  not  an  excuse  and  the  Chair  is  going  to 
order  you  to  answ^er  the  question. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  see  that  article  again  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  suggest  to  the  committee,  Mr.  Chairman,  that 
a  possible  reason  why  the  witness  is  not  answering  this  question  is 
because,  in  fact,  she  did  not  write  the  article,  although  it  appears 
under  her  byline,  and  I  would  like  to  put  that  hypothesis  to  the  wit- 
ness and  ask.  Is  it  true  that  you  did  not  write  this  article  which  appears 
here  under  your  byline  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  May  I  ask  my  counsel — this  is  really  getting  to  be 
kind  of  Chinese  puzzle  to  me.     I  do  not  know  what  to  say. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  may  confer  with  your  counsel.  Go  right 
ahead. 

(The  witness  conferred  with  counsel.) 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  do  not  want  to  get  into  this  chain  link  business, 
that  is  all.  I  mean  on  this  particular  thing,  on  man}'  of  the  questions, 
if  I  thought  I  would  not  have  to — if  I  thought  that  I  could  really  stop 
at  any  point  and  say  this  thing  may  incriminate  and  then  go  on  and 
answer  some  of  these  questions  which,  in  my  mind,  are  completely 
harmless,  and  I  would  be  very  glad  to  answer  as  long  as  they  clid  not 
compel  me  to  answer  something  that  I  did  think  would  incriminate 
me.  Do  I  make  myself  clear?  This  is  just  a  commonsense  business. 
Many  of  these  questions  I  would  be  very  glad  to  answer  if  they  did 
not  involve  me  in  further  questions. 


880  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr,  Chairman,  all  the  witness  is  saying,  and  I  say  it 
by  way  of  objection,  I  will  say  it  as  counsel  by  objecting  to  the  question 
that  the  witness  admits  she  knows  no  more  about  the  legal  problems 
involved  whatever  than  Mr.  Justice  Black  did  or  said  anybodv  knows, 
in  Blau  against  United  States,  and  Mr.  Sourwine  is  moving  around  in 
a  circle  here  apparently  attempting 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  enough.  You  are  not  making  an  objection. 
Let  us  go  ahead  with  the  question.  You  remember  the  last  question, 
do  you  not  ? 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  a  witness  against 
myself. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  offer  this  article  for  the  record  as 
the  article  which  was  shown  to  the  witness. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  article  will  be  received  and  made  a  part  of 
the  record. 

(The  article  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  65"  and  appears 
below :) 

Exhibit  No.  65 

A  Vision  of  Sanity 
(By  Anita  Willcox,  artist  and  writer) 

Seven  short  weeks  are  not  enough  to  enable  one  to  know  an  individual,  much 
less  the  half  billion  individuals  in  China ;  but  it  is  possible  to  receive  sharply 
etched  impressions.  Many  of  us  from  the  West  who  went  to  China  as  Peace 
Conference  delegates  had  moments  of  pessimism  at  home  when  it  seemed  that  it 
might  not  be  possible  to  thwart  the  plans  of  those  who  want  a  third  world  war. 

But  in  China  we  met  a  clear  dawn  of  expanding  opportunity,  vigor,  courage, 
and  joy.  How  many  laughing  faces  have  we  seen,  how  many  lusty  youngsters 
shouting  "Ho  Ping  Wan  Sui" — Long  live  peace.  In  cities,  in  villages,  even  in 
isolated  farmhouses  where  no  delegate  was  expected,  peace-dove  designs  wel- 
comed us.  For  in  this  new  China,  born  of  a  dreadful  civil  war  and  brutal  oc- 
cupation, every  man,  woman,  and  child  wants  peace. 

While  all  of  us  felt  this  joyous  sense  of  the  renewal  of  life,  each  must  have 
felt  an  aspect  of  it  in  his  own  way.  For  my  part,  I  have  not  ceased  to  marvel 
at  such  undeniable  spontaneity  within  such  extraordinary  organization. 

We  met  it  as  soon  as  we  arrived — on  the  eve  of  the  1st  of  October,  National 
Day — when  Chairman  Mao  Tse-tung  gave  a  banquet  to  some  2,000  guests,  includ- 
ing distinguished  Chinese,  representatives  of  national  minority  groups,  model 
workers  and  the  four  hundred-odd  delegates  and  observers  to  the  conference. 

I  have  never  regarded  such  affairs  enthusiastically,  with  the  waiting  around, 
desultory  conversation,  the  long,  long  speeches.  But  I  went  to  this  dinner 
with  great  curiosity,  and  I  had  a  wonderful  time.  Believe  it  or  not,  it  was  a 
warm,  colorful,  cordial  affair,  with  an  air  of  gaiety.  Long  buffet  tables  were 
set  up  in  the  ancient  palace  which  had  been  rebuilt  for  the  Peace  Conference. 
At  each  table  of  15  or  16,  2  Chinese  hosts  made  us  welcome,  made  graceful 
toasts,  and  saw  to  it  that  our  glasses  were  kept  filled. 

Chairman  Mao  spoke  for  5  minutes ;  then  we  ate  the  delicious  Chinese  food, 
and  presently  distinguished  national  leaders,  including  Premier  Chou  En-lai, 
made  the  rounds  of  the  tables  to  drink  our  health  and  chat.  The  delegations 
visited  each  other,  in  a  sort  of  spontaneous  informal  parade.  Beginning  at  7 
sharp,  the  banquet  broke  up  at  9. 

For  the  historic  Peace  Conference  which  opened  on  October  2,  the  palace  where 
we  had  dined  was  transformed.  Long  rows  of  desks  had  been  installed,  each  with 
its  own  earphones  which  could  be  plugged  into  one  of  four  languages.  The  equip- 
ment— made  in  China — worked  perfectly.  Underneath  a  huge  dove,  flanked  by 
the  flags  of  the  37  countries  participating,  was  the  platform.  Smaller  rooms 
adjoined  the  main  halls,  serving  refreshments  during  breaks  in  the  sessions; 
and  in  back  was  a  spacious  garden  banked  with  chrysanthemums,  where  we 
chattered  and  strolled,  looking  out  over  the  golden  tiled  roofs  of  the  ancient 
Forbidden  City  of  the  emperors. 


STRATEGY    A^■D    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  881 

Here  I  must  make  a  bow  to  the  China  Peace  Committee,  which  managed 
everything  with  tact  and  grace.  We  had  hotel  accommodations,  trausiwrtation 
to  the  conference  hall,  and  services  of  all  kinds,  including  hospital'  care,  ail  or- 
ganized seemingly  without  effort.  Timing — even  allowing  for  the  inevitable 
delegate  who  remembered  something  in  his  room  as  he  was  boarding  the  bus — 
was  perfect. 

We  were  gently  called  in  the  morning,  rounded  up  for  meals,  entertained  with 
so  little  apparent  direction  that  we  might  have  thought  we  did  it  for  ourselves — 
at  least,  those  among  us  who  had  never  helped  organize  a  convention.  Every- 
thing was  thought  of,  including  notebooks,  newspapers,  copies  of  the  previous 
day's  speeches — never  any  hurry,  always  on  time. 

We  discovered  this  eflSciency  as  the  conference  progressed,  but  it  was  first  ap- 
parent on  National  Day.  I  was  dubious ;  parades  never  held  any  attraction  for 
me,  and  we  were  told  that  it  would  be  polite  to  stand  when  Chairman  Mao  stood ; 
so  the  4  hours  looked  tedious  in  prospect. 

But  never  have  I  been  more  thrilled  by  any  spectacle.  The  parade  of  more 
than  500,000  began  on  the  scheduled  stroke  of  10  in  the  morning  and  ended 
5  minutes  early,  at  1:  50.  The  first  (military)  section  took  less  than  an  hour; 
then  came  the  people  of  Peking,  bands  playing,  banners  flying,  their  voices  singing 
and  shouting,  rather  flowing  than  marching  by,  a  mighty  river  of  vibrant  humanity 
300  feet  wide. 

In  the  wind  the  banners  stretched  bravely  out  in  the  sun,  over  the  laughing 
faces,  a  symphony  of  color  above  the  predominant  blue  dress  of  the  people.  The 
different  groups  chose  their  own  form  of  decoration,  and  as  they  marched  at 
different  speeds,  a  mass  of  jade-green  flags  might  linger  while  gay  cerise,  blue,  or 
purple  banners  streamed  by.  Masses  of  great  paper  flowers  waved,  hundreds  of 
live  peace  doves  were  released  to  circle  over  our  heads. 

The  floats,  proudly  showing  China's  rising  industrial  production,  were  fas- 
cinating :  there  were  great  papier-mache  spark  plugs,  telephone  switchboards,  a 
model  of  a  dam.   But  the  dominant  note  was  peace,  peace. 

In  the  3,000-mile  trip  we  made  after  the  conference  we  had  perfect  liberty  to 
poke  around  on  our  own,  and  we  talked  to  all  sorts  of  people.  We  saw  many 
evidences  of  the  capacity  for  efficient  organization,  coupled  with  spontaneity.  I 
found  it  hard  to  believe  that  3  short  years  of  liberation  from  the  inefficient  and 
corrupt  Kuomintang  could  produce  such  startling  results.  How  could  Chinese 
civilization,  thousands  of  years  old.  respond  so  fully  to  the  opportunity  offered 
by  liberation?  Certain  things  I  heard  and  observed  contribute  toward  an 
explanation. 

Cooperation  is  most  certainly  one  element  of  successful  organization.  For 
example,  at  least  1,000  students  and  workers  stood  on  a  platform  across  the 
tracks  when  we  left  Peking  on  our  tour.  They  stood  4  to  10  deep,  a  solid  laugh- 
ing mass,  toes  at  the  edge  of  the  platform.  They  shouted  "Long  live  peace," 
and  some  got  up  on  benches ;  but  nobody  pushed,  and  nobody  on  the  front  row 
had  to  guard  himself  against  being  shoved  off  the  platform.  I  marveled  at  it 
to  one  of  our  delegates.     "They  just  aren't  competitive,"  he  obsei-ved. 

When  I  asked  a  member  of  the  China  Peace  Committee  about  this  business  of 
cooperation,  he  said :  "The  people  had  to  learn  it  in  the  last  10  or  15  years  in 
order  to  survive.  They  suffered  so  under  the  KMT  and  the  Japanese  that  they 
had  to  cooperate  or  perish." 

As  for  organizational  ability,  a  friend  pointed  out  that  Chinese  servants  have 
always  had  a  reputation  with  "old  China  hands"  for  running  domestic  affairs 
with  a  smoothness  that  foreign  housewives  have  only  dreamed  of ;  at  the  other 
end  of  the  scale,  there  have  been  the  building  of  the  Grand  Canal  and  the  Great 
Wall,  which  required  vast  organization. 

Everywhere  I  noticed  one  striking  thing :  Of  the  hundreds  of  children  of  all 
ages  we  saw,  we  almost  never  heard  children  cry.  Their  round  little  faces  and 
bright  black  eyes  are  usually  friendly,  sometimes  a  little  shy;  but  it  is  very  easy 
to  coax  a  smile.  I  do  not  recall  any  fighting  or  quarreling  among  children 
playing  with  each  other. 

In  Nanking.  I  talked  with  Dr.  Wu  I-fang.  of  Gingling  University  (the  Hong 
Kong  papers  had  reported  her  a  suicide  the  previous  year!),  about  the  training 
of  children  in  China.  She  thought  that  Chinese  parents  are  much  less  rigid  in 
training  their  children  than  westerners;  that  they  include  them  in  activities 
more:  that  Chinese  children  are  much  more  relaxed.  Certainly  a  warmer,  more 
outgoing,  less  self-conscious  lot  of  children  I  have  never  seen. 

One  method  used  universally  by  the  People's  Government,  in  securing  coopera- 
tion  for  any  kind   of  work,   is   of  fundamental   importance :    the  objective  is 


882  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

explained  and  the  reasons  for  the  work  are  given.  The  Government  considers 
It  essential  to  explain  to  the  little  hoy  carrying  water,  to  the  last  worker  carrying 
dirt  in  baskets  hung  from  a  shoulder  pole,  why  the  water  must  be  carried,  the 
dirt  moved. 

In  China  people  are  working  together  because  they  believe  in  the  work;  and 
they  are  accomplishing  the  incredible.  China's  engineers  have  long  known 
what  was  required  to  keep  the  Huai  River  floods  from  ruining  the  crops  and 
lives  of  millions  who  live  between  the  lower  Yellow  and  Yangtze  Rivers.  But 
the  job  required  a  degree  of  coordinated  effort  which  no  government  in  the  past 
even  tried  to  muster.  The  work  has  been  done  by  the  farmers  who  suffered  from 
floods  in  the  pa^^t :  they  flocked  from  all  over  the  area,  and  mutual-aid  teams 
cared  for  their  land  and  crops  in  their  absence.  The  workers  returned  to  the 
farms  at  harvest  time.  The  blue-clad  men  and  women — 60,000  of  them  at  one 
place,  as  far  as  the  eye  could  see,  working  in  teams  of  14  and  marking  each 
team's  advance  with  scarlet  flags — found  breath,  as  we  passed,  to  cheer  those 
who  had  come  from  distant  lands  on  behalf  of  peace.  Such  wide  grins  on  eager 
faces,  such  a  tumble  of  words  about  their  dam,  and  how  much  more  they  can  grow 
when  they  need  fear  flood  no  longer !  They  had  known  many  floods,  they  had 
suffered  under  the  landlords,  they  now  knew  liberation. 

Like  those  eager  workers,  I  cannot  get  the  words  out  fast  enough  to  tell  of 
all  the  heartening  things  we  have  seen  in  this  amazing  new  China.  Coming 
back  to  our  own  beautiful  lands,  now  obscured  by  a  foul  fog  of  evil  rumors  of 
aggression,  fear  and  suspicion  of  neighbors,  we  brought  with  us  the  vision  of 
sanity  given  us  by  the  people  of  China. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  I  show  you  another  article  from  the 
same  publication  entitled,  "A  Big  Builder  is  Impressed,"  by  Henry 
Willcox,  construction  executive,  and  ask  you  whether  or  not  that  was 
written  by  your  husband  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  a  witness  against 
myself. 

Mr,  SoTTRWiNE.  You  have  declined  before  you  looked  at  the  exhibit. 
Would  you  look  at  it,  please  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  am  sorry. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  T  think  the  record 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Counsel,  I  am  going  to  ask  you  please,  sir, 
just  to  refrain  from  comment. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  repeat,  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my 
constitutional  privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  a  witness 
against  myself. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  ask  that  that  may  be  inserted  in  the  record  as  a 
document  the  witness  has  delined  to  identify. 

Senator  Daniel.  It  will  be  received  and  made  a  part  of  the  record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  66"  and 
appears  below:) 

Exhibit  No.  66 

A  Big  Buildee  Is  Impressed 

By  Henry  Willcox,  Construction  Executive 

I  had  never  seen  China  before.  I  had  a  mental  image  of  a  big  dusty  country, 
so  crowded  with  people  you  couldn't  sit  down,  so  poverty-stricken  it  couldn't 
improve.  Now  that  I  have  traveled  some  3,000  miles  up  and  down  East  China, 
my  general  impression  is  of  greenery  and  water.  si)ace  and  sunshine,  a  rich  and 
kindly  landscape,  cities  gay  witii  bright  paint  and  flags,  spotlessly  clean,  no 
beggars,  no  flies,  people  smiling,  well-nourished,  well-clothed.  These  people  are 
doing  amazing  things,  using  both  old  and  new  methods.  They  welcome  innova- 
tion ;  a  people  vigorously  raising  itself  by  its  own  bootstraps. 

I  had  no  idea  of  the  manufacturing  capacity  of  China.  It  has,  of  course,  been 
greatly  stepped  up  by  the  United  States  blockade,  which,  contrary  to  its  authors' 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  883 

intention,  has  had  the  effect  of  stimulating  many  new  kinds  of  production.  I 
judge  the  Chinese  are  now  making  practically  every  industrial  product  they 
need,  though  not  as  yet  in  adequate  quantity — cement,  structural  steel,  big  steel 
cables,  steel  windows,  seamless  tubing,  precision  lathes  and  grinders,  precision 
instruments,  complete  telephone,  telegraph  and  radio  equipment,  full  lines  of 
textile  machinery.     Production  curves  are  rising  sharply.     Costs  are  falling. 

The  new  economy  of  China  seems  to  be  a  challenging  and  completely  practical 
blend  of  state  and  private  enterprise.  Heavy  industry  and  transportation  are 
mostly  nationalized ;  state  and  private  textile  mills,  state  department  stores  and 
private  shops  co-exist  advantageously. 

The  owner-managers  in  a  huge  cotton  mill,  and  in  a  good-sized  woolen  mill,  both 
told  me  that  private  concerns  whose  business  serves  the  public  interest  were 
assured  of  raw  materials,  credit  and  profit ;  and  that  with  the  continuous  increase 
in  consumer  purchasing  power,  many  of  them  were  making  more  money  than  ever 
before.  The  mixed  economy  is  thriving.  To  me,  the  big  new  bank  building  in 
Peking,  built  by  a  private  bank,  indicates  the  considerable  stability  of  the 
arrangement. 

Till  I  came  to  China,  I  believe  I  had  not  even  heard  of  the  Huai  River  project. 
We  were  privileged  to  see  a  lot  of  it — this  job  that  will  double  the  safety  and 
productivity  of  a  hundred  thousand  square  miles  of  land  and  80  million  people. 
Obviously,  this  is  a  very  big  operation,  of  direct  interest  to  engineers  everywhere. 
It  is  of  special  interest,  as  showing  what  can  be  done  without  machinery :  at  1 
sluice-gate  site  I  saw  40,000  men  moving  earth  with  the  same  equipment  their 
forefathers  used  1,500  years  ago  to  dig  the  Grand  Canal.  These  men  had  all 
volunteered — all  knew  they  were  working  to  protect  their  own  farms,  and  they 
were  getting  approximately  the  prevailing  rate  of  wages  to  boot.  They  were 
shouting  and  singing.  And  they  moved  a  lot  of  dirt — I  estimated  very  roughly 
50,000  cubic  yards  a  day  with  a  half-mile  haul. 

Some  of  the  cut  was  below  water-table,  and  digging  had  stopped  there,  with  6 
feet  still  to  go.  At  my  request,  I  was  led  to  the  pumping  plant — a  pinpoint  on  the 
vast  perimeter  of  the  job.  Here  were  2  single-cylinder  15  horsepower  diesels, 
belted  to  8-inch  centrifugal  pumps  on  a  mile  of  cast-iron  pipe — the  whole  asson- 
bly  of  Chinese  manufacture.  I  was  just  thinking,  "We  would  have  about  5 
such  plants  with  30  or  100  horsepower  each,"  when  the  Chinese  engineer  said : 
"There  is  not  much  water,  it  will  all  come  out."     I  am  sure  it  will. 

I  am  not  a  hydraulics  man,  never  saw  a  radial  gate  "in  the  flesh"  till  I  came 
here.  But  this  battery  of  68  gates,  each  about  32  feet  wide  and  20  feet  high, 
able  to  pass  in  1  day  enough  water  to  flood  100  square  miles  to  a  depth  of  8  feet — 
this  Is  really  something,  in  any  man's  language.  They  will  use  170  million  man- 
days  of  hand  labor  on  this  project.  But  it  is  sound  engineering  to  use  what  you 
have.  The  outstanding  factor  here  is  that  by  organization  of  muscle  and  en- 
thusiasm, a  huge,  modern  construction  task  is  done  at  modern  tempo. 

More  in  my  line  is  the  Peace  Hotel  at  Peking.  I  have  been  putting  up  buildings 
for  40  years,  and  I  am  frankly  stumped  by  the  speed  of  this  job.  Through  the 
courtesy  and  persistence  of  our  Chinese  hosts,  I  obtained  a  4-hour  interview  with 
Mr.  Yang,  the  Chinese  engineer  who  designed  and  supervised  the  construction. 
Mr.  Yang  was  backed  by  Mr.  Lu,  the  resident  architect.  On  my  side  was  an 
English-speaking  architect  from  Chile.     We  had  three  interpreters. 

The  Peace  Hotel  covers  about  half  of  a  plot  served  by  two  busy  narrow 
streets,  and  encumbered  by  several  noble  trees  that  had  to  be  saved.  The  main 
building  is  about  45  by  190  feet,  eight  stories  and  basement,  with  projecting 
stair-tower,  major  1-story  wings  and  auxiliary  structures.  It  seems  that  work 
started  in  September  1951,  and  made  excellent  headway  with  a  force  of  about 
110  men.  By  cold  weather,  the  mat  foundation  and  five  concrete  floors  had 
been  erected.  Then  delays  occurred.  First,  it  was  decided  to  change  from  a 
dormitory,  which  was  the  original  intention,  to  a  hotel,  with  more  elaborate 
finish  and  much  additional  plumbing.  Then  the  building  department  became 
worried,  because  the  alluvial  soil  under  Peking,  to  unknown  depths,  is  soft; 
and  this  building  would  be  the  tallest  ever  set  upon  it.  Comprehensive  borings, 
load  tests,  and  studies  of  the  soil  by  Terghazi  formulas,  finally  satisfied  every- 
body the  design  was  safe.  All  winter,  materials  were  stockpiled.  Then  came  a 
rainy  spring.  When  the  order  of  the  China  Peace  Committee  came  through  on 
July  25  to  complete  the  hotel  by  September  15,  the  job  had  to  get  going  from 
a  standing  start. 

The  labor  force,  largely  from  Shanghai,  was  built  up  to  900  men.  Every  avail- 
able square  foot  in  surrounding  blocks  was  rented  to  house  and  feed  them. 


884  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OP    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Every  item  of  work  and  material  was  scheduled,  with  required  starting  and  com- 
pletion dates.  Material  suppliers  and  subcontractors  were  given  their  new 
deadlines,  and  it  appears  that  the  word  that  the  China  Peace  Committee  needed 
the  hotel  for  the  conference  got  everybody  concerned  on  his  toes. 

Normally,  the  job  worked  8  hours  every  day ;  but  temporary  lighting  was  pro- 
vided, and  any  trade  that  fell  behind  the  schedule  put  in  an  extra  4  hours  at 
double  wages.  If  the  workmen  had  not  caught  up  at  bedtime,  they  would  turn 
out  early  in  the  morning  and  do  their  stuff  without  extra  pay.  The  management 
had  to  discourage  this  practice,  to  safeguard  the  health  of  the  men. 

For  some  reason  imt  clear  to  me,  the  men  were  paid  every  day.  Under  these 
conditions  it  is  hard  to  see  how  time  was  found  to  hold  job  meetings — especially 
as  the  whole  labor  force  was  invited.  But  hold  them  they  did,  checking  and 
filling  in  all  the  details  of  the  schedule.  Mr.  Yang  was  outspoken  in  praise  of 
the  men's  suggestions  for  solving  critical  problems. 

An  outstanding  case  was  the  dining  room  wing.  Here  is  a  large,  airy,  one-st<jry 
structure,  with  mezzanine  gallery,  involving  a  lot  of  long-span  concrete  girders, 
a  slick  concrete  spiral  stair,  and  plenty  of  special  finish.  It  could  not  be 
started  until  tlie  main  building  was  topped  out,  as  tlie  huge  pile  of  concrete 
material  had  to  be  stored  on  the  dining-room  foundations.  So  there  was  only 
1  month  left  to  build  the  dining  room.  Forms  were  rushed  in,  big  girders  and 
all  were  concreted,  checked  by  field  cylinder  tests,  stripped  5  days  after  pouring ; 
and  the  whole  interior  filled  with  scaffolding  for  hung  ceiling,  duct  work  and  light 
troughs. 

But  the  dining  room  has  a  handsome  two-color  terrazzo  border,  with  a  fine 
hardwood  dance  floor.  It  was  decided  the  terrazzo  must  have  8  days  to  dry  out. 
before  hardwood  could  come  near  it ;  and,  of  course,  concrete  had  to  precede  the 
terrazzo.  Yet  the  scaffolding  would  be  used  by  the  painters  up  to  the  last 
minute. 

In  China,  scaffolding  is  a  special  trade,  fabricating  tall  saplings  or  bamboo 
poles  with  rope  or  fiber  lashings  (no  nails)  with  really  wonderful  speed  and 
rigidity.  The  Peace  Hotel,  a  weels  Iiefore  we  mo\  ed  in.  was  entirely  surrounded 
by  such  scaffolding,  a  hundred  feet  high.  Well,  in  the  case  of  the  dining  room, 
the  contractor  suggested  that  only  the  top  of  the  scaffolding  was  being  used  and 
only  the  lower  part  was  in  the  way.  Why  not  take  out  the  lower  part?  Diagonal 
poles  were  butted  against  the  mezzanine  girders,  sloping  up  to  the  center,  lashed 
at  intersections,  forming  a  40-foot  span  and  10-foot  rise.  All  the  scaffold  posts 
were  then  sawed  off  head-room  high  (another  innovation ;  they  never  cut  scaffold 
timber)  while  the  plasterers  worked  overhead,  and  the  laborers,  masons,  ter- 
razzo, and  carpentei's  moved  in  underneath. 

Yes,  carpenters.  The  flooring  crew  decided  they  could  make  a  job  working  in 
the  middle  toward  the  border— lay.  scrape,  and  finish.  Plaster  notoriously 
spatters  and  stains — but  if  any  dropped  on  that  dance  floor,  it  vanished  without 
trace.  On  deadline  day,  the  last  foot-wide  strip  of  tongue-and-groove  flooring 
was  worked  into  perfect  engagement  with  the  S-day  old  terrazzo,  and  I  could 
never  see  a  sign  of  the  patching. 

Mr.  Yang  says  the  hotel  was  actually  done  September  10,  5  days  ahead  of  time. 
Be  that  as  it  may,  when  I  moved  in  on  September  24  there  wasn't  a  paint  spot  or 
a  speck  of  dust  anywhere;  the  carpet  ran  up  the  stairs  and  down  the  halls;  cur- 
tains hung  at  the  windows :  and  linen,  china,  and  silverware  and  stationery  were 
all  marked  with  Picasso's  Dove  of  Peace. 

Exceptions  prove  the  rule.  As  has  not  infrequently  happened  on  less  exacting 
jobs,  the  elevators  were  not  quite  completed — ironically  enough,  American  ele- 
vators, two-push-button,  microdrive  machines.  They  had  arrived  from  the  United 
States  about  1937,  for  a  12-story  building  Mr.  Yang  was  erecting  in  Shanghai. 
But  the  Japanese  occupation  supervened,  the  owners  stopped  the  job  at  4  stories, 
and  the  elevators  had  lain  15  years  in  storage.  Mr.  Yang  dug  them  out  for  the 
Peace  Hotel. 

By  working  fantastic  hours,  a  70-year-old  elevator  constructor  and  his  team, 
in  the  month  remaining  after  the  shaft  was  completed,  got  these  elevators  in 
and  ruiming.  They  rolled  the  3-ton  machines  across  Mr.  Yang's  green  roof 
slab — but  the  roof  survived,  and  Mr.  Yang,  I  can  testify,  has  fully  i-ecovered  from 
shock.  These  elevators  hoisted  all  of  us  delegates  successfully,  bvit  that  car  doors 
were  not  finally  adjusted  till  near  the  end  of  the  conference. 

The  Peace  Hotel  cost  about  ,$1  million,  roughly  what  it  would  have  cost  in  New 
York.  Other  Chinese  buildings  I  have  examined,  built  under  normal  conditions, 
are  costing  40  to  50  percent  as  much  as  ours.  But  the  2-month  sprint  on  the  Peace 
Hotel  accomplished  what  we  might  do  at  home  in  6  months.    To  the  Chinese,  it 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMIVIUNISM  885 

seems,  nothing'  is  impossible,  and  anything  is  worth  while,  if  it  will  contribute 
to  the  cause  of  peace. 

]\rr.  SouKWiNE.  I  show  you  the  publication  New  World  Review  for 
Fel)ruary  1953,  wherein,  on  page  21,  appears  a  picture.  The  caption 
under  the  picture  is : 

Delegates  to  the  Asian-racific  Peace  Conference  in  the  garden  of  the  Summer 
Palace  in  Pelcing.  Facing  camera,  left  to  right,  they  are :  Joan  Hinton,  United 
States  scientist  who  worked  on  the  Los  Alamos  A-bomb  and  now  works  on  an 
animal-breeding  farm  in  Inner  Mongolia;  Anita  Willcox,  author  of  this  article; 
Monica  Felton,  of  England,  a  Stalin  Peace  Prize  winner;  Henry  Willcox,  United 
States  construction  engineer ;  Edwin  Cerney,  California  teacher  who  with  his 
wife  wrote  the  article  on  page  15.  Backs  to  camera,  left  to  right :  Hugh  Hardy- 
man,  a  retired  west  coast  date  grower ;  Lewis  Suzuki,  a  New  York  Japanese- 
American  ;  and  Isobel  Cerney. 

I  ask  you  whether  the  persons  identified  by  this  caption  as  you  and 
your  husband  are,  in  fact,  you  and  your  husband  ? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  object  on  the  ground  that  the  question  is  completely 
irrelevant  and  immaterial  to  a  congressional  investigation,  and  to  the 
issues  as  apparently  stated  by  the  chairman  in  his  case,  namely,  the 
Matusow  bail  issue. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  objection  is  overruled. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  a  witness  against 
myself. 

(Senator  McClellan  left  the  hearing  room.) 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  ask  that  a  cut  of  this  picture  be  inserted  in  the 
record.   It  is  a  good,  clear  picture. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  picture  will  be  inserted,  together  with  the 
lines  thereunder,  at  this  point  in  the  record. 

(The  picture  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  67"  and  appears 
below,  with  identifications  as  printed  by  the  magazine :) 


886  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Exhibit  67 


Delegates  to  the  Asian-Pacific  Peace  Conference  in  the  garden  of  the  Summer 
Palace  in  Peking.  Facing  camera,  left  to  right,  they  are:  Joan  Hinton,  U.S. 
scientist  who  worked  on  the  Los  Alamos  A-bomb  and  now  works  on  an  animal  breed- 
ing farm  in  Inner  Mongolia;  Anita  Willcox,  author  of  this  article;  Monica  Felton, 
of  England,  a  Stalin  Peace  Priie  winner;  Henry  Willcox,  U.S.  construction  en- 
gineer; Edwin  Cerney,  California  teacher  who  with  his  wife  wrote  the  article  on 
page  15.  Backs  to  camera,  left  to  right:  Hugh  Hardyman,  a  retired  West  Coast 
date    grower;     Lewis    Suiuki,    a     New     York    Japanese-American,     and     Isobel    Cerney. 

(Senators  Eastland  and  Daniel  are  present  at  this  point  in  the 
hearing  room.) 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  refer  to  your  own  country,  the  United 
States  of  America,  as  "obscured  by  a  foul  fog  of  evil  rumors  of  ag- 
gression, fear,  and  suspicion  of  neighbors"  ? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Mr.  Chairman,  if  Mr.  Sourwine  is  reading  from  some- 
thing, I  think  I  should  be  shown  it  before  the  witness  answers. 

If  he  is  not  reading  from  somethiiig — I  am  addressing  myself  to 
the  chairman,  and  I  am  not  arguing  because  the  chairman  does  not 
want  me  to  argue. 

Senator  Daniel,  He  is  not  reading  from  anything.  He  simply  is 
asking  a  question. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  read  from  a  card. 

Senator  Daniel.  I  mean  nothing  more  than  your  own  notes.    * 

Mr.  Sourwine.  A  question  I  intended  to  ask.  I  will  tell  you  where 
the  notes  came  from. 

Senator  Daniel.  Just  a  minute.   All  right.   Go  ahead. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  887 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  a  witness  against 
myself. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mrs.  Willcox,  in  the  New  World  Review  which  con- 
tained the  article  in  which  there  was  a  picture  that  I  asked  you  to 
identify,  there  appears  in  connection  with  the  picture  this  article 
entitled  "Peking  Jail,"  by  Anita  Willcox.    Did  you  write  that  article? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  decline  to  answer  on  the  grounds  of  my  constitu- 
tional privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment  not  to  be  a  witness  against 
myself. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  ask  that  the  text  of  this  article  from 
the  magazine  New  World  Review  of  February  1953,  a  publication 
which  used  to  be  titled  "Soviet  Russia  Today,"  may  be  inserted  in  the 
record  at  this  point. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  article  will  be  inserted  at  this  point  in  the 
record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  inarked  "Exhibit  No.  C8"  and  ap- 
pears below:) 

Exhibit  No.    68 

[New  World  Review,  February  1953] 

Peking  Jail 

wardens  have  no  guns  or  clubs,  cells  have  no  locks.    if  prisoner  misbehaves 
the  warden  and  prisoners  "talk  to  him" 

By  Anita  Willcox 

Anita  Willcox  is  a  New  York  arti.st.  Together  with  her  husband, 
Henry,  she  recently  toured  People's  China  where  they  were  delegates 
to  the  Peace  Conference  of  the  Asian  and  Pacific  Regions. 

It  was  the  Australians'  idea.  They  had  been  to  see  the  British  consul  as  a 
matter  of  Commonwealth  courtesy  and  he  cautioned  them  ominously,  "Well, 
things  may  look  pretty  good  on  the  outside,  but  there  are  a  lot  of  i>eople  in  jaiL" 
So  the  Australians  asked  the  always  obliging  China  Peace  Committee  if  they 
could  see  the  jail,  and  having  seen  it  they  told  the  Canadians  and  the  Canadians 
told  us  and  off  we  all  went  to  see  the  prison  which  is  the  only  one  in  Peking,  a 
city  of  over  2  million. 

I've  seen  other  prisons  (voluntarily)  ;  three  in  this  country,  and  they  looked 
just  like  the  movie  versions,  tiers  of  concrete  corridors  echoing  under  the  meas- 
ured pacing  of  the  guards ;  men  behind  bars  like  the  zoo,  always  visible  to  prying 
eyes.    And  very  smelly. 

Last  November  11  some  dozen  of  us,  including  our  interpreters,  drove  in  our 
special  bus  to  the  outskirts  of  Peking.  We  passed  the  armed  guards  that  always 
stand  at  attention  at  the  entrances  of  Government  buildings,  through  the  open 
gate  into  a  pleasant  courtyard  where  were  charming  green  shrubs,  trees,  and 
potted  chrysanthemums.  The  warden.  An  Lin,  a  somewhat  diffident,  young- 
looking  man  in  his  later  thirties,  met  us,  and  let  us  into  a  conference  room 
where  we  were  served  hot  tea  while  he  briefed  us  on  his  institution. 

The  buildings  were  constructed,  he  said,  by  a  war  lord  in  1910  who  did  not 
have  the  modern  attitude  toward  correction,  and  in  consequence  there  was  not 
enough  sunlight  and  air.  An  Lin  did  what  he  could,  had  partitions  taken  down 
between  the  cells,  and  kept  the  prisoners  out  of  doors  as  much  as  possible.  There 
were  over  a  thousand  prisoners,  100  of  them  women,  who  work  in  4  shops :  1  to 
make  .stockings,  1  for  printing  textbooks,  a  soap  factory,  and  a  cotton  mill.  With 
this  brief  description  he  led  us  around  personally. 

The  buildings  were  long  one-story  fireproof  affairs,  laid  out  in  a  geometric  pat- 
tern radiating  from  two  watch  towers,  triangular  courtyards  between  them,  and 
covering  about  two  large  city  blocks,  and  surrounded  by  a  high  masonry  wall. 
Cell  partitions  had  been  knocked  out  so  that  14  prisoners  slept  in  each  dormitory 
some  42  feet  by  10  feet,  with  r»  doors  opposite  ~>  barred  windows  3  by  4  feet.     A 

59886 — 55— pt.  10—5 


888  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

corridor  ran  the  length  of  the  buildings  with  windows  opposite  the  doors  so 
there  was  a  good  cross  draft  as  all  the  doors  were  open.    No  locks.    No  keys. 

We  followed  the  warden,  but  some  of  the  time  we  strayed  from  him  and  had 
to  hunt  him  up.  There  are  about  100  on  the  "staff,"  as  they  call  the  prison 
guards.  They  carry  neither  guns  nor  clubs.  Only  the  staff  live  in  cells,  which 
they  choose  for  privacy.  Some  are  married  and  we  saw  round-faced  smiling 
babies  crawling  around. 

Three  of  the  workshops  were  exceedingly  busy,  but  I  couldn't  tell  who  was 
staff"  and  who  prisoners.  No  uniforms.  I  asked  about  that  later  and  was  told 
that  numbers  and  prison  uniforms  were  not  compatible  with  human  dignity.  I 
also,  with  the  recent  prison  riots  in  this  country  in  mind,  looked  around  with 
curiosity  at  the  really  formidable  tools  I  saw  lying  handy ;  big  wrenches  for  the 
machinery,  an  ax  by  a  fire  extinguisher,  heavy  hammers.  The  soap  factory  was 
idle,  as  the  soap  seemed  to  be  in  a  drying  stage  and  the  workers  were  sitting  in 
a  circle  on  stools  in  the  courtyard  listening  to  a  prisoner  who  was  reading  a  news- 
paper out  loud  to  them.    They  did  not  glance  at  us. 

In  other  courtyards  we  saw  some  excellent  basketball  going  on  with  prisoner 
referees. 

In  each  of  the  four  sections  of  the  jail  are  raised  stages  and  on  one  of  these 
we  saw  a  busy  rehearsal  for  a  musical  the  prisoners  had  written  and  were  playing 
that  week.  There  were  women  rehearsing  with  the  men,  and  we  were  told  this 
was  the  only  activity  where  the  sexes  were  allowed  to  mix.  Every  week  each 
shop  gives  a  show ;  there  are  movies  and  "cultural  lessons,"  which  means  mostly 
learning  to  read,  I  hear. 

Ray  Gardiner,  one  of  the  Canadian  delegates,  said  he  wanted  to  talk  to  a 
prisoner,  and  was  told  to  pick  his  man.  He  picked  the  most  surly-looking  man 
he  could  see  and  asked  him  why  he  was  In  jail.  "Kuomintang  agent,"  was  the 
answer.  Reported  by  peasants  for  stealing  draft  animals,  which  was  his  privi- 
lege as  an  agent.  He  did  not  know  how  long  he  was  in  for,  but  said  he  was 
learning  a  good  trade,  and  hoped  to  get  a  job  in  the  jail  when  his  time  was  up. 

We  saw  a  new  building  almost  finished,  put  up  by  men  who  had  never  been 
in  the  building  trades  before.  It  was  an  excellent  job.  It  was  to  be  a  sort  of 
clubroom,  I  think. 

On  the  walls  of  the  dormitory  corridors  were  several  very  well  illustrated 
charts,  showing  the  rating  of  different  dormitories  for  health,  cleanliness,  work 
progress,  and  even  an  amusing  picture  story  of  the  workings  of  the  new  marriage 
laws.  The  prisoners  were  permitted  to  move  around  freely,  there  was  no  evil 
smell,  which  in  our  prisons  one  often  finds  from  the  primitive  toilet  arrangement 
in  the  cells. 

When  we  had  finished  poking  around  the  place  we  went  back  to  the  conference 
room  and  had  more  hot  tea  and  asked  all  the  questions  we  could  think  of. 

The  men  work  8  hours  a  day,  get  no  wages,  as  "they  have  forfeited  the  right  to 
earn,"  but  if  they  exceed  the  average  work  quota  they  get  a  cash  bonus  which  they 
can  spend  for  tobacco  and  incidentals  at  the  co-op  store.  Prisoners  are  permitted 
visitors  every  2  weeks,  whom  they  may  see  in  private,  with  the  exception  of 
"new  prisoners  whom  we  do  not  yet  know,"  in  which  case  a  staff  member  is  pres- 
ent. There  are  five  doctors  attached  to  the  jail,  and  hospital  cases  are  sent  to  the 
regular  civilian  hospital  in  that  area  of  Peking. 

We  asked  what  crimes  had  been  committed  by  the  prisoners,  and  the  answer 
was,  "mostly  political" ;  but  "by  'political'  we  mean  real  offenses  like  stealing, 
done,  however,  because  of  lack  of  political  understanding." 

All  prisoners  now  in  the  jail  had  been  committed  since  liberation  (October  1, 
1949).  The  Kuomintang  had  destroyed  all  records  of  the  prison  when  they  left 
Peking ;  so  all  previous  prisoners  were  let  out. 

The  prisoner's  work  record  is  reviewed  twice  a  year ;  the  magistrate  who  com- 
mitted him  reviews  his  case  once  a  year,  taking  into  consideration  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  other  prisoners  for  shortening  his  sentence.  No  sentence  is 
shortened  without  a  good  recommendation  from  the  other  prisoners  regarding  his 
record. 

We  asked  about  the  indeterminate  sentence  of  the  prisoner  Ray  interviewed  and 
the  warden  said  it  was  unusual.  The  man  had  not  come  clean  on  his  mis- 
demeanors.    The  authorities  probably  knew  more  than  he  had  confessed. 

"You  see,"  An  Lin  explained,  "we  have  two  aims  here.  First,  to  safe- 
guard the  public,  and  second,  to  reform  the  prisoners.  A  man  is  not  reformed  if 
he  is  too  self-centered,  too  individualistic." 

I  asked  about  punishment  of  unruly  prisoners.  Solitary  confinement,  physical 
punishment,  and  abusive  language  to  the  prisoners  are  all  against  the  law. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  889 

"What  you  do  do,"  I  said,  "if  a  prisoner  misbehaves?" 

"We  talk  to  him,"  said  An  Lin. 

"But  if  that  does  not  work?" 

"We  get  the  other  prisoners  to  talk  to  him." 

"You  don't  mean  to  say  you  have  committees  of  prisoners?" 

"Oh,  yes,  committees  for  each  dormitory  and  for  the  different  shops." 

"Weli,  suppose  the  other  prisoners  have  no  effect  on  your  unruly  man,  what 
then?" 

An  Lin  lowered  his  voice  and  looked  a  little  ashamed.  "We  are  allowed  to  use- 
handcuffs,"  he  said,  "but,"  brightening,  "we  have  never  had  to  use  them." 

The  prisoners  are  all  learning  useful  trades  and  will  have  jobs  when  they  are 
released.  Their  workshops  had  looked  much  like  other  factories  we  had  visited, 
with  one  very  striking  difference.  In  the  factories  outside  the  workers  rushed, 
up.  shook  hands,  applauded  the  peace  delegates,  grinned  all  over  and  generally- 
made  us  very  welcome.  In  the  Peking  jail  we  were  completely  ignored.  Just  liker 
the  workers  in  factories  I  have  visited  at  home. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  no  other  questions  of  this 

witness. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Can  the  witness  now  read  her  statement  that  she  gave 
to  the  committee  this  morning  before  recess  ? 

Senator  Daniel,  We  have  not  considered  the  statement  yet.  We 
will  do  that  just  as  soon  as  the  committee  has  an  opportunity  to  do  so. 
The  witness  is  excused. 

Mrs.  WiLLCOx.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  do  not  know  whether  I  should  say 
this  or  not.     I  have  not  consulted — — 

Senator  Daniel.  You  have  been  excused,  ISIrs.  Willcox. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  just  ask  then  if  the  committee  decides,  as  I  am 
sure  it  will,  that  this  statement  is  admissible,  will  it  incorporate  the 
statement  in  the  record  as  if  it  had  been  presented  by  the  witness? 

Senator  Daniel.  It  will. 

Mr.  BotTDiN.  But  indicating  that  it  was  not  read  orally  but  was  con- 
sidered by  the  committee  and  then  attached. 

Senator  Daniel.  It  will  if  the  committee  so  decides. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  statement 
may  be  incorporated  in  the  record,  I  would  like  to  ask  Mrs.  Willcox 
if  this  statement  is  incorporated  in  the  record  if  she  desires  it  to  stand 
as  her  sworn  testimony  ? 

Mrs.  Willcox.  Well,  do  you  mean  that  I  swear  that  this  is  the  truth, 
this  statement  ? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  That  is  right. 

Mrs.  Willcox.  I  certainly  do  and  I  am  awfully  sorry  I  could  not 
answer  all  those  other  questions.  I  would  like  to,  if  I  could  be  sure 
it  ^Yould  not  incriminate  me. 

Senator  Daniel.  Thank  you,  Mrs.  Willcox. 

(The  subcommittee  later,  after  considering  the  statement  offered  by 
Mrs.  Willcox,  ordered  it  marked  "Exhibit  No.  69"  and  placed  in  the 
record  with  the  notation  that,  in  spite  of  her  statement  that  she  meant 
it  to  be  her  testimony,  it  seems  obvious  from  the  face  of  the  document 
that  she  has  no  personal  knowledge  of  certain  of  the  matters  mentioned 
therein,  and  the  document  seems,  at  most,  only  a  statement  of  the 
witness'  opinion.     The  statement  follows:) 

Statement  re  Mattjsow  Bail 

I  assume  this  committee  wishes  to  know  why  I  posted  bail  for  Harvey  Matusow. 
Ever  since  I  received  my  summons  to  appear  here  I  have  been  asking  myself 
that  question. 

The  easy  logical  explanation  is,  of  course,  that  I  did  not  see  why  a  man  should 
he  jailed  for  trying  to  right  the  wrong  he  has  done.     Up  to  now  I  have  never 


890  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

seen  Matusow  nor  had  any  contact  with  him  whatsoever.  Unlike  the  judge  in 
El  Paso,  I  do  not  presume  to  know  when  he  lied.  That  is  precisely  the  point. 
When  was  Matusow  lying?  The  fate  of  many  possibly  innocent  people  is  involved 
and  justice  demands  that  truth  be  established  by  concrete  evidence,  not  divination. 
This  seems  to  me  to  be  esi>ecially  true  in  the  case  of  Clinton  Jencks,  where  the 
United  States  prosecuting  attorney  wrote  that  Matusow's  evidence  (I  quote), 
"was  absolutely  essential  to  a  successful  pro.secution." 

This  is  the  immediate  reason  I  posted  bail.  But  I  think  there  is  a  deeper 
concern,  a  danger  to  this  wonderful  country  of  ours. 

When  I  was  a  little  girl,  over  half  a  century  ago,  I  was  so  proud  of  our  country. 
I  believed  without  question  in  the  reality  of  the  freedom  my  forebears  had  fought 
to  establish ;  freedom  to  do ;  freedom  to  explore  places  and  people  and  ideas. 
I  believed  in  the  wisdom,  the  justice,  of  our  courts.  Ours  was  a  country  where 
all  the  downtrodden  of  the  earth  could  find  a  haven,  could  know  that  with  hard 
work  they  would  have  an  expanding  future  for  themselves  and  their  children. 
I  think  I  almost  equated  Teddy  Roosevelt  with  God. 

But  something  has  happened  to  this  beautiful  country  of  ours.  Today  experts 
and  scholars  are  afraid  to  voice  their  opinions  if  they  do  not  agree  with  the  dogma 
of  the  Government ;  scientists  may  not  .serve  if  they  speak  to  the  wrong  people ; 
men  and  women  are  in  jail  for  thoughts,  not  acts. 

Matusow's  book.  False  Witness,  is  not  only  an  appalling  self-portrait  of  a  paid 
informer,  it  documents  the  inducements  in  money  and  acclaim  that  await  a 
young  man  who  can  either  finger-point  or  invent  victims  for  the  Communist  hunt. 
I  have  no  idea  why  this  particular  young  man  was  finally  revolted  by  his  tale- 
bearing and  jail-filling  inventions,  nor  where  he  got  the  courage  to  expose  him- 
self. Maybe  he  only  has  a  pathological  passion  for  publicity.  Maybe  he  is  a 
truly  repentant  sinner.     I  do  not  know. 

But  this  I  do  know.  Harvey  Matusow  is  a  symbol  of  a  sickness  that  is  blight- 
ing our  beloved  country.  We  must  not  lock  him  up  or  forget  him.  We  must 
carefully  exhume  the  truth.  We  must  be  in  fact  what  we  boast  we  are — the  laud 
of  the  free  and  the  home  of  the  brave. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  should  like,  with  the  permission  of 
the  committee,  to  depart  briefly  from  the  scheduled  list  of  witnesses 
and  call  as  a  witness  Mr.  John  Lautner.  It  will  not  take  over  10 
minutes. 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Lautner. 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  solemnly  swear  the  testimony  you  are 
about  to  give  the  Internal  Security  Subcommittee  of  the  Committee  on 
the  Judiciary  of  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  is  the  truth,  the  whole 
truth,  and  notliing  but  the  truth,  so  help  you  God  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  do. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JOHN  LAUTNER,  DEPARTMENT  OE  JUSTICE, 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  may  take  the  witness  stand. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Will  you  give  your  full  name,  please,  and  your 
address  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  My  name  is  John  Lautner,  and  my  address  is  the; 
Department  of  Justice  Building,  internal  security  room  2306. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  ever  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party, 
United  States  of  America? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  When? 

Mr.  Lautner.  From  1929  to  1950. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  And  what  was  the  highest  position  you  attained  in 
the  party  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Among  others,  district  organizer  of  the  Communist 
Party  in  the  State  of  West  Virginia,  a  member  of  the  nationality 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMIVIUNISM  891 

groups  commission  of  the  Communist  Party,  head  of  the  New  York 
State  review  conmiission  of  the  Communist  Party,  a  member  of  the 
national  review  commission  of  the  Communist  Party,  security  officer 
for  the  New  York  State  organization  of  the  Communist  Party. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Lautner,  was  there  a  time  in  1948  when  for 
safety  reasons  you  had  a  part  in  phicing  J.  Peters  at  the  farm  of  Joe 
Herman,  a  Communist  Party  member  living  in  Riegelsville,  Pa? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  What  was  the  reason  for  placing  Mr.  Peters  there? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Joe  Peters  was  sought  after  by  numerous  Govern- 
ment agencies  and  by  the  labor  secretary  of  the  Communist  Party, 
John  Williamson.  I  was  entrusted  to  keep  J.  Peters  in  various  places 
in  hiding. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  he  was  hiding  from  congres- 
sional investigation  and  grand  jury  inquiry,  was  he  not? 

Mr.  Lautner.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Now  in  the  early  fall  of  1946,  were  you  contacted 
by  Ann  Rollins,  known  as  Silvers,  known  as  the  wife  of  J.  Peters? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Was  she  a  section  organizer  of  the  Communist 
Party  in  New  York? 

Mr.  Lautner.  She  was  an  industrial  section  organizer  in  New  York 
at  that  time. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Where  did  she  contact  you  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  In  my  office  at  35  East  12th  Street,  the  headquarters 
of  the  Communist  Party  on  the  fifth  floor. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  For  what  purpose  did  she  contact  you? 

Mr.  Lautner.  She  told  me — she  came  up  to  my  office — that  a  de- 
cision has  been  made  that  Peters  has  to  be  brought  in  from  the  farm 
and  that  he  is  to  contact  the  law  office  of  Cammer  &  Witt. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  she  tell  you  why  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  did  you  do  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  brought  J.  Peters  in  from  Riegelsville,  Pa.,  and 
directed  him  to  go  to  the  office  of  Cammer  &  Witt. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  take  him  there? 

Mr.  Lautner.  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  whether  he  went  there  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  do  not  know.     Later  on  I  found  out  he  did  go. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  When  you  say  Cammer  &  Witt,  what  are  you  re- 
ferring to? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  am  referring  to  a  law  office  on  40th  Street  east  of 
Fifth  Avenue  where  Nathan  Witt  &  Cammer  and  Lee  Pressman  were 
practicing  law. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  At  that  time? 

Mr.  Lautner.  At  that  time. 

Senator  Daniel.  Do  you  know  Nathan  Witt  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Senator  Daniel.  Did  you  see  him  here  yesterday  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  was  not  here  yesterday. 

Senator  Daniel.  But  you  know  that  a  Nathan  Witt  appeared  here 
yesterday  or  did  you  know  that? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  read  about  it  in  the  papers.  The  last  time  I  saw 
him  was  approximately  2  weeks  ago  in  Denver,  Colo. 


892  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes.  He  is  the  Nathan  Witt  that  represents 
Jencks  in  the  El  Paso  case  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  That  is  correct  because  he  was  discussing  it  there  in 
a  dining  room. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Now  after  the  occasion  of  which  you  have  told  us, 
did  Peters  thereafter  call  on  you  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  What  was  the  next  occasion  on  which  he  called  on 
you  after  the  time  you  brought  him  in  to  go  to  the  office  of  Cammer 
i&Witt? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Well,  it  was  shortly  after  he  came  back  from  this 
farm  and  was  functioning  as  one  of  the  party  functionaries  for  the 
national  committee  on  the  ninth  floor,  it  could  have  been  a  few  weeks 
after.  I  am  not  exact  on  the  time  but  it  was  shortly  after  I  brought 
him  in  he  called  me  up  to  his  office  on  the  ninth  floor  to  see  him. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  How  did  he  contact  you,  by  telephone  or  by  mes- 


senger ? 


Mr.  Lautner.  No;  by  telephone.  My  office  was  on  the  fifth  floor. 
When  I  came  in,  in  the  morning,  he  called  shortly  after  that  and  I 
went  up  to  the  ninth  floor  where  he  had  his  office. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Who  was  Peters  at  that  time  ?  What  was  his  func- 
tion in  the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  J.  Peters  was  considered  one  of  the  top  organization 
specialists  for  the  Communist  Party.  For  many  years  he  worked  on 
the  organizational  commission  of  the  Communist  Party  and  he  wrote 
a  manual — a  Communist  Party  manual  on  organization.  He  was  a 
high  functionary  of  the  party. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  he  have  anything  to  do  with  the  Communist 
underground  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  heard  a  lot  about  it.  I  have  no  personal  knowledge 
of  it,  only  isolated  little  instances  which  would  indicate  that  he  did 
have. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  But  you  do  know  of  your  own  knowledge  that  he 
was  a  high  official  of  the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  when  he  called  for  you  to  come  to  see  him, 
you  went  to  see  him  because  he  was  your  superior  in  authority  in  the 
party ;  is  that  correct  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  In  that  respect,  yes. 
■     Mr.  Sourwine.  Now,  what  happened  when  you  went  to  his  office? 

Mr.  Lautner.  He  told  me  that  there  is  a  very  sensitive  task  to  be 
performed  and  that  I  should  go  down  to  see  Nathan  Witt  in  his  law 
office. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  he  tell  you  what  the  sensitive  task  was? 

Mr.  Lautner.  No  ;  he  did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  he  give  you  to  understand  that  Mr.  Witt  would 
tell  you  and  that  you  were  to  follow  his  instructions  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  That  is  correct;  he  told  me  that  Nathan  Witt  will 
tell  me  about  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Pursuant  to  Mr.  Peters'  instructions,  did  you  go  to 
Mr.  Witt's  office? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes,  I  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  Mr.  Witt  see  you? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  893 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  he  usher  you  into  his  office  or  did  he  come  out? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Well,  I  went  to  the  building  which  is  on  the  north 
side  of  40th  Street,  east  of  Fifth  Avenue.  I  think  it  was  on  the  second 
or  the  third  floor.  I  took  the  elevator  up  into  the  building.  I  went 
into  the  foyer  and  the  girl  went  in  to  see  somebody  in  the  adjacent 
room  and  Nathan  Witt  came  out  and  he  took  me  into  that  office  room. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Then  what  happened? 

Mr.  Lautner.  He  introduced  me  to  Lee  Pressman  and  another  per- 
son who  was  there  in  that  room. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Who  was  that  other  person  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  You  mean  you  do  not  now  know  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  At  the  time  I  did  know.  I  don't  know.  I  recall 
Lee  Pressman  was  one  of  the  persons  and  then  this  other  person. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  then  what  happened  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Then  Nathan  Witt  told  me  that  we  should  go  out- 
side. We  went  downstairs  and  to  the  right  of  the  entrance  to  his 
building  there  was  a  bar  and  we  went  into  that  bar. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  talk  while  you  were  in  there  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  about? 

Mr.  Lautner.  He  told  me  that  the  sensitive  task  involved  is  to, 
first  of  all,  ascertain  in  exactly  what  office  room  is  Whittaker  Cham- 
bers working  at  Time  magazine  in  Radio  City.  Once  that  is  done, 
that  we  should  devise  a  very  subtle  form  of  intimidation  because 
Whittaker  Chambers,  by  his  very  nature,  is  a  very  scary  fellow  and  he 
will  understand  the  nature  of  the  intimidation. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  is  what  Witt  told  you  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes.  He  suggested  further  than  we  should  send  him 
a  bouquet  of  flowers  and  I  said,  "We  will  send  him  a  bouquet  of  white 
lilies." 

He  gave  me  $100  to  undertake  this  project  and  I  left  Nathan  Witt 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Then  what  did  you  do? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  went  back  to  the  office 

The  Chairman.  What  was  the  date  of  this  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  This  was  about  a  week,  approximately  a  week  before 
the  pumpkin  story  broke. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  In  the  fall  of  1948? 

Mr.  Lautner.  In  the  fall  of  1948.  Wliile  I  was  with  Witt  there 
were  also  grand  jury  hearings  in  New  York.  Peters  was  involved 
in  grand  jury  hearings.  I  went  back  and  I  told  Peters  that  I  saw 
Witt  and  he  says,  "Well,  you  know  what  to  do." 

I  contacted  one  of  the  party  organizers  by  the  name  of  Jim 
Faber 

Mr.  Sourwine.  How  do  you  spell  it? 

Mr.  Lautner.  F-a-b-e-r — to  give  me  a  reliable  person,  and  he  did. 
He  gave  me  a  person  who,  I  do  not  recall  his  name.  He  was  an  indus- 
trial organizer  for  the  party  in  Brooklyn  in  the  transport  industry. 

The  Chairman.  What  do  you  mean  by  "reliable  person"? 

Mr.  Lautner.  A  person  who  is  loyal,  devoted  to  the  Communist 
Party  and  can  carry  out  confidential  assignments. 

The  Chairman.  Go  ahead. 

Mr.  Lautner.  The  only  thing  I  recall  about  this  person,  he  is  an 
engineer  and  he  was  an  organizer  prior  to  that  in  the  Transport  Work- 
ers Union.     At  just  about  that  time,  there  was  a  factional  fight  in  that 


894  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

union  and  Mike  Quill  cleaned  out  some  of  these  party  or<^anizers  or 
was  in  the  process  of  cleaning  out  outspoken  party  organizers  in  that 
union. 

I  told  him  what  the  task  was.  He  went  up  to  Radio  City.  I  gave 
him  $10.  By  the  way,  Nathan  Witt  gave  me  $100  for  this  project. 
I  gave  him  $10  for  expenses,  cab,  and  so  forth.  Next  day,  he  came 
back  that  Whittaker  Chambers  is  not  with  Time  magazine,  he  is  not 
around  there  but  he  is  down  at  the  farm  somewhere  in  Maryland,  near 
Frederickstown,  I  do  not  recall  the  exact  name  of  the  town.  Well, 
I  was  going  to  send  him  down  there  to  Maryland.  In  the  meantime, 
the  pumpkin  story  broke.  That  same  evening  Nathan  AVitt  called  me 
up  at  my  home  at  212  West  22d  Street  to  not  to  do  anything  in  this  case, 
to  stop  any  activities  in  this  case,  and  he  told  me  he  will  be  down  at  my 
place  in  front  of  my  house  the  next  day  to  give  him  back  the  money. 
I  recall  he  came  in  front  of  my  house  at  1 :  10  o'clock  in  the  morning, 
and  it  was  a  Saturday  morning  and  that  was  the  end  of  that  assign- 
ment. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  there fter  call  off  the  project  to  send  the 
lilies? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  did  you  give  Mr.  Witt  back  the  money  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  gave  him  back  his  $90, 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  did  not  give  the  $10  back?  That  was  for 
expenses  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  attend  a  Communist  Party  convention 
at  which  Mr.  Witt  was  present  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  When  was  that? 

Mr.  Lautner.  That  was  the  1945  Reconstitution  Convention  of  the 
Communist  Party. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  saw  Mr.  Witt  there? 

Mr.  Lautner.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  whether  he  was  there  as  a  delegate  or 
as  a  visitor  or  in  what  other  capacity  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Well,  that  convention  was  a  closed  convention. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  do  you  mean  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  There  were  only  a  hundred  people  at  that  convention. 
No  outsiders  were  allowed.  Very  elaborate  security  measures  were 
set  up.  J.  Peters  was  in  charge  of  security  at  this  convention.  I  was 
one  of  his  aides  at  the  convention.  To  my  understanding  and  20  years 
of  membership  in  the  Communist  Party,  he  could  not  have  been  at  this 
convention  if  he  was  not  invited. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  If  he  was  not  what? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Invited. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  see  Mr.  Witt  at  a  Communist  Party 
plenum? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  do  you  mean  by  plenum  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  A  plenary  session  of  the  Communist  Party  is  an  en- 
larged national  committee  meeting  to  which  members  of  the  national 
committee,  district  organizers,  heads  of  various  national  commissions 
or  committees  are  invited,  in  addition  1  or  2  other  persons  who  are  in 
one  sort  of  another  type  of  confidential  assignment. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  895 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  say  you  had  seen  Mr.  Witt  at  such  a 
plenum  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  At  least  at  one  of  these  meetings. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  When  was  that  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  In  the  last  1930's. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Lautner,  do  you  know  Harry  Sacher? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  see  him  at  a  closed  Communist  Party 
gathering? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes,  in  1950,  the  beginning  of  January  at  a  birthday 
party  for  Alex  Bittelman  in  the  national  board  room  of  the  national 
committee  of  the  Communist  Party  at  35  East  12th  Street. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Was  that  a  closed  meeting  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  There  were  only  about  50  people  there  and  they  were 
all  high  functionaries  of  the  Communist  Party. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  remember  whether  a  toast  was  drunk  at 
that  party  to  the  health  of  Alex  Bittelman  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  Yes,  and  the  toast  was  offered  by  Henry  Winston. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  was  the  toast,  if  you  remember  it  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  The  toast  was  "Comrades,  let's  have  a  drink  to  the 
health  of  Alexander  Bittelman,"  or  something  to  that  effect,  but  he 
addressed  the  gathering  as  comrades. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  Air.  Sacher  drink  that  toast? 

Mr.  Lautner.  I  did  not  see  anybody  protesting  the  designation  of 
comrades  over  there.  I  did  not  see  whether  he  drank  or  not,  but  every- 
body did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  He  was  there  ? 

Mr.  Lautner.  He  was  there. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  But  you  do  not  know  whether  he  drank  a  toast? 

Mr.  Lautner.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  no  more  questions  of  this  wit- 
ness at  this  time. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  witness  will  be  excused. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  should  like  to  call  two  witnesses  who  were  called 
this  morning  and  were  not  here  so  the  record  may  show  whether  they 
are  present.    Mr.  Angus  Cameron?    (No  response.) 

Senator  Daniel.  Mr.  Cameron,  is  he  present  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  David  Ratner?    (No  response.) 

Senator  Daniel.  Is  Mr.  Ratner  present? 

Mr.  SouRAViNE.  Is  Mr.  Robert  Z.  Lewis  here  ? 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Lewis,  do  you  solemnly  swear  the  testimony 
you  are  about  to  give  the  Internal  Security  Subcommittee  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  the  Judiciary  of  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  is  the  truth, 
the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help  you  God  ( 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  do. 

TESTIMONY   OF   ROBERT   Z.    LEWIS,   ACCOMPANIED   BY   MORTON 

STAVIS,  HIS  ATTORNEY 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Lewis,  will  you  give  your  name  and  address, 
please  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  My  name  is  Robert  Lewis.  I  reside  at  127  West  82d 
Street,  New  York  City. 


896  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Chairman,  before  we  proceed,  I  think  it  might  be  expeditious 
if  at  this  time  I  could  express  my  position  regarding  the  jurisdiction 
of  this  committee  in  regard  to  this  inquiry  of  me. 

Senator  Daniel.  Do  you  have  something  there  in  writing? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No,  I  can  state  it  orally  very  quickly. 

Senator  Daniel.  Wait  just  a  moment.  You  will  proceed  to  answer 
the  questions  asked  by  the  committee  counsel.  That  has  been  the 
procedure  of  the  committee  all  along  and  we  will  continue  to  follow 
that  procedure.     Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  there  was  an  exchange  of  corre- 
spondence  

The  Chairman.  The  attorney  should  identify  himself. 

Mr.  Stavis.  I  am  Morton  Stavis,  744  Broad  Street,  Newark. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  There  was  an  exchange  of  correspondence  between 
this  committee  and  Mr.  Lewis  by  telegraph.  I  would  like  to  ask  per- 
mission to  read  these  and  then  have  them  inserted  in  the  record. 

Senator  Daniel.  Proceed. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr,  Lewis  wired  as  follows : 

Request  adjournment  of  my  appearance  before  Senate  Subcommittee  on  In- 
terna 1  Security  now  scheduled  for  April  IS,  195.-),  until  motion  for  new  trial 
in  United  States  v.  Flynn,  etc.,  grounded  on  Matusow  recantation  finally  disposed 
of.  Since  purpose  of  hearing  is  to  inquire  into  my  connection  as  an  attorney  for 
defendants  with  motion  deem  it  advisable  postpone  to  avoid  possible  prejudica 
Please  reply. 

To  which  the  chairman  replied : 

Mr.  RoRERT  Lewis:  Cannot  grant  your  request  to  be  excused  from  appearance 
before  Internal  Security  Subcommittee  April  18.  Your  stated  reason  for  request 
constitutes  unjust  reflection  on  Judge  Dimock,  who  is  an  able  and  experienced 
jurist  who  can  be  depended  upon  to  decide  any  case  coming  before  him  on  the 
record  made  in  his  court. 

Senator  Daniel.  They  will  be  made  a  part  of  the  record. 
(The  correspondence  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibits  Nos.  70  and 
70-A"  and  appears  below :) 

Exhibit  No.  70 

New  York,  N.  Y.,  April  12,  1955. 
CouNSET.,  Internal  Security  Subcommittee,  Judiciary  Committee,  United  States 
Senate,  Washington,  D.  C: 

Request  adjournment  of  my  appearance  before  Senate  Subcommittee  on  In- 
ternal Security  now  scheduled  for  April  18,  1953,  until  motion  for  new  trial  in 
United  States  v.  Flynn,  etc.,  grounded  on  Matusow  recantation  finally  disposed  of. 
Since  purpose  of  hearing  is  to  inquire  into  my  connection  as  an  attorney  for 
defendants  with  motion  deem  it  advisable  postpone  to  avoid  possible  prejudice. 
Please  reply. 

Robert  Z.  Lewis, 
127  West  82d  Street,  Neic  York  City. 


Exhibit  No.  70A 

April  13,  1955. 
Mr.  Robert  Z.  I^ewis, 

127  West  S2d  Street,  New  York,  N.  Y.: 
Cannot  grant  your  request  to  be  excused  from  appearance  before  Internal  Se- 
curity Subcommittee  April  18.  Your  stated  reason  for  request  constitutes  unjust 
reflection  on  Judge  Dimock,  who  is  an  able  and  experienced  jurist  who  can  be 
depended  upon  to  decide  any  case  coming  before  him  on  the  record  made  in  his 
court, 

James  O.  Eastland, 
Chairman,  Internal  Security  Subcommittee. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  897 

Mr.  Lewis.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  at  this  time  briefly  comment  on 
that  last  telegram  of  Senator  Eastland  ? 

The  Chairman.  Now  wait  just  a  minute,  please,  sir.  You  can 
answer  the  questions. 

Mr.  Lewis.  But  a  statement  was  made  about 

The  Chairman.  Wait  just  a  minute,  please.  Proceed,  Mr.  Sour- 
wine. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Lewis,  you  are  a  lawyer  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  am. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Where  do  you  practice  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  State  of  New  York. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  your  office  address? 

Mr.  Lewis.  615  Columbus  Avenue,  New  York  City. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  in  a  partnership  in  the  practice  of  law  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  am  not. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  have  any  office  associates  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  employ  any  other  lawyers  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  In  what  way,  Mr.  Lewis,  have  you  been  associated 
with  the  defense  of  Communist  cases  ? 

Mr.  Lewis,  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  raise  at  this  time  the  issue  of  the 
propriety  of  that  question  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  If  you  wish  to  make  an  objection,  you  may  do  that, 
but  otherwise  let  us  not  argue  the  propriety  of  the  question  because 
the  committee  would  not  permit  the  counsel  to  ask  the  question  if  the 
committee  did  not  believe  that  the  question  was  entirely  proper. 

Mr.  Lewis.  But  my  point,  Mr.  Chairman,  is  that  the  connnittee  does 
not  have  the  power  to  make  this  kind  of  inquiry. 

Senator  Daniel.  Well,  that  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  think  I  should  be  briefly  allowed  to  state  my  grounds 
for  that  belief  for  the  record. 

Senator  Daniel.  We  are  not  going  to  lose  the  time  for  that.  You 
have  sat  through  the  interrogation  of  other  witnesses  this  afternoon, 
have  you  not? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  have. 

Senator  Daniel.  And  you  know  the  procedure  we  have  followed  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  But  I  do  not  think  that  procedure  includes  being  de- 
nied the  opportunity  to  question  the  jurisdiction  of  Congress  over 
a  particular  area  of  investigation  and  that  is  my  position. 

Senator  Daniel.  We  are  certainly  not  going  to  lose  the  time  for  you 
to  question  the  jurisdiction  of  this  committee. 

Mr.  Lewis.  May  I  consult  with  counsel  for  a  minute? 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes ;  you  may. 

(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  STA\^s.  Senator,  may  I  state  just  about  one  or  two  sentences 
and  I  do  not  want  to  waste  any  time? 

Senator  Daniel.  If  you  do  so  in  the  form  of  an  objection,  but  we 
are  not  going  to  have  comments  and  statements.  You  know  it  would 
take  us  forever  to  complete  the  investigation  if  we  did.  Go  ahead  if 
you  have  an  objection. 

Mr.  Stavis.  May  I  object  to  this  question  very  briefly  because,  as 
the  Senator  well  knows,  the  bar  as  a  whole  in  the  United  States,  has 
been  concerned  that  people  who  are  charged  with  being  advocates  of 


898  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

unpopular  causes  shall  be  adequately  represented  before  the  courts  ol 
the  United  States.  I  think  you  are  aware  of  the  i)osition  that  the 
American  Bar  Association  took  upon  that,  I  think  you  are  aware  of 
the  statement  made  by  President  Truman  2  years  or  so  ago  to  the 
American  Bar  Association.  And  this  is  a  matter  of  deep  concern  to 
the  bar  as  a  whole. 

Now  when  the  question  is  asked,  before  a  congressional  committee, 
to  a  lawyer,  such  as  Mr.  Sourwine  has  just  asked,  "In  what  way  have 
you  represented  Communist  cases?"  or  questions  of  that  nature 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  was  not  the  question. 

Mr.  Stavis.  I  am  sure  IMr.  Sourwine  can  repeat  the  question  but  it 
is  a  question  of  that  connotation.  It  suggests  an  impropriety  in  the 
matter  of  a  lawyer  representing  someone  because  of  a  particular 
offense  for  which  he  is  charged  or  the  particular  views  which  he  holds. 

I  think  the  members  of  this  committee  who  are  lawyers  would  want 
to  uphold  the  long  standing  position  of  the  bar  that  every  person  has 
a  right  to  counsel.  The  matter  of  who  a  lawyer  represents  is  not  a 
matter  of  inquiry  or  concern. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  be  heard  briefly  on  the  point  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  Briefly. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  will  be  brief. 

It  would  suffice  if  the  witness  answered  this  question  by  saying  only 
as  retained  counsel.  I  am  not  purporting  to  tell  him  how  he  should 
answer  the  question,  but  the  question,  it  seems  to  me,  is  entirely  proper. 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes,  your  objection  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Stavis.  On  the  basis  of  that  statement  the  objection  is  even 
withdrawn. 

Senator  Daniel.  All  right,  proceed. 

Mr.  Lewis.  May  I  hear  the  question  again  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  question  is.  In  what  way  have  you  been  asso- 
ciated with  the  defense  of  Communist  cases  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  As  retained  counsel.     I  see  your  point  now. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  mean  only  as  retained  counsel  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Only  as  retained  counsel. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  associated  in  any  way  with  Harry  Sacher? 

Mr.  Lewis.  You  mean  professionally  as  attorney  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  In  any  way. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  have  been  associated  with  him  in  connection  with  the 
motion  for  a  new  trial  in  IJ .  S.  v.  Flynn  but  that  is  the  only  association. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  is  your  only  association  with  him  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  associated  in  any  way  with  Nathan  Witt? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  the  same  Robert  Z.  Lewis  who  appeared 
before  the  House  Un-American  Activities  Committee  on  July  8,  1954, 
as  attorney  for  John  Stuben  during  that  committee's  investigation  of 
Communist  influence  in  the  field  of  publications  and  presented  a  letter 
from  a  doctor,  stating  that  Stuben  was  too  ill  to  appear  as  a  witness 
on  that  date? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  did  appear  for  Mr.  John  Stuben  on  that  occasion  and 
did  present  such  a  letter. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  the  same  Lewis  who  appears  as  attorney  for 
Pat  David  Rappaport,  Rena  Dood,  and  Louis  J.  Lubin  in  connection 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  899 

with  the  public  hearings  by  the  House  Un-American  Activities  Com- 
mittee during  that  committee's  investigation  of  communistic  activities 
in  the  Albany  area  ? 

Mr.  Stavis.  May  I  object,  sir,  and  simply  state  that  if  the  purpose 
of  this  or  a  series  of  other  questions  is  to  show  that  Mr.  Lewis  has 
represented  certain  people  who  may  have  been  in  an  unpopular  posi- 
tion, I  think  you  pose  again  this  very  serious  question.  The  matter 
troubles  me  very  deeply  as  a  lawyer. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  counsel  of  the  committee  tells  me  this  is 
.strictly  for  identification.     With  that  in  mind,  do  you  wish  to  object? 

Mr.  Stavis.  I  do  not  think  there  has  been  any  issue  of  identification 
arose. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  There  are  too  many  Robert  Lewises. 

Mr.  Staves.  Not  Robert  Z.  Lewis.  If  it  is  a  matter  of  identifica- 
tion I  think  he  has  already  been  identified. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  We  have  information  about  a  person  named  Robert 
Lewis.  I  cannot  tell  whether  it  is  Robert  Z.  Lewis  or  this  Robert 
Lewis  unless  I  ask. 

Did  you  ever  live  in  Beverly  Hills,  Calif.  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  May  I  remind  the  counsel  I  did  not  reply  to  the  last 
question  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  Will  you  proceed  to  reply  to  it  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  As  I  understand  it,  it  was  with  respect  to  my  repre- 
sentation of 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Of  Pat  David  Rappaport,  Rena  Dood,  and  Louis 
J.Lubin.  i 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes ;  I  did  represent  them  as  attorney. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  live  in  Beverl}^  Hills,  Calif.  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  have  lived  in  Los  Angeles,  Calif.,  as  a  child  when  I 
was  10  years  old. 

I  do  not  recall  it  was  Beverly  Hills. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  live  in  Detroit,  Mich.  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  have  never  resided  in  Detroit,  Mich. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  ever  live  in  Washington,  D.  C.  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.    SouRwiNE.  Did   you   ever   attend   the   University   of   North' 
Carolina  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  Stavis.  Objection.  Are  we  still  on  the  matter  of  identifica- 
tion? 

The  Chairman.  Just  a  minute,  please.     Proceed  with  the  questions. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  attend  Duke  University  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No  ;  I  did  not. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  speak  French  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  ever  teach  French  at  a  boys'  school  in 
Connecticut  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  notarize  on  January  31,  1955,  the  affidavit 
by  Harvey  Matusow  in  the  case  of  Elizabeth  Gurley  Flyiin  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Wi  11  you  recount  the  circumstances  of  that  occasion  ? 

(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 


900  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Lkwts.  Your  question  is  whether  I  notarized  an  affidavit  on 
January  31? 

JNIr.  SouRwiNE.  You  have  stated  you  did  ? 
Mr.  Lewis.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  I  then  asked  you  to  recount  the  circumstances  of 
'that  occasion.  Tell  us  what  happened  when  you  notarized  that  affi- 
davit. 

]\Ir.  Lewis.  He  read  the  affidavit,  affirmed  that  it  was  his  affidavit 
and  it  constituted  the  truth  and  then  he  signed  his  name.  Thereafter 
I  notarized  it,  affixing  my  stamp  and  signature. 

IMr.  Sourwine.  Did  Mr.  Matusow  bring  the  affidavit  with  him  when 
lie  came  to  your  office  ?     I  will  apologize.     That  question  assumes  that 
lie  came  to  yonr  office.     Did  he  come  to  your  office  for  the  purpose  of 
having  the  affidavit  notarized  ? 
Mr.  Lewis.  He  did  not. 
;Mr.  Sourwine.  Where  was  it  notarized  ? 

]Mr.  Lewis.  It  was  notarized  in  an  automobile  at  125th  Street  near 
the  125th  Street  Station  of  the  New  York  Central  Railroad. 
]Mr.  Sourwine.  How  did  you  get  into  that  automobile  ? 
Mr.  Lp:wis.  I  walked  in. 

INIr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  stand  on  the  corner  or  on  the  street  and  wait 
for  the  car  to  come  along  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  Counsel,  the  witness  may  advise  with  you  any  time 
he  wishes  to,  but  please  do  not  interrupt  or  suggest  to  him  unless  he 
asks  you  for  advice.     All  right,  proceed. 
Mr.  Stavts.  Excuse  me,  sir,  just  a  moment. 
(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  Lewis.  May  I  inquire,  Mr.  Chairman 

Senator  Daniel.  No 

JNIr.  Lkwis.  I  need  clarification  of  the  question.  It  is  quite  clear 
but,  are  you  trying  to  ascertain  the  circumstance  whether  he  actually 
SAvoretoit? 

Senator  Daniel.  Trying  to  ascertain  all  the  circumstances  that  the 
counsel  for  this  committee  has  asked  you.  Tell  us  exactly  who  all  was 
there,  how  you  happened  to  meet  the  car,  and  all  of  the  circumstances. 
Mr.  Lewis.  I  wished  to  state  earlier,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  I  felt  that 
all  this  area  relating  to  my  conduct  in  connection  with  the  motion  and 
the  circumstances  of  the  bringing  of  that  motion  in  U.  S.  v.  Flynn  was 
a  matter  squarely  and  particularly  and  exclusively  for  the  court,  for 
the  judiciary ;  not  within  the  realm  of  Congress.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
right  this  minute  this  matter  is  pending  before  Judge  Dimock  in  the 
southern  district  of  New  York. 

Now,  as  far  ns  my  conduct  in  connection  with  the  motion  is  con- 
cerned, as  an  officer  of  the  court,  I  am  controlled  by  the  rules  of  that 
court,  by  the  judge  there  presiding  and  by  the  canons  of  ethics.  I 
fail  to  see  how  Congress,  not  only  this  committee,  Congress  may 
enter  into  an  area  so  clearly  demarked. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  permanent  chairman  of  this  committee  has 
already  ruled  on  that  and  I  am  sure  you  have  not  forgotten  it.  Now, 
if  you  will  proceed  to  answer  the  question  Mr.  Sourwine  is  asking 
you  about  your  capacity  as  a  notary,  the  affidavit  that  you  notarized — 
1)0  is  not  asking  you  anything  about  your  relationship  between  attorney 
and  client — I  think  you  could  very  easily  tell  us  all  the  facts  about  this 
situation. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  901 

Mr.  Lewis.  All  right,  with  that  understanding.  I  had  an  appoint- 
ment with  Mr.  Matusow  for  approximately  8  o'clock  that  morning. 

Senator  Daniel.  Who  made  the  appointment? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  made  the  appointment  with  Mr.  Matusow. 

Senator  Daniel.  Wlio  aslced  you?     Did  you  know  him  before? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Well,  I  was  one  of  the  attorneys  in  connection  with  the 
preparation  of  this  motion.  I  had  met  Mr.  Matusow  the  previous 
week. 

Senator  Daniel.  And  you  had  helped  to  prepare  the  motion  for  a 
new  trial  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes;  I  did. 

Senator  Daniel.  Did  you  help  prepare  the  affidavit  that  Mr.  Matu- 
sow signed? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  did. 

Senator  Daniel.  And  you  had  then  been  in  conference  with  him 
concerning  the  affidavit  that  you  were  to  use  in  the  motion  for  new 
trial ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes. 

Senator  Daniel.  All  right,  and  then  you  made  the  appointment 
witli  Mr.  Matusow  as  to  where  you  would  meet  him  to  swear  to  the 
affidavit? 

Mr.  Lewis.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  Daniel.  All  right.     Go  ahead. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  am  sorry.    Now,  where  are  we? 

Senator  Daniel.  You  just  proceed.  You  made  the  appointment  at 
8  o'clock.     Then  what  happened? 

Mr.  Lewis.  1  was  there. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Where  was  "there"? 

;Mr,  Lewis.  At  the  railroad  station ;  125th  Street,  New  York  Central 
Ivaihoad  Station.  Our  intention  was  to  meet  in  the  waiting  room 
there. 

Senator  Daniel.  Of  the  railroad  station? 

Mr.  Lewis.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  1  met  him  coming  out  of  the  waiting 
room. 

The  car  in  question  was  already  parked  across  the  street  near  the 
station. 

Senator  Daniel.  Whose  car? 

Mr.  Lewis.  1  do  not  know  wliose  car  it  was. 

Senator  Daniel.  Well,  did  you  bring  it  there  or  did  he  bring  it 
there  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No  ;  it  was  not  mine.     I  came  by  bus. 

Senator  Daniel.  How  did  you  happen  to  go  to  this  particular  car? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Well,  1  met  Mr.  Matusow  coming  out  of  the  station  and 
he  went  to  the  car  and  I  went  with  him. 

Senator  Daniel.  Proceed. 

Air.  Lewis.  We  entered  the  car.  I  entered  the  front  seat.  Mr. 
Matusow  sat  in  the  rear  seat  and  I  had  the  affidavit  with  me.  I 
handed  it  to  him,  he  read  it  and  then  as  1  said  before,  he  affirmed  that 
it  was  his  affidavit,  that  it  was  the  truth.     He  signed  it. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Was  there  any  other  person  in  the  car '? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes ;  a  Mr.  Herb  Tank. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Was  he  waiting  in  the  car  when  you  and  Mr.  Matu- 
sow came  to  the  car  ? 


902  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Lewis.  No  ;  he  was  with  Mr.  Matusow  when  I  walked  out  of  the 
railroad  station. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Was  there  any  other  person  besides  the  three  of  you  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  And  when  you  jjot  into  the  car,  did  Mr.  Tank  sit  in 
the  front  seat  with  you  or  in  the  back  seat  with  Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Mr.  Tank  sat  at  the  driver's  seat.  1  sat  beside  him. 
Matusow  sat  in  the  back. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  where  the  affidavit  attested  by  you  and 
signed  by  Mr.  Matusow  on  January  31  in  this  automobile  was  actually 
typed  ? 

(Witness  confers  with  counsel.) 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Attorney,  wait  just  a  minute.  He  can  confer 
with  you,  but  do  not  interrupt. 

Mr.  Stavis.  I  am  not  interrupting. 

The  Chairman.  Yes ;  you  spoke  to  the  witness.  He  can  confer  with 
you  when  he  desires. 

Mr.  Lewis.  May  I  say  at  this  point,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  now  you 
are  again  embarking  into  the  area  which  I  believe  is  exactly  before 
the  court  at  this  moment,  the  circumstances  under  which  the  affidavit 
was  formulated. 

The  Chairman.  The  witness  will  answer  the  question,  please. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  wish  to  consult  with  counsel. 

( The  witness  consulted  with  counsel. ) 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  will  answer  the  q.uestion,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  just  wish 
to  emphasize  that  now  the  ground  has  shifted. 

Originally  you  were  examining  me  on  my  basis  as  a  role  of  a  notary. 
Now  you  are  examining  me  on  the  basis  of  my  role  as  attorney  in  this 
case. 

Senator  Daniel,  Proceed.    That  is  your  conclusion,  sir.    Proceed. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  think  that  is  a  conclusion  which  is  compelled  by  the 
record.  Now  the  affidavit  actually  was  typed  at  the  home  of  Mr. 
Albert  Kahn. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  is,  the  affidavit  which  he  signed,  that  self-same 
affidavit,  was  typed  at  the  home  of  Mr.  Albert  Kahn  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  When? 

Mr.  Lewis.  The  previous  day,  that  is,  January  30. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  what  day  of  the  week  that  was? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Sunday. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now,  by  whom  was  it  typed  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  It  was  typed  by  a  secretary. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  did  not  ask  the  capacity  of  the  person  who  typed 
it.  I  asked  you  by  whom  it  was  typed,  if  you  know,  and  you  do  know, 
don't  you  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  do. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Wlio? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Phyllis  Lewis. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  she  any  relation  to  you  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  She  is. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  she  your  wife? 

Mr.  Lewis.  She  is 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  she  a  typist? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  903 

Mr.  Lewis.  She  was  formerly  a  legal  secretary. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  She  is  then  a  stenographer? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Correct. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  did  she  type  this  affidavit  from  notes? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Is  that  your  question  ? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  she  type  this  affidavit  from  notes? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Part  of  it  was  dictated  to  her,  part  of  it  was  from 
manuscript,  that  is,  written  down. 

jNIr.  SouRwiNE.  When  you  say  part  of  it  was  dictated,  you  mean 
she  took  it  down,  she  took  dictation  directly  to  the  typewriter? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No;  I  do  not  recall.  I  think  she  took  it  directly  in 
shorthand  and  then  transcribed  it.  Is  that  what  you  meant  by 
^'notes'"  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes. 

Mr.  Lewis.  Well,  part  of  it  by  notes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Part  of  it  was  from  shorthand  notes? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  "Wliich  she  had  taken  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Correct. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now,  who  gave  that  dictation  ? 

(Senator  Jeniier  came  into  the  hearing  room.) 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  will  reassert  at  this  time,  Mr.  Chairman,  because  I 
want  the  committee  to  at  all  times  be  aware  of  the  fact  that  it  is  in 
accordance  with  the  opinion  set  forth  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  Kil- 
hourne  v.  Thompson^  preaching  a  separation  of  powers  system  in  our 
Government  and  intervening  into  the  area  of  the  courts.  The  matter 
is  now  pending  before  the  court. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  was  ruled  on  before  you  appeared  as  a 
witness. 

Proceed. 

Mr.  Staves.  May  I  state  an  objection  very  briefly,  sir? 

Senator  Daniel.  Is  it  the  same  objection?  It  has  been  ruled  on; 
has  it  not? 

Mr.  Stavis.  Unfortunately,  I  was  not  able  to  be  present  this  morn- 
ing, but  I  am  disturbed  and  I  think  I  ought  to  tell  you  that  as  a 
lawyer,  and  I  appear  in  courts  practically  every  day,  about  the  very 
suggestion  that  when  a  case  is  pending  in  court  and  when  a  lawyer 
who  has  worked  on  the  case  states  to  you,  if  there  is  any  question  with 
respect  to  the  preparation  of  that  case  or  any  of  his  conduct  in  the 
case  that  he  thinks  that  the  proper  place  to  adjudicate  such  questions 
is  before  the  court.  I  am  disturbed  and  I  think,  Senators,  if  you  think 
about  it  in  your  own  capacity  as  lawyers,  and  I  am  sure  some  of  you 
were  judges  at  times,  that  any  judge  would  be  disturbed  that  anything 
in  that  case  while  it  is  pending  before  him  should  become  a  matter 
of  congressional  investigation. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  the  same  objection  that  has  been  passed 
on  by  the  permanent  chairman. 

Mr.  Stavis,  Unfortunately,  I  did  not  hear  the  permanent  chair- 
man pass  upon  that.  I  do  not  mean  to  be  wasting  time  but  I  never 
appeared  before  this  committee  before. 

Senator  Daniel.  Just  a  moment.  You  read  the  telegram  from 
Senator  Eastland,  did  you  not? 

Mr.  Stavis.  I  did  not  read  it. 

59886— 55— pt.  10 6 


904  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Senator  Daniel.  Did  you  hear  it  ? 

Mr.  Stavis.  I  heard  the  telegram  read  by  Mr.  Sourwine.  I  have 
not  seen  it  before.  I  did  not  hear  it  until  I  heard  it  here,  but  I  just 
do  not  think  that  enough  thought,  if  I  may  be  so  bold  as  to  suggest 
it • 

Senator  Daniel.  Counsel,  just  a  moment.  I  am  not  going  to  allow 
you  to  continue  to  make  your  statements  and  give  us  your  opinions 
on  matters  that  have  already  been  ruled  on.  The  witness  will  proceed 
to  answer  the  question.     That  is  all,  sir. 

Mr.  Stavis.  May  I  ask  this  very  brief  question  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  all,  sir. 

The  witness  will  proceed  to  answer  the  question 

Mr.  Lewis.  What  is  the  question  now  pending  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  question  is  by  whom  was  the  dictation  given 
which  your  wife  took  down  in  shorthand  from  which  she  subsequently 
typed  a  portion  of  this  affidavit — who  gave  it  ? 

(The  witness  conferred  with  the  counsel.) 

Senator  Daniel.  Let  the  record  show  an  extended  conference  with 
counsel. 

Mr.  Staves.  I  do  not  know  what  the  definition  of  "extended"  is  at 
tliis  point. 

Senator  Daniel.  Proceed. 

Mr.  Lewis.  There  were  several  people  present  at  the  time  of  dic- 
tation. Mrs.  Mary  Kaufman,  who  is  an  attorney  and  associated  with 
this  motion  also  in  the  trial  of  a  case  originally,  myself  and  Mr. 
Matusow,  and  the  secretary,  and  the  dictation,  while  it  may  have,  you 
know,  verbally  come  from  Mrs.  Kaufman,  was  generally  after  dis- 
cussion with  Mr.  Matusow  as  to  the  language  to  be  used  and  the  facts 
to  be  included  in  it  paragraph  by  paragraph. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  am  particularly  interested  in  who  said  the  words 
that  your  wife,  acting  as  secretary,  took  down  and  from  which  notes 
she  subsequently  typed  a  part  of  this  affidavit. 

Senator  Daniel.  Counsel,  we  have  asked  you  please  not  to  inter- 
rupt the  witness.    If  the  witness  wants  to  confer 

Mr.  Stavis.  I  did  not  interrupt. 

Senator  Daniel.  If  the  witness  wishes  to  confer  with  you,  sir, 
he  may  do  so. 

We  have  granted  the  witness  the  privilege  of  having  counsel  here, 
but  we  do  not  want  the  counsel  to  interrupt  the  witness  when  he  is 
about  to  give  his  testimony.  If  he  wishes  to  consult  with  you,  ho 
may  do  so  at  any  time. 

Proceed,  sir. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  wish  to  consult  with  counsel. 

(The  witnass  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  Lewis.  The  affidavit,  well,  I  guess  it  was  done  the  way  which 
most  lawyers  do  it.  The  lawyer  dictated.  Mr.  Matusow  intervened, 
interjected  or  objected,  as  language  was  developing  and  it  was  cor- 
rected in  that  way.     I  also  participated  in  that. 

Senator  Daniel.  Participated  in  the  dictation  of  the  affidavit. 

Mr.  Lewis.  That  and  in  the  correction  of  formulations  as  they 
were  given. 

Senator  Daniel.  Proceed. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Wliat  I  am  trying  to  find  out  is  who  said  the  words 
which  your  wife,  acting  as  secretary,  took  down  ? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  905 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  am  sorry,  that  is  just  not  the  way  affidavits  are  drawn, 
as  you,  as  attorneys,  would  know. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  I  have  drawn  affidavits  like  that  and  so  have  you. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  have  dictated  affidavits  when  they  are  my  own.  Where 
others  are  involved,  I  have  sometimes  dictated  them  and  had  them 
read  and  had  them  approved.  In  this  case  I  would  say  it  was  a  joint 
venture. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  am  not  attempting  to  suggest  there  was  any 
impropriety. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  don't  suggest  that  you  are. 

Mr.  SouR^v^NE.  I  am  just  trying  to  find  out  on  the  record  exactly 
how  it  was  done  and  I  will  tell  you  that  Mr.  Matusow  has  testified 
before  this  committee  as  to  how  it  was  done  and  the  committee  is 
interested  in  testing  his  credibility  and  the  accurateness  of  his 
testimony. 

We  want  to  know  from  you  exactly  what  happened. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  understand.  My  recollection  of  it  is  that  Mrs.  Kauf- 
man dictated  it.  Mr.  Matusow  was  present.  Mr.  Matusow  was  at 
times  interjecting  in  it.  I  interjected.  That  is  the  best  way  I  can 
describe  it. 

Senator  Daniel.  Who  dictated  the  most  of  it  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  don't  know. 

Senator  Daniel.  Did  you  dictate  as  much  as  she  did ;  Mrs.  Kaufman, 
was  it? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  do  not  believe  so. 

Senator  Daniel.  Wlio  took  the  lead  in  dictating  the  affidavit? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Wliat  do  you  mean  by  the  lead?    I  am  sorry. 

Senator  Daniel.  Well,  who  was  in  charge  of  the  dictation  project? 

(The  witness  conferred  with  counsel.) 

Senator  Daniel.  Mrs.  Kaufman  is  an  attorney  too,  is  that  correct? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes. 

Senator  Daniel.  Wliich  of  you  two  took  the  lead  in  dictating  the 
affidavit  to  your  wife  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  As  between  the  two  of  us,  I  think  that  ISIrs.  Kaufman 
did,  but  actually  she  worked  very  closely  with  Mr.  Matusow  in  that. 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes,  she  dictated  the  final  words  that  went  in 
the  affidavit  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No  ;  I  am  not  saying  that.    She  dictated  the  words. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  what  I  mean. 

Mr.  Lewis.  And  because  Mr.  Matusow  participated  in  the  process, 
I  could  not  say  that  they  necessarily  were  her  words  which,  you  know, 
were  presented.    I  should  say  this.    I  think  that  there  was  agreement. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  After  these  words  had  been  taken  down,  they 
were  then  typed  off,  is  that  correct  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Also  as  a  part  of  the  affidavit  you  said  there  was 
some  typing  which  was  copied  by  your  wife,  acting  as  secretary,  from 
some  typed  script  which  was  there,  is  that  right? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  think — yes,  some  of  it  was  typed.  My  recollection  is 
that  even  before  it  got  down  to  typing  the  affidavit  that  certain  por- 
tions were  dictated  jointly  and  then  that  was  copied  back  in.  Also 
there  was  handwritten  material. 


906  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRWiNE,  "What  were  the  portions  that  had  already  been 
typed  from  wliich  she  copied  as  a  part  of  the  affidavit? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  have  no  recollecion  as  to  how  the  breakdown  was. 

Mr.  SoFRwiNE.  Do  you  know  whether  they  were  technical  portions. 
an  opening  perhaps  or  a  close  or  a  caption  or  whether  they  were  sub- 
stantial ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  am  sorry. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  whether  they  were  technical,  that  is 
an  opening  or  a  closing  or  a  caption  or  whether  they  were  substantial 
parts  of  the  affidavit  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  You  are  referring  now  to  the  typed  material  which  was 
given  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  typed  material  which  your  wife  copied  into 
the  affidavit? 

Mr.  Lew^s.  I  am  not  entirely  certain  of  that.  I  do  know  that  the 
first  couple  of  paragraphs — I  think  they  were  form  paragraphs  es- 
tablishing jurisdiction,  stating  jurisdictional  facts  already  were  in 
existence. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  "V^Hio  brought  those  to  Mr.  Kahn's  home  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  believe  those  were  brought  bv  Mrs.  Kaufman  or  my- 
self. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  do  not  know  which  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  where  did  they  originate  ?  Had  you  originated 
them,  or  had  Mrs.  Kaufman,  do  you  know  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No,  even  those  originated  by  Mr.  Matusow. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  mean  that  the  form  portions  of  the  affidavit 
originated  with  Mr.  Matusow? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouR"s\aNE.  Is  he  a  lawyer? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No  ;  he  is  not.    Mny  I  explain  that  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes,  if  you  know  the  explanation. 

Mr.  Lewis.  PTe  had  already  executed  an  affidavit  in  the  Jencks  case 
and  he  liked  the  formulation  which  appeared  in  the  original  two  para- 
graphs I  believe  of  the  Jencks  case  and  if  you  examine  the  paragraphs 
in  the  affidavit  filed  in  the  Flynn  case,  you  will  find  them  rather  par- 
allel.  We  saw  no  objection  as  attorneys. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  know  that  Mr.  Matusow  had  received  those 
form  paragraphs  from  Mr.  Nathan  Witt  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Well,  I  know  that  he  executed  an  affidivit  in  that  case 
and  I  suppose  he  had  a  copy  of  that  affidavit  and  I  also  know  that 
Mr.  Witt  was  associated  as  attorney  with  that  case. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Well,  that  does  not  quite  answer  the  question.  Tt 
may  be  that  that  is  all  you  know  about  the  matter.  If  it  is,  all  you 
have  to  do  is  say  so. 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  question  is  did  you  know  that  ^fatusow  had 
obtained  these  form  paragraphs  for  the  affidavit  from  Mr.  Witt? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Well,  I  cannot  assume  what  happened  between  them,  you 
see. 

Mr.  Souravine.  I  do  not  want  you  to  assume. 

Mr.  Lewis.  They  may  have  been  his  formulation  even  there,  in  con- 
sultation with  Mr.  Witt.  That  is  all  I  am  saying,  you  see.  I  do  not 
know  how  they  originated. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  907 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  am  only  asking  if  you  knew  he  obtained  them  from 
Mr.  Witt? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  do  not  know  that. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Now  after  this  material  had  all  been  drawn  together 
into  a  single  affidavit,  did  Mr.  Matusow  then  read  it  over? 

Mrs.  Lewis.  Yes;  he  did. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  You  have  spoken  of  material  in  longhand  which 
was  copied  into  the  affidavit.  In  whose  handwriting  was  that  ma- 
terial if  you  know? 

Mr.  Lewis.  You  see,  it  was  in  longhand  written  there. 

Mr.  Sourw^ine.  Then  you  know  whose  handwriting  it  was  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  As  I  recall,  it  was  both  Mr.  Matusow  and  Mrs.  Kaufman 
did  that. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  They  both  wrote  out  material  in  longhand? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  When  she  wrote  out  material  in  longhand  did  Mr. 
Matusow  dictate  it  to  her? 

Mr.  Lewis.  It  was  not  dictation.    It  was  done  jointly. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  She  wrote  out  some  without  anyone  dictating  to  her 
and  Mr,  Matusow  wrote  out  some  without  anyone  dictating  to  him, 
right  ? 

Mr.  Lew^s.  You  see  what  happened  was  the  secretary  would  go 
out  and  start  typing  material.  No  secretary  was  available  for  dic- 
tation, so  consequently  they  sat  down  and  started  writing  it.  Since 
the  whole  operation  was  done  always  together,  it  was  not  a  question 
of  assigning  a  portion  of  the  affidavit  to  one  and  a  portion  to  the 
other,  everything  was  done  jointly,  they  worked  together. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  they  both  writing  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  For  instance,  Mrs.  Kaufman  may  at  one  time  be  writing 
something,  later  on  Mr.  Matusow,  although  I  have  no  recollection  of 
Mr.  Matusow  actually  writing. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  You  have  no  recollection  of  him  actually  writing; 
is  that  correct  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  SoFRWiNE.  Now,  when  Mr.  Matusow  read  this  finished  affidavit, 
did  he  make  any  corrections? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  have  no  recollection  of  his  correcting  it. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  After  it  had  been  finished,  that  is,  taking  material, 
some  of  it  from  handwritten  material,  some  of  it  from  typed  script, 
and  some  of  it  from  notes  and  combined  them  into  a  single  affidavit, 
was  that  single  affidavit  rewritten  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  That  single  affidavit  then  and  there  completed,  is 
it  one  which  Mr.  Matusow  signed  and  which  you  attested? 

Mr.  Lewis.  He  signed  the  affidavit  the  next  day ;  that  it  correct. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  And  in  whose  custody  was  it  from  the  time  it  was 
completed  at  Mr.  Kahn's  home  until  Mr.  Matusow  signed  it  the 
next  day  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Mine. 

Mr.  SouRwixE.  In  your  custody  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  And  you  made  no  changes  in  it  of  any  character? 


908  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Lewis.  None  whatever.  I  may  repeat  he  read  it  again  the 
next  day.  I  should  also  like  to  repeat  that  he  kept  a  copy  of  it  after 
it  was  completed  on  the  30th. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  ever  live  at  76  Maple  Avenue,  Hemp- 
stead, N.Y.? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  ever  live  at  258  West  105th  Street,  Man- 
hattan ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No  ;  I  have  no  recollection  of  having  lived  there. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  live  at  2146  Vyse  Avenue,  in  the 
Bronx  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  live  at  153  West  84th  Street,  Man- 
hattan ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No. 

Mr.  SouRAviNE.  Do  you  know  Emanuel  Bloch,  attorney  for  the 
Rosenbergs  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  am  acquainted  with  Mr.  Bloch,  or  was. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  send  a  floral  offering  to  his  funeral  in 
February  1954? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  have  no  recollection  of  having  done  so. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  Abe  Isserman  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  am  acquainted  with  Mr.  Isserman. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  he  a  lawyer  in  Newark  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Excuse  me,  sir,  just  a  minute. 

(The  witness  confers  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  am  sorry,  I  just  do  not  know  what  his  status  as  attor- 
ney is  now.  I  did  know  there  were  some  disbarment  proceedings  in 
connection  with  him.    I  do  not  Imow  what  happened. 

]Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  knoAv  whether  he  has  an  office  in  Newark? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  a  member  of  the  Young  Communist 
League  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Excuse  me,  please. 

(Tlie  witness  consulted  counsel.) 

Mr.  Lewis.  Upon  all  the  grounds  already  stated,  Mr.  Chairman, 
and  on  the  further  grounds  of  the  first  amendment,  and  I  further  de- 
cline to  bear  witness  against  myself,  I  further  decline  to  answer  this 
question. 

Senator  Daniel.  Do  you  mean  that  you  decline  to  answer  this  ques- 
tion on  the  grounds  that  you  claim  the  privilege  under  the  fifth  amend- 
ment not  to  be  a  witness  against  yourself? 

Mr.  Lewis.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  vou  president  of  the  Young  Communist 
League  at  Cornell,  1940-41  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  decline  to  answer  that  for  the  same  groimds  stated 
heretofore. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  work  in  Communist  Party  headquarters 
during  the  first  trial  of  the  Communist  Party  leaders? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Excuse  me  just  a  minute. 

(The  witness  confers  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  Lewis.  Will  you  please  repeat  the  question  ?    I  am  sorry. 

Senator  Daniel.  Repeat  the  question. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  909 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  work  in  the  Communist  Party  headquar- 
ters during  the  first  trial  of  the  Communist  Party  leaders  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Mr.  Counsel,  I  did  work  in  connection  with  the  defense 
in  that  case  but  I  do  not  believe  it  was  ever  in  Communist  Party  head- 
quarters.   It  was  in  the  office  of  defense  counsel. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Are  you  stating  that  your  work  in  that  connection 
was  solely  as  retained  counsel? 

Mr.  Lewis.  No.  I  am  not  because  I  was  not  admitted  to  the  bar  at 
that  time. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  stating  that  you  were  not  working  for  the 
Communist  Party  but  only  for  defense  counsel  for  the  party  ? 

Mr.  Lewis.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  Daniel.  Are  you  now  or  have  you  ever  been  a  member  of 
the  Communist  Party? 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  decline  to  answer  that  question  for  the  reasons  I  have 
stated  heretofore. 

Senator  Daniel.  Will  you  state  those  reasons  to  us  clearly  ?  This 
is  an  important  question  and  I  would  like  to  know  the  full  statement, 
if  you  will,  the  full  grounds  for  your  refusal  to  tell  this  committee 
whether  you  are  now  or  have  ever  been  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party. 

Mr.  Lewis.  My  full  grounds  are  as  follows :  The  question  arises  in 
connection  with  inquiry  in  an  area  which  the  committee  has  no  power 
to  investigate.    That  is  my  first  ground. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  overruled. 

Mr.  Lewis.  Very  well,  you  wished  me  to  state  my  full  groimds  and 
lam. 

I  state  further,  on  the  grounds  that  the  association  and  beliefs  of 
individuals  cannot  be  the  subject  of  inquiry  by  Congress. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  overruled,  sir. 

Mr.  Lewis.  I  take  the  position,  further,  on  the  ground  thati  decline 
to  bear  witness  against  myself  within  the  meaning  of  the  fifth  amend- 
ment. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  sufficient  ground  for  you  to  refuse  to  give 
this  committee  the  information  as  to  whether  you  are  a  member  of 
the  Communist  Party. 

Are  you  a  member  of  a  lawyers  gi'oup  within  the  Communist  Party? 

Mr.  Lewis.  The  same  reply,  Mr.  Chairman, 

Senator  Daniel.  Well,  now,  you  mean 

Mr.  Lewis.  All  three  grounds,  the  two  that  were  overruled,  and 
further  I  decline  to  bear  witness  against  myself. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  honestly  feel  that  a  true  answer  to  that 
question  mav  tend  to  incriminate  you  or  may  be  used  as  evidence 
against  you? 

Mr.  Lewis.  Your  honor — I  beg  your  pardon.  I  think  I  have  suf- 
ficiently asserted  the  privilege.  I  am  an  attorney.  I  understand  pre- 
cisely what  it  means  to  testify  under  oath  and  I  do  not  wish  to  enlarge 
upon  it  further. 

Senator  Daniel.  I  simply  wanted  to  test  your  sincerity  and  that  is 
why  I  asked  you  the  same  question  that  was  asked  the  previous  wit- 
ness as  to  whether  you  sincerely  and  honestly  feel  that  a  truthful  an- 
swer to  that  question  may  be  used  against  you,  may  tend  to  incriminate 
you  in  some  way. 


910  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

In  fact,  otherwise,  you  are  not  entitled  to  claim  the  fifth  amend- 
ment as  a  ground  for  refusing  to  answer  that  question. 

Mr.  Lewis.  Well,  this  committee  may  assume  because  1  am  an 
attorney  that  I  am  sincere  in  whatever  I  say  before  it. 

Senator  Daniel.  Well,  not  necessarily.  You  do  not  object  to 
saying  that  you  sincerely  and  honestly  believe  that  a  truthful  answer 
to  the'question  may  be  used  against  you,  do  you  ? 

Mr.  Stavis.  May  I  object  to  the  question  at  this  points 

Senator  Daniel.  Yes,  you  may  object. 

Mr.  Stavis.   And  suggest  a  very  simple  proposition,  sir. 

Senator  Daniel.    You  may  suggest  any  objection  that  you  have. 

Mr.  Stavis.  It  is  an  objection  that  I  am  suggesting. 

The  objection  is  that  in  this  second  round  of  this  question,  it  is 
perfectly  obvious  that  the  committee  is  attempting  to  pursue  an  area 
as  to  which  the  witness  has  pleaded  the  privilege  in  order  to  establish 
what  the  committee  itself  says  it  wants  to  establish,  namely,  a  lack  of 
sincerity  and  therefore  possibly  the  criminal  charge  of  contempt,  i 
may  point  out  to  the  Senator,  and  I  am  going  to  mail  it  to  you  as 
soon  as  I  get  back  to  my  office,  that  the  New  Jersey  Law  Journal, 
which  is  a  publication  which  all  New  Jersey  lawyers  receive,  discussed 
this  very  question  that  you  are  posing,  namely,  the  tendency  of  con- 
gressional committees— they  discuss  this  in  an  editorial— when  a 
person  pleads  the  privilege,  to  sort  of  push  them  to  the  wall  and  get 
them  actually  to  sav  that  the  reason  that  they  are  pleading  the  privilege 
is  because  that  niav  actually  incriminate  them  and,  therefore,  to 
develop  the  popular  feeling  that  people  who  plead  the  privilege  are 
actually  guilty  of  something,  whereas  in  truth,  and  m  fact,  as  you 
know,  and  as  the  courts  have  said,  the  plea  of  the  fifth  amendment  is 
for  the  innocent  as  well  as  the  guilty.     I  want  to  send  you  a  copy  of 

that  editorial.  ,  _^        •   ^        -    i  • 

Senator  Daniel.  I  will  be  glad  to  have  it,  but  now  I  am  interested  in 
your  objection,  and  your  objection  only.  i      n    .,      c-c^t 

Mr.  Stavis.  It  is  very  important  when  the  witness  pleads  the  htth 
amendment;  it  is  not  for  the  witness  to  explain  in  further  incrimmat- 
mo-  grounds,  if  you  please,  why  it  is  that  he  has  pleaded  the  htth 
aniendment.  It  is  sufficient  under  the  Constitution  that  he  states 
that  he  pleads  the  fifth  amendment. 

Senator  Daniel,  Mr.  Counsel,  your  objection  is  overruled.  As 
long  as  I  am  acting  chairman  of  this  committee,  I,  certainly  when 
a  lawyer,  and  the  witness  before  us  is  a  lawyer,  sworn  to  uphold  the 
Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States,  claims  the  fifth  amend- 
ment and  refuses  to  tell  the  committee  whether  or  not  he  is  now  a 
member  of  the  Communist  Party,  I  am  going  to  test  his  sincerity, 
and  I  will  say  to  you  very  frankly  that  I  do  not  believe  that  any 
lawyer,  an  arm  of  the  courts  of  'this  land,  sworn  to  uphold  the 
Constitution  and  laws  of  this  country,  ought  to  refuse  to  answer  a 
question  as  to  whether  or  not  he  is  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party 
on  any  grounds,  and  I  will  say  this  further,  I  do  not  think  that  any 
lawyer  who  so  refuses  ought  to  have  the  right  to  practice  m  the  courts 

of  this  land.  .       ,      -^  i  i    j  j.i,- 

Now,  that  is  my  feeling  about  it,  and  that  is  why  I  have  asked  this 
witness,  a  lawyer,  the  same  question  that  I  asked  a  layman  a  moment 
ago  as  to  w^hether  or  not  you  are  sincere  and  honest  in  your  belief  that 
alruthf  ul  answer  to  this  question  may  be  used  against  you,  may  be  con- 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  911 

strued  as  testimony  against  yourself.    And  I  direct  you  to  answer  the 

^"mf  ^LEms    The  only  way  this  committee  could  test  my  sincerity 
on  this  question  is  ask  me  if  I  am  sincere.     I  tell  you  I  am  sincere. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  all  I  am  asking.  Thank  you.  Do  you 
have  any  questions,  Senator  Eastland? 

Senator  Jenner? 

Any  further  questions? 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  No,  sir. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  witness  is  excused. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Joseph  Starobin. 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  solemnly  swear  the  testimony  you  are  about 
to  ^ive  the  Internal  Security  Subcommittee  of  the  Committee  on  the 
Judiciary  of  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  is  the  truth,  the  whole 
truth  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help  you  God  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  do. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JOSEPH  STAEOBIN,  ACCOMPANIED  BY  LEONARD  B. 

BOUDIN,  HIS  ATTORNEY 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Starobin,  am  I  pronouncing  your  name  cor- 

ectly  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  ask  that  no  pictures  be  taken  { 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Would  you  give  your  full  name  and  your  residence, 

please^ 

Mr.  Starobin.  What  was  that  question,  please,  sir  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  AVould  you  give  your  full  name  and  your  residence 

address,  please.  . 

Mr.  Starobin.  My  name  is  Joseph  Starobin  and  I  reside  at  51 

Charles  Street,  New  York  City.  . 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  what  is  your  business,  sir  { 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  a  writer  and  journalist. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Starobin,  you  have  been  a  Communist  tor  25 
years,  have  you  not  ?  .  i-^-     i     • 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  say,  Mr.  Sourwme,  that  my  political  views 
have  been  a  matter  of  public  record  for  a  long  time. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  is  right.  -,     .,      a 

Mr.  Starobin.  But  my  party  affiliations,  if  any,  under  the  American 
system  are  my  private  affair. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  have  testified  with  regard  to  your  Communist 
membership  and  your  Communist  positions,  have  you  not? 

Mr.  Starobin.  \  answered  the  questions  with  respect  to  this  phase 

of  affairs.  ^  ^        ^,    ,  , 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  I  am  asking  you  it  it  is  not  true  that  you  have 

been  a  Communist  for  25  years?  ■     .i      x  jt 

Mr  Boudin.  J^Iay  I,  before  the  witness  answers,  m  the  form  ot  a 
foundation  for  an  objection,  ask  for  the  reason  why  this  witness  has 

been  called. 

The  Chairman.  Now  this  is  an  investigation,  sir. 

Mr.  Boudin.   Yes,  sir.  .  . 

The  Chairman.  It  is  not  proper  for  the  committee  to  give  its 
reasons  for  pursuing  a  line  of  questions.  Suffice  to  say  that  the 
reasons  are  good  ones. 


912  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  indicate,  in  order  to  object,  sir,  in  order  to 
object,  as  I  have  a  right,  under  the  decisions,  to  the  pertinence  and 
relevance  of  a  question  or  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  committee  to  ask 
it,  I  have  to  know  what  the  committee  is  inquiring  into. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  May  I  suggest  to  the  counsel  that  he  has  no  right 
to  object.  It  is  a  privilege  granted  him  by  the  committee  which  can 
be  withdrawn  at  any  time. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  deny  that,  but  I  will  not  argue  with  Mr.  Sourwine. 
I  am  here  as  a  matter  of  right. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  The  question  is,  Is  it  not  true,  Mr.  Starobin,  that 
you  have  been  a  Communist  for  25  years  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  have  stated  that  my  political  views  were  a  matter 
of  record,  but  my  party  affiliations,  if  any,  are,  under  the  American 
system,  my  private  affair. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  ask  that  the  witness  be  directed  to  answer  the 
question. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  witness  is  directed  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  answer  the  question  on  the  grounds 
of  the  first  amendment  to  the  Constitution;  on  the  grounds  of  the 
fifth  amendment  to  the  Constitution. 

Senator  Daniel.  What  part  of  the  fifth  amendment  are  you  refer- 
ring to  ?    State  the  objection,  if  you  will,  please,  sir,  fully. 

Mr.  Starobin.  The  fifth  amendment  says,  and  I  quote : 

No  person  shall  be  held  to  answer  for  a  capital  or  otherwise  infamous  crime 
unless  on  presentment  or  indictment  of  a  grand  jury,  except  in  cases  arising  in 
the  land  or  naval  forces,  or  in  the  militia,  when  in  actual  service,  in  time  of  war 
or  public  danger;  nor  shall  any  person  be  subject  for  the  same  offense  to  be  twice 
put  in  peopardy  of  life  or  limb ;  nor  shall  he  be  compelled  in  any  criminal  case 
to  be  a  witness  against  himself;  nor  be  deprived  of  life,  liberty,  or  property, 
without  due  process  of  law ;  nor  shall  private  property  be  taken  for  public  use 
without  just  compensation. 

Senator  Daniel.  Is  your  refusal  based  upon  that  part  of  the  fifth 
amendment  which  says  that  no  person  shall  be  required  to  be  a  witness 
against  himself? 

Mr.  Starobin.  It  is  the  same — it  says : 

Nor  shall  be  compelled  in  any  criminal  case  to  be  a  witness  against  himself. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  what  I  mean. 

Mr.  Starobin.  Yes. 

Senator  Daniel.  Is  that  the  basis  of  your  refusal  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  take  it  on  that  ground. 

Senator  Daniel.  On  those  grounds? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  do.  Senator. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  inasmuch  as  this  witness  has  testified 
under  oath  in  court  in  public  session  to  his  membership  in  the  Com- 
munist Party,  to  the  fact  that  he  joined  the  Communist  League,  the 
Young  Communist  League  in  1930,  and  to  numerous  other  facts  with 
regard  to  his  membership,  I  contend  that  he  has  long  ago  waived  his 
privilege  with  respect  to  this  question.  I  ask  that  he  be  directed  to 
answer  the  question. 

Senator  Daniel.  I  want  to  confer  with  members  of  the  committee. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  have  the  court  record  here,  if  the  committee  would 
like  to  have  it. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  913 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Would  the  chairman  care  to  hear  my  statement  in 

answer  to  Mr.  Sourwine  ?  ,         •  j. 

Senator  Daniel.  No  ;  I  am  about  ready  to  direct  the  witness  to 
answer  the  question.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  you  have  answered  the 
question  previously,  that  you  have  been  a  member  of  the  Communist 
Party,  I  think  that  you  have  waived  any  right  to  claim  the  privilege 
now,  and  1  order  and  direct  you  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  BouDiN-.  Mr.  Chairman 

Senator  Daniel.  Just  a  moment.  .  . 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  just  want  to  call  your  attention  to  a  court  decision 
directly  contrary  to  your  ruling.     I  am  not  afraid  of  your  ruling. 

Senator  Daniel.  If  you  are  not  afraid  of  the  ruling,  let  the  witness 
answer  the  question,  that  is  all. 

Mr.  Boudin.  Very  well. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  stand  on  my  statement  that  I  claim  the  right 
of  the  first  amendment  and  of  the  appropriate  clause  of  the  fifth 
amendment  to  the  Constitution  in  declining  to  answer  your  question. 

Senator  Daniel.  Now,  after  the  Chair  has  ordered  you  to  answer 
the  question  with  your  full  knowledge,  if  the  Chair  is  correct  in  his 
ruling  that  you  may  be  subject  to  contempt  of  this  committee,  you 
again  refuse  to  answer  the  question ;  is  that  correct  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  can  only  claim  the  protection  of  the  Constitution 
against  this  type  of  procedure. 

Senator  Daniel.  I  just  want  to  make  the  matter  clear  that  you 
have  been  warned,  that  if  the  Chair  is  correct,  you  may  be  in  contempt 
of  this  committee.  After  having  been  warned  of  that,  do  you  again 
refuse  to  answer  the  question  on  the  grounds  stated  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Yes;  of  course,  I  will,  Mr.  Senator. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Will  the  chairman  allow  me  to  make  a  one-sentence 
statement  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Starobin,  are  you  the  Joseph  Starobin  who  tes- 
tified in  August  1949  in  the  case  of  the  United  States  of  America  v. 
Eugene  Dennis  and  others? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  In  October 

Senator  Daniel.  Just  a  minute,  counsel.  Your  counsel  has  already 
held  his  hand  in  front  of  your. face  signifying  that  you  should  not 
speak,  and  I  want  to  say  to  the  counsel  that  is  not  proper  procedure. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  How  can  I  object.  Senator? 

Senator  Daniel.  Just  a  moment.  When  you  were  here  represent- 
ing an  earlier  witness,  I  tried  to  caution  you  on  that.  The  witness  has 
the  right  to  refer  to  his  counsel  or  at  least  the  privilege  that  we  have 
granted  here  and  to  consult  the  counsel,  but  the  counsel  will  not  by 
any  means  indicate  to  the  witness  not  to  answer  or  that  the  witness 
should  consult  him.  It  is  a  matter  up  to  the  witness.  Therefore,  I 
will  ask  the  counsel  to  observe  the  rules  that  I  cautioned  him  about 
earlier.     Now  the  witness  will  proceed  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  state  an  objection  ?  If  a  question  seems  to  me 
to  be  objectionable,  I  do  not  care  what  the  witness  thinks  about  it. 
I  am  going  to  object  as  his  counsel.  I  am  not  guided  by  his  views 
as  to 

Senator  Daniel.  Senator  McClellan  and  I  acting  as  chairman  of 
this  subcommittee  today,  have  been  very  lenient  and  patient  with  you 
in  allowing  you  to  state  objections. 


914  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Yes. 

Senator  Daniel.  But  if  you  continue  to  state  objections  that  you 
know  that  this  committee  has  already  passed  on,  you  are  simply  wast- 
ing the  time  of  the  committee,  you  are  interrupting  the  witness  on 
an  answer  which  he  may  otherwise  give  and  therefore,  I  want  to 
caution  the  counsel.  1  will  let  you  state  the  objection  which  you  now 
have  but,  as  I  said  before,  we  are  not  going  to  let  you  take  advantage 
of  the  committee  on  these  objections.     Now  state  your  objection  briefly. 

Mr.  BouDiN,  No,  Senator.  I  am  sorry,  but  I  am  not  going  to  state 
my  objection  at  all,  if  that  is  what  you  are  saying.  I  am  here  as  a 
matter  of  right,  but  if  you  tell  me  I  have  taken  advantage  of  the  com- 
mittee, I  would  rather  remain  silent  if  you  think  that  is  correct. 

Senator  Daniel.  I  said  if  you  take  advantage  of  the  committee 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  have  not  done  so  and  I  resent  the  suggestion  that 
I  have. 

Senator  Daniel.  We  will  proceed. 

Mr,  Starobin.  "WHiat  was  your  question? 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  The  question  is,  Are  you  the  same  Joseph  Starobin 
who  testified  in  August  of  1949  in  the  case  of  United  States  of  America 
V.  Eugene  Dennis  and  others? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Now,  I  am  going  to  decline  to  go  into  any  matters 
pertaining  to  past  testimony  or  to  writings  or  to  what  may  be  alleged 
to  be  activities,  and  I  am  going  to  ask  the  counsel  to  tell  me  what  it  is 
that  this  committee  has  on  the  agenda  today  that  he  wants  me  here  for. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  ask  that  the  witness  be  instructed 

The  Chairman.  You  are  instructed  and  ordered  to  answer  the  ques- 
tion, sir.     It  is  a  perfectly  proper  question. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  going  to  decline  to  answer  that  on  the  grounds 
of  the  first  and  the  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  ask  that  the  witness  be  ordered,  notwithstanding 
his  claim  of  privilege,  to  answer  the  question. 

The  Chairman.  You  are  ordered,  regardless  of  the  claim  of  privi- 
lege, to  answer  that  question,  sir. 

Mr.  Starobin,  I  have  already  stated  my  position  and  I  will  repeat 
it,  that  I  decline  to  answer  such  questions  on  the  ground  of  the  first 
amendment  and  the  appropriate  clause  of  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  ]Mr.  Chairman,  I  dislike  to  burden  this  record,  but 
since  it  is  obviously  impossible  to  secure  any  answers  from  the  witness 
about  this  testimony,  I  ask  that  the  testimony  of  Joseph  Starobin  in 
the  case  which  I  have  mentioned  be  ordered  inserted  in  small  type  in 
the  record  of  this  proceeding. 

Senator  Daniel.  It  is  so  ordered. 

(The  testimony  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  7"  and  is  as 
follows:) 

Exhibit  No.  71 

Joseph  Starobin,  called  as  a  witness  on  behalf  of  the  defendants,  being  duly 
sworn,  testified  as  follows : 

Direct  examination  by  Mr.  Isserman  : 

Q.  Mr.  Starobin,  where  do  you  reside? — A.  3945  48th  Street,  Long  Island  City, 
New  York. 

Q.  And  with  whom  do  you  reside  there? — A.  My  wife  and  son. 

Q.  Were  you  a  member  of  the  Communist  Political  Association  in  the  period 
1944  to  1945?— I  was. 

Q.  Were  you  a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  before  then. — A.  I  was. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  915 

Q.  Whendidyou  join  the  Communist  Party? — A.  In  1934. 

Q.  Were  you  also  a  member  of  the  YCL? — A.  I  was. 

Q.  Before  that  time?— A.  That's  right. 

Q.  Now,  where  were  you  employed  in  1945? — A.  At  the  Daily  Worker. 

*  *  *  *  *"  *  * 

Q.  And  how  long  had  you  been  employed  there  by  April  1945? — A.  I  had  been 
employed  there  since  November  of  1942. 

Q.  And  are  you  employed  there  now? — A.  I  am. 

Q.  In  what  capacity  did  you  first  work  at  the  Daily  Worker? — A.  As  a  reporter 
in  the  foreign  department. 

Q.  And  did  you  some  time  later  change  the  nature  of  your  work  at  the  Daily 
Worker  or  change  your  position? — A.  I  became  a  member  of  the  editorial  board 
sometime  in  the  middle  of  1943. 

******* 

Q.  When  you  were  a  member  of  the  editorial  board  did  you  continue  to  work  as 
a  writer  in  the  foreign  department? — A.  Yes ;  I  remained  in  the  field  of  foreign 
affairs. 

******* 

Q.  Who  did  you  work  under  in  the  foreign  department? — A.  At  the  outset  I 
worked  under  the  foreign  editor  at  that  period,  James  S.  Allen. 

Q.  And  for  how  long  did  you  continue  to  work  under  him? — A.  Until  he  went 
into  the  Armed  Forces,  whereupon  I  became  the  foreign  editor. 

Q.  And  when  was  that? — A.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  that  was  sometime 
in  1944. 

Q.  Now,  did  your  duties  as  foreign  editor  cover  both  the  Daily  Worker  and  the 
Sunday  Worker? — A.  At  that  period,  they  did. 

Q.  Was  there  a  period  subsequently  when  your  duties  did  not  include  both  the 
Daily  Worker  and  Sunday  Worker? — A.  Yes.  When  Mr.  Allen  returned  from 
the  sen'ice  we  shared  the  work  of  the  foreign  editor  in  the  sense  that  I  was  the 
foreign  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker  and  he  was  the  foreign  editor  of  the  Sunday 
Worker. 

Q.  And  for  how  long  did  that  continue? — A.  That  continued  through  most  of 
1945,  after  which  time  Mr.  Allen  left  the  paper  and  I  became  the  foreign  editor 
of  the  Daily  Worker  and  the  Sunday  Worker. 

Q.  Now,  as  forei"!!  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker,  what  do  you  do? 

Mr    McGoHEY.  Objection. 

The  Court.  Sustained. 

******* 

Q.  Do  you  hold  any  other  position  on  the  Daily  Worker? — A.  As  a  member 
of  the  editorial  board,  I  wrote  editorials  and  articles  dealing  with  American 
policy,  American  foreign  iwliey. 

Q.  And  as  foreign  editor  of  the  Daily  Wor*cer,  did  you  in  1945  become  a  cor- 
respondent for  the  Daily  Worker? — A.  I  attended  the  first  session  of  the  United 
Nations  at  San  Francisco  in  April  and  May  of  1945.  and  I  have  been  the  United 
Nations  correspondent  for  the  paper  .since  that  time. 
•        *  ♦  *  *  *  *  * 

Q.  Did  you  in  the  period  1944  to  1945  conduct  any  columns  in  the  Daily 
Worker? — A.  Yes;  I  conducted  a  column  on  foreign  affairs  under  the  title  "Be- 
tween the  Lines." 

Q.  And  did  you  subsequently  discontinue  that  column? — A.  That  column 
was — yes,  that  column  was  replaced  bv 

Mr.  McGoHET.  I  object  to  what  the  further  answer  is. 

The  Court.  The  answer  is  yes,  it  was  later  discontinued. 

Q.  Did  you  later  write  another  column  for  the  Daily  Worker?— A.  Yes,  I  did. 

Q.  And  what  was  the  name  of  that  column? — A.  It  is  entitled  "Around  the 
Globe." 

Q.  Now,  in  the  period  of  your  employment  with  the  Daily  Worker  from  1942 
to  the  present  day  did  you  hold  any  position  in  the  Communist  Party? — A.  No; 
I  have  not. 

*  *  ♦  *  *  *  .  • 

Q.  You  have  been  a  member  throughout  that  period — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  Now,  did  you  in  the  course 

The  Court.  I  take  it  when  you  say  "positions"  you  mean  official  positions? 
Mr.  IssERMAN.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  Did  you  in  the  course  of  your  work  go  to  San  Francisco  to  the  United 
Nations  conference  sometime  in  1945? 


916  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  Objection. 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  And  how  long— can  you  tell  us  the  date  when  you  arrived  in  San  Francisco 
and  the  date  you  left  San  Francisco  on  that  occasion  in  1945,  when  you  attended 
the  United  Nations  Conference? — A.  I  arrived  in  San  Francisco  on  April  the  23d, 
194.5,  and  left  San  Fr:incisco  in  the  early  morning  of  May  the  17th,  1945. 

Q.  When  did  you  arrive  in  New  York  after  your  departure  from  San  Francisco, 
as  you  testified? — A.  I  arrived  in  New  York  the  morning  of  May  the  18th,  1945. 

Q.  Now  while  you  were  in  San  Francisco  did  you  cover  the  United  Nations 
Conference  as  a  correspondent? — A.  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  send  in  any  material  to  the  Daily  Worker? — A.  I  sent  wire  stories 
of  the  dav's  events,  my  column  by  airmail,  articles — interpretive  articles  mostly 
by  airmail,  and  occasional  editorials  by  airmail. 

»♦***** 

Q.  Mr.  Starohin,  while  you  were  in  San  Francisco,  as  you  have  testified  yes- 
terday, covering  the  United  Nations  conference,  were  you  an  accredited  corre- 
spondent to  that  conference? — A.  I  was. 

*♦•♦*•* 

Q.  Now  you  have  testified  as  to — at  the  close  of — .i«st  before  the  close  of  yes- 
terday's session  you  had  testified  as  to  the  material  which  you  had  sent  into  the 
Daily  Worker.  Was  there  any  other  material  which  you  sent  in  which  you 
did  not  mention  yesterday? — A.  Yes;  there  was  other  material. 

Q.  And  what  did  that  consist  of? — A.  There  were  interoffice  communications, 
letters  to  the  managing  editor,  acting  managing  editor,  advices  on  how  I  thought 
a  particular  story  should  be  played,  proposals  for  further  articles — that  kind  of 
thing. 

Q.  Now,  while  at  San  Francisco  covering  this  conference  in  the  period  con- 
cerning which  you  testified,  did  you  in  the  course  of  your  work  meet  delegates 
to  the  United  Nations? — A.  Yes;  I  met  many  delegates. 

Q.  And  did  you  meet  them  from  any  particular  country? — A.  I  met  delegates 
from  as  many  countries  as  I  could. 

Q.  Would  you  name  some  of  the  countries  from  which  you  met  delegates? — 
A.  The  United  Kingdom,  the  United  States,  Chile,  France,  Denmark,  China — 
those  are  a  few. 

Q.  Dd  you  meet  any  delegates  from  the  Soviet  Union? — A.  Yes.  I  met  dele- 
gates from  the  Soviet  Union. 

Q.  Did  you  meet  any  delegates  from  the  Ukranian  Republic  of  the  Soviet 
Union? — A.  Yes;  I  met  the  Foreign  Minister  of  the  Ukranian  Soviet  Republic. 

Q.  And  who  was  the  foreign  minister  of  that  republic? — A.  Mr.  D.  Z. 
Manuilsky. 

Q.  And  will  you  tell  us  how  many  times  you  met  Mr.  Manuilsky  while  you 
were  in  San  Francisco  in  the  period  concerning  which  you  testified? — A.  I  encoun- 
tered Mr.  Manuilsky  twice. 

Q.  Would  you  tell  us  when  and  where  you  encountered  him  on  the  first  occasion 
to  which  you  referred? — A.  I  encountered  Mr.  Manuilsky  together  with  a  group 
of  correspondents  as  he  entered  the  chief  committee  room  on  the  day  of  his 
arrival  in  San  Francisco. 

Q.  Did  you  talk  to  Mr.  Manuilsky  on  that  occasion? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  second  occasion  on  which  you  met  Mr.  Manuilsky? — A.  I 
met  him  at  a  reception  given  for  all  the  delegates  and  all  the  correspondents  by 
the  delegation  of  the  Soviet  Union. 

Q.  And  where  was  that  reception  held? — A.  That  was  at  the  St.  Francis  Hotel, 
San  Francisco. 

Q.  And  on  what  day  was  that  held?— A.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  It 
was  on  May  12  or  13  of  1945. 

Q.  And  did  you  talk  to  Mr.  Manuilsky  on  that  day? — A,  Yes. 

******  0 

Q.  Were  you  introduced  to  Mr.  Manuilsky  on  that  day? — ^A.  I  was. 
Q.  And  where  was  that? — A.  On  the  receiving  line  of  the  reception. 

******  ^ 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  during  the  period  you  were  in  San  Francisco  have 
any  private  conversation  with  Mr.  Manuilsky? 
Mr.  McGoHEY.  Objection. 
The  Court.  I  will  allow  it.     Yes  or  no. 
A.  No. 


STRATEGY    .KXD    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  917 

Q.  Did  you  receive  while  in  San  l"^ancisco  covering  the  United  Nations  con- 
ference any  communication  in  any  form  from  Mr.  Manuilsky? 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  Objection. 

The  CouKT.  I  will  allow  a  yes  or  no  answer. 

A.  No. 

The  Court.  I  take  it  what  you  mean  by  that  is  that  you  received  no  communi- 
cation from  him  either  directly  or  indirectly? 

The  Witness.  Neither  indirectly  nor  directly. 

Q.  Specifically  I  ask  you  if  you  received  any  communication  directly  or  indi- 
rectly, and  I  am  reading  from  page  1614  of  the  record  to  the  effect 

'««*♦•♦♦ 

Q.  (continuing).  To  the  effect  that  "Comrade  Manuilsky  was  indignant  at  the 
American  I'arty  for  not  having  criticized  American  officials  more  severely  and 
particulai-ly  the  Secretary  of  State  and  that  French  comrades  had  been  given  the 
commission  to  instruct  the  American  comrades  as  to  how  to  act  in  these  matters"? 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  Objection  to  that  question  in  that  form. 

The  Court.  He  has  already  said  he  received  no  communication  whatsoever,  and 
I  will  permit  the  answer  to  this  question. 

Did  you  receive  any  such  communication  as  that  from  Manuilsky? 

The  Witness.  Absolutely  not. 

Q.  Did  you  receive  such  a  communication  as  I  have  just  indicated  from  anyone 
at  any  time? 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  Objection. 

The  Court.  I  will  allow  it. 

A.  Certainly  not. 

Q.  Now  I  ask  you,  again  referring  to  the  quotation  on  page  1614  which  I 
have  just  read,  whether  or  not  you  sent  any  communication  to  the  editorial 
board  of  the  Daily  Worker,  attention  of  Mr.  Budenz,  while  you  were  in  San 
Francisco  covering  the  United  States — United  Nations  conference  containing 
the  statements,  in  substance  and  effect,  which  I  have  just  read  out  of  page  1614?— 
A.  No,  I  did  not. 

•  •*•♦♦• 

Q.  Did  you,  while  you  were  in  San  Francisco,  refer  to  Mr.  Manuilsky  In  any 
communication  to  the  Daily  Worker  as  Comrade  Manuilsky? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  send  a  communication  to  any  one  on  the  Daily  Worker,  in  sub- 
stance and  effect,  containing  the  words  which  I  have  read  from  page  1614  of  the 
transcript  while  you  were  in  San  Francisco  covering  the  United  Nations  confer- 
ence? 

Mr.  McGoHET.  Objection ;  it  has  been  answered. 

The  Court.  I  will  allow  it. 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  It  has  been  answered,  your  Honor. 

The  Court.  I  know,  but  I  will  let  him  say  it  again. 

A.  No  ;  I  did  not. 

Q.  Now,  as  I  understand  your  testimony,  the  second  time  and  last  time  that 
you  saw  Mr.  Manuilsky  was  at  the  public  reception  in  San  Francisco  on  the  12th 
or  13th  of  May;  is  that  correct? — A.  Right. 

Q.  Now  when  did  you  leave  San  Francisco? 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  Objection. 

The  Court.  Sustained. 

Q.  How  many  days 

The  Court.  He  left  San  Francisco  in  the  early  morning  of  May  17,  1945. 

•  •**••• 

Q.  Now,  were  you  present  at  an  editorial  board  meeting  of  the  Daily  Worker 
on  or  about  July  10,  1945? — A.  I  was. 

Q.  And  where  was  that  meeting  held? — A.  It  was  held  in  the  editorial  of- 
fices *  *  *  of  the  paper. 

Q.  Who  was  present  at  that  meeting? — A.  The  board  and  the  staff,  the  circula- 
tion department,  the  advertising  department.  There  were  other  people  coming 
and  going. 

Q.  No,  I  am  referring  to  an  editorial  board  meeting  on  July  10. — A.  Oh,  yes, 
yes,  I  remember  an  editorial  board  meeting  at  which  the  editors  of  the  paper 
were  present. 

Q.  And  your  testimony  which  you  were  giving  is  referring  to  some  other  meet- 
ing about  the  same  time? — A.  I  had  it  confused  with  another  matter. 

Q.  Now,  who  was  present  at  the  editorial  board  meeting  on  July  10,  on  or 
about  July  10? — A.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection  Mr.  Budenz  was  there,  Mr. 
Alan  Max 


918  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

The  Court.  Who  was  that? 
A.  Mr.  James 

The  Court.  Who  was  the  second  one? 
The  Witness.  Mr.  Alan  Max. 

The  Witness.  Mr.  James  Allen. 

The  Court.  Yes. 

The  Witness.  And  I  believe  Mr.  Stachel  was  there. 

Q.  Was  anything  said  at  that  meeting 

The  Court.  Anybody  else  ? 

Tlie  Witness.  Not  to  my  recollection. 

By  the  court : 

Q.  Did  you  hear  a  debate  between  Mr.  Allen  and  Mr.  Stachel  in  June  or  July 
of  1945  in  the  editorial  office  of  the  Daily  Worker?— A.  Yes,  I  did. 

Q.  Was  that  debate  on  one  day  or  did  it  continue  over  several  days?— A.  It 
continued  over  several  days. 

Q.  What  was  the  day  that  came  first?— A.  The 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled.     I  am  not  going  to  play  around  with  this  indefinitely. 

Q.  What  was  the  day  that  was  fir.st?— A.  The  third  Friday  in  June. 

Q.  The  third  Friday  in  June.  The  place  was  the  editorial  oflSce  of  the  Daily 
Worker;  was  it? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question.     That  is  not  the  testimony  of  tht' 

witness. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

Q.  You  say  it  was ;  do  you  not? 

The  Witness.  May  I  have  what  I  have  already  said  reread? 

Q.  Well,  you  mean  that  you  said  "Yes"  to  my  question,  and  then  when  Mr. 
Isserman  said  that  you  did  not  say  "yes";  you  want  to  change  it?— A.  No;  I 
don't  want  to  change  it.    I  want  to  confirm  what  has  been  said. 

Mr.  ISSERMAN.  May  I  say  a  word  on  that? 

The  Court.  No,  you  may  not,  Mr.  Isserman. 

Q.  Now,  Mr.  Starobin,  this  debate  which  you  say  took  place  between  Mr. 
Allen  and  Mr.  Stachel  on  the  third  Friday  in  June  of  1945  took  place  where?— 
A.  In  the  editorial  offices  of  the  paper. 

Q.  And  it  was  there — A.  Pardon  me,  your  Honor,  it  began  on  the  third  Friday 

of  June. 

Q.  I  understand  that,  but  we  can't  take  three  of  them  at  once.  We  have  to  start 
with  the  first  one.  That  is  what  the  trouble  was  with  Mr.  Isserman's  question. 
He  would  bring  out  three  of  them  and  then  he  would  say  "on  that  occasion," 
and  nobody  could  tell  which  occasion  it  was.  Now  we  have  got  it  precisely  fixed 
on  the  third  Friday  of  June  which  was  the  start 

Mr.  ISSERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

Q.  At  the  editorial  office;  and  who  was  there? 

The  Court.  I  overrule  the  objection. 

******* 

A.  The  staff  of  the  paper,  business  and  circulation  department,  advertising 
department ;  those  were  the  people  present. 

*  *  *  .*  ..•  „•  .* 

By  Mr.  Isserman : 

Q.  Will  you  tell  us  who  was  present  at  that  session,  the  first  session,  I  am 
referring  to  now? 

The  Court.  Is  this  a  new  question?  You  are  asking  the  question  how  many 
people  were  there. 

♦  *  *  *  •  *  .  ♦ 

A.  I  can  tell  you  the  people  I  remember  personally. 

Q.  Well,  that  is  what  we  want,  Mr.  Starobin. — A.  Mr.  Budenz  must — was  there. 
Alan  IMax  was  there,  James  S.  Allen  was  there,  Mr.  Stachel  was  there.  I  believe 
Mr.  Williamson  sat  in  at  least 

Q.  That  is  the  defendant  Williamson  you  are  referring  to? — A.  That  is  right 
He  was  there.  I  can't  say  who  was  or  was  not  present  beyond  these  people  whom 
I  remember  very  well. 


I 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  919 

The  CouKT.  Do  you  remember  others  who  were  present? 
The  Witness.  I  can't  recall. 

The  Court.  So  that  you  say  as  to  the  rest  you  do  not  recall  who  they  were? 
The  Witness.  Right. 

Q.  Now.  I  ask  you  approximately  how  many  persons  were  at  that  meeting? — 
A.  About  75. 

******* 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  in  your  association  with  the  Daily  Worker,  as  you  have 
testified  to,  write  any  article  of  any  kind  which  advocated  the  overthrow  of  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  by  force  and  violence? 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  Objection. 

The  Court.  I  will  allow  it. 

A.  I  have  not. 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  in  your  association  with  the  Daily  Woi'ker  read  any- 
thing in  the  Daily  Wox'ker  whicli  advocated  the  overthrow  of  the  Government 
of  the  United  States  by  force  and  violence? 

Mr.  McGoHET.  Objection. 

The  Court.  Sustained. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  defendants  in  this  case? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  Have  vou  heard  the  defendants  speak  in  tlie  period  from  April  1945,  to 
July  20,  194S?— A.  I  have. 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  hear  any  defendant  advocate  the  overthrow  and 
destruction  of  the  Government  of  the  Unitefl  States  by  force  and  violence? — A. 
I  have  not. 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  hear  any  defendant  teach  the  necessity  of  the  over- 
throw of  the  Government  of  the  United  States  by  force  and  violence? — A. 
Certainly  not. 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  Cross-examine. 

Cross-examination  by  Mr.  McGohey  : 

Q.  Mr.  Stai'obin,  you  told  us  on  your  direct  testimony  tliat  you  had  at  one 
time  been  a  member  of  the  Young  Communist  Ueague,  did  you  not? — A.  I  have. 

Q.  And  when  did  you  first  join  the  Young  Communist  League? — A.  In  the  sum- 
mer of  1930. 

Q.  And  what  branch  did  you  join? — A.  I  have  no  recollection. 

Q.  Was  it  in  New  York  City? — A.  It  was. 

Q.  Were  you  a  student  at  any  school  at  that  time? — A.  Yes,  I  was. 

Q.  Where  were  you  a  student? — A.  I  was  a  student  at  Washington  Square 
College,  New  York  University. 

Q.  And  how  old  were  you? — A.  I  was  then  17,  I  guess. 

Q.  Seventeen? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  join  a  unit  or  branch  of  the  YCL  at  Washington  Square,  New  Y'ork, 
NYU? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  No.  I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  join  a  unit  in  some  neighborhood? 

^Ir.  IssERMAx.  I  object  to  that. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

The  Witness.  Did  you  allow  that? 

The  Court.  I  did. 

A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  say  you  do  not  recall  the  name  of  the  branch  or  unit  you  joined? — 
A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  Did  it  have  a  meeting  place? 

Mr.  Isserman.   I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  Yes.    It  must  have  had  a  meeting  place. 

Q.  Well,  I  ask  you,  did  it  have  a  meeting  place? — A.  Yes,  it  had  a  meeting 
place. 

Q.  Did  you  attend  the  meetings? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  Yes,  I  attended  the  meetings. 

Q.  Where  did  you  attend  the  meetings? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object. 

59886 — 55 — pt.  10 7 


920  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

A.  I  don't  recall. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

By  the  Court : 

Q.  Were  they  at  the  same  place? — A.  It  was  20  years  ago  ;  I  just  don't  recall. 
Q.  This  was  your  hrst  c(»utact  with  the  Young  Comuuinist  League,  wasn't  it? 
Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 
The  Court.  Overruled. 
A.  That  is  correct. 
Q.  As  a  boy  of  17?— A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  But  you  don't  remember  the  place  \^•here  it  was? — X.  1  just  don't  remember 
where  it  was. 

By  Mr.  McGohey : 

Q.  Did  you  complete  your  course  at  Washington  Sipiare  College  in  New  York 
University? — A.  I  did  complete  my  course  at  Washington  Square  College. 

Q.  When?— A.  In  1936. 

Q.  I  assume  that  you  were  not  constantly  at  New  York  University  from  1930  to 
1936,  were  you? — A.  That  is  correit ;  I  was  not. 

Q.  And  did  you  go  to  some  other  school  between  those  years? 

Mr.  IssEKMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overniled. 

Let  me  first  ask  him  :  Did  you  graduate  from  NeAv  York  Uni ver.sity  ? 

The  Witness.  That  is  right. 

The  Court.  What  degree? 

The  Witness.  Bachelor  of  arts. 

The  CoLTRT.  A.  B.? 

The  Witness.  B.  A. 

By  Mr.  McGohey  : 

Q.  Were  you  a  freshman  at  New  York  University  in  1930? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object  to  that. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  Well,  1930  is  a  year  that  embraces  two  terms. 

The  Court.  AVell,  I  still  think  you  ought  to  be  able  to  answer  that  even  If  that 
year  does  embrace  two  terms. 

The  Witness.  I  was. 

Q.  Were  you  a  freshman  at  New  York  University  at  the  time  you  joined  the 
Young  Communist  League? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  Yes,  I  was. 

Q.  Now,  you  say  that  between  1930  and  1936  yon  attended  another  and  dif- 
ferent school  than  New  York  University? — A.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

Q.  When  did  you  leave  New  York  University  to  attend  this  other  school? — A. 
I  left  New  York  University  in  the  winter  of  1930-31. 

Q.  And  what  was  the  other  school  that  you  went  to? — A.  I  transferred  to  the 
City  College  of  New  York. 

Ci.  And  did  you  join  a  branch  of  the  YCL  at  City  College  after  you  became  a 
student  there? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  did  not. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  remain  a  student  at  City  College? — A.  Until  the  winter 
of  1932-33. 

Q.  Thewinterof  1932-33?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  you  were  at  City  College  for  about  a  year? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Now,  du.ring  your  year  at  City  College  were  you  associated  in  any  way 
with  any  of  the  YCL  at  City  College? 

Mr.  Issekman.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  No.  I  was  not. 

Q.  Did  you  during  that  year  remain  a  member  of  the  branch  or  unit  which  you 
liiul  tii-st  joined  in  the  YCL? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object. 

The  Cottrt.  Overruled. 

A.  No,  I  was  not. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  921 

Q.  r.ut  you  werH  in  the  YCL  at  that  time? — A.  I  was  not. 

Q.  You  mean  that  you  got  out  of  the  YCL  after  you  went  to  City  College? — 
A.  No,  I  got  out  nf  the  YCL  while  I  was  at  Washington  Square  College. 
Q.  I  see.     And  then  did  you  rejoin  the  YCL  at  sometime  later? 
Mr.  IssKKMAN.  I  object. 
A.  1034. 

Q.  1984?— A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Now,  while  you  were  in  the  YCL  did  you  meet  the  defendant  John  Gates? 
Mr.  IssKRMAN.  I  object. 
The  Court.  Overruled. 

■  «***** 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  When  did  you  first  meet  him? — A.  I  first  met  him  in  1931  which  was  before 
I  rejoined  the  YCL. 

Q.  Did  you  meet  him  at  City  College? — A.  Well,  that  was  not  the  first  time 
I  met  him.'  I  had  met  him  at  City  College,  however. 

Q.  But  do  I  understand  your  testimony  to  be  that  you  had  met  him  prior  to- 
goiug  to  City  College? — A.  I  am  certain  I  met  him  at  DeWitt  Clinton  High, 
School,  which  was  prior  to  my  membership  in  the  YCL. 

Q.  And  while  you  were  in  the  YCL  did  you  meet  the  defendant  Gilbert  Green  ?.- 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overrruled. 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  When  did  you  first  meet  him? — A.  My  first  meeting  with  him  was  in  1937. 

Q.  Where? — A.  In  the  offices  of  the  Young  Communist  League. 

Q.  And  where  were  they?— A.  35  East  12th  Street,  New  York  City. 

Q.  At  that  time  did  ^Ir.  Green  hold  the  highest  national  position  in  the  Young; 
Communist  League? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  think  he  did. 

Q.  Did  you  hold  any  position  in  the  Young  Communist  League  at  that  time? 

Mr.  ISSERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  No  :  I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  hold  any  position  in  the  Young  Communist  League? — 
A.  Yes ;  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  hold  more  than  one  position  in  the  Young  Communist  League? — 
A.  I  don't  recall  that  I  held  more  than  one. 

Q.  Well,  give  us  the  name  of  the  position  and  the  time  that  you  first  assumed 
a  position  in  the  Young  Communist  League. 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  I  will  sustain  the  objection.    That  word  "assumed." 

Q.  Well,  will  you  tell  us  what  was  the  first  position  you  held  in  the  Young 
Communist  League. 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  became  the  editor  of  the  publication  of  the  Young  Communist  League 
which  I  founded  or  helped  to  found  in  the  fall  of  1937. 

Q.  And  what  was  the  name  of  that  publication? — A.  It  was  called  the  Young 
Communist's  Review. 

Q.  Young  Communist's  Review? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Wei'e  you  elected  to  that  position? 

Mr.  ISSERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  No  ;  I  was  appointed  to  it. 

Q.  By  whom? — A.  By  Mr.  Winston,  I  believe,  the  organizational  secretary  of 
the  Young  Communist  League. 

Q.  Was  he  the  national  organizational  secretary? — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Was  that  the  first  time  you  had  met  Mr.  Winston? — A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  You  had  not  met  him  at  any  time  before  that? — A.  I  have  no  recollection 
before  that  time. 

*  *  *  *  *  ^L  0 

Q.  During  your  membership  in  the  Young  Communist  League  did  you  meet 
the  defendant  Gus  Hall?— A.  No  ;  I  did  not. 

Q.  Never  met  him  in  the  Young  Communist  League? — A.  No. 


922  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Q.  When  was  the  first  time  that  you  met  him?— A.  I  believe  it  was  sometime 
in  1942  or  1943. 

Q.  After  you  became  an  employee  of  the  Daily  Worker?— A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  meet  him? — A.  In  the  offices  of  the  Daily  Worlcer. 

Q.  Also  at  35  East  12th  Street?    A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  Was  he  employed  by  the  Daily  Worker  at  that  time,  do  you  know? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  don't  know  that  he  was — no.  he  was  not. 

Q.  What  position,  if  any,  did  he  hold  in  the  Communist  Party  at  that  time? 

Mr.  IssEUMAN.  I  object. 

A.  I  did  not  know. 

******* 

Q.  Do  you  know  now?^A.  What  position  he  held  then? 

Q.  Right.— A.  No. 

Q.  During  your  time  in  the  Young  Communist  League  did  you  meet  the  de- 
fendant John  Williamson? — A.  No,  I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  meet  at  any  time  during  your  membership  of  the  Young  Communist 
League  the  defendant  Robert  Thompson? — A.  Yes,  I  did. 

Q.  And  when  and  where  did  you  first  meet  him? — A.  I  met  him  in  1937  or  1938, 
in  that  period,  at  the  offices  of  the  Young  Communist  League  in  New  York. 
******* 

Q.  When  did  you  join  the  Communist  Party? — A.  In  1934. 

Q.  And  you  have  been  a  member  continuously  since  that  time? — A.  That  is 
correct. 

Q.  Up  to  now,  correct? — A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  Now,  from  the  time  you  joined  the  Young  Communist  League  in  1930  up  to 
the  present  time  have  you  attended  any  schools  maintained  either  l)y  the  Young 
Communist  League  or  the  Communist  Party? 
Mr.  IsSEBMAN.  I  object. 
The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  No.     In  what  capacity?     That  is  as  a  student,  your  Honor? 
Q.  Yes.     I  want  to  ascertain  did  you  attend  any  schools  nuiintained  either 
by  the  Young  Communist  League  or  by  the  Communist  Party  as  a  student? — A. 
No,  I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  attend  at  any  such  school  as  a  teacher? 
Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 
The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  have  given  one  lecture  at  a  school  of  the  Communist  Party. 
Q.  And  when  and  where  was  that  school  conducted? — A.  That  school  was — ■ 
there  was  one  class  of  the  school  in  the  fall  of — no,  it  must  have  been  in  the 
winter  of  1946-47  after  my  return  from  Latin  America,  and  the  school  was  at 
Camp  Beacon. 

Q.  You  mean  Camp  Beacon,  New  York? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Were  any  of  the  defendants  now  on  trial   teachers  or   lecturers   at   that 
school? — A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  taught  at  the  Jefferson  School? — A.  Yes,  I  have. 
Q.  When? — A.  I  taught  at  the  Jefferson  School  in  the — 1943-44  semester  and 
1944—45,  and  I  believe  I  taught  a  session  in  1946. 

Q.  Now  since  1944.  I  think,  according  to  your  testimony,  you  have  been  the 
foreign  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker;  is  that  correct? — A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  And  that  has  been  your  employment  continuously  since  that  time? — A.  That 
is  correct. 

Q.  And  in  your  employment  in  the  Daily  Worker  for  whom  were  you  working? — 
A.  For  the  Daily  Worker. 

Q.  For  the  Daily  Worker. — Have  you  ever  concealed  that  fact,  that  you  were 
employed  and  working  for  the  Daily  Worker? 
Mr.  ISSERMAN.  I  object. 
The  Court.  Overruled. 
A.  Not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Well,  have  you  in  any  instance  where  you  were  required  to  state  your  era- 
l)loyment  concealed  the  fact  that  you  were  employed  by  the  Daily  Worker? 
Mr.  ISSERMAN.  I  object. 
The  Court.  Overruled. 
A.  Not  to  my  recollection. 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  represent,  any  time  since  1944.  where  you  were  required 
to  state  your  employment,  or  say  that  you  were  self-employed? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COAIIVIUNISM  923 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 
The  Court.  Overruled. 

*  ****** 

A.  It  is  possible.    I  have  no  recoUectiou. 
Q.  Did  you  register,  to  vote  in  the  year  1946? 
Mr.  IssERMAX.  I  object. 
The  Court.  Overruled. 
A.  I  believe  so. 

******* 

Q.  I  show  you  this  register  of  voters  for  the  26th  election  district  of  the  second 
assembly  district  in  the  county  of  Queens  for  the  year  1946,  and  I  call  your  atten- 
tion to  this  signature  which  appears  at  the  extreme  right  of  line  10,  and  ask  you 
if  that  is  not  your  signature? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  the  question. 

Tlie  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  That  is  my  signature. 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  I  offer  this  in  evidence. 

Q.  .Just  above  your  signature  do  you  see  a  statement  reading  "The  foregoing 
statements  are  true"? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  Yes,  that's  right. 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  I  offer  in  evidence  pages  150  and  151  of  the  register  of  voters, 
County  of  Queens,  26th  election  district,  second  assembly  district,  bearing  the 
imprint  "Signature  Copy." 

Mr.  Isserman.  The  offer  is  objected  to. 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  If  the  Court  please,  I  hand  up  the  book  but  ask  leave  to  substi- 
tute photostatic  copies  of  those  two  pages. 

The  Court.  Yes,  you  may  do  so. 

******* 

The  Court.  Have  you  shown  this  to  Mr.  Isserman? 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  Mr.  Isserman  objected  to  it  immediately  upon  its  offer. 

The  Court.  Objection  overruled. 

(Marked  "Government's  Exhibit  204.") 

*  ****** 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  *  *  *  If  the  Court  please,  I  should  like  to  read  the  exhibit  to  the 
jury. 

The  Court.  You  may  do  so. 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  Ladies  and  gentlemen  of  the  jury  :  I  am  reading  from  this  official 
original  copy  of  the  signature  register  of  voters  for  the  County  of  Queens,  26th 
election  district,  second  assembly  district. 

On  page  150,  line  10  thereof,  appears  some  preliminary  information  including 
the  date  October  8,  the  party  registered,  and  under  that  appears  Joseph 
Starobiu — 

Q.  Your  address  then  was  3938  48th  Street,  was  it,  Mr.  Starobin? — A.  Correct. 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  Then  information  as  to  voter's  age,  32  years  of  age,  married, 
length  of  residence,  32  years,  in  city  32  years,  in  the  election  district  4  months, 
born  in  the  United  States,  full  name  of  the  householder,  tenant,  year  of  last  vote, 
1945,  in  New  York  City,  and  then  further  under  information  as  to  voters  under 
titles  28  and  29  appears  "Self-employed." 

Q.  That  was  not  a  tiiie  statement,  was  it,  Mr.  Starobin? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object. 

A.  No,  it  was  an  error. 

Q.  Pardon? — A.  It  was  an  error. 

Q.  It  was  not  the  truth  was  it? — A.  No,  it  was  not. 

Q.  Did  you  have  some  reason  on  October  8,  1946,  to  conceal  the  fact  that  you 
were  employed  by  the  Daily  Worker? — A.  I  can't  recall  of  the  reason. 

Q.  You  might  have  had  a  reason  to  conceal  it ;  is  that  what  you  mean? — A.  No, 
I  should  have — I  should  have  stated  that  it  was  the  Daily  Worker. 

Q.  No,  my  question,  Mr.  Starobin,  is  on  October  8,  1946,  when  you  stated  that 
you  were  self-employed  and  said  that  that  was  a  true  statement,  did  you  have 
some  reason  to  conceal  the  truth  from  the  election  inspectors? — A.  None  that  I 
can  think  of. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  by  that  that  it  is  possible  that  you  may  have  had  a  reason  to 
conceal  it? — A.  No,  there  was  no  such  reason. 

Q.  Now,  your  position  as  foreign  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker  is  a  position  in 
the  Communist  Party ;  is  it  not? 


924  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  IssEEMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  No,  it  is  not. 

Q.  Well,  have  you  at  any  time  said  under  oath  that  it  was  a  posltiou  in  the 
Corumunist  Party? — A.  Not  that  I  can  recall. 

Q.  Well,  you  testified,  did  you  not,  as  a  witness  for  a  man  named  Gerhard 
Eisler  in  an  enemy  alien  hearing  here  in  New  York  City  about  a  year  and  a  hal£ 
or  2  years  ago;  did  you  not? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

The  Witness.  Must  I  answer  that? 

The  Coubt.  Yes;  you  must  answer  that. 

A.  Yes,  I  did. 

Q.  And  at  that  time  you  were  under  oath  when  you  gave  your  testimony,  were 
you  not? — A.  I  don't  recall  that  I  was,  but  I  probably  was. 

Q.  Well,  don't  you  know  perfectly  well  that  you  were? — A.  No,  I  don't  know^ 
but  if  you  say  so  I  take  your  word  for  it. 

Q.  Well,  you  were  there,  weren't  you? — A.  So  were  you. 

Q.  No,  I  was  not. — A.  Yes ;  I  testified  under  oath. 

******* 

Q.  Do  you  remember  seeing  me  at  that  hearing? — A.  I  thought — I  thought 
I  had  seen  you  there. 

******* 

Q.  Now,  at  that  hearing  weren't  you  asked  by  Mr.  Mclneruey  the  following 
questions  to  which  you  made  the  answers  which  I  shall  read : 

"Q.  Do  you  have  a  party  name,  sir? — A.  I  do  not. 

"Q.  You  are  a  member  under  your  own  name? — A.  That  is  right. 

"Q.  Have  you  held  any  official  positions  in  the  Communist  Party? — A.  Other 
than  these  posts? 

"Q.  Membership? — A.  Not  that  I  recall. 

"Q.  When  you  say  'Other  than  these  jMDsts',  what  do  you  mean  by  posts?" 

Mr.  McGohey.  That  is  Mr.  Mclnerney  questioning  you,  and  your  answer : 

"A.  Well,  I  have  been  the  foreign  editor  of  tlie  Daily  Worker.  I  have  been — 
I  was,  prior  to  being  foreign  editor  of  the  New  Masses,  one  of  the  editors  of  the 
publications  of  the  Young  Commimist  League.  These  are  not  official  organiza- 
tional posts.     They  are  more  in  the  sense  of  technical  positions." 

You  made  those  answers;  did  you  not? 

A.  That's  right. 

Q.  Now,  I  ask  you,  is  not  your  position  as  foreign  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker 
a  position  in  the  Communist  Party? — A.  No;  it  is  not. 

Q.  Is  it  a  technical  position  in  the  Communist  Party? — A.  No,  it  is  not. 

Q.  Were  you  telling  the  truth  when  you  gave  that  answer  to  Mr.  ^Mclnerney 
under  oath? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  was  mistaken. 

Q.  That  statement  you  gave  to  Mr  Mclnerney  was  not  true? — A.  It  was  a 
mistaken  statement. 

Q.  It  was  not  true? — A.  It  was  untrue. 

Q.  Now  you  told  us  that  you  saw  Dimitri  Manuilsky  at  San  Francisco  once 
at  a  press  conference  and  once  at  an  official  reception.  I  take  it  that  those  were 
both  in  the  nature  of  formal  occasions? — A.  No.  The  first  one  is  an  informal 
occasion. 

Q.  I  beg  your  pardon  ? — A.  It  is  a  press  conference. 

Q.  I  mean  it  was  formal  in  the  sense  that  all  of  the  press  were  admitted  to 
the  conference. — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  it  was  your  testimony  that  you  saw  him  only  twice,  on  those  two 
occasions ?^A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Did  you  see  him  at  any  time  informally? — A.  No. 

Q.  Never? — A.  Never.  Pardon  me.  The  word  "see."  I  testified  that  I  en- 
countered him.     I  have  seen  him  at  meetings  of  all  sorts  of  the  United  Nations. 

Q.  Very  well.  I  will  withdraw  the  question  because  when  I  said  "see"  I 
intended  it  to  mean  having  a  conversation  with  liim.  So  I  withdraw  that  and 
ask  you : 

Did  you  encounter  him.  to  use  your  own  words,  on  occasions  other  than  those 
two  you  testified  to? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WOULD    COMMUNISM  925 

.     Mr.  IssERMAN.  Now  I  ask  that  this  question  he  limited  to  the  San  Francisco 

'Conference. 

Mr.  McGoiiKY.  Yes.  it  is. 

Q    It\^  a 'fa"risn't  it.  tliat  Manuilsk.v  saw  a  great  many  i^eople  informally 
during  the  period  that  Ix.th  .vou  and  he  were  at  tlie  San  Francisco  Conference' 
Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 
The  Court.  Overruled. 

q:  rwryon'write  that  in  ...le  of  y<.ur  stories  in  the  Worker  during  that 

^""Q^And^iidif't' you' also  write  in  the  Vs'orker  that  you  had  been  watching  the 
Soviet  delegation'incUiding  him  for  a  period  of  3  weeks? 
Mr.  ISSERMAN.  Objected  to. 

*     \^p<    T  Ti  n  f  1  liPPll 

q'  And  that  thev  bad  seen  many  people  informally  in  that  period?— A.  I  wrote 
that  it  had  been  said  that  they  had  met  with  people  informally  m  that  period. 

Q  That  it  had  been  said,  or  that  you  were  saying  it?  Which  did  you  write  .'—A. 
W>U  I  wrote  in  mv  name  that  I  was  reporting  that  to  be  a  fact. 

O    Yon  reported  it  as  a  fact  in  your  paper?— A.  That  is  right.          .,,,„„ 
Q    (Continuing).  That  von,  Joseph  Starobin,  had  watched  the  Soviet  delega- 
tion for  3  weeks  and  that  the  Soviet  delegates,  including  Manuilsky ■ 

Mr.  ISSERMAN.  I  object.  .    ^  „      _  .       ^, .  „ 

Q.    (Continuing I.  Had  seen  a  great  many  people  informally,  did  you  not.' 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

\    That  is  I'i'^ht 

O  Is  'it  vour^testimonv  now  that  although  you  were  a  special  correspondent 
for  tlie  Daflv  Worker  at  San  Francisco,  and  although  you  knew  that  Manuilsky 
was  seeing  a  great  many  people  informally,  that  you  never  saw  and  talked  to 
him  iiiforninllv  in  that  period? — A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  You  were  particularly  interested  in  the  views  of  the  Soviet  delegation  at  the 
€onference,  were  you  not? 

Mr.  IssERMAX.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A    Not  more  so  than  the  views  of  all  the  other  great  powers. 

o'  Very  well  ■  but  there  was  some  difference  of  view,  was  there  not,  between 
the  Soviet  delegates  and  the  delegates  of  other  great  powers  at  the  Conference?— 

A    T^liril"  is  oorvoct 

Q  \nd"althoii?h  the  opportunity  was  available  to  see  Manuilsky  and  the  others 
at  these  informal  occasions,  you  did  not  take  advantage  of  that  to  talk  to  him 
and  get  some  background  information  from  him  ? 

Mr.  ISSERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Sustained  as  to  form. 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  I  withdraw  it.  »  ,  i..         ». 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  take  advantage  of  these  informal  meetings  to  secure 
background  information  from  Mr.  Manuilsky? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  No,  I  did  not.  ,  ..x.         t         i 

Q.  Have   you    ever    represented   yourself   by    any    other    name   than    Joseph 

The  Witness.  May  I  ask,  is  the  prosecutor  referring  to  my  writing? 

The  Court.  You  m'av  ask  him  that.    I  will  permit  that.  ^      .       .    ., 

The  witness  desires  to  know,  Mr.  McGohey,  whether  you  are  referring  to  the 
names  he  used  as  a  writer  or  names  used  in  some  other  capacity. 

Q  I  desire  to  learn,  Mr.  Starobin,  whether  in  any  manner,  as  a  writer  or 
otherwise,  you  have  ever  represented  yourself  by  any  name  other  than  Joseph 

'  Q.Vy  "what  name  have  "you  represented  yourself?— A.  Well,  I  am  known  by 
the  name  of  Rosen.    May  I  explain.  Your  Honor? 

The  Court.  Yes ;  I  think  tliis  is  a  good  time  to  do  it. 

The  Witness  Yes.  About  10  years  ago  my  wife  bought  a  little  cottage  up  in 
Dutchess  County  under  her  own  name,  and  we  have  summered  U5p  there  from 
time  to  time  ever  since.  Her  name  is  Rosen,  and  it  got  so  that  occasionally  by 
some  townspeople  I  am  called  Rosen,  although  I  get  mail  under  the  name  of 
Starobin  and  althongh  the  place  is  now  under  the  name  of  Starobin,  so  that  I 
would  not  say  flatly  that  I  am  not  known  by  any  other  name  in  this  connection, 
because  some  people  do  know  me  by  my  wife's  maiden  name. 


926  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OP   WORLD    COlMMUlSriSM 

The  Court.  As  I  understand  it,  some  of  the  natives  up  in  this  country  place 
found  out  in  some  way  that  your  wife's  maiden  name  was  Rosen,  and  they  started 
calling  you  Rosen. 

The  Witness.  She  bought  the  house  in  her  name ;  it  was  her  house  at  the 
outset. 

The  Court.  That  was  after  you  were  married? 

The  Witness.  That  is  right. 

By  Mr.  McGohey : 

Q.  Now,  when  people  refer  to  you  as  Mr.  Rosen,  do  you  correct  them  and  tell 
them  that  your  name  is  Mr.  Starobin? — A.  Some  of  them  I  do.  I  am  trying  very 
hard  to  discourage  them  from  calling  me  Rosen. 

Q.  Well  now,  my  question,  Mr.  Starobin,  was,  have  you  ever  represented  your- 
self as  having  any  other  name  than  Starobin?    Now  you  have  told  us  about  this 

situation  up  in  Duchess  County  where  people  mistake  you  and  call  you  Rosen? 

A.  Yes. 

Q.  (continuing).  But  I  want  to  find  out  about  cases,  if  there  are  any,  where 
you  represented  yourself  to  be  a  man  with  a  name  other  than  Starobin. 

Mr.  IsSERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  Other  than  this  particular  situation? 

Q.  At  any  time,  or  in  any  way. — A.  Yes.  I  have  walked  into  the  plumber's 
and  said,  "Say,  will  you  send  up  some  piping  to  the  Rosen  place,"  and  he  would 
say,  "What  was  your  name  again?"  and  I  would  say  "Rosen." 

Q.  Now,  apart  from  Rosen,  have  you  ever  held  yourself  out  to  be  a  person  by 
any  other  name 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that. 

Q.  (Continuing).  Than  (1)  Starobin;  (2)  Rosen? — 

A.  Not  to  my  recollection. 

The  Court.  I  want  to  overrule  that  objection  that  was  made  in  the  middle  of 
a  question.  Do  you  desire  to  restate  the  objection,  Mr.  Isserman?  Do  you  desire 
to  restate  the  objection?  You  made  an  objection  in  the  middle  of  a  question, 
and  I  do  not  like  to  have  the  record  garbled.  Do  you  desire  to  make  the  objection 
again  and  put  it  in  the  form  of  a  motion  to  strike  the  answer? 

Mr.  IssEKMAN.  Not  at  this  point. 

The  Court.  Well,  I  overrule  the  objection,  and  if  there  is  a  motion  to  strike  out, 
I  deny  the  motion. 

By  Mr.  McGohey : 

Q.  Have  you  ever  represented  yourself  to  be  a  person  named  Hans  Berger?^ 
A.  No.  I  have  never  represented  myself  to  be  such  a  person,  because  there  is  no 
such  person. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  written  articles  in  the  Daily  Worker  or  other  publications 
under  the  name  of  Hans  Berger? — A.  I  have. 

Q.  Is  Hans  Berger  your  name? — A.  No,  it  is  not.     It  is  a  pen  name. 

Q.  Is  it  the  name  of  a  man  otherwise  known  as  Gerliart  Eisler? — A.  It  is  not  his 
name  either. 

Q.  When  you  wrote  these  articles  for  the  Daily  Worker  and  other  publications 
under  the  name  of  Hans  Berger,  as  you  say,  were  you  doing  that  on  behalf  of 
Gerhart  Eisler? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  was  doing  that  on  my  own  behalf. 

Q.  Did  you  write  truthfully  in  those  stories  that  you  wrote  under  the  name  of 
Hans  Berger? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  To  the  best  of  my  ability. 

Q.  Were  you  at  any  time  in  your  life  a  German  anti-Fascist? — ^A.  No. 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

Q.  AVere  you  at  any  time  in  your  life  a  German  anti-Fascist?— A.  No,  I  was  not. 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object  to  that  question. 

Q.  Were  you  at  any  time  in  your  life  in  Berne,  Switzerland? — A.  No,  I  was  not. 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  in  the  Worker  write  an  article  under  the  name  of  Hans 
Berger,  dating  it  Berne,  Switzerland?— A.  Yes,  I  did.  May  I  explain.  Your 
Honor? 


STRATEGY    AXD    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    CO.MMUNISM  927 

The  Court.  Well,  you  better  answer  the  question  now,  first.  The  explanations 
are  usually  made  on  redirect  examination. 

The  Witness.  I  see.     I  thought  we  could  clear  this  thing  up. 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time,  writinj;  iinder  the  name  of  Hans  Berger,  state  in 
explanation  of  the  article  that  you  wrote  that  it  was  in  the  viewpoint  of  a 
German  anti-Fascist  refugee? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  have  so  stated. 

Q.  It  was  not  true,  was  it? — A.  It  was  true. 

Q.  You  were  not  a  German  anti-Fascist,  were  you? 

The  Witness.  May  I  explain  this.  Your  Honor? 

Mr.  McGOHEY.  Will  you  please  answer  my  question? 

The  Court.  Answer  the  questions  first. 

A.  No  ;  I  was  not. 

Q.  You  never  Avere  in  Berne,  Svi^dtzerland  ? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  When  you  put  an  article  in  the  Worker  saying  it  had  come  from  Hans 
Berger,  which  you  say  was  yourself,  from  Berne,  Switzerland,  that  was  not  true, 
was  it? — A.  No  ;  it  was  not  true. 

The  Court.  Now.  what  is  the  explanation  yoir  want  to  make,  Mr.  Starobin? 
******* 

The  Witness.  I  just  would  like  to  make  this  point :  as  the  foreign  editor  of 
the  Daily  AVorker  it  was  my  job.  particularly  in  the  early  war  years  when  we 
were  cut  off  from  Europe  and  we  didn't  have  any  corresiwndents  over  there,  to 
keep  in  touch  with  as  many  anti-Fascists  in  tliis  city  and,  if  possible,  in  the 
coinitry,  who  could  give  us  information  on  some  asi)ect  or  another  of  their  coun- 
try. At  that  time  I  approached  a  German  anti-Fascist  who  happened  to  have 
found  himself  here  and  to  whom  I  happened  to  have  been  introduced  in  a  res- 
taurant, and  I  asked  him  to  do  some  pieces  for  us.  He  declined.  I  had  never 
met  the  man  before.    But  he  said,  "I  would  be  willing  to  supply  you  information 

if  you  will  whip  it  up  into  an  article  under  your  own  name" 

By  Mr.  McGohey  : 

Q.  May  I  interrupt,  please,  to  ask,  if  you  will  tell  the  jury  and  the  court  the 
name  of  this  man. — A.  This  man's  name  is  Gerhart  Eisler. 

I  said  I  could  not  ix)ssibly  write  so  much  stuff  in  the  Daily  Worker  under  my 
own  name.  As  it  was  I  was  doing  a  great  deal  of  that.  So  I,  using  his  material 
and  the  material  of  other  anti-Fascist  refugees,  did  contribute  to  various  publi- 
cations in  1942  on  through  about  194.5,  1946.  articles  largely  about  German  ques- 
tions under  the  name  of  Hans  Berger.  There  is  no  such  person ;  Eisler  did  not 
invent  the  name :  I  invented  the  name ;  it  was  a  pen  name.  That  is  the  heart 
of  the  whole  business  of  Hans  Berger. 

******* 

The  Court.  It  did  not  represent  Gerhart  Eisler  any  more  than  you  said  it  did  ? 
The  Witness.  That  is  right. 

******* 

The  Witness.  As  I  was  telling  you  about  these  pieces  that  were  published  all 
during  that  period  under  the  name  of  Hans  Berger,  the  first  time  I  had  one  of 
those  things  I  was  not  quite  sure  as  whether  to  say  "Hans  Berger,  New  York, 
N.  Y.",  or  "Washington,  D.  C",  or  something  like  that,  or  just  "Hans  Berger," 
and  so,  as  very  often  happens  in  the  newspaper  business,  I  said,  "Well,  let's" — 
I  said  to  somebody  at  the  Daily  Worker,  I  was  not  there  at  the  time — "Let's  give 
this  a  Berne,  Switzerland,  dateline  and  see  how  it  looks  like,"  which  we  did. 
To  my  knowledge  they  never  again  appeared  under  that  dateline  and  it  was 
purely  an  experiment  to  determine  how  they  would  look  best  in  the  paper. 

I  thought  I  would  make  that  clear. 

The  Court.  That  is  an  explanation. 

The  Witness.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  McGohey  : 

Q.  Have  you  ever  worked  on  any  other  newspaper  than  the  Daily  Worker? — • 
A.  Commercial  papers? 

Q.  Any  kind  of  newspaper? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Which  paper  ?— A.  The  DeWitt  Clinton  News. 

******* 

Q.  What  year  was  that?— A.  That  was  the  year  1928-29. 

Q.  Did  the  DeWitt  Clinton  News  have  foreign  correspondents? — A.  No;  it 
did  not. 


928  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Q.  Now,  outside  of  the  DeWitt  Clinton  News  and  the  Daily  Worker  have  you 
worked  on  any  other  newspapers? — A.  No  ;  I  have  not. 

Q.  Did  you  study  journalism  any  place? — A.  No  ;  I  did  not. 

Q.  You  stated  in  your  explanation  of  the  Berne  dateline  to  this  jury  that  as 
was  common  in  newspapers  you  put  a  Beine  dateline  on  it  even  though  you  knew 
it  had  not  come  from  Berne,  Switzerland.  Didn't  you  say  that? — A.  Will  you 
have  that  reread,  just  what  I  did  say? 

(Mr.  Starobiu's  statement  was  read.) 

*  ■*  A:  :ti  *  *  * 

Q.  Now,  did  you  mean  by  that  statement  of  yours  that  it  is  customary  news- 
paper practice  to  represent  a  piece  as  coming  from  a  foreign  country  when,  in 
fact,  it  does  not  come  from  a  foreign  country? — A.  It  is  sometimes  done. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  reputable  newspaper  in  the  United  States  that  ever 
did  that? — A.  I  can  think  of  some. 

Q.  Would  you  tell  us  them,  please? — A.  I  have  seen  many  articles  in  the  Hearst 
papers,  for  example,  which  perhaps  are  not  quite  reputable  and  that  publish 
material  like  that.  For  20  years  they  have  published  material  coming  out  of 
Riga,  for  example,  by  Donald  Day,  and  I  would  not  be  surprised  if  a  lot  of  the 
r'arl  von  Wiegand  material  that  appears  in  the  Hearst  papers  was  turned  out 
that  way. 

Q.  Were  you  in  Riga  at  the  time  these  articles  were  appearing  in  the  papers 
as  you  say? — A.  No,  I  was  not. 

Q.  You  were  not  in  Riga? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  don't  know  whether  the  man  who  wrote  them  and  dated  them  from 
Riga  was  actually  there  or  not,  do  you? — A.  I  don't  know  from  my  own  knowledge. 

The  Court.  He  said  he  would  not  be  surprised  if  it  turned  out  that  way. 

Q.  Now,  when  was  it  that  you  tirst  met  Gerhart  Eisler? 

Mr.  IssEKMAN.  I  object. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  It  was  in  December  of  1941. 

Q.  And  I  think  you  said  that  you  met  him  in  a  restaurant? — A.  That's  right. 

Q.  Do  you  recall  who  it  was  introduced  you  to  liim? — A.  Yes,  I  do. 

Q.  Who  was  it? — A.  Albert  Schreiner,  a  German  writer. 

Q.  And  thereafter  Berger,  or,  rather,  Eisler  lived  near  you  out  in  Queens, 
didn't  be? — A.  At  times. 

Q.  What  is  that?— A.  At  times  he  did. 

Q.  Whether  he  lived  near  you  at  times  in  Queens  or  not,  you  became,  anyway, 
pretty  good  friends,  did  you  not?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  visited  his  house? — A.  Yes,  that's  right. 

Q.  And  Gerhart  Eisler  visited  your  house? — A.  That's  right. 

Q.  And  your  families  visited  together? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  went  to  social  affairs  together? — A.  Occasionally. 

******* 

Q.  Now,  Gerhart  Eisler  was  paid  for  the  articles  that  you  wrote  on  his  ma- 
terial under  the  names  of  Hans  Berber,  wasn't  he? 

Mr.  ISSERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  He  was  paid  for  the  information  which  he  gave  me  for  the  articles  which 
I  wrote  from  time  to  time. 

Q.  And  he  was  paid  by  the  Daily  Worker,  wasn't  he? — A.  He  was  paid  by  me. 

Q.  Out  of  funds  which  you  got  from  the  Daily  Worker? — A.  My  editorial 
expenses. 

Q.  Well,  didn't  you  ask,  whoever  was  the  business  manager,  for  funds  out  of 
which  you  have  paid  Eisler? — A.  Out  of  which  I  could  pay  my  editorial  expenses, 
some  of  which  from  time  to  time  went  for  Eisler. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  mean  to  indicate  by  that  answer  that  you  did  not  disclose  to 
the  Daily  Worker,  No.  1,  that  you  were  getting  information  from  Eisler  and. 
No.  2,  that  you  were  paying  him  for  it? — A.  No.  I  mean  to  indicate  that  I  also 
paid  other  people  for  information. 

O.  Yes,  but  my  point  is  directed  to  Eisler.  Eisler  was  paid  by  you  for  what- 
ever help  he  gave  you  out  of  funds  which  you  got  from  the  Daily  Worker? — 
A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  And  you  told  the  officials  of  the  Daily  Worker,  did  you  not,  that  you  were 
using  some  of  their  funds  to  pay  Eisler? — A.  Yes,  I  must  have  mentioned  it  ta 
the  business  manager. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COAIMUNISM  929 

Q.  Why,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  wheu  you  brought  in  these  articles  under  the  name 
of  Hans  Berger,  you  submitted  them  to  the  defendant  Stachel,  didn't  you — A. 
Not  always,  not  always ;  in  fact,  rather  rarely. 

******* 

Q.  Didn't  you  bring  them  in  and  submit  them  to  him,  and  wasn't  it  the  fact 
that  sometimes  he  would  approve  them  at  once  and  at  other  times  he  would  hold 
them  for  a  few  days  and  then  authorize  them  to  be  printed? — A.  May  I  explain 
this? 

Q.  No,  please.     I  would  like  to  have  you  answer  that  question. 

*  H:  *  *  *  *  * 

A.  I  have  often  handed  them  to  Jack  Stachel  as  to  other  editors. 

Q.  And  there  were  occasions,  wei'e  there  not,  when  they  looked  them  over  right 
away  and  said  all  right,  they  could  be  printed? — A.  There  were  occasions  when 
he  commented  on  them  and  thought  I  should  rewrite  them,  gave  them  back  to 
me,  and  there  were  occasions  when  he  took  them.  I  can't  recall  whether  he 
ever  held  them  or  not.    It  is  possible. 

Q.  Now,  you  described  some  meetings  of  the  editorial  board  that  you  attended 
and  particularly  the  series  of  meetings  where  there  was  a  debate  between  Allen 
and  Stachel  that  you  testified  to  this  morning? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Now,  you  say  that  those  meetings  were  held  on  the  last  two  Fridays  of 
June  1945  and  the  first  Friday  in  July? — A.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection. 

Q.  Now  are  you  sure  about  that? — A.  I  think  I  stated  to  the  best  of  my  recollec- 
tion that  is  when  they  were  held. 

Q.  And  you  told  us  that  the  first  meeting  occurred  on  the  third  Friday  in 
July?— A.  Not  July. 

Q.  The  third  Friday  in  June,  I  beg  your  pardon. — A.  I  mean  the  next  to  the 
last  Friday  of  June. 

Q.  You  don't  know  whether  there  were  four  or  five  Fridays  in  June? — 
A.  I  have  not  looked  at  the  calendar  as  to  how  many  Fridays  there  were  in  June. 

Q.  But  you  are  quite  sure  about  what  Mr.  Allen  said,  you  think? — A.  That 
is  right. 

Q.  And  what  Mr.  Stachel  said  that  day? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  You  are  quite  sure  about  that? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  No  doubt  about  that  at  all?  Your  recollection  on  that  is  good  and  clear, 
isn't  it'/ — A.  That's  right. 

Q.  Now,  you  told  us  some  of  the  people  who  were  there.  I  think  you  said, 
of  course,  Mr.  Stachel  was  there,  and  Mr.  Allen,  Mr.  Budenz,  and  yourself,  and 
Mr.  Alan  Max,  and  I  think  you  said  the  defendant  John  Williamson  was  there, 
and,  as  I  recall  it,  that  is  about  all  you  named? — A.  That's  right. 

Q.  But  you  said  there  were  other  people  at  the  meeting? — A.  That's  right. 

Q.  Now,  were  the  same  people  at  the  second  and  third  meetings  as  were  at 
the  first  meeting? — A.  I  could  not  say  for  every  single  one  of  them.  There  were 
people  coming  and  going. 

Q.  Now  let  us  take  those  that  you  have  named? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Stachel  at  the  second  meeting?. — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Allen?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  how  about  Mr.  Budenz? — A.  He  was  there. 

Q.  And  Alan  Max?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  John  Williamson? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  yourself  ?— A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  And  were  six  people  also  at  the  third  meeting? — A.  Yes;  they  were. 

Q.  Now,  was  the  defendant  Dennis  at  any  of  these  meetings  at  all? — A.  He  may- 
have  dropped  in. 

Q.  What  was  John  Williamson's  job  on  the  Daily  Worker  in  the  latter  part  of 
June  and  the  early  part  of  July,  in  194,5? 

Mr.  IssERMAX.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  don't  know  whether  he  had  a  job  or  not  on  the  Daily  Worker. 

Q.  You  know  that  he  did  not,  don't  you? — A.  I  don't  know  whether  he  did  or 
he  did  not. 

Q.  Well,  was  he  a  member  of  the  editorial  board  of  the  Daily  Worker  at  that 
time? — A.  No;  he  was  not. 

Q.  Was  he  a  memlier  of  the  advertising  department? — A.  No;  he  was  not. 

Q.  Was  he  a  member  of  the  circulation  department? — A.  No;  he  was  not. 

Q.  Was  he  a  member  of  the  staff  of  any  department  of  the  paper? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  office  did  he  hold  in  the  Communist  Party  at  that  time? — A.  Well, 
that  was  the  Communist  Political  Association  at  that  time. 


930  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Q.  Very  well :  at  the  Communist  Political  Association,  what  oflTice  did  he  hold? — 
A.   I  believe  he  was  labor  secretary. 

Q.  Now,  you  said  the  defendant  Dennis  came  in  once  in  a  while? — A.  That  is 
right. 

Q.  Did  he  occupy  any  position  on  the  editorial  board? — A.  Yes;  he  was  an 
associate  editor  of  the  paper. 

Q.  And  he  was  also  an  official  of  the  Communist  Political  Association,  was  he 
not?— A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Now.  you  told  us  on  Friday  (I  am  reading,  Mr.  Isserman,  from  p.  12782  of 
the  transcript)  : 

"The  staff  of  the  paper,  business  and  circulation  department,  advertising  de- 
partment ;  those  were  the  people  present." 

Q.  Now,  Mr.  Stachel  was  there  in  his  capacity  as  a  member  of  the  editorial 
board,  was  he  not? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Was  he  one  of  the  associate  editors  of  the  paper? — A.  He  was  a  member  of 
the  editorial  board. 

Q.  A  member  of  tlie  editorial  board? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  and  Mr.  Allen  and  Alan  Max  and  Budenz  were  all  there  as  members 
of  the  editorial  board? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Now,  who  was  there  from  the  business  department? — A.  I  have  no  recollec- 
tion, as  I  have  already  stated. 

Q.  There  was  somebody  in  charge  of  the  business  department  of  the  paper, 
was  there  not? — A.  Tliat  is  right. 

Q.  That  was  the  man  tliat  you  used  to  go  to  get  this  money  that  you  paid  to 
Gerhart  Eisler? — A.  Except  that  that  is  the  previous  5  years — the  previous  4 
jears. 

Q.  You  mean  that  the  man  that  was  tlie  business  manager  for  the  paper  in 
June  and  July  of  304n  was  not  the  same  man  from  whom  you  had  received  the 
money  to  pay  Eisler? 

Mr.  Isserman.  T  object  to  that. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  don't  remember  how  many  business  managers  there  were  in  that  i)eriod. 
I  did  receive  money  for  Eisler  to  my  recollection  from  William  Browdor,  who 
was  the  business  manager  of  the  paper  at  least  through  1945. 

Q.  At  least  through  1945?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  he  was  the  head  of  the  business  department  at  the  time  these  meet- 
ings were  held? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  He  was  subsequently  expelled  from  the  Communist  Party,  wasn't  he? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  ob.iect  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  He  was. 

Q.  Was  he  at  this  meeting? — A.  I  don't  recall. 

[).  How  manv  people  were  in  the  business  department  of  the  paper  in  June 
and  July  of  1945? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  wouldn't  know. 

Q.  Were  there  five? — A.  I  wouldn't  Imow. 

Q.  Was  there  more  than  one? — A.  Yes,  there  was. 

Q.  Now.  do  you  know  whether  one  or  more  than  one  person  from  the  business 
department  were  present  at  these  debates? 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  object  to  that. 

A.  I  just  don't  recall  wlio  were  present  from  these  departments. 

Q.  Was  there  a  foreign  department  of  the  paper? — A.  There  was. 

Q.  You  were  in  that,  weren't  you  ? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  AndMr.  Allen?— A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Anybody  else? 

^Tr.  Isser:\ian.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  I  would  rather  not  go  into  the  business  of  other  people's  names. 

The  Court.  Do  you  remember  \>ho  those  other  persons  were  in  the  foreign 
department? 

The  Witness.  I  remember  otlier  names  of  people  in  the  foreign  department. 
******* 

Q.  I  am  not  asking  for  tlie  identity  of  persons  :  I  want  to  know  bow  many 
more  there  were  in  the  foreign  department  besides  yourself  and  ]Mr.  Allen.  James 
Allen. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COIVIMUNISM  931 

^Jr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  Well,  1  or  2  other  people. 

Q.  One  or  two?    Was  it  one  or  two? — A.  One  or  two. 

Q.  Are  you  able  to  tell  me  whether  it  was  one  or  whether  it  was  two? 

Mr.  IssERMAX.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  People  shifted  their  posts  from  time  to  time. 

The  Court.  No,  but  the  question  is,  are  you  able  to  tell  Mi:  McGohey  whether 
at  the  time  of  these  3  Friday  meetings,  you  having  given  this  detailed  description 
of  this  discussion  or  debate  between  Mr.  Allen  and  Mr.  Stachel — whether  you  can 
remember  also  whether  there  was  at  the  time  1  other  member  of  the  foreign 
department  or  2  other  members  of  the  foreign  department  besides  yourself? 

The  Witness.  I  believe  there  was  only  one. 

The  Court.  AVhat  is  that?     You  say  just  one? 

The  Witness.  I  believe  there  was  only  one  other  member. 

Q.  And  you  know  who  that  person  is,  do  you  not? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  Yes,  I  do. 

Q.  And  you  knew  who  that  person  was  last  Friday  when  you  were  testifying, 
didn't  you? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  that  person  present  at  those  debates? — A.  I  don't  remember. 

Q.  AYho  was  the  head  of  the  circulation  department  of  the  paper  in  June  and 
July  of  1945? 

Mr.  IssERMAX.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  I  will  sustain  the  objection  unless  it  appears  he  was  one  of  the  per- 
sons present. 

Q.  AVas  there  a  head  of  the  circulation  department  in  June  and  July  of  1945? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  If  there  was  a  department  there  must  have  been  a  head  of  it. 

Q.  Let  me  read  your  answer  on  Friday  afternoon  on  the  question  of  if  there 
was  a  department : 

"The  staff  of  the  paper,  business  and  circulation  department,  advertising  de- 
partment ;  those  were  the  people  present." 

Was  there  at  that  time  or  was  there  not  at  that  time  a  circulation  depart- 
ment?— A.  There  was. 

Q.  And  was  there  a  head  of  the  circulation  department? — A.  There  was. 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object. 

Q.  Was  there  a  head  of  the  circulation  department  present  representing  the 
circulation  department  at  those  discussions?- — A.  I  don't  remember  whether  he  or 
she  was  or  was  not. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  whether  there  was  anybody  from  the  circulation  de- 
partment? 

The  Court.  While  you  were  there,  you  don't  remember  whether  he  or  she  was 
or  was  not  ? 

The  Witness.  It  might  have  been  a  he  or  she.     I  don't  remember. 

The  Court.  You  don't  rememl)er  that  much. 

The  Witness.  I  had  very  little  connection  with  the  circulation  department. 

Q.  Mr.  Starobin,  you  have  testified  and  said  there  were  present  at  that  dis- 
cu.ssion  the  staff  of  the  paper,  business  and  circulation  department,  and  I  am 
trying  to  find  out  was  the  head  of  the  circulation  department  on  of  those  repre- 
senting his  department  at  those  discussions? 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  oliject. 

Tlie  Court.  Well,  the  witness  objects  to  your  use  of  the  word  "his"  because  he 
says  it  may  have  been  a  he  or  it  may  have  been  a  she.  Isn't  that  what  you 
said? 

The  Witness.  I  said  in  response  to  the  previous  question  I  did  not  know 
whether  he  or  she  was  or  was  not  present. 

The  Court.  Then  you  must  say  the  same  tiling  to  this  question,  mu.st  you 
not? 

Mr.  ISSERMAN.  I  object  to  that.     It  has  been  answered. 

A.  I  just  don't  remember  whether  those  people  were  there. 


932  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF   WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Q.  Do  you  remember  whether  it  was  a  man  or  woman  who  was  head  of  the 
circulation  department  at  that  time? — A.  No,  I  do  not. 

Mr.  IssERMAN.  I  object  to  that  question. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

Now,  Mr.  Isserman,  once  in  a  while,  I  think  about  every  fourth  objection,  you 
might  rise  from  your  seat  in  the  customary  way. 

Mr.  Isserman.  I  will  do  that. 

Q.  Do  you  recall  now  any  person  from  the  circulation  department  of  the  paper 
who  was  present  at  those  discussions? — A.  No,  I  do  not. 

Q.  Do  you  recall  any  person  from  the  advertising  department  who  was  pres- 
ent?—A.  I  don't  recall  whether  tliey  were  present  or  not,  which  was  my  original 
answer  to  that  question. 

Q.  Oh,  your  testimony  on  Friday  is  this.  I  will  read  it  for  the  third  time: 
"The  staff  of  the  paper,  business  and  circulation  department,  advertising  depart- 
ment;  those  were  the  people  present."  Did  you  mean  on  Friday  to  testify 
under  oath  that  people  from  those  departments  were  present? — A.  Yes,  but  I  an- 
swered a  subsequent  question  saying  I  did  not  know  whether  they  were  or  were 
not  present.     That  is  the  situation. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  now,  were  there  present  or  were  there  not  present  at  those 
discussions,  people  from  the  business  department,  the  circulation  department 
and  the  advertising  department? — A.  Yes,  there  were. 

Q.  But  your  testimony  is  now  that  you  don't  remember  any  person  from  any 
of  those  departments  being  present? — A.  Present  or  absent. 

Q.  You  cannot  tell  us  who  any  of  them  was? — A.  No. 

Q.  In  1945,  you  had  been  with  the  paper  for  3  years,  is  that  correct? — A.  That 
is  right. 

Q.  Or  4  years,  isn't  it?  Didn't  you  start  in  1941? — A.  No,  I  came  here  in  No- 
vember of  1942. 

Q.  So  that  you  were  in  June  and  July  there  almost  3  years? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  And  you  have  been  with  the  paper  continuously  from  that  time  to  this? — 
A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  And  you  remember  with  clarity  a  discussion  and  what  Mr.  Allen  said  at 
those  debates  and  what  Mr.  Stachel  said?— A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  But  you  do  not  remember  any  of  the  persons  from  those  various  departments 
wiio  were  present? — A.  That  is  right.  Perfectly  obvious,  your  Honor.  What 
they  said  was  very  important  whereas  who  was  present  is  not. 

The  Court.  I  would  not  argue  the  matter.  That  is  all  for  the  jury  to  pass  on. 
The  fact  is  that  of  the  other  75  that  you  said  were  there  you  cannot  remember 
a  single  one  except  the  ones  you  have  mentioned. 

The  Witness.  That  is  right. 

Q.  In  connection  with  this  issue  of  the  Bern  dateline  on  a  story  which  was 
written  in  New  York.  I  understood  your  testimony  a  little  while  ago  to  be  sub- 
stantially this :  "I  suggested  that  we  use  a  Bern  dateline  and  see  how  it  goes" 
or  something  along  that  line,  is  that  correct? — A.  No,  I  suggested  to  the  people 
on  the  paper,  because  I  was  not  on  the  paper  at  the  time 

Q.  I  say  you  suggested  to  the  people.  Who  on  the  paper  did  you  make  that 
suggestion  to? — A.  I  think  to  the  assistant  managing  editor. 

Q.  And  that  was? — A.  Alan  Max. 

Q.  Was  that  the  first  story  under  the  name  of  Hans  Berger  that  you  submitted 
to  the  Daily  Worker?— A.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection. 

Q.  Didn't  you  submit  that  to  the  defendant  Stachel? — A.  To  Mr.  Alan  ]\lax. 

Q.  I  asked  you,  didn't  you  submit  it  to  the  defendant  Stachel? — A.  No,  I  did 
not. 

Q.  Didn't  you  submit  most  of  them  to  Mr.  Stachel? — A.  I  submitted  some  of 
them  to  Mr.  Stachel  as  well  as  to  other  editors  of  the  paper. 

Q.  Now  Mr.  Stachel,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  at  that  time  was  the  actual  editor  of 
the  paper,  wasn't  he? — A.  He  was  the  actual  political  editor  of  the  paper;  that 
is  to  say,  the  editor  in  charge  of  political  affairs. 

Q.  That  was  in  1941  when  you  first  submitted  them? — A.  In  1941? 

Q.  Yes. — A.  1942  was  when  I  became  intimately  familiar  with  the  paper — 
from  November  of  1942. 

Q.  With  respect  to  these  Berger  articles,  isn't  it  a  fact  that  nearly  every  article 
under  the  name  of  Berger  you  personally  submitted  to  the  defendant  Stachel? 

Mr.  Sacher.  I  object  to  that.     It  has  been  answered. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  933 

A.  No.  I  submitted  some  to  him  as  one  of  my  colleagues  and  some  to  others 
in  charge  of  the  executive  management  of  the  paper. 

Q.  Didn't  you  submit  most  of  them  to  him? 

Mr.  IssEKMAX.  I  object  to  that. 

The  Court.  Overruled. 

A.  My  recollection  is  that  I  submitted  some  to  Mr.  Stachel,  who  was  the  politi- 
cal editor  in  charge  of  political  affairs,  and  some  to  Mi-.  Max,  and  to  other  editors 
in  charge  of  executive  questions 

The  Court.  The  question  is,  Mr.  Starobiu,  didn't  you  submit  most  of  them 
to  Stachel? 

The  Witness.  I  could  not  say  most  or  some. 

Q.  Haven't  you  at  some  time  in  the  past  testified  under  oath  that  most  always, 
to  use  your  own  language,  most  always  you  handed  them  to  Mr.  Stachel? — 
A.  Yes,  I  have. 

Q.  Were  you  telling  the  truth  when  you  said  that? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  That  is  the  truth  now?— A.  There  is  no  great  contradiction  between  the 
two  statements. 

Q.  Most  always  you  handed  the  Berger  articles  to  Mr.  Stachel? — A.  That  Is 
right. 

Q.  The  man  who  was  at  that  time  the  actual  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker? — 
A.  No,  the  political — the  editor  in  charge  of  the  political  department. 

Q.  Haven't  you  testified  heretofore  under  oath  that  he  was  the  political  editor 
or  the  actual  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  And  that  was  a  fact,  wasn't  it ;  he  was  the  actual  editor  of  the  Daily 
Worker? — A.  No.  I  have  to  explain  what  we  mean  by  "editor."  He  was  an 
editor  of  the  Daily  Worker.  The  actual  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker  in  1945  was 
Mr.  Browder. 

Q.  You  testified,  did  you  not,  as  a  witness  in  the  case  of  United  States  v.  Ger- 
hard E'sler  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  did  you  not? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  And  you  were  called  as  a  witness  on  behalf  of  Gerhard  Eisler? — A.  That 
is  right. 

Q.  And  you  were  examined  by  Mr.  Isserman,  Mr.  Eisler's  lawyer? — A.  That 
is  right. 

Q.  That  is  the  same  Mr.  Isserman  sitting  here  at  this  table? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  And  you  testified  there  under  oath,  didn't  you?— A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  Now  I  ask  you  if  at  the  time  you  were  a  witness  there  you  were  not  asked 
this  question  by  Mr.  Isserman  and  whether  you  did  not  give  the  answer  which  I 
shall  x-ead : 

'Q.  Could  you  tell  us  briefly  the  process  of  a  Hans  Berger  article  through  the 
course  of  the  ofiice  of  the  Daily  Worker,  after  you  had  prepared  it  initially, 
what  would  happen  to  it  genei'ally? — A.  Well,  this  article  would  be  done,  say  I 
brought  it  in  with  me  in  the  nmniing,  or  I  sat  down  in  the  morning  and  did  it 
before  our  editorial  board  meeting.  I  would  bring  the  article  in  at  the  12  o'clock 
editorial  board  meeting,  and  I  would  say  'I  propose  that  we  publish  this  as  soon 
as  we  can.'  Most  always  I  would  hand  the  article  to  the  man  who  was  then  the 
political  editor,  the  actual  etlitor,  of  the  paper,  Mr.  Jack  Stachel.  Stachel  might 
look  at  the  article  then  and  there  and  return  it  to  me  to  put  it  through  the  mill 
or  might  take  the  article  away  with  him,  come  back  the  next  afternoon,  and 
hand  it  to  me,  or  might  give  it  to  someone  else  on  the  paper." 

Didn't  you  make  that  answer? — A.  That  is  right. 

Q.  And  that  was  truthful?— A.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  McGoHEY.  I  have  no  further  questions. 

Redirect  examination  by  Mr.  Isserman  : 

Q.  Mr.  Starobin,  you  said  you  paid  Mr.  Eisler  for  the  information  that  he  sub- 
mitted to  you  in  connection  with  the  Hans  Berger  articles.  Over  how  many 
years  did  you  pay  him  for  this  information?— A.  Over  about  4  years. 

Q.  And  what  was  the  sum  total  of  the  money  that  you  gave  him? — A.  Two  or 
three  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  Altogether?— A.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  SotJRwixE.  jVIr.  Starobin,  is  it  true  that  you  joined  the  Young 
Communist  League  in  1930  at  the  age  of  17? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  going  to  repeat  that  I  decline  to 
go  into  past  testimony,  activities,  allegations  of  affiliations,  writings 


934  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

that  do  not  seem  to  me  to  pertain  to  my  present  activity,  and  I  will 
do  so  on  the  grounds  of  the  protection  of  the  tirst  amendment  and  of 
the  fifth  amendment  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  ask  that  the  witness,  notwithstand- 
ing his  claim  of  privilege,  be  ordered  to  answer  the  question. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  ordered  and  directed  to  answer  the 
question. 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  respectfully  decline  on  the  grounds  already  stated. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you,  Mr.  Starobin,  a  member  of  the  Commu- 
nist Political  Association  in  1944  and  1945  and  of  the  Communist 
Party  before  and  after  that? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Mr.  Counsel,  T  have  already  stated  that  I  am  not 
going  to  go  into  this  area  of  subject  matter. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  have  stated,  Mr.  Starobin,  that  you  are  not 
going  to  answer  questions 

Mr.  Starobin.  Excuse  me;  you  are  interrupting  me. 

Mr.  SouRwaNE.  I  am  interrupting  you,  sir,  for  the  purpose  of  clari- 
fying the  record. 

Mr,  Starobin.  I  w^ould  like  to  finish. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  have  stated  that  you  would  not  answer  ques- 
tions in  areas  which  you  considered  not  pertinent  to  your  present 
activities.  I  have  no  idea  what  you  consider  pertinent  to  your  present 
activities.  I  will  proceed  to  ask  the  questions  on  the  subjects  with 
respect  to  which  the  committee  wants  answers,  and  if  you  wish  to 
claim  your  constitutional  privilege,  you  may  do  so. 

The  question  is:  Were  you  a  member  of  the  Communist  Political 
Association  in  1944  and  1945  and  of  the  Communist  Party  before  and 
after  that  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  respectfully  decline  to  answer  this  question  on  the 
grounds  of  the  first  amendment  and  the  appropriate  clause  of  the 
fifth  amendment  to  the  Constitution. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  ordered  and  directed  to  answer  the  ques- 
tion, regardless  of  the  claim  of  privilege  that  you  have  just  stated. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  respectfully  maintain  my  previous  answer,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Are  you  the  same  Starobin  who  wrote  articles  for 
the  Daily  Worker  under  the  byline  of  Hans  Berger,  based  on  infor- 
mation received  from  Gerhard  Eisler  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  must  say  it  seems  to  me  to  be  very  far  afield,  but 
I  will  decline  once  again  to  answer  on  the  constitutional  protections 
which  I  believe  that  I,  as  a  citizen,  should  uphold. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  ask  that  the  witness  be  ordered 
to  answer  the  question. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  ordered  and  directed  to  answer  the 
question. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  respectfully  decline  on  the  same  grounds,  Senator. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  ask  that  there  be  inserted  in  the 
record  at  this  point,  an  excerpt  from  testimony  before  the  House 
Un-American  Activities  Committee,  November  22,  1946,  consisting 
of  four  paragraphs. 

Senator  Daniel.  The  excerpt  will  be  made  a  part  of  the  record. 
(The  excerpt  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  72''  and  appears 
below:) 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  935 

Exhibit  No.  72 

Joseph  Starobin 

(From  testimony  of  Louis  F.  Budeuz,  before  HUAC,  November  22,  1946) 

Later  on  he  (Gerhard  Eisler.  representative  of  the  Communist  International) 
admitted  it  was  himself,  but  that  he  had  written  these  articles  (for  the  Daily 
Worker)  through  a  ghost  writer,  who  turned  out  to  be  Joseph  Starobin,  the 
foreign  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker  (p.  20), 

I  have  copies  of  the  Communist  here  in  my  possession  which  show  the  leading 
position  of  Gerhard  Eisler  as  Hans  Berger.  These  articles  prove  his  high  i-ank, 
for  they  are  on  vital  subjects  in  the  theoretical  organ  of  the  Communist  Party. 
*  *  *  In  the  Communist,  Berger-Eisler  has  written  as  "the  quivalent  to  a  repre- 
sentative of  the  Communist  International,"  which  Dennis  said  he  was  (p.  20). 

For  instance,  you  do  not  take  a  Joseph  Starobin,  the  foreign  editor  of  the 
Daily  Worker,  and  make  him  write  an  article  of  that  kind,  because  Starobin  has 
not  got  that  authority.  But  you  take  Hans  Berger,  and  he  writes  it  out,  and 
Starobin  may  turn  it  into  better  English  for  him.  That  is  one  thing  that  the 
foreign  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker  very  frequently  does,  *  *  *.  Then  there  are 
the  Daily  Worker  articles.  These  came  to  the  Daily  Worker,  and  they  did  not 
come  through  Starobin,  wlio  Berger  makes  liis  ghost  writer  *  *  *  they  were  in 
Germanized  English  and  they  had  to  be  straightened  out  and  Starobin  had  the 
job  of  seeing  that  they  were  straightened  out  *  *  *(i)p.  26,  27). 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  right  on  the  eve  of  the  Browder  business,  Joseph  Starobin, 
the  foreign  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker,  wrote  a  very  indiscreet  letter  to  the 
editorial  board  of  the  Daily  Worker,  from  whence  it  was  snatched  up  and 
immediately  traveled  to  the  ninth  floor.  And  in  that  letter  he  said  toward  the 
end  of  the  San  Francisco  Conference,  that  the  French  comrades,  who  were  used 
largely  to  beat  the  Americans,  asserted  that  there  should  be  more  of  an  attack 
upon  Stettinius  by  the  American  Commtmists.  He  added  that  this  was  "likewise 
the  opinion  of  Comrade  Manttilsky."  This  letter  was  quickly  taken  by  Stachel 
and  it  traveled  to  the  ninth  floor  and  disappeared  (p.  34). 

Mr.  SouRwiNE,  Mr.  Starobin,  how  much  in  total  have  you  con- 
tributed or  loaned  to  Cameron  &  Kahn,  a  corporation  in  the  publishing 
business  in  New  York  City. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  made  an  advance  of  $1,950  to  the  publishing  firm 
of  Cameron  &  Kahn. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  When  did  you  make  that  advance  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  In  April  and  May  of  last  year — I  believe  I  com- 
pleted sometime  in  May  of  last  year — in  connection  with  the  publi- 
cation of  my  book  Eye  Witness  in  Indochina. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  give  them  the  money  all  at  one  time  ? 

Mr.  Starobix.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  believe  I  gave  the 
money  in  installments. 

]\Ir.  Sourwine.  Did  you  give  them  the  sum  of  $500  prior  to  May  14, 
1954? 

Mr.  Starobin.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  did. 

Mr.  Souravine.  Did  you  give  them  $300  on  ]\Iay  14,  1954  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  $100  on  May  19,  1954? 

Mr.  Starobin.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  $50  on  or  about  ^lay  25, 1954  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Now  can  you  tell  us  from  your  memory,  or  from 
memorandums  now  available  to  you,  other  amounts  that  3' ou  gave  them 
and  dates  on  which  you  gave  them  such  amounts  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  promised  them  pud 
did  give  them  in  the  period  of  April  and  May  of  1954  in  connection 
with  the  publication  of  my  book,  a  total  of  $1,950. 

59886— 53— pt.  10 8 


936  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Yes.  The  question  was,  whether  you  can  tell  us 
any  specific  amounts  and  dates  on  which  you  gave  them  those  amounts 
other  than  the  ones  concerning  which  you  have  already  testified. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  would  have  to  refresh  my  recollection  with  the 
receipts  which  I  have  for  those  amounts  in  my  personal  custody. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Well,  now,  let  me  point  out  that  the  sums  to  which 
you  have  testified  add  up  to  $950,  that  you  have  said  that  you  gave  them 
^1,950.  That  leaves  open  the  possibility  that  you  may  have  given  them 
$1,000  at  some  time.     Did  you? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  did,  either  in  the  form  of  a  thousand-dollar  pay- 
ment or  in  some  fraction,  some  proportion  thereof. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Do  you  know  which  it  was  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  would  have  to  refresh  myself  with  tlie  receipts  in 
my  custody. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  give  them  all  these  sums  in  cash? 

Mr.  Starobin.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  did. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  did  not  give  them  any  checks  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  did  not. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Now  was  this  under  agreement  that  you  were  to  pay 
for  the  cost  of  publishing  your  book,  or  part  of  that  cost  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  This  was  under  agreement  that  I  was  to  contribute  to 
the  cost  of  the  publication  of  this  book. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Were  you  to  be  repaid  your  contributions  at  a  later 
date? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  was. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Was  that  to  be  in  addition  to  the  royalties  on  the 
book,  or  as  a  part  of  the 'payment  of  royalties  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  That  was  under  a  separate  agreement,  I  think  it  was 
called  an  exchange,  in  which  repayment  was  to  be  made  of  that  capital 
investment,  apart  from  the  payment  of  the  royalties  for  the  book. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Have  you  been  repaid  any  of  that  money  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  have  been. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  How  much  of  it? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  have  been  repaid  about  $1,000  of  it. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  If  you  were  told  that  the  books  of  Cameron  and 
Kahn  showed  receipts  from  you  of  only  $950,  would  that  make  any 
difference  in  your  testimony  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  AYell,  I  have  receipts  for  the  full  sum  of  $1,950. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Very  good,  sir.  Would  you  produce  those  receipts 
for  the  committee  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  can  do  so  but  I  am  not  able  to  do  so  at  present. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  the  witness  be  instructed  to 
furnish  those  receipts  for  the  committee  at  the  earliest  possible  date? 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  so  instructed  and  you  will  furnish  them, 
will  you  not,  sir  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  try  to,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  may  it  be  ordered  that  the  receipts,  themselves, 
be  inserted  in  the  record  at  this  point  when  they  are  received  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  The  receipts  will  be  so  inserted. 
(The  receipts  referred  to  were  ordered  marked  "Exhibit  No.  73" 
and  had  not  been  supplied  the  subcommittee  at  the  time  of  printing.) 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you  receive  from  Cameron  &  Kahn,  in  repay- 
ment of  the  money  pre-C-iously  paid  by  you,  the  sum  of  $125  on  June  8, 
1954? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  937 

Mr.  Starobin.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  did. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  The  sum  of  $125  on  or  about  June  14  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  The  sum  of  $196.48  about  July  22? 

Mr.  Starobin.  That  may  very  well  be,  yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  The  sum  of  $100  about  August  26  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  That  may  very  well  be. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  The  sum  of  $250  about  September  8  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  That  may  very  well  be. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  "Wlien  you  say  that  may  very  well  be,  do  you  mean 
that  you  received  these  amounts,  or  that  you  have  no  memory  about  it 
at  all? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Well,  I  have  a  record  of  these  amounts  received. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  do  have  a  record  of  the  amounts  received  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Yes. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Will  you  furnish  the  committee  with  that  record  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  be  glad  to  do  so  at  an  appropriate  time. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  So  that  the  record  may  be  clear,  may  the  witness 
be  instructed  to  furnish  that  record  of  amounts  received  from  Cam- 
eron &  Kahn  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  The  witness  is  so  instructed  and  they  will  be  made 
part  of  the  record. 

(The  requested  material  was  ordered  marked  "Exhibit  No.  73A" 

and  appears  below :) 

Exhibit  No.  7oA 

Rabinowitz  &   BOUDIN, 
New  York  J,,  N.  Y.,  May  h,  1955. 
Mr.  Benjamin  Mandel, 

Internal  Security  Subcommittee,  Senate  Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 
Senate  Office  Building,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Dear  Mr.  Mandel:  I  enclose  herewith  Mr.  Starobin's  letter  of  April  20,  1955, 
which  is  self-explanatory. 
Very  truly  jours, 

Leonard  B.  Boudin. 


April  20,  1955. 
Leonard  B.  Boudin, 

New  York  City. 

Dear  Mr.  Boudin  :  With  reference  to  my  offer  to  submit  details  of  my  financial 
transactions  with  Cameron  &  Kahn.  Inc..  in  re  the  publication  of  my  book, 
Eyewitnesses  in  Indochina,  made  to  the  subcommittee  of  the  Senate's  Internal 
Security  Committee  on  April  19,  I  communicate  to  you  the  following : 

My  personal  records  show  receipts  and  acknowledgments  by  Mr.  Cameron 
and  by  Mr.  Kahn  in  the  sum  of  $1,850  as  advances  of  capital  for  the  publication 
tif  the  book.  I  know  for  a  fact  that  there  was  an  additional  sum  of  $100  to 
make  a  total  of  $1,950,  which  is  all  that  was  paid.  The  books  of  Cameron  & 
Kahn,  which  I  consulted  in  the  offices  of  Mr.  Stanley  Faulker  a  week  ago,  bear 
out  entries  from  me  in  that  amount.  Moreover,  a  statement  to  me  of  June  14, 
1954,  which  covers  "Sales,  billings,  royalty,  and  loan  accomits"  also  bears  out 
that  the  full  sum  was  $1,950,  for  there  is  an  entry  in  this  statement  showing 
a  repayment  of  $125  for  June  11,  leaving  a  balance  due  of  $1,825  as  of  that  date. 
Thus  the  records,  both  on  the  C.  &  K.  books,  and  in  the  statement  given  me 
shows  the  full  sum  to  have  been  as  stated  above.  But  I  myself,  I  repeat,  only 
have  receipts  and  acknowledgments  of  $1,850.  There  must  have  been  a  $100 
payment  in  that  period,  probably  in  cash,  which  was  not  receipted. 

A  breakdown  of  the  above  shows : 

1.  A  letter  from  Mr.  Cameron  to  Mrs.  Starobin  of  March  30,  1954,  acknowledg- 
ing a  check  for  $500. 


938  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

2.  A  letter  from  Mr.  Cameron  of  April  16,  with  the  seal  of  his  firm,  acknowl- 
edging the  receipt  of  $1,000.  I  am  ahnost  certain  this  was  a  cash  payment 
made  a  day  or  two  before. 

3.  A  receipt  signed  by  Mr.  Cameron  for  May  18,  1954,  acknowledging  $300.  of 
wliieh  $200  was  in  the  form  of  a  check.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say  whether 
this  was  my  personal  clieck,  or  tlie  check  of  one  of  my  creditors,  or  perliaps  a 
check  of  some  member  of  my  family.     In  addition,  a  sum  of  $100  in  cash. 

4.  A  receipt  signed  by  Mr.  Kahn,  May  24,  1954,  for  $50.  No  indication  whether 
it  was  a  clieck  or  by  cash,  but  I  would  guess  it  was  cash. 

With  respect  to  repayments.  I  liave  a  letter  fi'om  Mr.  Cameron,  January  31, 
1955,  wliicli  itemizes  tlie  checks  of  the  C.  &  K.  firm  beginning  witli  June  8.  1954, 
and  running  through  October  5,  1954.  the  total  of  which  comes  to  $1,005.28  as 
having  been  repaid  under  the  agreement.  I  am  currently  awaiting  repayment 
of  the  balance. 

I  trust  you  will  agree  this  account  fulfills  my  offer  to  the  committee. 
Cordially, 

Joseph  R.  Starobin. 
51  Charles  Street,  New  York  City  14. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  try  to  do  so,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  You  say  you  will  try  to  ? 

Did  you  say  you  would  or  you  would  try  to  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  going  to  make  every  effort  to  do  so.  Wlietlier 
in  fact,  I  am  able  to  by  the  time  the  committee  wants  it,  is  of  course, 
a  question  of  the  future. 

The  Chairman.  That  is  all  right,  sir. 

Mr.  SoTJRwiNE.  Mr.  Starobin,  were  these  amounts  received  by  you 
from  Cameron  &  Kahn  all  paid  to  you  in  cash  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  My  recollection  is  that  many  of  them  were  paid  in 
checks. 

Mr.  SouRw^iNE.  In  checks.  Now  would  they  be  checks  drawn  to 
your  order,  on  Cameron  &  Kahn's  bank  and  signed  by  Mr.  Cameron  or 
Mr.  Kahn,  or  both  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  have  no  recollection  of  that  detail,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  remember  the  details  with  respect  to  any 
checks  that  you  got  from  Cameron  &  Kahn  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  have  a  recollection  of  the  sums  that  you  have  read. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  But  you  do  not  remember  on  what  bank  or  how 
signed,  or  who  was  the  payee  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  afraid  not;  no,  I  do  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  This  amount  of  $196.48  rather  clearly  was  a  check 
instead  of  cash,  wouldn't  you  think  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  If  I  may  so  so,  sir,  I  am  prepared  to  bring  my 
records  instead  of  relying  on  my  recollection. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  All  right.  Now,  where  did  you  get  the  money 
which  you  gave  Cameron  &  Kahn  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  think  I  will  consult  with  counsel  on  that. 

(The  witness  consulted  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  borrowed  that  money  from  five  friends  in  this 
country. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Who  were  they  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  answer  that  question  and  I  will  not 
disclose  the  confidence  that  these  people  showed  in  me  in  advancing 
me  these  sums. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  ask  that  the  witness  be  ordered  to  answer. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  ordered  and  directed  to  answer  the  ques- 
tion, sir. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  939 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  will  decline  to  do  so  on  tlie  grounds  of  the  first  and 
tlie  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Neither  the  first  nor  the  fifth  amendments  has  any- 
thing to  do  ^Yith.  divulging  the  names  of  friends,  does  it,  Mr.  Starobin  ? 
Mr.  Starobin.  I  consider  that  the  Constitution  protects  me  in  the 
confidence  that  other  people  have  shown  in  me  and  I  do  not  find  that 
this  is  a  realm  of  inquiry  that  can  possibly  alfect  your  judgment  of  the 
book  or  any  aspect  of  that  problem. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  suggest  that  counsel's  argument  with  the  wit- 
ness not  be  had. 

Senator  Daniel.  Just  a  minute,  Counsel.  Did  you — did  the  people 
from  whom  you  received  this  money  know  for  what  purpose  you  were 
to  use  the  money? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  cannot  say  that  they  knew  the  precise  purpose 
except  that  I  told  them  that  I  was  going  to  publish  a  book,  and  asked 
them  to  advance  me  these  sums. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  told  them  what  the  book  was? 
Mr.  Starobin.  I  may  have.     I  may  not  have. 

Senator  Daniel.  And  you  told  them  that  you  needed  the  money  to 
advance  to  the  publisher  of  the  book  ? 
Mr.  Starobin.  That  is  right,  sir. 

Senator  Daniel.  I  am  going  to  order  and  direct  you  to  answer  the 
c|uestion  that  Mr.  Sourwine  has  asked  you  as  to  the  names  of  these 
parties. 

Mr.  Starobin.  Will  Mr.  Sourwine  repeat  the  question? 
^Ir.  SouRAviNE.  Yes.     The  question  is,  Who  are  the  five  persons 
who  advanced  to  you,  from  whom  you  borrowed,  the  money  you  gave 
to  Cameron  &  Kahn  ? 

]Srr.  Starobin.  I  decline  to  answer  that  on  the  grounds  of  the  first 
and  the  fifth  amendments. 

INIr.  Sourwine.  Technically,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  believe  that  is  a  new 
question  declined.  I  ask  that  the  witness  be  ordered  to  answer  the 
question. 

Senator   Daniel.  You   are  ordered   and   directed   to   answer  the, 

question. 

]Mr.  Starobin.  I  shall  have  to  decline  on  the  same  grounds.  Senator. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  anyone  ever  furnish  to  you  or  oifer  or  promise 

to  furnish  to  you  any  of  the  money  which  you  gave  to  Cameron  & 

Kahn? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  Could  that  be  repeated  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Yes.  I  am  asking,  aside  from  tliese  five  friends  from 
^vhom  you  borrowed  money,  did  anyone  ever  offer  to  you  or  furnish 
to  you  or  offer  or  promise  to  furnish  to  you  the  money  or  any  part 
of  the  money  that  you  gave  to  Cameron  &  Kahn? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Aside  from  these  five  friends,  wasn't  that  your 
original  question  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Aside  from  the  five  friends  whose  names  you  have 
refused  to  divulge. 
Mr.  Starobin.  Not  to  my  recollection. 
Mr.  Sourwine.  Where  do  you  bank,  Mr.  Starobin  ? 
Mr.  Starobin.  At  the  Amalgamated  Bank. 
Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  have  any  other  bank  accounts? 
Mr.  Starobin.  New  York. 
Mr.  Sourwine.  At  any  other  banks  ? 


940  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

(The  witness  consults  counsel.) 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  do  have  a  bank  account  in  the  Lloyd's  Provincial 
&  Foreign  Limited  Bank  of  Geneva,  Switzerland. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Do  you  have  any  other  bank  accounts  beyond  the 
two  that  yon  have  testified  of  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  No. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  When  you  received  the  money  from  your  five 
friends,  did  you  get  it  in  cash  in  each  instance? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  should  think  that  most  of  it  came  in  cash.  I  do  not 
have  a  recollection  of  any  check  transactions  there. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  yon  clear  it  through  your  bank  account,  or  did 
you  take  that  cash  and  give  it  directly  to  Cameron  &  Kahn? 

Mr.  Star(  iniN.  You  are  pressing  my  recollection  now.  I  believe  that 
at  least  the  largest  part  of  it  was  given  directly  to  Cameron  &  Kahn. 
Now  there  may  have  been  a  deposit  for  exchange.    That  is  possible. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  With  respect  to  the  sums  which  you  received  in  cash, 
from  any  friends  and  which  you  took  directly  and  gave  to  Cameron 
&  Kahn,  were  you,  in  fact,  making  advances  for  your  own  account  or 
were  you  only  acting  as  intermediary  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  have  acted  as  an  intermediary  for  nobody  on  this 
transaction  with  Cameron  &  Kahn. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Wlien  you  received  money  from  Cameron  &  Kahn,. 
did  you  deposit  it  in  your  bank  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  should  say  in  many  cases  I  did ;  yes. 

Mr.  Sour  WINE.  ^Vhen  you  received  checks  from  them,  did  you 
deposit  the  checks  to  your  account  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  In  most  cases,  I  did,  but  I  have  a  recollection  of 
sending  perhaps  one  of  these  checks  to  one  of  my  creditors  who  had 
engaged  in  this  advance  of  funds  to  me. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Who  was  that  creditor  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  going  to  decline  to  answer  that,  Counselor,  on: 
the  same  basis  as  I  stated  before. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  On  what  ground  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  On  the  groimds  that  I  consider  this  infringes  my 
rights  under  the  first  and  the  appropriate  clause  of  the  fifth  amend- 
ment. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  In  view  of  the  witness'  prior  statement  that  indi- 
cated he  was  doing  this  to  save  embarrassment  of  his  friends,  I  ask: 
that  he  be  directed  and  ordered  to  answer  the  question. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  ordered  and  directed  to  answer  the' 
question. 

Mr.  Starobin.  Wliat  was  your  question,  sir  ? 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  ordered  and  directed  to  answer  the  ques- 
tion Mr.  Sourwine  put  to  you. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  do  not  think  that  I  said  that  I  had  ever  entered 
into  this  arrangement  or  declined  to  answer  the  question  on  the  grounds 
of  sparing  my  friends  embarrassment.  I  simply  declined  on  the 
grounds  that  I  did  not  think  this  was  the  proper  area  of  questioning. 

Mr.  SotTRwiNE.  You  still  decline  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  do  on  the  same  ground,  on  the  ground  of  the  first 
and  fifth  amendment  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr,  SoTJRWiNE.  Mr.  Starobin,  what  have  been  your  sources  of  income 
since  1942? 

(Witness  consults  counsel.) 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COIMMUNISM  941 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  sorry,  but  I  am  afraid  that  I  feel  that  is  another 
way  of  asking-  the  questions  that  I  have  already  declined  to  answer  and 
so  I  will  decline  this  on  the  grounds  of  the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Money  you  borrow  from  a  friend  is  not  income  and 
cannot  be  included  within  the  question  that  I  just  asked  you.  Do  you 
understand  that  ? 

Mr.  Starobix.  Well,  but  you  asked  me  what  my  source  of  income 
was  without  reference  to  this  particular  matter. 

Mr.  SoTjRwiNE.  Money  that  you  borrow  is  not  income.  Therefore, 
no  money  that  3"ou  received  as  a  loan  would  be  included  in  your 
answer. 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  am  well  aware  of  that  but  I  have  declined  to  answer 
the  question  with  resjject  to  the  source  of  my  income  since  whatever 
date  it  was  that  you  asked,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  How  much  have  you  earned  approximately  each 
year  since  1942? 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  am  afraid  I  will  decline  to  answer  that  until  I  can 
refresh  my  memory.  I  am  not  sure  that  I  could  answer  that — -1,  2,  3, 
that  way. 

Mr.  SouRwiXE.  Are  you  paid  a  salary? 

Mr.  Starobix.  At  present  I  am  not. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  Have  you  in  the  last  15  years  been  paid  a  salary? 

(Witness  confers  with  counsel.) 

jNIr.  Starobix.  I  have  within  tlie  last  15  years  been  paid  a  salary. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  And  from  whom  did  you  receive  that  salary? 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  am  going  to  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the 
grounds  already  stated. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  On  the  grounds  of  what  ? 

Mr.  Starobix.  On  the  grounds  already  stated. 

Senator  Daxiel.  State  your  grounds.  As  I  have  heretofore  said, 
I  think  the  record  should  show  exactly  what  your  grounds  are. 

Mr.  Starobix.  Yes.  I  think  you  are  right,  Senator.  I  am  sorry. 
I  will  decline  to  go  into  the  sources  of  my  income  or  who  paid  me  that 
income  on  tlie  grounds  of  the  protection  afforded  me  by  tlie  first  and 
the  clauses  of  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  Has  any  part  of  your  income  come  from  the  Com- 
munist Party  ? 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  will  decline  to  answer  that  question  on  the  grounds 
of  the  protections  afforded  me  by  the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  Mr.  Starobin.  has  any  of  your  income  come  from 
Soviet  sources  ?     That  is,  Soviet  Russian  sources. 

Mr.  Starobix.  T  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  first  and  the  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  SouR^\^xE.  Have  you  ever  referred  to  yourself  as  a  small-busi- 
ness man  ? 

Mr.  Starobix.  Not  to  my  knowledge,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  Do  you  consider  yourself  a  small-business  man  ? 

Mr.  BouDix.  I  object  on  tlie  gi'ounds  it  seems  totalh'  irrelevant  to 
Mr.  Matusow. 

Senator  Daxiel.  Objection  overruled.     Proceed. 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  do  not  consider  myself  a  small-business  man. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  Mr.  Starobin.  have  you  reported  all  your  income 
and  the  source  thereof  on  your  income-tax  returns  each  year  as  re- 
quired by  law  ? 


942  STRATEGY    AXD    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Starobin,  I  have  and  I  believe  I  have  so  sworn  in  making  out 
those  income-tax  bhxnks. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Have  any  of  your  books  and  articles  been  published 
in  Communist  countries? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Just  a  moment,  sir. 

(The  witness  confers  with  counsel.) 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  answer  that  on  the  grounds  of  the 
first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SotiRWiNE.  Have  you  received  royalties  from  Communist  coun- 
tries ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  take  the  same  stand,  that  I  decline  to  answer 
on  the  grounds  of  the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Starobin,  in  connection  with  your  book,  Eye 
Witness  in  Indochina,  did  you  visit  Indochina? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Well,  sir ;  I  am  going  to  decline  to  go  into  the  area 
of  my  travels  which  have  been  very  extensive,  on  the  grounds  that  I 
do  not  think  they  have  any  relevance  to  the  inquiry  as  I  understand  it. 

The  Chairman.  You  are  ordered  to  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  going  to  decline  to  go  into  that  on  the  grounds 
of  the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  In  your  book.  Eye  Witness  in  Indochina,  you  stated 
you  had  visited  Indochina;  did  you  not? 

Senator  Jenner.  What  is  he,  another  Matusow? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Yes.  I  am  going  to  decline  to  go  into  the  subject 
matter  of  this  book  at  this  particular  forum  on  the  grounds  of  the 
first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  the  author  of  the  book.  Eye  Witness  in 
Indochina  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am. 

Mr.  SouRW^iNE.  Mr.  Starobin,  assuming  that  what  you  stated  in  that 
book  is  true,  and  that  you  did  visit  Indochina,  I  ask  you  who  paid 
your  expense  for  that  visit  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  should  say,  sir,  I  would  be  glad  to  debate  this 
question  at  any  appropriate  forum  outside  of  this  committee. 

The  Chairman.  Answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Starobin.  But  I  am  not  going  to  go  into  this  subject  matter 
with  this  committee  at  this  time  and  I  will  assert  my  privilege  under 
the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Senator  Daniel.  Are  you  sincere  in  your  opinion  and  honestly 
stating  to  this  committee  you  believe  a  truthful  answer  to  that  ques- 
tion may  tend  to  incriminate  you  or  may  be  giving  evidence  against 
yourself? 

Mr.  Starobin.  The  Constitution  tells  me  I  cannot  be  compelled  in 
any  criminal  case  to  be  a  witness  against  myself. 

Senator  Daniel.  That  is  exactly  what  I  am  asking  you.  Do  you 
sincerely  state  to  this  committee  that  you  fear  that  a  truthful  answer 
to  that  question  may  be  interpreted  as  giving  testimony  against  your- 
self? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Well,  it  is  not  a  matter  of  fear,  sir.  It  is  a  question 
of  law  as  I  understand  it,  and  if  it  were  a  matter  of  my  personal  fears, 
it  would  be  very  simple.  I  am  prepared  to  argue  about  these  or  any 
other  questions  anywhere. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COJMIMUNISM  943 

Senator  Daniel,  I  am  not  asking  for  any  argument.  The  question 
is  to  test  your  sincerity  and  be  sure  that  is  your  reason  for  claiming 
protection  under  the  fifth  amendment. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  sincerely  claiming  protection  under  the  first 
and  fifth  amendments. 

Senator  Daniel.  Were  you  given  safe  conduct  behind  the  lines  of 
the  Communists  in  Indochina? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  answer  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  that 
1  have  already  stated,  and  I  do  not  see  that  we  can 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Have  you  read  the  book,  Eye  Witness  in  Indochina  ? 

(Witness  confers  with  counsel.) 

Air.  Starobin,  Yes,  I  have  read  the  book. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Does  not  that  book  state  that  the  author  was  behind 
the  lines  of  the  Communist  armies  in  Indochina  l 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  going  to  decline  to  go  into  the  contents  of  the 
book  or  the  circumstances  of  the  book,  sir,  and  I  invite  all  of  the  com- 
mittee members  to  take  a  copy  of  the  book  if  the}^  wish,  but  I  am  not 
going  to  answer  any  questions  along  these  lines,  sir,  on  the  grounds 
of  the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Mr,  SouRwiNE,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  suggest  to  the  committee  that  the 
witness  at  this  time,  in  connection  with  this  question,  is  improperly 
claiming  a  privilege  under  the  fifth  amendment.  I  ask  that  he  be 
directed  to  answer  the  question. 

Senator  Daniel.  You  are  hereby  ordered  and  directed  to  answer 
the  question,  again  with  the  warning  that  if  you  are  not  correct  in 
claiming  the  privilege  that  you  may  be  in  contempt  of  the  committee. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  respectfully  decline,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you,  Mr.  Starobin,  ever  a  representative  of 
the  Cominform? 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  object  on  the  grounds  it  is  irrelevant  to  whether  or 
not 

The  Chairman.  AYait  just  a  minute,  now,  we  have  ruled  on  those 
things. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  You  have  not  ruled  on  this  question  at  all. 

The  Chair3ian.  j\[i-.  Attorney,  now  listen.  Keep  quiet.  Answer  the 
question. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  state  my  objection. 

The  Chairman.  We  do  not  want  to  hear  your  objection. 

Mr.  Starobin.  After  I  protest  the  line  of  questioning  that  counsel 
has  so  deliberately  taken,  since  it  is  so  obviously  out  of  this  world,  I 
will  decline  to  answer  it  on  the  grounds  of  the  first  and  the  fifth 
amendments. 

The  Chairman.  That  is  not  a  proper  claim  of  the  privilege.  I  order 
and  direct  you  to  answer  that  question.  Repeat  the  question,  Mr. 
Reporter. 

Go  ahead.  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  a  representative  of  the  Cominform  ? 

Mr,  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  answer  that  question  or  anything 
similar  to  it  under  the  protections  afforded  me  by  the  first  and  fifth 
amendments. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  it  not  true  that  you  visited  Indochina  and  China 
as  a  representative  of  the  Information  Bureau  of  Workers  in  the 
Communist  Party  ? 


944  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  want  to  protest  the  line  tluit  the  counsel  is  taking 
witli  respect  to  an  American  citizen  whose  record  is  absolutely  public 
in  this  country. 

The  Chairman.  Answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Starobin.  And  I  will  decline  to  ansAver  that  question  on  the 
grounds  of  the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Starobin,  is  your  record  with  respect  to  repre- 
sentation of  the  Cominform  a  matter  of  public  record  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  did  not  answer  your  question,  sir,  and  I  resent  the 
twist  that  you  give  to  my  answer. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  I  thought  you  said  that  you  were  an  American  citi- 
zen whose  record  with  respect  to  these  matters  was  a  matter  of  public 
record. 

Mr.  Starobin.  That  is  riglit,  and  that  is  why  I  reject  and  resent 
questions  that  ])ut  me  in  the  position  of  appearing  to  be  or  said  to  be 
a  repre.sentative  of  the  Cominform  or  anything  of  that  kind,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  denying  that  you  are? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  have  taken  the  privilege  and  repeat  the  privilege 
with  respect  to  your  question. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  there  any  pul)lic  record  anywhere  in  the  United 
States  or  any  other  country  which  shoAvs  that  you  are  not  or  that  you 
have  ever  denied  being  a  representative  of  the  Cominform? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  have  stated  at  the  outset,  sir,  that  my  activities,  my 
beliefs  are  a  matter  of  public  knowledge  over  a  period  of  some  time.  I 
have  declined  to  go  into  questions  on  the  ground  that  they  are  my  pri- 
vate affair.  I  am  not  going  to  answer  (questions  of  this  kind  and  I 
respectfully  submit  that  I  will  take  the  privilege  of  the  first  and  fiftii 
amendments  on  that  question. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  think  that  it  is  a  pri^-ate  nuitter,  or  a  matter 
of  belief  whether  an  American  citizen  is  a  representative  of  the  Comin- 
form ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  going  to  claim  the  same  privilege  on  that  ques- 
tion, sir.    I  think  it  speaks  for  itself. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Starobin,  luive  you  ever  received  finids  from 
anybody,  for  a  foreign  purpose,  from  Moscow? 

Mr.  Starobin,  ^-^^lile  i-esenting  the  implications  of  that  (juestion,  I 
will  decline  to  answer  it  on  the  grounds  of  the  first  and  fifth  amend- 
ments. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Starobin,  were  you  in  1948  appointed  secretary 
of  the  TTnited  States  Connnunist  Party's  Peace  Committee? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Will  you  repeat  the  question,  sir  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you,  in  1948,  appointed  secretary  of  the 
TTnited  States  Communist  Party's  Peace  Committee? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Starobin,  you  have  stated  that  you  would  not 
answer  questions  with  regard  to  your  travels,  is  that  right? 

Mr.  RouDiN.  Could  I  have  that  repeated? 

j\Ir.  Sourwine.  You  have  stated  that  you  would  not  answer  ques- 
tions with  regard  to  your  travels,  is  that  right  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Would  you  repeat  the  question  and  answer  in  which 
1  have  so  stated,  sir? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    CORIMUNISM  945 

Mv  Soi-RwiNE.  I  Avill  Start  fresh  if  yon  doirt  remember.  Did  yoa, 
in  1946,  travel  in  France,  Enohind,  Yn^roslavia,  Italy,  Colombia,  and 

A'eneznela('  ,  .•  -^i,  i. 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  will  decline  to  answer  that  qnestion  with  respect 
to  those  travels  if  any,  sir,  on  the  gronnds  of  the  first  and  fifth  amend- 
ments. ^  .    1      •      -r.    Ti.-       1     \  XI'    • 

Mr.  Soi  HwixE.  In  connection  with  your  article  m  Political  Atlairs 
for  March  11)47,  on  the  Brazilian  elections,  did  you  visit  Brazil? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  take  the  same  stand  in  that  regard,  sir,  under 
the  first  and  fifth  amendments.  i     t   ^       a 

Mr  SoiRwixE.  In  connection  with  your  article  on  the  Inter- Ameri- 
can Conference  in  Political  Atfairs  for  October  1947,  did  you  visit 

Latin  America?  .  ■  i    ^     •  ^i 

:Mr.  Staroutn.  I  ^vill  respectfully  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the 

o-rounds  of  the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

*  Mr.  SouRWiNE.  In  1948,  did  you  visit  Brazil,  Italy,  Hungary,  Cxer- 

many,  France,  Greece,  Poland,  Czechoslovakia  and  England  ? 

Mr.  Si'AiiOBix.  Excuse  me,  sir. 

OVitness  consults  with  counsel.)  ,     n    .       i  c^^-i. 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  will  also  take  the  same  stand,  sir,  the  first  and  titth 

timendments.  .  .   ^     ,    -n.-  it-  o 

Mr  SouRwixE.  In  1949  did  vou  visit  Costa  Rica  and  Europe  i 

Mr  Starobix.  I  will  take  the  same  position,  sir,  that  the  committee 
has  no  right  to  go  into  these  matters,  under  the  first  and  fifth  amend- 
ments. .     -,  r^  •. •        •      •  -i- 

Mr  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  if  a  United  States  citizen  is  visiting 
all  these  countries  as  a  representative  of  the  Cominform,  on  an  Ameri- 
can passport,  I  think  this  committee  certainly  has  the  right  to 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  reject  and  resent  any  such  implications,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRw^ixE.  Do  you  deny  it  ?  ■  j- 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  prepared  to  debate  or  discuss,  m  any  torum, 
any  of  my  activities,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  Then  answer  him. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  do  not  think  this  is  the  provnice  of  this  committee. 

The  Chairman.  Then  answer  the  question,  sir.  ^       .    ,      n    ^ 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  have  declined  to  do  so  on  the  grounds  ot  the  first 
and  fifth  amendments  and  I  will  take  that  stand  again,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRw^ixE.  Did  you,  in  1950,  visit  Warsaw,  make  a  tour  ol 
Poland,  visit  the  Second  World  Conference  m  October  and  visit 
Latin  America  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  decline  to  answer  that. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  you,  in  1951,  visit  Switzerland,  the  Berlin  move- 
ment, the  U.  S.  S.  E.,  Denmark,  and  France?  ,      .  ,. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that  on  the  grounds  ot  the 
first  and  fifth  amendments.  ,      ^  .    .        ^ 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  vou,  in  1952,  visit  China,  the  Peipmg^  Peace 
Conference;  in  France,\nd,  in  December,  the  World  Peace  Confer- 
ence in  Vienna,  arriving  there  from  Czechoslovakia  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  ot 
the  first  and  fifth  amendments.  , 

Mr.  SouRwaNE.  Did  you,  in  1953,  visit  China,  visit  Viet  Nam,  Indo- 
china, and  Western  Europe,  arriving  in  Amsterdam  in  August,  1953, 
en  route  to  the  United  States  ? 


946  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

:Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  gronnds  of 
the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Mr,  SouRwiNE.  Was  your  passport  taken  np  by  the  State  Depart- 
ment in  August  of  1953  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  It  was,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  ]\Ir.  Starobin,  do  you  know  a  person  named  Max  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  Pardon  me,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  a  person  named  Max,  a  representative 
of  the  Young  Communist  International  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  am  not  going  to  go  into  any  of  my  associates,  before 
this  committee,  acquaintances,  passing  contacts,  knowledge  of  people, 
or  anything  else.  Obviously,  having  traveled  abroad  as  a  corre- 
spondent for  many  years,  I  have  met  a  great  many  people,  but  I  am  not 
going  to  go  into  this  subject  matter  here  within  the  confines  of  this 
committee.  I  decline  to  answer  that  on  the  grounds  of  the  first  and 
fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  object  to  the  question  as  well.  May  I  state  an  objec- 
tion if  you  do  not  mind. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  ask  that  the  witness  be  ordered  to  answer  the 
question. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  state  an  objection? 

The  Chairman.  Wait  just  a  minute. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  I  have  been  waiting. 

The  Chairman.  You  are  ordered  and  instructed  to  answer  the 
Question,  Mr.  Starobin. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  May  I  state  an  objection,  Mr.  Chairman  ? 

The  Chairman.  You  can  state  an  objection  if  it  is  brief. 

Mr.  BouDiN.  It  will  be  veiy  brief.  The  question  is  irrelevant  and 
immaterial  and  beyond  the  jurisdiction  of  the  committee. 

The  Chairman.  That  is  overruled.    Now  answer  the  question. 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  respectfully  decline  on  the  grounds  of  the 
first  and  the  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Is  it  your  intention,  similarly,  to  decline  all  ques- 
tions with  respect  to  persons  whom  you  may  know  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  think  it  would  be  best  if  we  take  your  questions 
one  by  one,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  Gerhard  Eisler,  representative  of  the 
Communist  International  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  answer  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  first  and  fifth  amendments. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  Lombardo  Calidano,  a  Communist 
trade-union  leader  in  Mexico  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  answer  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  Carlos  Prestes,  leader  of  the  Com- 
munist Party  in  Brazil? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  Mr.  Vishinsky,  the  former  Soviet 
Foreign  Minister  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  Mr.  M.  Manuelski,  the  former  head 
of  the  Communist  International  ? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  947 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  g:o  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  tirst  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SoFRwiNE.  Do  you  know  Ho  Chi-minh,  the  Communist  Presi- 
dent of  Indochina  ? 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  hrst  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  know  Feng  Yu-Hsiang,  Chinese  General 
m 

Mr.  Starobin.  Let  me  have  that  again,  sir. 

]Mr.  SouRwiXE.  Feng,  Yu-Hsiang,  I  am  not  at  all  sure  of  my 
]3ronunciation. 

JNIr.  Starobix.  And  the  man  is  dead  many  years  but  I  will  decline 
to  go  into  that  on  the  grounds  of  the  first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the 
Constitution. 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  Do  you  know  any  Guiseppi  de  Victoria,  Italian 
Communist  leader  ( 

Mr.  Stakob.tx.  1  will  decline  to  go  into  that  on  the  first  and  fifth 
amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  .'  ()  i:wixi:.  Do  you  know  a  man  named  Juergen,  a  German,  and 
Comnumist  leader  ? 

^fr.  SrARor.ix.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  first  and  fifth  amendment  to  the  Constitution. 

yiv.  SoiRwixE.  Do  you  know  a  man  named  Kuczynski,  a  German 
Communist  leader? 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  will  decline,  sir,  to  go  into  that  on  the  grounds  of 
tlie  lirst  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SdiRwixE.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  don't  you  know  that  the  name  is 
.'uej'gen  Kuczynski,  and  didn't  you  make  some  comment  about  it  when 
1  aslv'cd  vou  about  th.o  name  of  Juergen? 

Mr.  SiARor.ix.  Pardon  me.     I  made  no  such  comment,  sir. 

Mr.  Soi'RwiXE.  Do  you  know  Albert  Norden,  a  German  Communist 
leader  i 

Mr.  SiARor.ix.  Will  you  repeat  that,  sir? 

Mr.  Sourwixe.  Albert  Norden. 

Mr.  S'jAROBix.  1  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
the  iirst  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  Soi  RwixE.  Do  you  know  Jacques  Duclose,  a  French  Communist 
leader? 

^Iv.  Starobix.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that  on  the  grounds  of  the 
first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

^Iv.  Sol  RwiXE.  Do  you  know  any  Communist  leaders  in  Greece? 

Mr.  SiARoBix.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  privilege? 
aliorded  me  by  the  first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

jMr.  S(KRwiXE.  Do  you  know  Matthias  Rakosi,  a  Hungarian  Com- 
munist leader? 

^Ir.  Starobix.  I  will  decline  to  go  into  that,  sir,  on  the  grounds  of 
tiie  first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

]Mr.  Sourwixe.  I  have  one  final  question.  You  were  given,  when 
you  arrived  here,  a  memorandum  respecting  certain  associations  and 
activities  of  yours  with  a  note  indicating  that  you  would  be  asked  to 
produce  the  memorandum  and  to  state  whether  there  was  anything 
theie  that  you  wanted  to  testify  was  in  error  or  factually  inaccurate. 

Mr.  Starobix.  I  have  ho  comment  to  make  on  that,  sir. 


948  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouRwiXE.  You  have  no  comment  to  make  on  that  memo- 
randum ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  That  is  riglit. 

Mr.  Sourwinp:.  Mr.  (^hairman,  I  ask  that  this  memorandum  be  in- 
serted in  the  I'ecord  at  this  point. 

The  Chairman.  Yes;  it  will  be  ordered  inserted  in  the  record. 

(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  exhibit  74  and  appears, 
below :) 

Exhibit  No.  74 

Joseph  R.    Starobin 

Author  of  Eyewitness  in  Indocliinii  i»ul)l)slie(l  by  ("anieron  &  Kahn.  Re- 
leased May  10,  1954.     i:)aily  l^eoph'S  World.  :May  H,  1!J."'>4,  page  7. 

.Tor:  .Stakobix 

Dance  in  liehalf  of  Conuininist  leaders.  Si)onsor.  Daily  Worker,  .Inly  5, 
949,  page  5. 

.JO.SEPH  Sl'AUOBIN 

Commnuist  Political  Association.  Speaker.  The  Worker,  September  10, 
1944,  page  7. 

American  Continental  Congress  for  World  Peace.  Particijiaiit.  Daily  Worker, 
September  9,  1949,  page  6. 

California  Labor  School.  Scheduled  to  lecture  during  the  snmmer  term. 
Daily  Peoples  World,  .July  8,  19.54,  page  7. 

Appears  on  TV  pi'ogram  (  L.  A.).    Daily  Peoples  World,  August  9.  19.~)0,  isage  3. 

Subject  of  article  by  Alan  Max  datelined  from  New  York  on  Starobin's  return 
from  "People's  China."     Daily  Peoples  World.  August  14,  19.53.  page  4. 

Writer  of  a  series  of  articles  on.  I  Saw  the  Vietnam  War  for  Independence, 
beginning  June  5.     Daily  Peoples  World,  June  5,  19-53,  pages  4  and  .5M. 

Veteran  foreign  correspondent  .just  Aisited  Vietnam  and  will  report  his  iindings 
in  an  exclusive  series  to  begin  June  5  (photo).  Daily  Peoples  World,  May  29, 
19.53,  page  1. 

Writer  of  an  article  from  Peiping,  "Pacilic  Peace  Meet  Knits  Unity  of  Asians 
and  Latin  Americans."    Daily  Peoples  World,  October  17,  1952,  page  4. 

Writer  of  article  from  Peiping,  "Captured  U.  S.  I'ilot  Lists  Dates,  Names  in 
New  Germ  War  Report."    Daily  Peoples  World,  Septend)er  17.  19.52,  page  1. 

Writer  of  article  from  Peiping.  "World-Famed  Experts  Say  Germ  War  True." 
Daily  Peoples  World.  September  15,  19.52,  page  1. 

Writer  of  article  from  Peiping,  "Asian.  Pacitic  Peace  Meet  Ends  With  Appeal 
to  U.  N."     Daily  Peoples  world,  October  14,  1952,  page  1. 

Writer  of  article.  World  Peace  Meet  Calls  to  America.  Daily  Peoples  World, 
July  7,  1952,  page  8. 

Writer  of  a  series  of  on-the-spot  articles  aboxit  Vietnam.  Daily  Peoples  World, 
June  15,  1953,  page  4. 

Writer  of  article,  Soviet  Chinese  Cooperation ;  The  Story  of  How  the  U.  S.  S.  R. 
Is  Helping  in  the  Modernization  of  New  China.  Daily  Peoples  World,  May  1, 
19.53,  page  M5. 

Writer  of  article  from  Peiping,  '"New  China  Ready  and  Anxious  to  Renew 
Full  World  Trade."     Daily  Peoples  World.  July  28,  1953,  page  4. 

Writer  of  eyewitness  account  of  Asian  Peace  Conference  in  I'eiping.  Daily 
Peoples  World,  November  21,  1952,  pages  M4  and  M5. 

Writer  of  article,  Asian  Peace  Conference,  eyewitness  report  of  peace  con- 
ference on  October  1-12  in  Peiping.  Daily  Peoples  World,  November  21,  19.52, 
pages  M4  and  M5. 

Writer  of  series  of  articles  from  Peiping.  Daily  Peoples  World.  January  7, 
1953.  page  4. 

Charges  United  States  with  force  and  violence.  Daily  Peoples  World.  April 
1.  1948,  page  6. 

Writes  article  the  Land  of  No  Jim  Crow.  Daily  Peoples  World,  January  12, 
1951,  section  2,  page  1. 

Writer  of  eulogy  of  Vishinsky  and  Manuilsky.  Daily  Peoples  World,  Novem- 
ber 10,  1948,  page  2. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  949 

Writer  of  article  on  World  Peace  Congress.     Daily  Peoples  World,  October 

"^H  l!ir)0  iiaiie  (i. 

"writer  of  article  from  Geneva.   Switzerland.  "Freedom  of  the  Press?     U.   S. 

Pul)lishers  Hog  W(.rld   Newsprint."     Daily   Peoples  World.   November   1,   11).)1. 

*^Migner  of  Connnuuist  Party  Nominating  Petition  for  Councilman  Israel  Amter 
1939"    (See  Dies  committee  reports,  pp.  ')U0,  5600ff,  5677,  5682,  5690.) 

Spe-iker  at  meeting  beld  under  the  auspices  of  the  Citizens  Committee  to  1  ree 
Earl  Browder,  held  at  Greeupoiut  Avenue  and  44th  Street,  Queens,  around  May  1.), 

'  Speaker  on  Marshall  plan  discussion  by  Crown  Heights  Communist  Party  at 
Public  School  No  167.  102.")  Eastern  Parkway.  Brooklyn,  on  January  lo,  1948. 

Delegated  to  National  Convention  of  ('(mimunist  Party  at  the  New  York  State 
special  convention  of  the  Communist  Party  held  at  Manhattan  Center  on  July 
Qi_2'>    1945 

"  Addressed  Eislei"  meeting  on  November  12,  1047.  held  at  Manhattan  Center. 
Instructor  on  foreign  policy,  .JetTerson  School  of  Social  Science,  winter  term, 

'  Speaker  at  a  forum  meeting  held  at  Manhattan  Center  on  December  21,  1944, 
under  the  auspices  of  New  York  County  Communist  Political  Association. 

\ddressed  Brooklvn  Communist  I'arty  Press  Conference  at  the  Livingston, 
Schermerh..™  and  Nevins  Streets.  Brooklyn.  N.  Y^,  Pf  ^mber  29    104s^ 

Testified  before  Judge  Medina  Couit  Communist  Trial,  August  20,  1J49. 

SiJoke  at  meeting  Bronx  Winter  Garden,  June  29,  1944,  as  foreign  editor  of 

Instructor  ^f^f  Kev  Problems  in  American  Foreign  Policy  at  Workers  School, 
35  E.  12th  Street,  "for  fall  term  of  1942.     (Predecessor  of  Jefferson  School  of 

^""^uthofof  Wartn^the  SoVil^t^fn  issue  of  December  19,  1939,  of  New  Masses; 
Balance  Sheet  in  Finland,  March  2(>,  1940.  issue  of  New  Masses  :  America  s  Peace 
INlovement,  May  6.  1941,  issue  of  New  Masses.  ^^     .       ^   ^  ^.  „  .,      ^^^, 

Elected  to  publicity  committee  at  Special  National  Convention  of  the  Com- 
munist Party  Association  held  at  Fraternal  Club  House  on  July  26,  27,  28,  194o. 

Received  i)ress  card  as  reporter  for  Daily  Worker,  1949. 

1950— Lecturer  at  Jefferson  School  of  Social  Science  on  the  peace  movement- 
ideology,  organization,  and  programs.  i,  i^  u     xt  „, 

He  participated  in  a  meeting  km.wn  as  Interpretation  Please  held  by  New 
Masses  at  Webster  Hall  on  November  14,  1940,  119  East  11th  Street,  New  York 

^^He  spoke  at  a  meeting  .sponsored  by  CPA  of  Queens  on  May  22,  1945,  held  at 
Lost  Battalion  Hall.  98-29  Queens  Boulevard. 

Communist  Party.  United  States  of  America  ;  membei"  of  public  affaus  depart- 
ment, secretary  of  party's  peace  committee.     Daily  Worker,  January  11,  1.350, 

^''communist  Party.  Crown  Heights  section.  New  York.    Speaker.    Daily  Worker, 

"^""SSun^'sf  Parfv,^siiaker,  Astoria  Forum.  April  13,  1947.  Leaflet :  Ditmars 
Club  News,  issued  by  Communist  Party,  Astoria  branch. 

Contributor  to  the  Communist.    The  Communist,  January  1943,  page  73. 

Defends   Brazilian    Communist   Party.      Peoples   World,    September   3,   1947, 

^"wrfter  of  article  in  defense  of  Luis  Carlos  Prestes,  Brazilian  Communist. 
Dailv  Worker,  April  28,  1948,  page  8.  ..    ^     ^  ^  -^u 

Sivpports  Luis  Carlos  Prestes;  statement  regarding  attitude  toward  war  with 
the  Soviet  Union.    Daily  Peoples  World,  May  10,  1949,  page  6. 

Speaker  on  Communist  Parties  of  Europe.    Daily  Worker,  February  3,  1949, 

^""communist  Party  convention.  New  York.  Chairman  of  convention's  publicity 
committee,  delegate  from  Queens.    New  York  Herald  Tribune.  July  2<    194... 

Fin-nish^d  official  report  of  proceedings  of  National  Convention  of  Commu^^^^^ 
Party.    Member  of  the  news  staff  of  Daily  Worker.    New  York  Times,  July  27. 

^^Writer   of  article  on   anniversary  of   Soviet  Union.     Daily  Peoples   World, 

November  11,  1949.  page  1.  section  2.  ^  »  .^  _^  K«r.ir  in  thp  f^ll  ' 

Writer  of  article  on  Italian  Communists;  statement,     'Come  bac^  in  the  fall 
people  tell  me  here.    -That's  when  big  things  will  be  happening'."    Daily  Peoples 
World,  August  27,  194S,  page  0. 


950  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMIMUNISM 

Writer  of  article,  What  the  Youth  Festival  Was  Really  Like.  Daily  Peoples 
World,  Aupnst  24,  1951,  page  4. 

Subversive  statement :  U.  S.  Warmongering  Failing  To  Frighten  Soviet  Union. 
Daily  Peoples  World,  October  25,  1947,  page  6. 

Writer  of  article  on  statute  of  liberty  for  eastern  European  zone;  quotes 
Gerhart  Eisler.    Daily  Peoples  World.  August  19,  1949,  page  G. 

Returns  from  trip  to  Western  Europe.  Writer  of  article.  Daily  Peoples 
World,  March  12.  1951,  page  4. 

Writer  of  article.  Cop  Attacks  Turn  French  to  Second  Look  at  Smith  Act. 
Daily  Peoples  World.  June  12,  1952,  page  4. 

Writer  of  article  from  Paris,  "Showdown  in  Germany."  Daily  Peoples  World, 
May  9.  19.52,  page  M5. 

Writer  of  article,  The  Duclos  Frameup — A  Drive  on  the  World  Peace  Move- 
ment.   Daily  I'eoples  World,  June  6,  1952,  page  4. 

Writer  of  article,  French  Act  Against  U.  S.  War  Makers.  Daily  Peoples  World, 
June  2,  1952,  page  4. 

Writer  of  article.  French  Communists  Pledge  Greater  Fight  for  Coalition. 
Daily  Peoples  World.  June  24,  1952,  page  4. 

On  tour.     Biography.     Photo.     Daily  Peoples  World,  June  29,  1950,  page  2. 

Reviews  "Listen  Hans,"  article  by  Dorothy  Thompson.  Peoples  World,  Janu- 
ary 20,  1943,  page  5. 

Writer  of  article  from  P.erlin,  "In  Berlin,  There  Is  Marching  for  Peace." 
Daily  Peoples  World,  August  13,  1951,  page  8. 

Plioto  at  cathedral  inside  Kremlin.  Daily  Peoples  World,  January  12.  1951. 
section  2.  page  1.    Peace  delegate. 

To  tour  the  Pacific  coast  in  October  under  the  auspices  of  the  Peoples  World ; 
tentative  schedules  is :  Pacific  Northwest,  October  7-13 ;  southern  California. 
October  14-21;  northern  California,  October  21-November  1.  (Photo.)  Peoples 
World,  September  18,  1953,  page  1.  Recently  returned  from  foreign  correspond- 
ents assignment  in  Far  East. 

To  speak  on  his  travels  in  China,  Indochina,  and  Western  Europe  as  corre- 
spondent for  the  Peoples  World  at  the  following  cities :  Los  Angeles,  October  16 : 
San  Bernardino.  October  17;  San  Diego,  October  18;  Mendocino,  October  25; 
San  Jose.  October  27 :  San  Francisco,  October  30 ;  and  Oakland,  November  1. 
Daily  Worker,  October  16,  19-53,  page  8. 

The  Daily  Peoples  World  is  sponsoring  his  speaking  tour  of  the  Pacific  coast 
described  as  the  only  U.  S.  journalist  to  visit  the  liberated  areas  of  Vietnam 
and  interview  President  Ho  Chi-minh.  His  schedule  follows :  Los  Angeles, 
NBC  Auditorium,  July  9;  San  Francisco.  150  Golden  Gate  Avenue,  July  16: 
Berkeley,  3138  Grove  St.,  July  17 ;  small  cities  and  towns  in  southern  California 
on  July  3-10 ;  northern  California  on  July  16-25 ;  Washington  State,  July  28- 
August  1;  Oregon,  August  3-8.    Daily  Peoples  World,  June  25,  1954,  page  4. 

The  Peoples  World,  in  announcing  a  speaking  tour  by  Starobin,  stated  that 
he  sijent  a  year  in  new  China ;  weeks  with  the  Vietnam  "People's  Army" ; 
made  4  trips  across  the  Soviet  Union ;  spent  time  in  Paris  and  Berlin ;  and  is 
the  only  U.  S.  correspondent  to  report  the  war  in  Indochina  from  the  side 
of  the  liberation  forces ;  described  as  the  "foremost  authority  on  U.  S.  foreign 
policy."    Daily  Peoples  World,  October  2,  1953,  page  1. 

Scheduled  to  make  speeches  on  his  "observance  of  the  foreign  scenes"  at 
Embassy  Auditorium,  Los  Angeles,  October  16 ;  at  San  Bernardino.  October  17 ; 
San  Diego,  October  18 ;  Sonoma.  October  23 ;  Mendocino,  October  25 ;  San  .lose, 
October  27 ;  150  Golden  Gate  Avenue,  San  Francisco,  October  30 ;  and  160  Grand 
Avenue,  Oakland,  November  1.    Daily  Peoples  World,  October  12,  19.53,  page  1. 

Writer  of  article  from  Peiping  (by  mail)  on  the  Daily  Life  of  China's  Liber- 
ated Army.     Daily  Worker,  March  IS,  19.53,  page  4. 

Writer  of  articles  from  Peiping,  China.  Daily  Worker,  February  10,  1953, 
page  8;  the  Worker,  Sunday,  February  8,  1953,  page  4;  Daily  Worker,  February 
19, 1953,  page  5. 

Assigned  to  overseas  coverage  of  developments  in  China  including  Asian  Peace 
Congress  to  oi)en  in  September  in  Peiping.  Daily  Worker,  September  11,  1952, 
page  1. 

Writer  of  a  series  of  articles  from  Communist-controlled  Vietnam.  (Photo.) 
The  Worker,  May  31,  1953,  pages  1  and  11 :  3\me  2,  1953,  page  2 ;  June  15,  1953, 
page  8;  June  16,  1953,  page  S:  June  17,  19.53.  page  8;  Jxme  18,  1953,  page  8; 
June  21,  1953,  page  5;  June  19,  19.53,  page  4:  June  8,  19.53.  page  2. 

Writer  of  article  from  Peiping  on  flourishing  of  businessmen  under  Chinese 
Commimist  regime.     Daily  Worker,  April  13,  1953,  page  4. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  951 

Writer  of  article  from  Peiping,  China,  on  reactions  of  a  former  Chiang  general 
who  surrendered  to  Chinese  Communists.    Daily  Worker,  April  22,  19o3,  page  5. 

Writer  of  second  in  a  series  of  articles  from  Peiping,  China,  on  former  Kuomm- 
tans  general  who  is  now  working  with  Chinese  Communist  regime.  Daily 
Worker,  April  23,  1953,  pages  5  and  8.  .     .  -,     ^,  •  ^        ^     n^.i 

Writer  of  a  series  of  articles  from  somewhere  mside  Communist-conti oiled 
Vietnam  resions,  Dailv  Worker,  June  1,  1U53,  pages  2  and  5  ;  June  9,  19.53,  page  2 ; 
June  11,  1953,  page  2 ;  June  12,  19.53,  page  2 ;  June  7,  19-53,  pages  5  and  14 ;  June 
10,  19.53,  page  S ;  June  14,  1953,  page  5.  _  „       ,     c        i,    i 

Writer  of  article  from  Peiping,  China,  entitled  "How  Chinese  People  Smashed 
Wall  Street  Attempt  at  Blockade."     Daily  Worker,  May  11,  19o3,  page  5. 

Writer  of  articles  from  Vienna  (by  mail  delayed)  dealing  with  Vienna  Congress 
of  the  Peoples.  Daily  Worker,  February  20,  19-53,  page  4 ;  Daily  Worker,  Feb- 
ruary 23,  1953,  page  4 ;  Daily  Worker,  February  24,  1953,  page  4. 

Correspondent,  Rio  de  Janeiro.  Worker,  Septemlier  7,  1947,  pages  oM  and  b 
(southern  edition).  .  .        c,     •  4- 

Writer  of  article  attacking  the  United  States  budget  and  praising  Soviet 
budget.     Dailv  Worker,  February  3,  1948.  page  8.  .  .  -,k 

Foreign  editor  covers  Rio  de  .laniero  Conference.  Daily  Worker,  August  15, 
10-iT   nfi^'G  *^  . -  . .   -        ~..^.    !-  ^ 

Daily  W(rrker— writer ;  author.     Daily  Peoples  World,  March  13,  1948,  page'^. 

Contril)utor.     The  Worker,  November  29,  1942,  page  7.  V"'.^ 

Contributor  magazine  section.     The  Worker.  November  22,  •1942,  page  4-. 

Contributor,  Daily  Worker,  May  6.  1938,  page  7.  '  •  ''  ■    ■'.■'■■  '    ''" '^^  ° 

Contributor.     Dailv  Worker,  December  4,  1942,  page  1.  ','. '■:''' 

New  York  Dailv  Worker,  assigned  to  overseas  coverage— report  developments 
in  China  including  Asian  Peace  Congress.  Daily  Peoples  World,  September  15, 
1952,  page  4.  __ 

Scheduled  to  speak  at  annual  Christmas  bazaar  brunch  December  13,  19od, 
at  2705  Jov  Road,  Detroit,  IMichigan  Worker.     Handbill:  "Frameup!  *  ■*^*"' 

Writer  of  article— Shanghai.     The  Worker,  January  11,  19o3,  page  7.        ■ 

Writer  of  article  Washington's  Deal  for  Arming  Nazis  Gets  Harder  To  Sell 
in  all  Europe.     Worker,  May  4,  19.52,  page  2.      (In  Paris.) 

Writer  of  article  French  Fight  Attempt  To  Foist  Renazilied  Germany  on  Them. 

June  8,  1952,  page  3,  Worker.  ..,,._,  o 

Book  Eyewitness  in  Indo-China  reviewed  in  the  Worker,  May  9,  I9i)4,  page  8. 

Writer  of  article  on  Second  World  Peace  Congress.     Daily  Worker,  October 

13.  1950,  page  G.  '  -r         ,a    -,^,r. 

Photos.  Daily  Worker,  May  8,  1939,  page  7r  Daily  mrker,  June  16,  194  (, 
page  7 ;  Daily  Worker,  August  27,  1947,  page  2.  •'  \^ 

Signer  of  statement  to  the  President  on  the  death  of  the  German  "anti-1  ascist 
writer  Friedrich  Wolf.     Daily  Worker,  October  14,  1953,  page  7. 

Attacks  State  Department.     Daily  Worker,  September  17,  1947.  page  2. 

Attacks  American  foreign  policy  on  WABD  on  Tuesday,  April  13,  1948,  8  to  9 
p.  m.     Daily  Worker,  April  19,  1948,  page  13. 

Inter-American  Press  Congress.  Representative  in  letter.  Daily  Worker, 
October  11,  1950,  page  2.  „    -^^^     ^ 

Calls  the  United  States  "the  eneiny."  Daily  Worker,  January  2,  1946;  Con- 
gressional Record.  April  19,  1948,  page  A2455. 

Comments  on  speech  of  Maleukov.     Daily  Worker,  November  9,  1949,  page  8. 

Writer    of   article   on   Mid-Centxiry   Conference   for    Peace.     Daily   Worker, 

June  ],  19.50,  page  3.  ^    -,-•  i. 

Fifth  in  series  of  articles  inside  Communist-controlled  area  of  Vietnam. 
Dailv  Worker,  June  4,  1953,  page  2.  .  •  ^ 

Writer  of  fourth  in  a  series  of  articles  from  somewhere  inside  Communist- 
controlled  area  of  Vietnam.     Daily  Worker,  June  3,  1953,  page  2. 

Writer  of  article  Militant  Mass  Fight  for  Peace  Called  Key  by  French  C.  P. 
Dailv  Worker.  June  10,  1952,  page  4. 

Writer  of  article  on  Prestes.    Daily  Worker,  September  15,  1947,  page  6. 

Writer  of  article  from  Prague.     Daily  Worker,  September  1,  1948,  page  8. 

\Vriter  of  article  from  Paris,  "French  Communists  Criticize  Errors."  Daily 
Worker,  June  24,  1952,  page  4.  „.         ^ 

Writer  of  article  on  Vanguardia  Popular,  the  party  of  the  Costa  Rican  Com- 
munists.    Daily  Worker,  February  6,  1948,  page  8. 

Interviews  Feng  Yu-hsiang.    Daily  Worker,  January  15,  1948,  page  8. 

59886— 55— pt.  10 9 


952  STKATKGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Writer  i>t'  aiticle  on  Giiiseppe  I>i  Vit«»ri(t.  Daily  Worker.  Aujnist  24.  1!)4.S, 
page  8. 

Visits  Italy.    Writer  of  article.    Daily  Worker,  August  2'{,  11)48,  page  8. 

Writer  of  article  on  L'Unita,  Italian  Communist  nevvspaj)er.  Daily  Worker, 
August  25,  194.S,  page  S. 

Writer  of  aiticle  headlined  '"Yanqui  Conquistadores  Face  Rebellion  at  Rio  Con- 
ference."   Worker,  August  17,  1047,  page  2. 

Writer  of  article  from  Berlin;  The  Truth  About  Berlin  Youth  Festival.  Daily 
Worker,  August  22,  1951,  page  3. 

Writer  of  article  on  Diniitroflf.    Daily  Worker,  .July  17,  1949,  jtage  1,  .section  1. 

Writer  of  article  on  Vishinsky.    Worker,  October  2, 1949,  page  5. 

Writer  of  article  from  Berlin,  Germany's  New  Generation.  Daily  Worker, 
August  19,  1951,  section  2,  page  1. 

Interviews  .Juergen  Kuczynski  and  Albert  Norden.  Dailv  Worker.  December 
13,  1948,  page  8. 

Writer  of  article  on  French  civil  strike.  Daily  Worker.  November  12,  1948, 
page  3. 

Reviews  article  in  Cahiers  du  Communisme.  Daily  Worker,  February  3.  1949, 
page  8. 

Interviews  .Jacque  Duclos,  French  Communist  leader.  Dailv  Worker,  Septem- 
ber 29,  1948,  page  8. 

Interviews  Greek  Communist.     Daily  Worker,  November  2,  1948,  page  2. 

Interviews  Matthias  Rakosi,  Hungarian  Communist  leader.  T>aily  Worker, 
November  8,  1948,  page  8. 

En  route  to  Europe.  Daily  Worker,  August  3,  1948,  page  3.  (Foreign  affairs 
editorial  of  the  Daily  Worker. ) 

Writer  of  article  from  Prague.    Daily  Worker,  September  15,  1948,  page  8. 

Statement,  "The  governments  which  insist  upon  it — Marshall  plan.  North 
Atlantic  Pact  would  rest  cm  bayonets,  or  be  overthrown  by  civil  wars."  Daily 
Worker,  April  8,  1949,  page  8. 

Writer  of  article  on  Brazil.    Daily  Worker,  Augu.st  25,  1947.  page  1. 

Writer  of  article  from  Berlin,  History  Marches  Forward  in  Berlin.  Daily 
Worker,  August  23,  1951,  page  3. 

Writer  of  article.  Military  Intrigue  in  Washington,  Ottawa.  Rome.  Daily 
Worker,  September  10,  1951,  page  5. 

Writer  of  article,  French  Stunned  at  U.  S.  Defiance  of  Worldwide  Plea  for 
McGhee.    Daily  Worker,  May  14,  1951,  page  7. 

Writer  of  article  from  Paris,  Iran's  Reckoning  With  the  Oil  Imj)erialists. 
Daily  Worker,  May  23, 1951,  page  4. 

Writer  of  article.  World  Youth  Hear  Story  of  U.  S.  Communist  I^eader  from 
Berlin.    Daily  Worker,  Augiist  17,  1951,  page  8. 

Writer  of  article  in  supiK)rt  of  Vishinsky.  Daily  Worker,  October  24,  1950, 
page  2. 

Writer  of  article  from  Paris,  French  Communists  Call  for  Building  Anti- 
Fascist  Front.    Daily  Worker,  June  22,  1952,  page  3. 

Writer  of  article  on  World  Peace  Congress,  Warsaw.  Daily  Worker,  December 
13,  1950,  page  8. 

Writer  of  article  defending  U.  S.  S.  R.  policy  on  Jerusalem.  Daily  Worker, 
December  14,  1949,  page  6. 

Supports  Henry  A.  Wallace  in  article.    Daily  Worker,  January  2,  1948,  page  4. 

Writer  of  article  on  Stalin.  The  Worker,  southern  edition,  De(enil>er  18.  1949, 
page  5,  section  2. 

Writer  of  article,  Hell  Bomb  or  Peace  Parley?  The  Worker,  southern  edition, 
February  5,  1950,  page  3. 

Foreign  editor.     The  Worker,  October  15,  1944.  page  9.  magazine  section. 

Daily  Worker  and  the  Worker  European  corre.spondent.  I>aily  Worker 
April  24,  1951,  page  2. 

"*  *  *  foreign  editor  of  the  Daily  Worker  and  the  Sunday  Worker  *  *  * 
lectures  for  the  Jefferson  School  of  Social  Science  and  for  many  organizations 
*  *  *  reported  the  United  Nations  conference  in  San  Francisco  and  has  covered 
its  proceedings  since.  In  1947  he  visited  T^tin  America  twice  *  *  *  is  a  former 
foreign  editor  of  New  Masses  and  a  regular  contributor  to  its  successor  Masses 
and  Mainstream."  Pamphlet:  Should  Americans  Back  the  Marshall  Plan?  by 
Jo.seph  Starobin,  inside  front  cover.      (1948,  New  Century  Publishers.) 

Writer  of  article  from  Peiping,  China  (by  mail)  under  the  title.  "New  China 
Industry  Grows  With  Soviet  Technical  Aid."    The  Worker,  April  19.  19.".:!,  i.aue  5. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  953 

Wi'iter  of  artic-U's  from  IVipitij;  descriliiiiK  cleanup  of  <-orrnption  in  Commu- 
nist China.  Daily  Worker,  March  27,  lUXi.  page  4;  Daily  Worker,  March  31, 
ll)5;i,  page  5. 

Writer  of  article  from  I'eii)ing  dealing  with  how  China  and  U.  g.  S.  U.  are 
heing  knit  by  cultural  exchanges  and  Chinese  learning  Russian  language.  Daily 
Worker,  March  20,  1953,  page  4. 

International  Workers  Order.     S])eaker.     New  Leader,  July  .I,  1947,  page  4. 

International  Workers  Order.  Speaker.  Daily  Worker,  March  13,  1942, 
I'age  S. 

International  Workers  Order,  Lodge  5()().  Speaker.  Daily  Workei",  Febru- 
ary 2S,  1947,  page  S. 

Labor  Youth  League.  University  of  Wisconsin  Chapter.  Speaker  at  meeting 
held  on  the  campus.     Evening  Star.  December  IS,  19r)3,  page  A9. 

Contributing  editor.     Masses  and  Mainstream,  January  19;"),  inside  front  cover. 

Ma.sses  and  Mainstream  reviewer  of  The  Struggle  for  the  New  China,  by  Soong 
Chingling,  in  books  in  review.  Masses  and  Mainstream.  Januaiv  19.").">.  pages 
59-()0. 

Masses  and  Mainstream  contributing  editor.  Masses  and  Mainstream,  June 
19r)4,  inside  front  cover. 

Writer  of  article  Cultural  Trends  in  China.  Masses  and  Mainstream,  January 
1954,  pages  24-33. 

Contributor  of  article  Literature  of  the  New  Resistance.  Masses  and  Main- 
stream, June  1952,  page  50. 

Reviewed  The  Philosophy  of  Peace,  by  John  Somerville.  Masses  and  Main- 
stream, June  1949,  page  81. 

Contributor  of  Europe  Judges  the  Smith  Act.  Masses  and  Mainstream,  Octo- 
ber 1951,  page  1 ;  page  62. 

Writer  of  article  Racism  V  Latin  America's  Song  About  It.  Michigan  Herald, 
February  16,  1954,  page  N12. 

National  Student  League.  Contributor  of  A  Symposium :  The  Conference  of 
Students  in  Politics — The  National  Student  League,  to  the  Student  Review. 
Student  Review,  February  1935,  page  17.  (Member.  conferen<e  executive  com- 
mittee.) 

Contributor  to  New  Masses,  Augu.st  19,  1941.  page  8:  May  27.  1941.  page  24; 
October  14,  1941,  page  24 ;  May  20,  1941,  page  5 ;  March  31,  1942,  i)age  6  :  March  22, 
1938,  page  20;  March  1,  1938.  page  19;  February  8.  193s.  page  !>:  January  11, 
1938.  page  13;  November  4,  1941,  page  12;  November  18,  1941,  page  12;  March  17, 
1942,  page  23;  February  10,  1942,  page  12;  January  13.  1942,  page  20;  April  22, 

1941,  pages  4  and  26;  April  7,  1942,  pages  13  and  24:  Februai-y  17,  1942,  pages 
11  and  26;  December  9,  1941;  pages  6  and  24;  May  26.  1942.  page  11;  May  19, 

1942,  page  23;  July  20,  1943,  page  12;  June  29.  1943,  page  15;  February  23,  1943, 
page  25;  July  27,  1943.  page  27;  July  1,  1947.  page  4;  Ai>ril  14.  1942.  page  12; 
October  28,  1941.  page  6 ;  September  20.  1938,  page  17 ;  September  27.  1938.  page 
19 ;  December  20,  1938,  page  5 ;  December  27,  1938,  page  24 ;  November  14,  1939, 
page  16;  May  7.  1940,  page  26;  May  28,  1940.  page  6;  June  4,  1940,  page  8; 
May  3,  1938.  page  15 ;  August  30,  1938.  page  17 ;  September  13,  193S,  page  3 ;  Jan- 
uary 28,  1941,  page  7  ;  February  18,  1941,  page  16 ;  April  15,  1941.  page  6 :  Septem- 
ber 24,  1940,  page  21 ;  October  1,  1940,  page  19 ;  October  29,  1940.  page  17. 

Contributor  to  New  Masses,  June  11,  1940,  page  30;  July  16,  1940,  page  6; 
August  6, 1940,  page  12 ;  September  3, 1940,  page  9. 

Contributor  to  New  Masses.    Daily  Worker,  Februai-y  2,  1938,  page  5. 

New  Masses  Fordham  Forum.  Speaker  at  Questions  Please  discussinn  pro- 
gram May  29  at  Bronx,  N.  Y.    New  Masses,  April  22,  1941,  page  26. 

New  Masses  speaker.  Interpretation  Plea.se  discussion  panel  April  4, 1941.  New- 
Masses,  April  1,  1941,  page  25. 

Summer  forums.     Lecturer.     New  Masses,  July  2,  1940,  page  26. 

New  Masses  member  of  staff.     Daily  Worker,  September  IS.  1940,  page  6. 

New  Masses  member  of  editorial  board.    New  Masses,  October  7,  1941.  page  31. 

Contributing  editor.  New  Masses,  March  14,  1944,  page  2 :  September  7,  1943, 
page  2  ;  June  22,  1943,  page  2. 

New  Masses  editor.  March  10,  1942,  page  18 ;  March  3.  1942.  page  19 ;  February 
17,  1942,  page  20 :  Jaiuiary  28,  1941,  page  20. 

New  Masses  speaker  Interpretation  Please.  New  Masses,  December  23.  1941, 
page  25. 

Speaker,  Interpretation  Please.    New  Masses,  November  4,  1941.  page  29. 

Speaker,  symi>osium  on  The  World  Against  Hitler.  New  Masses.  July  29, 
1941,  page  25. 


954  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Member,  reception  committee,  32d  annual  artists  and  writers  ball.  New 
Masses,  November  30,  1943,  page  31. 

Foreign  analyst  for  the  New  Masses,  December  1,  1940.  Speaker,  Peoples 
Forum,  810  Locust  Street. 

Philadelphia  Peoples  Forum.  New  Masses  speaker,  Interpretation  Please  pro- 
gram, December  1,  1940,  Philadelphia,  Pa.    New  Masses,  December  3,  1940,  page 

27. 

Author  of  Eyewitness  in  Indochina  published  by  Cameron  «&  Kahn.  New 
World  Review,  June  19,  1954,  pages  46  and  47. 

Political  Affairs  contributor.  May  1947,  page  403;  October  1947,  page  887; 
July  1948,  page  586 ;  August  1946,  page  675  ;  March  1947,  page  269. 

Workers  School,  New  York  City.  Instructor.  Leaflet:  Announcement  of 
Courses  for  Workers,  fall  term,  1940. 

Workers  School.  Instructor.  (6  Courses)  Daily  Worker,  September  12,  1940, 
page  8;  Daily  Worker,  September  18,  1940,  page  6;  Daily  Worker,  September  24, 
1940;  page  5;  New  Masses,  January  6,  1942,  page  29;  New  Masses,  January  13, 
1942,  page  27 ;  New  Masses,  April  14,  1942,  page  31. 

Workers  School.    Speaker.    Daily  Worker,  February  28.  1942,  page  8. 

Workers  School.  Instructor.  Leaflet ;  Bi-Centennial  Commemoration  of 
Thomas  Jefferson.    Spring  term,  1943. 

New  York  Workers  School.  To  conduct  a  course  at  the  fall  session,  October 
7, 1940.    New  Masses,  October  8,  1940,  pages  2  and  30. 

World  Peace  Congress.  Delegate.  Photo.  Daily  Worker,  January  7,  1951, 
page  1,  section  2. 

World  Peace  Congress.  Correspondent  at  Warsaw.  Daily  Worker,  November 
21,  1950,  page  2.  - 

Young  Communist  Review.  Contributor.  Daily  Worker,  April  11. 1938,  page  5 ; 
Daily  Worker,  February  10,  1938,  page  2. 

Young  Communist  League.  Sent  greetings.  Young  Commvinist  League  Year- 
book, 1938,  page  63. 

Young  Communist  Review,  March,  1938,  editor  and  contributor.  International 
Book  Review,  June,  1939,  page  97. 

Mr.  SoTjRwiNE.  Mr.  Starobin,  do  you  know  Anita  Willcox  ? 

Mr.  Starobin.  I  will  decline  to  answer  that  on  the  grounds  of  the 
first  and  fifth  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr,  Chairman,  maj^  the  list  which  I  now  hand  the 
chairman,  being  a  compilation  indicating  the  source  of  the  informa- 
tion that  the  witness  does  in  fact  know  each  of  these  Communist  lead- 
ers concerning  whom  J  questioned  him,  be  placed  in  the  record  at  this 
point.  'i?^'-  '"'■'  -^^..  y'^'i  -^r-q  M'ri  -isiK 

The  Chairman.  It  will  be  made  part  of  the  record  at  this  point. 
(The  document  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  75"  and  ap- 
pears below :) 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 


955 


Exhibit  No.  75 

•loHcph  Star-ohin — Representatives  of  the  Communist  International  or  the  infor- 
mation bureau  of  the  Communist  and  ivorkers  parties  or  foreign  Communist 
parties  whom,  he  knew 


Within 

Name 

Post 

Source  and  date 

United  States.. 

Max.. 

Representative    of    Young 
Communist  International. 

Representative  of  Commu- 
nist International. 
Communist  trade..  .  .  .  ._ 

Age  of  Suspicion,  by  James 

Do 

Gerhard  Elsler 

Lcmbardo              .  . 

Weahsler    (p.    107),    1937, 
Louis  Budenz,  1942,  1943. 

Do 

Louis  Budenz. 

Mexico 

Brazil 

Toledano 

Luis  Carlos  Prestes... 

Vishinsky 

Union  leader,  Mexico. 

Leader,  Communist  Party, 

Brazil. 
Soviet  Foreign  Minister 

Former  head  of  Communist 

International. 
Communist     president     of 

Indochina. 
Chinese  general 

1948. 

DaUy  People's  World,  No- 

Indochina.. .  . 

Manuilsky 

Ho-Chi-mlnh..  

vember  10,  1948  (p.  2). 
Daily  People's  World,  June 

United  States 

Feng  Yu-hsiang 

Guisseppe  Di  Vitoria.. 

Juergon  Kuczynski 

.'Albert  Norden 

25,  1954  (p.  4);  1953. 
Daily  Worker,  January  15, 

Italy 

Germany 

Italian  Communist  leader... 

German  Communist  leader. 

do 

1948  (p.  8). 
Daily    Worker,    August   24, 

1948  (p.  8). 
Daily  Worker,  December  13, 

1948  (p.  8). 
Do. 

France 

Jacques  Duclos 

French  Communist  leader... 
Communist  leader 

Daily  Worker,  September  29, 

1949  (p.  8). 
Daily  Worker,  November  2. 

Hungary ... 

Matthias  Rakosi 

Hungarian      Communist 
leader. 

1948  (p.  2). 
Dailv  Worker,  November  8, 

1948  (p.  8). 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  have  no  further  questions  of  this  witness. 

The  Chairman.  Wlio  is  your  next  witness  ? 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  V.  O.  Overcash. 

The  Chairman.  Will  you  hold  your  hand  up?  Do  you  solemnly 
swear  the  testimony  you  are  about  to  give  the  Internal  Security 
Subcommittee  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  of  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States  will  be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but 
the  truth,  so  help  you  God  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  I  do. 

The  Chairman.  Sit  down,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  V.  0.  OVEECASH,  CUTBANK,  MONT. 


Mr.  SouRwiNE. 
address  ? 
Mr.  Overcash. 
Mr.  SouRwiNE. 

Mr.  0\T.RCASH. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE. 

Mr.  Overcash. 

Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Overcash. 

Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Overcash. 
term  "business." 

Mr.  Sourwine. 
money  ? 

Mr.  Overcash. 


Would  you  state  your  full  name,  please,  and  your 

V.  O.  Overcash,  Cutbank,  Mont. 
And  what  is  your  business  address  ? 
Same  place,  sir,  Cutbank,  Mont. 
In  what  business  are  you  engaged,  Mr.  Overcash  ? 
In  credit  reporting  and  collections. 
Do  you  know  Harvey  Matusow? 
Yes,  sir. 

Have  you  ever  had  any  business  dealings  with  him? 
No  business  in  the  sense  that  I  understand  the 

Did  you  ever  pay  to  him  or  deliver  to  him  any 

No,  sir. 


59886— 55— pt.  10- 


-10 


956  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  SouBwiNE.  Do  you  know  of  any  payments  of  money  made  to 
Matusow  ? 

Mr.  OvERCASii.  No,  I  do  not. 

Mr.  SotTRAviNE.  Did  yon  ever  have  anything  to  do  with  any  adver- 
tising or  speech  made  by  Matusow  ? 

Mr.  OvERCASii.  It  is  })ossible  that  I  did  indirectly,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  prepare  any 

The  Chairman.  AVliat  do  you  mean,  "indirectly"? 
Mr.  OvERCASH.  It  would  require  a  little  bit  of  explanation,  Senator, 
if  I  may  go  into  that. 

The  Chairman.  Yes,  you  may. 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  In  1952,  October  of  1952,  I  headed  up  a  committee 
to  s])onsor  the  appearance  of  Mr.  ]\Iatusow  in  Montana  to  make  some 
speeches  with  reference  to  anti-Communist  activities,  and  I  did 
prepare  a  brief  outline  of  some  suggested  advertising  and  I  may  have 
suggested  over  the  telephone  to  certain  local  committees  who  were 
sponsoring  him  certain  types  of  advertising. 

Mr.  SoiiTJwiNE.  Did  you  do  that  on  the  basis  of  any  information 
furnished  to  you  by  Mr.  Matusow  ? 
Mr.  OvERCASH.  No,  sir ;  I  did  not. 

Mr.  SouBwiNE.  ^^^lere  did  yon  get  the  information  on  the  basis 
of  which  you  suggested  or  contracted  any  advertising? 

Mr.  OvERCAsii.  Princi])ally  from  an  article  in  the  American  Legion 
magazine  of  October  1952,  and  from  various  congressional  committee 
reports  with  which  I  was  familiar  and  had  in  my  possession,  and 
from  information  which  I  heard  by  radio  and  read  in  the  newspapers 
relating  to  an  investigation  of  the  ]\Iine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers 
Union  in  Utah  in  Sei^tember  and  October  of  1952. 

Mr.  SoFRAviNE.  Did  you,  in  October  1952,  have  any  reason  to  believe 
that  Harvey  Matusow  had  lied  at  any  time  under  oath? 
Mr.  OvERCAsn.  Certainly  not,  sir.  * 

Mr.  SouRAviNE.  Did  you  ever  tell  Matusow  to  lie  or  suggest  to  him 
that  he  lie? 

]\Ir.  OvERCASii.  Xo:  I  did  not. 

Mr.  SoiTRwiNE.  Did  you  ever  furnish  him  any  information,  written 
or  oral,  or  any  other  material  for  inclusion  or  use  in  any  of  his  speeches 
in  Montana? 

Mr.  OvERCASii.  Yes.  I  did. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  'Wliat  material  did  you  furnish  to  him? 
Mr.  OvERCASH.  I  furnished  him  a  considerable  amount  of  material 
with  reference  to — may  I  start  again,  sir?  I  furnished  him  a  consid- 
erable amount  of  material  obtained  from  left-wing  groups  and  other 
left-wing  sources  in  Montana  and  matters  which  I  dug  up  from  reports 
of  congressional  committee  hearings  which,  if  I  may  be  a  little  bit — 
well.  I  will  start  again. 

I  obtained  the  material — and  I  seemed  to  have  greater  knowledge 
than  he  evidenced  at  tliat  time. 

]\Ir.  SoTTRwiNE.  Can  you  be  more  specific  ?  What  did  those  concern  ? 
For  instance,  what  were  they  like? 

Mr.  O^T.RCASH.  I  will  be  glad  to  if  I  may  reach  in  my  briefcase. 
One  instance,  Mr.  Counsel.  I  furnished  Matusow  with  a  copy  of  a 
left-wing  newspaper  published  in  Helena,  Mont.,  known  as  the  People's 
A^oice.     That  co])y  of  that  ]iaper  contained  an  insertion  in  behalf  of 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  957 

the  Comiimnist  Party  of  the  State  of  Montana,  i)uri){)itiu<>-  to  be  in 
tiie  interest  of  peace,  referring  to  Engene  V,  Debs  and  Eugene  Dennis, 
One  of  them^I  have  a  copy  of  it,  sir.  I  will  be  glad  to  give  it  to 
the  connnittee  for  such  use  as  they  may  deem  advisable.  It  is  headed, 
'*In  the  Service  of  the  American  People  for  Peace,  for  Civil  Liberties, 
for  Socialism.'"  and  it  says: 

Speak  out,  and  in  letters,  petitidus.  and  resolutions,  deiuand  an  end  to  the 
uiideelared  war  in  the  Far  East  nnd  freedom  for  Gene  Dennis  iUid  :ill  fighters  for 
jjeaie.     Hands  oif  K(uea — 

issued  bv  the  Connnunist   Party  of  Montana,   Post   Office  Box   77,, 
Butte,  Mont. 

^Mr.  St)tTiwixE.  Mr.  Overcash,  I  wasn't  attempting  to  determine- 
Avltat  was  in  this  material  so  nnich  as  to  identify  the  information  there 
for  the  connnittee.  If  you  have  those  items  there,  if  you  coukl  leave 
them  for  the  committee,  I  think  that  woidd  suffice  and  then  we  could 
move  to  other  material  if  any  which  you  furnished  Mr.  Matusow. 

If  you  desire  to  aslv  tliat  these  be  returned  to  you,  the  C(Mnmittee 
will  do  that. 

Mr.  Overcash.  Mr.  Counsel,  I  have  every  desire  to  be  cooperative 
with  3'ou.  If  I  may  state  my  position  and  my  situation  here,  I  assume 
that  the  committee  will  be  as  generous  with  me  in  giving  me  an  oppor- 
tunity to  defend  myself  here  as  it  has  other  witnesses  which  I  have 
observed  here,  and  I  assure  the  committee  that  I  am  convinced  that 
some  of  the  rea.sons  behind  my  subpena  here  have  been  a  deliberate 
and  a  calculated  attempt  to  destroy  my  etfectiveness  as  an  anti-Com- 
nuniist  in  the  State  of  Montana,  and  I  would  like  to  present  my  side 
of  the  issues  as  I  see  them.  If  I  have  taken  undue  time  in  identifying 
this,  I  woidd  be  glad  to  cooperate,  provided  I  have  the  opportunity  to 
<lescribe  these  documents  to  some  extent. 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Overcash,  you  are  absolutely  wrong. 

Mr.  Overcash.  I  beg  your  pardon. 

The  Chairman.  You  are  absolutely  wrong,  sir.  There  is  no  inten- 
tion to  destroy  your  etl'ectiveness  in  any  way.  Your  name  was  brought 
into  these  hearings.  We  are  closing  these  hearings.  We  have  some 
questions  that  we  want  to  ask  you  regarding  the  testimony  of  Mr. 
Matusow.  Now  you  are  not  charged  with  anything.  You  certainly 
will  be  given  an  opportunity  to  present  your  side  of  anything  that 
is  material  to  this  investigation.    This  is  not  a  political  investigation. 

This  is  a  subcommittee.  There  has  been  no  politics,  Democrat  or 
Republican,  at  these  hearings.  Now  we  are  going  to  be  courteous  to 
you,  sir.  We  are  going  to  give  you  every  right  to  which  you  are 
entitled. 

You  are  not  charged  with  anything.  We  simply  want  you  to  answer 
the  questions  and  if  you  desire  to  comment  after  answering  the  ques- 
tions, you  will  be  given  that  privilege,  sir. 

]\Ir.  Overcash.  Thank  you,  sir. 

I  would  not  wish  the  chairman,  nor  the  committee  to  infer  that  I 
am  casting  any  aspersions  on  the  committee.  I  assume,  sir,  and  accept 
the  fact  completely  that  the  committee  is  acting  in  good  faith. 

The  Chairman.  Yes,  sir.  I  signed  the  subpenas.  I  had  the  sub- 
])ena  issued  subpenaing  you  and  it  was  not  a  part  of  any  plan  to 
discredit  you,  sir.  It  is  an  attempt  to  get  pertinent  information  in 
this  investigation,  and  1  hope  and  I  am  conhdent  that  you  will  coop- 
erate with  us  in  this  endeavor. 


958  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  I  assure  tlie  chairman  that  I  am  a  friendly  witness. 
I  have  no  intention  of  taking  the  fifth  amendment,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Will  you  let  the  committee  have  these  papers  that 
you  just  referred  to? 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  Yes,  sir, 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Do  you  have  several  of  them  there  ? 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  Yes;  I  do,  Mr.  Counsel. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  If  you  will  let  us  have  them,  before  you  leave,  or 
when  you  leave  the  stand.  If  you  desire  them  returned  the  committee 
will  return  them. 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  That  is  right;  thank  you. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  I  ask  that  these  papers,  Mr.  Chairman,  be  made 
exhibits  but  not  printed  in  the  record. 

The  Chairman.  That  will  be  done. 

(The  papers  were  marked  "Exhibit  No.  76"  and  will  be  found  in 
the  files  of  the  subcommittee.) 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Overcash,  I  show  you  a  handbill : 

Hear  "It  can  happen  here."  Harvey  Matusow,  Wednesday,  October  15,  Cut- 
bank  High  School  gym. 

I  ask  you  if  you  have  seen  that  before  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Well,  I  have  seen  some  like  that. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  recognize  it? 

Mr.  AvERCASH.  I  do,  sir. 

Mr.  SoTJRwiNE.  Mr,  Matusow  has  given  testimony  here  on  the  ques- 
tion of  how  he  has  designated  himself  and  I  call  your  attention  to  the 
fact  that  on  the  back  of  this  handbill  there  is  some  printing  wliich  has 
at  the  top,  "Harvey  Matusow,  Ex-Communist,"  and  then  goes  on : 

One  of  the  Nation's  most  effective  operatives  within  the  Communist  Party  was 
Harvey  Matusow,  leader  of  the  Kremlin's  youth  movement  in  this  country. 

It  goes  on  further  down  to  say  Matusow  has  testified,  and  goes  on 
and  says,  "Matusow's  record."  Now,  I  ask  you,  Did  Harvey  Matusow 
do  anything  to  turn  up  or  furnish  the  information  on  the  basis  of 
which  this  description  of  him  and  his  activities  was  made? 

Mr.  Overcash.  I  do  not  believe  he  did,  sir.  It  is  my  opinion  that  he 
did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  whether  he  saw  this  copy  before  the 
handbill  was  printed  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not.     I  doubt  that  he  did. 

Mr.  Sour^\t:ne.  I  ask,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  this  handbill  be  inserted 
in  the  record. 

The  Chairman.  That  will  be  put  in  the  record. 

(The  handbill  referred  to  was  marked  "Exhibit  No.  77"  and  appears 
below :) 

Exhibit  No.  77 

Hear  "It  Can  Happen  Here"  in  Cut  Bank 

WITH    THE    SHOCKING    TRUTH A    SENSATIO?>tAL   EXPOSE    OF    A    COMMUNIST    SPY    FOR 

THE  FBI 

Based  on  the  personal  experiences  of  Harvey  M.  Matusow — Wednesday,  October 
15,  8  p.  m..  Cut  Bank  Hi  School  Gym.  The  public  is  invited,  no  collection  or 
admission  charges — paid  for  by  Glacier  Citizens  for  Americanism. 

Harvey  Mattjsow — Ex-Communist 

One  of  the  Nation's  most  effective  operatives  within  the  Communist  Party 
was  Harvey  Matusow,  leader  of  the  Kremlin's  youth  movement  in  this  country. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COaiMTJNISM  959 

Among  his  sensational  revelations  in  the  press  and  before  congressional  com- 
mittees was  the  fact  that  there  have  been  more  than  1  million  card-carrying 
Communists  in  America,  and  more  than  3,500  young  Communists  in  the  schools 
of  New  York  alone. 

Working  in  the  New  York  headquarters  of  the  Communist  Party  as  director 
of  literature  and  participating  in  many  front  organizations,  he  performed  an 
invaluable  service  to  the  FBI  and  his  country  with  his  exjwsures  of  lied  perfidy. 

Carrying  on  as  undercover  observer,  the  information  he  obtained  for  the  De- 
partment of  Justice  has  been  of  immeasurable  value  in  turning  the  tide  of  Com- 
munist influence  here. 

Intimate  with  all  the  policies  and  practices  of  the  great  conspiracy  and  especial- 
ly with  the  Communist  Party's  plans  to  snare  the  young  people  of  the  country, 
Harvey  Matusow  answers  the  questions  "  How  can  it  happen  here?"  and  "How 
can  our  young  boys  and  girls  become  Reds?"  He  tells  the  almost  unbelievable 
story  of  how  it  is  done — and  how  it  can  be  stopped. 

MATUSOW   HAS  TESTIFIED 

Last  v.'eek  at  Salt  Lake  before  the  Senate  [Internal]  Security  Committee 
pertaining  to  the  role  that  the  Mine,  Mill,  and  Smelter  Workers  plan  in  the 
Commie  setup. 

That  the  Government  of  Czechoslovakia  attempted  in  1951  to  steal  atomic 
secrets  at  Los  Alamos,  N.  Mex. 

As  a  Government  witness  in  the  trial  of  the  infamous  13  east  coast  Communist 
leaders — which  trial  is  still  going  on. 

Before  the  House  Un-Americanism  [sic]  Committee  exposing  Communist 
youth  activities. 

Before  Senate  Internal  Security  Committee  to  show  tie-up  of  Owen  Latimore 
and  Communist  book  groups  with  the  official  Communist  Party  program  in  Asia. 

Identifying  Owen  Lattimore  and  a  number  of  other  Institute  of  Pacific  Rela- 
tions groups  as  members  of  the  Communist  Party. 

Before  Senate  committee  that  Communists  attempt  to  infiltrate  Boy  Scouts. 

MATUSOW'S  RECORD 

Veteran  of  World  War  II  and  Korean  war  in  Air  Force. 

His  brother  was  killed  in  action  in  Europe  as  member  of  United  States  Air 
Force. 

Joined  Communists  while  in  Army  service  in  1945,  joining  Commie  fronts  in 
1946,  belonging  to  a  total  of  40  Comnrie  front  gi-ouj^s,  with  contact  with  hundreds^ 
of  Communists  both  high  up  and  in  the  rank  and  file. 

Member  of  Committee  of  Democratic  Far  Eastern  Policy. 

Full-time  employee  of  the  Progressive  Party. 

Drew  a  salary  from  the  Commie  Party  and  Commie  bookshop  groups. 

A  member  and  leader  of  the  Labor  Youth  League,  presently  known  as  Young 
Communist  Youth  League. 

While  a  member  in  1950  of  the  American  Newspaper  Guild  he  attended  many 
Commie  meetings  with  other  party  members  working  for  the  New  York  Times, 
New  York  Herald  Tribune,  Time  magazine,  members  of  the  staffs  of  the  Asso- 
ciated Press  and  United  Press. 

Worked  as  an  investigator  for  the  Ohio  Un-American  Activities  Commission  in 
January  of  1952. 

See  his  story  in  the  October  1952,  issue  of  the  American  Legion  magazine. 

The  Chairmax.  Mr.  Overcash,  you  stated  that  you  were  chairman 
of  a  committee  to  bring  Mr.  Matusow  into  the  State  of  Montana;  is 
that  right  ?     Was  that  your  testimony  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  It  might  well  have  been,  sir.  That  is  substantially 
correct. 

The  Chairman.  AVlien  did  you  first  hear  of  Mr.  Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Well,  my  first  independent  recollection  of  hearing 
him  was  a  result  of  the  news  reports  relative  to  the  hearing  which  was 
being  conducted  in  Salt  Lake  by  the  McCarran  committee  ancl  from 
reading  the  article  that  appeared  in  the  October  1952,  American  Legion 
magazine. 


960  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Tlie  Chairman.  Was  it  your  idea  to  ])riii«'  liiin  into  the  State  because 
of  the  information  you  had  received  of  his  testimony  ? 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  That  was  a  contributing  factor ;  yes,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  Did  you,  personally,  arrange  to  bring  him  into  the 
State? 

Mr.  OvERCASii.  No ;  I  did  not. 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  know  who  did,  sir  ? 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  Mr.  James  H.  Morrow. 

The  Chairman.  Was  any  money  put  u\)  to  bring  Mr.  ]Matusow  into 
the  State? 

Mr.  OvERCASiT.  I  did  not  put  up  any,  and  I  could  not  say,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  You  do  not  know  whether  any  was  or  was  not  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Not  of  my  personal  knowledge,  I  do  not. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  Mr.  Sourwine. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  Matusow  appear  in  Montana  under  the  spon- 
sorship of  the  American  Legion  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  No,  sir ;  by  all  means,  he  did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Under  what  sponsorship  did  he  appear? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Ilndei'  the  sponsorship  of  the  Montana  Citizens  for 
Americanism. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  is  that  a  local  organization  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Is  that  a  political  organization  or  nonpolitical  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  No  ;  it  is  nonpolitical. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  you  an  official  of  that  organization  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Yes,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Matusow  testified  that  that  was  a  front  organ- 
ization for  the  Republican  Party.     Is  that  testimony  correct  ? 

Mr.  0^^:RCASH.  Well,  that  is  the  first  indication  that  I  have  ever 
heard,  Mr.  Chairman.  That  the  Eepublican  Party  had  front  organ- 
izations. 

My  understanding  of  the  word  is  that  the  word  "front"  has  here- 
tofore applied  exclusively  to  Communist  organizations. 

The  Chairman.  Was  this  a  Republican  organization,  then  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  No  ;  it  was  not. 

The  Chairman.  It  was  not  affiliated  in  any  wav  with  the  Republican 
Party  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Was  it  controlled  substantially  or  directed  by  the 
Republican  organization  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  accompany  Matusow  during  any  of  the 
time  he  was  in  Montana? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  When  and  where  and  how  long  were  you  with  him? 

Mr.  0^^:RCASH.  May  I  dig  out  the  reference  to  the  dates,  sir? 

The  Chairman.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Are  these  notes  of  your  own  making  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Yes,  sir.  I  accompanied  him  from  Great  Falls  to 
Lewistown,  Mont.,  October  17, 1952,  and  from  Lewistown  to  Roundup, 
Mont.,  on  Saturday,  October  18,  and  from  Roundup  to  Billings  on 
Sunday,  October  19,  and  I  believe  that  that  is  the  only  place  where  I 
could  say  that  I  accompanied  him.  However,  I  did  hear  him  speak 
on  other  occasions  and  other  dates. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WOULD    COMMUNISM  961 

The  Chairman.  What  av;is  the  purpose  of  brinoinjr  him  in  the 
State? 

Mr.  OvERCASii.  To  figlit  coininuiiisni  and  subversion.  <>ive  the  people 
of  Montana  an  opportunity  to  hear  a  man  who  had  rej^ortedly  had 
experiences  in  the  Communist  movement,  to  brino-  to  their  minds  and 
explain  the  si<rnificance  of  some  of  the  policies  whicli  I,  as  an  anti- 
Communist,  believed  were  detrimental  to  the  interests  of  my  country 
at  that  time. 

The  Chairman.  Now,  who,  besides  Mr.  Matusow,  have  you  brought 
into  the  State  for  that  purpose  ? 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  I  have  been  instrumental  in  bringiiiij;  Mr.  Ed  Gib- 
bons  from  Los  Angeles,  a  well-known  anti-Communist  expert  and 
authority  on  communism. 

The  Chairman.  AMien  did  lie  come  into  the  State? 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  1950  and  1951,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  sir. 

Mr.  0\t:rcash.  I  do  not  recall  that  I  brought  anyone  into  the  State 
but  I  was  instrumental  in  setting  up  an  organization — seminars  on 
subversive  and  un-American  activities  group  iu  1949.  I  have  spoken 
on  several  occasions  on  that  general  subject  myself,  and  have  been 
present  at  seminars  arranged  with  organizations  with  which  I  have 
been  associated. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  On  these  trips  on  which  you  accompanied  Mr.  Ma- 
tusow, how  did  you  travel  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  By  cars. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Whose  automobile  ? 

Mr.  0\'ERCASH.  It  is  my  recollection  that  it  was  a  rented  car  in  the 
possession  of  Mr.  Matusow. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  You  do  not  know  where  he  got  the  car  ? 

Mr.  Oa^rcash.  It  had  a  Utah  license  plate  on  it,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  And  who  paid  for  the  gasoline  during  that  trip  ? 

Mr.  Oat:rcash.  He  did.     I  may  say  that  he  used  a  credit  card. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Was  it  in  his  own  name? 

Mr.  Overcash.  It  is  my  impression  that  it  was. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  When  he  used  the  credit  card  he  would  sign  the 
slips? 

Mr.  Oa^rcash.  Yes ;  he  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Who  ])aid  for  Matusow's  airplane  trips  from  Lewis- 
town  to  Livingston  and  from  Livingston  to  Great  Falls,  on  October  17 
and  18, 1952? 

Mr.  Overcash.  I  do  not  know,  sir.  I  doubt  that  they  were  paid 
for. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  ^Y[\o  arranged  for  the  air  transportation  for  Mr. 
Matusow,  if  you  know,  on  those  occasions? 

Mr.  OvERCAsri.  I  do  not  have  any  personal  knowledgee  of  who  ar- 
ranged for  it,  sir. 

]Mr.  Sourwine.  "\Yliat  makes  you  say  you  doubt  if  it  has  been  paid 
for? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Well,  I  was  under  the  impression  that  it  was  just 
a  contribution  by  someone  who  owned  an  airplane  and  probably 
agreed  to  transport  him  on  those  occasions. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  who  owned  the  airplane  in  which  he 
flew  on  those  trips  ? 


962  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  OvEROASH.  I  was  introduced  to  tlie  gentleman  who  owns  the 
plane  but  I  cannot  recall  his  name  at  this  time. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Was  he  a  member  of  this  nonpolitical  organization 
concerning  which  you  have  testified  ? 

]\Ir.  OvERCASH.   No. 

Mr.  SouRWJNE.  Was  he  to  your  knowledge  a  member  of  the  Re- 
publican Party? 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  I  do  not  know  whether  he  was  or  not,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Mr.  Overcash,  are  you  now  or  have  you  ever  been 
a  member  of  the  Communist  Party  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  No;  I  have  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  did  not  have  any  difficulty  answering  that 
question,  did  you  ?  . 

Mr.  Overcash.  Not  a  bit  in  the  world,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  covered  the  points  that  I  had 
in  mind  with  this  witness. 

Senator  Jenner.  I  have  no  questions. 

Senator  Daniel.  No  questions. 

Mr.  Overcash.  I  do  have  considerable  additional  material  here,  Mr. 
Counsel.  You  asked  me  about  material  that  I  furnished  Mr.  Matusow 
that  I  have  not  covered.  It  seems  that  I  perhaps  inadvertently  side- 
tracked the  committee. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  We  would  like  to  know  about  it,  sir,  if  you  have 
additional  information. 

Mr.  OvTERCASH.  I  furnished  him  with  some  material  specifically 
referring  to  communism  in  the  Farmers  Union,  Communist  infiltra- 
tion of  the  Farmers  Union  with  specific  emphasis  on  the  situation  in 
the  State  of  Montana. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Overcash,  the  committee  is  not  at  the  present 
time  investigating  the  Farmers  Union.  Will  you  identify  the  nature 
of  the  material  that  you  gave  Mr.  Matusow  without  going  extensively 
into  the  content  thereof?  And  I  may  say  to  you,  in  the  case  of  the 
Farmers  Union,  if  the  committee  investigates  it  and  communism  in 
agriculture,  we  will,  on  your  statement  that  you  have  a  great  deal  of 
information  on  this,  call  you  as  a  witness. 

The  Chairman.  The  purpose  of  this  information  was  for  Matu- 
sow's  speeches?  For  what  purpose,  in  fact,  did  you  give  him  this 
information  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  Oh,  so  that  he  could  implement  his  knowledge  and 
experience  in  the  Communist  movement  with  something  that  specifi- 
cally applied  to  the  situation  in  Montana,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  It  was  something  that  he  knew  nothing  about,  you 
are  testifying  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  I  believe  that  I  stated  something  to  the  effect  that 
I  appeared  to  have  a  little  greater  knowledge  of  that  particular  thing 
than  he  did. 

The  Chairman.  Eight,  but  you  gave  him  stuff  for  his  speeches  in 
Montana. 

Mr.  Overcash.  Yes.    I  furnished  him  some  material. 

The  Chairman.  Material  that  he  knew  nothing  about,  yet  he  was  to 
make  those  speeches  and  use  that  material  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  No,  that  is  not  quite  correct,  sir.  He  knew  some- 
thing about  it.  In  fact,  he  purported  to  have  certain  experiences  and 
acquaintances  with  people  whom  he  claimed  were  members  of  the 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COAIMUNISM  963 

Farmers  Union  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  country,  and  I  do  have,  I 
believe,  with  me  in  the  brief  case,  committee  reports  which  indicate 
t  hat  to  be  a  fact. 

The  Chairman.  Did  he  use  that  information  you  gave  him  in  his 
speeches  ? 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  Yes,  sir ;  he  did. 

The  Chairman.  lie  used  it  as  that  api^lied  to  the  State  of  Montana  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  That  is  right,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  And  he  had  no  personal  knoAvledge  of  the  correct- 
ness of  the  information. 

Mr.  Overcash.  Well,  I  could  not  say  as  to  whether  he  had  personal 
knowledge  as  to  correctness  or  not. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  he  knew  nothing  about  communism  in  the 
Farmers  Union  in  the  State  of  Montana,  did  he  ? 

Mr.  O'v^RCASH.  Well,  again  I  could  not  say  whether  he  did  or  not, 
sir,  whether  he  knew  anything  about  it.  I  will  have  to  revert  to  my 
statement  that  at  least  I  appeared  to  have  a  greater  knowledge  about 
it  than  he  did. 

The  Chairman.  Call  your  next  witness. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  I  wanted  to  be  sure  he  had  finished. 

Mr.  0^"ERCASH.  I  have  not  finished. 

The  Chairman.  Go  ahead,  then. 

Mr.  Overcash.  I  also  furnished  him  with  a  photostatic  copy  of  a 
petition  circulated  by  the  Cascade  County  Civil  Eights  Committee 
which  was  in  opposition  to  what  was  at  that  time  the  Mundt-Ferguson- 
Jackson  bill,  it  later  became  known  as  the  Mundt-Nixon  bill  and  was 
eventually  passed  and  known  as  the  Internal  Security  Act  of  1950  or 
the  McCarran  Act.  This  had  a  considerable  number  of  names  and 
signatures  and  that  was  also  used. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed. 

Mr.  Overcash.  I  would  like  to  say  that  we  also  used  a  considerable 
number  of  photostats  of  the  Communist  Daily  Worker  and  photostats 
of  articles  which  appeared  in  the  New  Masses. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  "\'\niat  do  you  mean  by  "we  also  used"  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  The  committee  and  Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Does  that  complete  your  statement  with  respect 
to  that  matter  you  o;ave  Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Overcash.  I  believe  it  does  so  far  as  I  can  recall  at  this  moment. 
Would  it  be  permitted  for  me  to  make  a  brief  statement  to  the  com- 
mittee in  clarification  of  my  earlier  statement  with  respect  to  the 
reasons  why  I  am  here,  sir  ? 

The  Chairman.  You  are  here  under  subpena,  Mr.  Overcash. 

I  will  permit  you  to  comment  on  questions  that  are  asked  you  to 
better  explain  your  answers. 

Mr.  Overcash.  As  I  understand,  Mr.  Chairman,  there  was  a  tele- 
gram here  received  by  the  committee  from  certain  leadership  asking 
that  I  be  subpenaed. 

The  Chairman.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  that  and  do  not 
want  to  go  into  that.  That  has  nothing  to^  do  with  the  issuance  of 
your  subpena.  I  authorized  the  issuance  of  your  subpena  as  I  issued 
subpenas  for  a  number  of  people  whose  names  had  come  into  this 
testimony. 


964  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr,  Matusow  lias  testified  under  oath,  and  we  have  simply  been  test- 
ing the  veracity  of  that  testimony  as  a  basis  for  further  action  against 
him,  sir. 

Mr.  OvERCASH.  Yes,  sir.  Well,  may  I  say  that  I  am  prepared  to 
prove  I  believe  with  credible  evidence 

The  Chairman.  I  do  not  want  to  hear  any  charges  against  anyone, 
Mr.  Overcash.  That  has  got  nothing  to  do  with  your  being  here.  Who 
is  your  next  witness? 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Is  Mr.  Morrow  here? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Yes,  sir. 

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

Mr.  Morrow.  I  do. 

The  Chairman.  I  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Overcash  one  further  ques- 
tion. Do  I  understand  from  your  testimony  that  Mr.  Matusow  did 
not  come  into  the  State  of  Montana  under  the  auspices  of  the  Kepub- 
lican  Party  or  any  organization  affiliated  with  or  controlled  by  the 
Republican  Party? 

Mr.  Overcash.  He  did  not,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JAMES  H.  MORROW,  JR.,  BOZEMAN,  MONT. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Give  us  your  full  name,  sir. 

Mr.  Morrow.  James  H.  Morrow,  Jr.,  Bozeman,  Mont. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  What  is  your  business  or  profession  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  am  a  lawyer. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  practice  in  Bozeman? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Mr.  Morrow,  are  you  or  have  you  ever  been  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Communist  Party,  USA  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  have  not,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  That  question  does  not  trouble  you,  does  it? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Not  in  the  least. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  Harvey  Matusow? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Have  you  ever  had  any  business  dealings  with  him  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  No.  I  have  had  dealings  pertaining  to  his  coming 
into  Montana  in  1952. 

Mr.  Sourw^ine.  Tell  us  about  that. 

Mr.  Morrow\  Yes.  In  the  latter  part  of  September  1952,  as  I  re- 
call, he  phoned  me  from  New  York  City,  stating  his  background  of 
having  been  in  the  Communist  Party,  breaking  away  from  the  Com- 
munist Party,  giving  information  to  the  FBI,  to  the  Department  of 
Justice,  to  various  Government  agencies,  in  testifying  before  them. 

The  Chairman.  Right  there,  have  you  ever  been  employed  by  the 
Department  of  Justice? 

Mr.  Morrow-  Yes,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  In  what  capacity? 

Mr.  Morrow.  As  a  special  agent  of  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investi- 
gation. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed,  sir. 

Mr.  Morrow\  He  also  referred  to  the  American  Legion  magazine, 
the  article.  Reds  in  Khaki,  by  him. 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  965 

Senator  Jexxkr.  What  is  the  name  of  the  article? 

Mr.  MoRROAv.  Reds  in  Khaki.  He  also  referred  to  the  fact  he  had 
campaigned  in  the  McCarthy  campaign  in  "Wisconsin  in  the  primaries 
of  1952. 

The  Chairman.  Did  he  tell  yon  why  he  telei)honed  you  ? 

Mr.  ]\I()RR(nv.  Yes.  He  stated  that  the  reason  that  he  was  calling 
me  Avas  that  he  felt  that  he  shonld  campaign  in  the  Ecton-Manstield 
campaign  to  reflect  that  background  of  the  foreign  policies  presently 
existing  and  associated  with  Mansfield  theretofore. 

The  CHAiR:>rAx.  Why  did  he  call  vou  ?  How  did  he  get  your  name, 
sir? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Because  I  AA'as  chairman  of  the  Ecton-for-Senator 
Club,  and  my  name  had  been  so  noted,  I  presume,  at  diiferent  places. 

The  Chairmax.  That  would  not  mean  that  a  man  in  New  York 
would  know  that. 

]\Ir.  iNIoRROw.  Xo.    He  must  have  made  inquiry. 

The  Chairman.  Did  he  tell  you  who  gave  him  your  name? 

Mr.  Morrow.  He  did  not,  sir.  And  I  wish  to  state  to  the  committee 
and  for  the  record  that  there  is  no  personal  animosity  between  my- 
self and  INIike  JNIanslield.  We  have  been  personal  friends  for  many 
years.  In  this  phone  call  he  stated  he  would  like  to  give  talks  to  re- 
flect the  Communist  background  of  the  China  policies,  his  support 
thereof,  through  the  Daily  Worker,  and  to  that  end,  I  told  him  I  could 
not  see  how  it  could  be  used  in  the  State  of  JMontana,  that  particular 
subject,  for  the  reason  Mansfield  was  not  in  any  manner  connected 
with  the  Communist  Party  or  any  part  thereof,  but  I  would  consider 
the  situation.  Thereafter  I  made  full  inquiry  as  to  this  man's  back- 
ground. I  checked  the  American  Legion  magazine.  I  checked  the 
fact  as  to  whether  or  not  he  had  made  any  talks  in  Wisconsin;  I 
checked  the  fact  as  to  whether  or  not  he  had  made  any  appearances 
before  these  committees  of  Congress  and  various  other  matters  of  his 
background  and  I  determined  what  he  had  said  in  that  connection  was 
true.  I  also  phoned  Mr.  Overcash  at  Cut  Bank  who  was  the  national 
committeeman  of  the  American  Legion  of  the  State  of  Montana  and 
the  past  commander  thereof  and  discussed  the  fact  that  this  man  had 
called,  determined  that  Mr.  Overcash  had  known  about  him,  knew 
something  about  him.  But  I  told  him  I  could  not  see  how  this 
man  could  be  brought  into  Montana  in  the  political  campaign  under 
the  circumstances  and  he  decided,  however,  that  it  would  be  of  value 
for  the  entire  anti-Communist  program  that  the  man  could  be  in  here 
on  a  speaking  tour  of  some  kind. 

The  Chairman.  Did  he  attack  Senator  Mansfield  in  his  speeches? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  would  not  know.  I  do  know  this,  that  I  told  him 
nothing  as  to  what  to  say;  that  the  only  thing  1  did  say  to  him  in 
regard  to  Senator  INIansfield  is  to  at  no  time  personally  attack  Senator 
Mansfield. 

The  Chairman^.  Of  course,  you  know  that  Senator  Mansfield  is 
not  a  Communist  and  is  not  affiliated  with  communism. 

Mr.  Morrow.  Certainly  not,  sir,  and  I  so  told  him.  I  did  hear  the 
man  talk  once  under  the  auspices  of  the  Montana  State  Young  Repub- 
lican Club  at  Bozeman,  Mont. 

Mr.  SouRWiNE.  Did  he  in  that  speech  attack  Senator  Mansfield? 

Mr.  Morrow.  No  ;  he  did  not  personally. 

The  Chairman.  What  do  you  mean,  personally? 


966  STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM 

Mr.  Morrow.  As  I  recall,  he  specifically  stated  that  Mr.  Mansfield 
was  not  connected  with  the  Communist  Party  nor  any  part  thereof. 
He  did  cite  four  Daily  Worker  issues  that  highly  lauded  certain 
speeches  of  Senator  Mansfield  in  1945  relative  to  the  China  policies. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  that  was  not  an  attempt  to  smear  him,  was  it  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  doubt  if  it  was  an  attempt  to  smear  Senator  Mans- 
field. In  view  of  the  nature  of  the  talk  given,  he  went  into  many 
other  subjects  to  show  infiltration  used  in  statements  made  by  poli- 
ticians and  various  other  organizations  of  the  country,  as  I  recall. 

Mr.  SouKwiNE.  Did  you  ever  pay  to  or  deliver  to  Mr,  Matusow 
any  money? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  did,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  "Wlien,  where,  and  what  for  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  may  relate  that  he  called  me  back  a  second  time 
from  New  York  City.  He  was  anxious  to  come  out  to  do  something, 
and  told  me  the  expense  would  not  be  heavy.  On  or  about  October  12, 
1952,  at  Bozeman,  Mont.,  I  did  pay  to  him  the  sum  of  $600  as  an 
expense  item  during  the  time  that  he  might  be  staying  in  Montana. 

The  Chairman.  Wliere  did  that  money  come  from  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  That  came  from  the  Ecton-for-Senator  Club,  from 
a  fund  that  was  provided  to  me. 

The  Chairman.  Senator  Ecton  was  the  Republican  nominee  for 
the  United  States  Senate? 

Mr.  Morrow.  He  was,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  The  Republican  Party  of  Montana  then  financed 
Mr.  Matusow's  trip  to  Montana  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Pardon  me,  sir  ? 

The  Chairman.  I  say  the  Republican  Party  of  Montana  financed 
Mr.  Matusow's  trip  to  Montana  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  That  is  not  correct,  sir.  That  was  the  Ecton-for- 
Senator  Club  which  was  not  connected  with  the  Republican  Party. 

The  Chairman.  All  right,  sir.  That  was  the  Ecton-for-Senator 
Club. 

Mr.  Morrow.   Yes,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  And  he  was  to  speak  not  under  the  auspices  of 
the  Ecton-for-Senator  Club,  but  under  the  auspices  of  Mr.  Overcash's 
committee  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Well,  under  the  arrangements,  the  only  speaking  that 
he  did  was  under  the  auspices  of  the  Overcash  committee  and  one 
other  talk  as  I  recall  under  some  other  group,  the  Young  Republican 
Group  of  some  kind. 

The  Chairan.  Did  Mr.  Overcash  know  that  you  were  paying  him? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  do  not  know,  sir.  I  said  that  he  would  not  have  to 
be  worried  or  concerned  about  the  expenses  of  this  man  in  coming 
into  Montana. 

The  Chairman.  Proceed. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  pay  or  deliver  to  Mr.  Matusow  any 
other  money  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  did,  sir.  As  he  was  leaving  Montana,  I  believe,  on 
October  22,  he  related  that  he  had  other  engagements  to  make,  he  was 
short  of  money  and  felt  he  needed  to  purchase  an  automobile  or  other 
rapid  means  of  transportation.  He  wanted  to  know  if  he  could  borrow 
the  sum  of  $500  and  I  loaned  him  that  sum  of  money. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  he  ever  repay  it  ? 


STRATEGY    AND    TACTICS    OF    WORLD    COMMUNISM  967 

Mr,  Morrow.  No,  sir. 

The  CHAiRiiAN.  Where  did  that  money  come  from  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Well,  that  came  from  myself,  primarily. 

The  Chairman.  Your  personal  funds  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  reimbursed  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  would  say  there  were  funds  that  had  been  made 
•available  to  me  through  the  Ecton-for-Senator  Club.  There  was 
money  that  I  put  up  myself. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  ever  reimbursed  for  that  money  or  did 
you  stand  the  temporary  loss  of  that  $500  down  to  the  present  time  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  The  only  reimbursement  that  I  had  was  from  the 
Ecton-for-Senator  Club. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Were  you  substantially  reimbursed  ? 

Mr.  ISIoRROw.  I  was,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Was  it  in  total  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  In  total. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  And  when  were  you  so  reimbursed  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  At  the  time  from  the  Ecton-for-Senator  Club. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  mean  you  got  the  money  from  the  funds  of  the 
Ecton-for-Senator  Club  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Then  the  loan  you  made  him  was  from  the  Ecton- 
for-Senator  Club? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Through  me ;  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  You  had  authority  to  lend  the  money  of  the  club, 
then? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Under  those  circumstances  I  felt  that  I  did. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  "Wliat  happened  to  the  Utah  automobile  in  which 
he  had  come  into  Montana  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  He  stated  he  was  going  to  take  it  back  into  Utah. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  He  needed  another  car  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  After  he  took  that  car  back  to  Utah ;  yes. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  in  October  1952  have  any  reason  to  believe 
TIarvey  Matusow  had  lied  at  any  time  under  oath  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  tell  Matusow  to  lie  or  suggest  to  him 
that  he  lie? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  furnish  him  with  any  information 
written  or  oral,  or  any  other  material  for  inclusion  or  use  in  any  of 
his  speeches  in  Montana  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Did  you  ever  have  anything  to  do  with  any  adver- 
tising for  a  speech  made  by  Matusow  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  did  not,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  of  any  money  paid  to  Mr.  Matusow 
or  delivered  to  him  while  he  was  in  Montana  other  than  the  two 
amounts  you  testified  to  as  being  delivered  by  you  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  I  do  not,  sir. 

Mr.  Sourwine.  Do  you  know  who  wrote  copy  for  any  of  the  ads  for 
Mr.  Matusow's  appearance  other  than  the  testimony  you  have  heard 
from  Mr.  Overcash  earlier  today  ? 


BOSTON  PUBLIC  LIBRARY 

miiii     "' 

968  STRATEGY    AND    TACTIC 


.11 

3  9999  05445  3707 


Mr.  Morrow.  I  do  not,  sir. 

Mr.  SouRwiNE.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  no  other  questions. 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Morrow,  if  jVIr,  Matusow's  purpose — the  pur- 
pose was  to  bring  him  in  the  State,  he  was  to  make  speeches  on  com- 
munism under  the  auspices  of  a  nonpolitical  organization,  where  was 
it  within  the  province  of  the  Ecton-for-Senator  Club  to  finance  that 
trip  ? 

Mr.  Morrow".  I  told  him  to  come  on  out.  We  felt  that  it  was  an 
obligation  to  provide  for  the  expenses. 

Tlie  Chairman.  Why  was  it  an  obligation  to  provide  for  those 
expenses  when  you  state  he  was  not  to  attack  Senator  Mansfield  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Not  personally,  sir,  the  policies  of  Senator  Mansfield. 

The  Chairman.  The  policies  of  Senator  Mansfield  ? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Yes. 

The  CiiAiRMAX.  And  he  did  attack  those  policies? 

Mr.  Morrow.  As  reflected  in  the  Daily  Workers  only  and  that  was 
on  the  backgi'ound  of  the  Daily  Worker. 

The  Chairman.  And  you  stated  then  that  you  said  he  described  how 
the  Daily  Worker  would  take  advantage  of  men  in  public  office  by 
lauding  those  individuals? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Yes,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  That  is  not  then  an  attack  on  Senator  Mansfield? 

Mr.  Morrow.  Not  to  my  knowledge. 

The  Chairman.  Nothing  further. 

Senator  Jenner.  I  have  no  questions. 

The  Chairman.  You  may  stand  aside. 

Mr.  SoTjRwiNE.  Before  we  close  the  hearing  tonight,  I  would  like 
to  ask  if  Mr.  Angus  Cameron  has  come  into  the  room  ? 

Angus  Cameron?     (No  response.) 

Is  Mr.  David  Ratner  here  ?     David  Ratner  ?     ( No  response. ) 

The  Chairman.  That  will  be  all. 

(At  5:15  p.  m.  the  subcommittee  adjourned  until  10:30  a.  m., 
Wednesday,  April  21,  1955.) 

X 


SI 


a;