(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of ""United front" technique of the Southern California District of the Communist Party. Hearings before the Committee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives, Eighty-seventh Congress, second session .."

. 





''U8 
{9 


. 


' m 


i 





:«v 



C/S <Z>oc :?. y?/ ,//^.< / - ^ ,' . 



:; 



a 




COLLEGE 
LIBRARY 



'Shoe S,7 9/ 

"UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 



HEARINGS 



BEFORE THE 



COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 
HOUSE OE REPRESENTATIVES 

EIGHTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 
APRIL 24, 25, 26, 27, 1962 



INCLUDING INDEX 



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




■LIEGE Li2^-.:r/ 
Jo.iLD BY THt 
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 

SLr iO 1963 



U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
20OO4 WASHINGTON : 1962 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 20402 - Price 45 cents 



COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 
United States House of Representatives 
FRANCIS E. WALTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman 
MORGAN M. MOULDER, Missouri GORDON H. SCHERER, Oliio 

CLYDE DOYLE, California AUGUST E. JOHANSEN, Michigan 

EOWIN E. WILLIS, Louisiana DONALD C. BRUCE, Indiana 

WILLIAM M. TUCK, Virginia HENRY C. SCHADEBERG, Wisconsin 

Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., Director 
Alfred M. Nittle, Counsel 
John C. Walsh, Co-counsel 
QwENN Lewis, Administratire Assistant 

II 



•JO/tiiilfrJu' 



CONTENTS 



Page 

April 24, 1962: Ben Dobbs _- 53 

Afternoon session: Ben Dobbs (resumed) 77 

April 25, 1962: 

Fred A. Cannon 89 

Howard G. Louks 91 

Helen Weingast 94 

Don Matsuda 97 

Jeanne Katz 101 

Marco Schneck 105 

Paul Rosenstein 120 

Afternoon session: 

Leonard H. Potash 125 

Jack V. Neff __ __ 130 

Mimi Alexander 133 

Robert Carrillo Ronstadt^ 

Shirley Kessler 146 

Helen Konick 148 

Frank Beyea 152 

April 26, 1962: 

Wesley A. Bissej^ 157 

Margaret Carl Burgess 161 

Irving A. Snider 166 

Pierre Mandel 168 

Harry Freed 175 

Marlene Kagan 180 

Jacob Lutz 182 

Betty Willett 185 

Blanche Zwillinger Spindel 191 

Afternoon session: 

Frank Savas Lopez 193 

Beverly Dell Radcliffe 201 

Bessie (Bessia) Blumen 206 

Edith H. Barrv 208 

Robert W. Large 210 

Guillermo M. Martinez 215 

Albert J. Lewis ^ 

April 27, 1962: 

Steve Roberts ^ 

Cbauncey A. Alexander 217 

Afternoon session: 

Marco Schneck (resumed) 220 

Index i 

(Exhibits reproduced during hearings appear in a separate committee pub- 
lication entitled Report and Appendix: "United Front" Technique of the 
Southern California District of the Communist Party.) 

> Report and Testimony of Robert Carrillo Ronstadt, entitled The Communis Party's Cold War Against 
Concressional Investigation of Siihrei'sion relensed hy committee Oetoher 10, 1962. 

- Report and Testimony of Albert J. Lewis and iSteve Roberts, entitled CommuniH and Trotyskyist Activ- 
ity within the (Greater Los Angeles Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, released by committee No- 
vember 2, 19fi2. 

Ill 



Public Law 601, 79th Congress 

The legislation under which the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities operates is Public Law 601, 79th Congress [1946]; 60 Stat. 
812, which provides: 

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

PART 2— RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Rule X 

SEC. 121. STANDING COMMITTEES 
******* 

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

Rule XI 

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 
******* 

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

CA) Un-American activities. 

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

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

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

******* 

Rule XII 

LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT BY STANDING COMMITTEES 

Sec. 136. To assist the Congress in appraising the administration of the laws 
and in developing such amendments or related legislation as it may deem neces- 
sary, each standing committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
shall exercise continuous watchfulness of the execution by the administrative 
agencies concerned of any lav.'s, the subject matter of which is within the jurisdic- 
tion of such committee; and, for that purpose, shall study all pertinent reports 
and data submitted to the Congress by the agencies in the executive branch of 
the Government. 



RULES ADOPTED BY THE 87TH CONGRESS 

House Resolution 8, January 3, 1961 

* * * * * * 

Rule X 

STANDING COMMITTEES 

1. There shall be elected by the House, at the commencement of eachSCongress, 
)t ***** * 

(r) Committee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine Members. 

******* 

Rule XI 

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 
******* 

18. Committee on Un-American Activities. 

(a) Un-American activities. 

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

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

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

27. To assist the House in appraising the administration of the laws and in 
developing such amendments or related legislation as it may deem necessary, 
each standing committee of the House shall exercise continuous watchfulness 
of the expcution by the administrative agencies concerned of any laws, the subject 
matter of which is within the jurisdiction of such committee; and, for that purpose, 
shall study all pertinent reports and data submitted to the House by the agencies 
in the executive branch of the Government. 

▼I 



"UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 



TUESDAY, APRIL 24, 1962 

United States House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Los Angeles, Calif. 

executive session ^ 

A subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities met 
at 9:00 a.m., in Room 519, United States Federal Building, Los 
Angeles, California, Honorable Clyde Dojde (chairman of the sub- 
committee) presiding. e r\ v 

Subcommittee members: Representatives Clyde Doyle, of Cali- 
fornia; Edwin E. Willis, of Louisiana; William M. Tuck, of Virginia; 
Gordon H. Scherer, of Ohio; and August E. Johansen, of Michigan. 

Subcommittee members present: Representatives Clyde Doyle, 
William M. Tuck, Gordon H. Scherer, and August E. Johansen. 

Staff members present: Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., director, and 
William A. Wheeler, mvestigator. 

Mr. Doyle. The committee will be in order. 

Please raise your right hand and be sworn. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. DoBBS. Yes. 

Mr. Doyle. Be seated. 

TESTIMONY OF BEN DOBBS, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, FRED 

OKRAND 

Mr. Tavenner. You are Mr. Dobbs? 

Mr. DoBBS. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your fuU name? 

Mr. DoBBS. Ben Dobbs. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will comisel accompanying you state his name 
and address for the record? 

Mr. Okrand. Yes. Fred Okrand, 0-k-r-a-n-d, 257 South Sprmg 
Street, Los Angeles. t% i.i, o 

Mr. Tavenner. When and where were you born, Mr. Dobbs? 

Mr. Dobbs. I was born February 23, 1912, in the city of New York. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you now reside? 

Mr. Dobbs. 1529 Highpoint, Los Angeles. 

1 Released by the committee and ordered to be printed. 

53 



54 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. When did you come to the State of California to 
make it a place of your residence? 

Mr. DoBBS. I believe it was in the early part of 1920. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will j'-ou give the committee, please, a brief 
statement of your formal educational training? 

Mr. DoBBS. I went to grade school, junior high school, high school, 
and about 2}^ years of the university at UCLA and Universitv of 
California. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your present employment? 

Mr. DoBBS. I am going to refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I have a du-ection that the witness answer 
the question? 

Mr. Doyle. Will you read the question, reporter, please? 

(Record read.) 

Mr. Doyle. What is your answer to that? 

Mr. DoBBS. I am going to refuse to answer that question but would 
like to give the grounds for refusal to answer the question. 

First, I don't see the pertinency of the question — as I don't see the 
pertinenc}^ of the question. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question. 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer on the grounds of the failure to see 
the pertmency of the question and, secondly, I refuse to answer on 
the grounds that whatever answer I give may incriminate me — in 
other words, on the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, inasmuch as the witness has raised 
a question as to the pertinency, I think it would be well for you to 
make your opening statement for the benefit of the other committee 
members as well as for the witness at this time. 

Mr. Doyle. Very well, I will read the statement. 

[Reading:] 

Let the record show that the Honorable Francis E. Walter, chair- 
man. Committee on Un-American Activities, appointed a subcom- 
mittee to conduct these hearings consisting of Representatives Edwin 
E. Wilhs, Wilham M. Tuck, Gordon H. Scherer, August E. Johanpen, 
and mj^self, Clyde Doyle, as chairman, all of whom are present with 
the exception of Representative Willis. The order of appointment 
will be set forth in the record at this place : 

rr T^^ -c dm X April 19, 1962. 

To: Mr. Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., 

Director, House Committee on Un-American Activities: 

Pursuant to the provisions of the law and the Rules of this Committee, I herebv 
appoint a subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities, consisting 
of Honorable Clyde Doyle as Chairman, and Honorable Edwin E Willi'; Honor- 
able William M. Tuck, Honorable Gordon H. Scherer and Honorable August E 
Johansen as associate members, to conduct a hearing in Los Angeles Cahfornia 
Tuesday, April 24, 1962, at 10:00 a.m., on subjects under investigation by the 
Committee and take such testimony on said days or succeeding days, as it may 
deem necessary. 

Please make this action a matter of Committee record. 

If any Member indicates his inability to serve, please notify me. 

Given under my hand this 19th day of April, 1962. 

(S) Francis E. Walter, Chairman, 

Committee on Un-American Activities. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 55 

The committee resolutions adopted January 17, 1962, authorizing 
these hearings adequately set forth the subjects and purposes. The 
resolution controlling the first phase of the hearings is as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at 
such time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives 
and activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legisla- 
tive purpose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and 
Congress in determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be 
amended in a manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist 
Party of the United States, and that the staff of the Committee be authorized 
to conduct investigations deemed reasonably necessary in preparation for 
said hearings. 

At the time of the adoption of the resolution the staff of the com- 
mittee was working with me in the preparation of a bill amending the 
Internal Security Act of 1950 in a manner designed to make unlawful 
membership in the Communist Party. This bill was introduced by 
me on January 30, 1962, bears the designation of H.R. 9944, and was 
referred to the Committee on Un-American Activities. 

The committee has information indicating organized efforts of 
members of the Communist Party of the United States to evade 
compliance with the registration provisions of the Internal Security 
Act of 1950. The committee in considering the propriety and 
necessity of recommending legislation in line with H.R. 9944 believes 
it important to ascertain the recent and present strategy and tactics of 
the Communist Party in this highly sensitive and important area of 
the country. 

The subcommittee has determined that these hearings will be held 
in executive session. 

Mr. Doyle. I think, Witness, that clearly sets forth why we are 
here, and clearly sets forth that this question by our counsel is 
pertinent for the subject matter of this investigation and these 
hearings. 

Mr. DoBBS. Ma}' I consult with ni}^ attorney for a moment? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, indeed. 

Mr. Tavennee. All right, now, will you answer the question, 
please? 

Mr. DoBBS. I still refuse to answer the question on the grounds I 
don't see what the pertinency is in spite of the statement. 

I am going to refuse to answer on the grounds of the first amend- 
ment, that it obviously is an effort to pry into my associations, and 
also on the fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, do you recall an occasion when the 
Committee on Un-American Activities conducted a hearing in Los 
Angeles on September 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th of 1958 and then again 
on February 24th and 25th of 1959, after which it issued a report on 
those hearings entitled Report on the Southern f'alifornia DiMrict 
of the Communist Party: Structure — Objectives — Leadership, which 
was released April 3, 1959? Do you recall it? 

Mr. Dobbs. No, not particularly. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you read the report that I mentioned that 
had been issued by the committee based on those hearings? 

Mr. Dobbs. Not to my best knowledge and belief. 



56 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Let me read to you a paragraph appearing on 
page 30 of the report, the title of which is "Dobbs, Ben." 

Dobbs is administrative secretary for the Communist Party's Southern Cali- 
fornia District as well as a member of the executive board of the Southern 
California District Council. 

Now, let me interpolate. 

I will want to ask you the question as to whether any statement 
that is made in here is erroneous and now I will continue to read: 

He attended thi-ee Communist Party conventions during the first quarter of 1957: 
the Los Angeles County conference on January 5-6, the California State conven- 
tion on January 19-20, and the Southern California District convention on April 
13-14. Dobbs joined the Communist Party November 14, 1933, at the age of 21. 
His first activity was in the Young Communist League. In 1938 he was State 
administrative secretary for the Young Communist League. Li 1948, 1949, and 
1950 he was labor secretary, Communist Party, Los Angeles County. Dobbs 
was arrested in September of 1951 for violation of the Smith Act and convicted 
on August 5, 1952 of conspiring to teach and advocate violent overthrow of the 
United States Government. The sentence received by Dobbs, 5 years in prison 
and $10,000 fine, was appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court re- 
versed the decision of the lower courts and Dobbs was granted a new trial. The 
indictment was subsequently dismissed upon recommendation of the United 
States attorney. He was born on February 23, 1912 in New York. 
Occupation: clerk. 

Now, will you tell the committee, please, whether any statement 
contained in that report relating to you is in error? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
grounds already stated, namely, on the first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. You had seen this statement relating to you prior 
to today, had you not? 

Mr. Dobbs. Just as I said, I just don't recall it. 

Mr. Tavenner. Let me ask you this question: Didn't you take 
pains to read this report and the hearings upon which it was based? 

Mr. Dobbs. I just don't recall any distinct thing about this report 
being distinct from others. 

Mr. Tavenner. Let me see if I can refresh jour recollection. 

Isn't it a fact that, as a result of these hearings and the report based 
upon them, you instituted an investigation within the Communist 
Party to ascertain how the committee acquhed the information as 
reflected in the report? Doesn't that refresh your recollection? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to have to refuse to answer that question 
on the grounds as previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. But doesn't it refresh your recollection? 

Mr. Dobbs. I still refuse to answer the question on the previous 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. You refuse to answer the question whether my 
statement to you refreshes your recollection or not? 

Mr. Dobbs. That's right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Then, let me ask you vrhether you did not, in 
fact, conduct such an investigation? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
grovmds as previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether there 
have been some rather drastic changes m the structural organization 
of the Communist Party since the hearings — ^I mean the Communist 
Party in Southern California — since the hearings to which I refer? 

Mr. Dobbs. Would you repeat the question, please? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 57 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. Is it a fact that there have been drastic 
clianges in th.e organizational structure of the Communist Party in 
Southern CaUfornia since April 3, 1959, when the report mentioned 
was issued by this committee? 

Mr. DoBBS. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
grounds as previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is the Southern District of California still a sep- 
arate district of the Communist Party? 

Mr. DoBBS. I am refusing to answer that question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr Tavenner Is it correct that tiie northern most counties in the 
Southern District of the Comujunist Party of California are Kern and 
Santa Barbara Counties and the eastern boundar}^ is the State of 
Nevada and the State of Arizona and that the southern boundary is 
Mexico ; is that not correct? 

Mr. DoBBS. I am giving the same answer.. 

Mr. Tavenner. In the report issued by this committee on April 3, 
1959, it was shown that the Southern California District of the Com- 
munist Party was originally broken down into 28 sections. The 
number of sections was subsequently reduced to 26, and I would like 
to ask you to confirm that the 26 sections had the following titles: 
Needle Trades Section, Cultural Section. Professional Section, Zapata 
Section, Miscellaneous Industrial Section, Building Trades Section, 
Silverlake Section, Echo Park Section, Beverly-Fairfax Section, 
Whittier Section, 57th Assembly District Section, Boyle Heights-City 
Terrace Section, San Gabriel Valley Section, Valley 21st Congressional 
District Section, Valley 22d Congressional District Section, Bay 
Cities Section, Pasadena Section, Harbor Section, Centinella or 46th 
Assembly District Section, Compton Section, Moranda Smith Section, 
San Bernardino County and Riverside County Section, Orange 
County Section, Ventura-Santa Barbara Section, San Diego County 
Section, and 58th Assembly District Section. 

Now, my question is: Is that a correct statement of the 26 sections? 

Mr. DoBBS. May I smoke? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, if you wish. 

Mr. DoBBS. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
grounds as previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Off the record for a minute. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Doyle. Back on the record. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, under tlie structural organization of 
the Communist Party as it existed on April 3, 1959, was there consti- 
tuted a District Council composed of two delegates from each section 
making 52 delegates and, in addition, 10 who were loiown as the 
Executive Board? 

Mr. DoBBs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr Dobbs, the investigation of the connnittee 
reveals that the names of the Executive Board members and their 
positions duruig tlie period 1959-61 were as follows, and J will want to 
ask you wliether in your judgment there is any error: Dorothy R. 
Heaiey, district chairman; Ben Dobbs, meaning yourself, executive 
secretary; Bill Taylor, chairman, Negro Commission; Charlene 
Mitchell, chairman. Youth Commission; Solomon P. Monroy, chair- 
man, Mexican Commission; John Kykyri, chairman, Press Cbm- 



58 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

mission; Ileitis l*crrv, cluiiriiiaii, Minorities Coniniissiou; Nemmy 
Sparks, chaiririaii, Political Coiniuissioii; Hugh DeLacy, chairman. 
Education Commission; Bernard Lusher, chairman, Labor Com- 
mission. 

Now, would you answer the question, please? 

Mr. DoBBS. No, I will refuse to answer on the grounds of, as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavemnp^r. Our investigation sliows further that Sophie Silver 
replaced Mr. Lusher as chairman of the Ijabor Commission. 

Now, A\all you tell the conmiittee, please, whether this District 
Council, consisting of the two delegates from each of the 26 sections 
and 10 executive members, is still in existence? 

Mr. DoBBS. I ani going to refuse to answer that question on the 
same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation discloses that there 
was a District Convention held by the Southern California District 
of the Communist Party which met in two separate sessions. One 
began November 20th and adjourned November 22nd, 1959, and the 
second session began January 29th and adjourned on the 31st of 
January, 1960. 

WOl you tell the committee, please, why that convention was held 
in two sessions so far apart? 

Mr. DoBBS. No, I am going to refuse to answer that question on 
the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Isn't it a fact that it was divided into two sessions 
because the National Convention of the Communist Party was to 
be held in December 1959, so that you would have a pre-National 
Convention session and a post-National Convention session? 

Mr. DoBBS. Well, the same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a delegate to the convention — -and 
when I am referring to the convention, without further describing 
it, I mean the S^^cond Convention of the Southern California District 
of the Communist Party rather than to repeat it each time. 

Were you a delegate to the convention? 

Mr. DoBBs. I will give the same answer. I refuse to answer the 
question on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a delegate to the National Convention 
which met in December of 1959? 

Mr. DoBBS. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. At the District Convention was it not determined 
that the 62-member council was too unwieldy and in order to oper- 
ate efficiently, the ninnber of members siiould be substantially de- 
creased? 

Mr. Dopes. What? 

Mr. Tavenner. I say isn't it true? 

Mr. DoPBS. I will give the same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did not this same convention decide to change 
the name from "District Council" to "District Conmiittee"? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same anRW(>r. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did not that convetition consolidate a number 
of these sections so that you would have 20 sections in all instead of 26? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was it not decided that each section should 
have one delegate to the District Committee and, in addition, that 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 59' 

there should be 10 persons constituting an Executive Board, thus 
making a District Committee of 30 members? 

Mr. DoBBS. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. After this convention, which began in November 
1959, were not tlie following sections the only recognized sections of 
the Communist Party in Southern California, or, in otlier words, 
were they not reduced hi number to the following: Needle Trades, 
Juarez, Boyle Heights, Pasadena, Centinella or 46th Assembly Dis- 
trict, Citv Terrace, 24th Congressional District, Bay Cities, Beverly- 
Fairfax, Far East, Monterey Park, Valley, Moranda Smith, Profes- 
sional and Cultural, Long Beach, Compton, Building Trades, San 
Gabriel, Miscellaneous Trade Unions, and San Diego? 

The committee's hivestigation in 1958 reflected that tlie council 
meetings were required to be held every 6 weeks. 

Will you tell the committee whether, in the reorganization that 
took place in 1959, the District Committee was required to meet 
every month? 

Mr. DoBBS. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
grounds as previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were the meetings of the District Committee 
called by Dorothy Healey, the chairman? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, you are aware of the fact, are you not, 
that on June 5, 1961, the Supreme Court of the United States held 
provisions of the Internal Security Act of 1950 requiring a registration 
of the Communist Party and its members to be constitutional, you 
are aware of that, are you not? That was in the case of the Com- 
munist Party of the United States v. Subversive Activities Control Board. 

Mr. DoBBS. I will give the same answer to that. 

Mr. Tavenner. What did you do immediately after that decision 
came down? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Didn't you immediately go through the form of 
severing your connection with the Communist Party and with Hugh 
DeLacy's help, become an employee of the firm he works for? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. What business was Hugh DeLacy engaged in at 
that time? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Isn't it true that immediately after June 5 these 
various section organizations of the Southern Cahfornia District of 
the Communist Party were technically dissolved? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was this done in an effort, on the part of local 
members of the Communist Party and, particularly, the leadership 
of it, to evade the provisions of the Internal Security Act of 1950? 

Mr. Dobbs. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation shows, and I want 
to ask you whether or not it is a fact, that four of the members of the 
Southern California District's Executive Board; namely, yourself, 
Dorothy Healey, Charlenp Mitchell and William Taylor, contmue 
to function as a top executive body and continue to direct and coordi- 
nate the work of the Communist Party members in the Southern 
District of California? 



60 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. In the interest of party security has not the Com- 
munist Party in the Southern District of CaUfornia removed from its 
jurisdiction and supervision party activity in San Diego County? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Isn't it true that the work of the party in sections 
of the party is now being carried on by party bodies known as 
"Coordinating Councils"? 

Mr. DoBBS. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Isn't it also correct that these councils are now 
composed of the chairmen of the respective clubs having a common 
geogi-aphical area and each council controls and represents not more 
than four clubs? 

Mr. DoFu^.s. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it not true that for security purposes these 
councils do not hold regular meetings but convene only at the call 
of the district executives, such as yourself, for the purpose of receiving 
directives which are handed down to you? 

Mr. DoBPS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, the staff has succeeded in procur- 
ing a number of documents which were used in the 1959 session of 
the Convention of the Southern California District of the Communist 
Party and also the one in January 19G0, which is the last convention 
that has been held according to the conmiittee's information. 

Mr. Doyle. You mean Comnmnist Party convention documents? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Doyle. Official documents of that convention? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. 

The first document is identified on its face as the "CaU to the Sec- 
ond Convention of the Southern California District, Communist Party, 
U.S.A." 

I would like to offer it in evidence and ask that it be marked Dobbs 
Exhibit 1.1 

Mr. Doyle. It will be received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, will you look at this document and 
advise the committee whether delegates to this District Convention 
were selected by the system described in it? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the witness and his counsel 
are inspecting that document, Exhibit 1. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now, will you answer the question, please? 

Mr. Dobbs. I will give the same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. The Call states that each party club is entitled to 
at least one convention delegate. The document further states that 
clubs are entitled to one delegate for every eight members in the club, 
so that clubs with large memberships may send additional delegates. 

Each section organization of the party is also authorized to send a 
delegate to the District Convention. 

Were all 26 of the sections represented at the convention? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you advise the committee how many party 
clubs there are within the Southern California District of the Com- 
munist Party? 

■' See committee Peport and Appendix, "United Front" Techniqiie of the Southern California District of 
the Communist Parly, p. 40. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 61 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee from its investigation has learned 
that you summarized the status of the party organization in Southern 
CaHfornia in a speech at the Second District Convention. Did you 
not state that there were approximately 60 party clubs in Los Angeles 
and the five outlying counties? Did you not make that statement at 
the Second District Convention? 
Mr. DoBBS. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it not true that there were 83 regular or voting 
delegates at the District Convention in addition to a number of 
alternate delegates and what were known as fraternal delegates? 
Mr. DoBBS. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. What rights do alternate and fraternal delegates 
enjoy at the conventions? 

Mr. DoBBS. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Dobbs Exhibit 
No. 2, which is a document entitled "Proposed Rules." ^ 
Mr. Doyle. It wiU be so received and so marked. 
Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, wUl you examine the document, please, 
Exhibit 2, and state whether or not these rules governing procedures 
at the convention were adopted on the second day of the convention, 
namely, November 21, 1959? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the witness and his counsel 
are inspecting Exhibit No. 2. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now, will you answer the question, please? 
Mr. Dobbs. I am sorry, I was reading the document, I didn't get 
the question. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were not these rules governing procedures at the 
convention adopted on the second day, November 21, 1959? 

Mr. Dobbs. I will refuse to answer that question on the grounds 
as previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do not these rules specify that alternate delegates 
may speak at the convention but may not vote unless a regular 
delegate is absent? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it not true that, according to these rules, fra-, 
ternal delegates are also permitted to speak at the convention but do 
not have voting rights? 
Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to offer in evidence Exhibit 3, which is a 
report of the District Board to the District Convention by Dorothy 
Healey.^ 

Mr. Doyle. It is so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. The Second Convention, Mr. Chairman, of the 
Southern California District was officially opened with District Chair- 
man Healey's dehvery of this report on November 20, 1959, according 
to the committee's investigation, and I would like to verify that point 
through this witness, if he will. 

Was it opened by the making of this report by Dorothy Henley? 
Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer the question on the 
same arounds. 



2 Ibid., p. 41. 

3 Ibid., p. 42. 



6^ "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, Mrs. Healey reported that you and 
other members of the District Executive Board unanimously endorsed 
the line of a draft resolution prepared and circulated by the national 
Communist Party leaders and proposed for adoption at the 17th 
National Convention in December 1959. 

From her discussions of its contents it is clear that the Board was 
approving the main political resolution, the most important National 
Convention resolution, laying down overall pohcy and strategy for 
Communists tlu-oughout the United States. 

Will you verify that as a fact? 

Mr. Dobbs. I will refuse to answer that question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Healey's report, which I have before me, 
takes note of her Communist Party club's observation that the resolu- 
tion from the national office contains an awful lot of "musts" but not 
many "hows." However, Mrs. Healey states her report to the South- 
ern California District Convention would deal instead with the 
"whys" of the resolutions, by which she has reference to the necessity 
for the policy and strategy laid down in the national draft resolution. 

The Southern California District Convention on the following da}-, 
November 21, 1959, innnediately approved the main line of this 
important draft resolution, did it not? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. In recently concluded hearings conducted by the 
Committee on Un-American Activities in Washington on the nation- 
wide organization and functioning of the Communist Party, U.S.A., 
the committee received testimony substantiated by the published 
complaints of Communist Party members themselves that delegates 
to national conventions do not actually help to formulate party policy 
and strateg}-. 

The evidence showed that conventions have chiefly a rubber-stamp 
role, approving policies and strategies already decided on in advance 
by the top national leadership clique. 

_ As I have pointed out, Mrs. Healey's report stresses unanimous 
district approval of the resolution to be adopted at the national 
convention in spite of the lengthy list of "musts" or duties spelled 
out for Communist Party members in the resolution and her report 
was confined to justifying the national leadership's decisions. 

Can you give lis any example of an independent contribution from 
the Southern California District leadership and its Second Convention 
to policies enunciated at the subsequent 17th National Convention 
of the party? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. As a matter of fact, did not the national party 
leadership in 1959 rebuff efforts made by you and other Southern 
California District Communist Party leaders to have some voice in 
the selection of your area representative on the top National Com- 
mittee of the Comnmnist Party, U.S.A.? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to introduce as Exhibit No. 4 a series 
of so-called pre-convention resolutions which were submitted for 
possible action at the first session of the Southern California District 
Convention in Novenibtr 1959.^ 

« Ibid., p. 4s. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 63 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Let the record show the witness and his counsel are inspecting 
Exhibit 4. 

Mr. Tavenner. These resolutions vary in subject matter as well 
as source. Some are listed as originating with the Southern California 
District Board. Others as the recommendations of particular sections 
or clubs within the district. The resolutions are numbered from 1 
through 34. 

I will want to consider some of those items before our examination 
is terminated, but I have no other questions on that particular docu- 
ment at this moment. 

Mr. Chairman, I would also like to introduce at this time as Exhibit 
No. 5 four documents from the November 1959 session of the District 
Convention dealing with constitutional and organizational matters 
and iden tilled on th(nr face as: 

"Report of the District Pre-Convention Committee on Constitu- 
tion, Organization, and By-Laws," which we will designate as 5~A.^ 

"Discussion and Proposals Regardhig Article V, Section 5," which 
we will designate as 5-B.^ 

"Proposals on the Preamble to the Constitution," which we will 
designate as 5-C.'' 

"Proposals on the Right of Dissent," which we will designate as 
5-D.« 

Mr. Doyle. They will be received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, I ask you to examine these documents 
and I ask you whether or not they were submitted for consideration 
at the November 1959 session of the Second Convention of the South- 
ern California District of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show the witness and his counsel are 
examining the exhibit. 

Mr. DoBBS. Did you ask me a question in reference to those last 
four exhibits? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. The question was whether or not those 
four documents were submitted to the first session in November of 
1959 of the convention of the Communist Party for Southern Cali- 
fornia for its consideration. 

Mr. DoBBs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, the committee is aware that up to 
the time of the 16th National Convention of the party in 1957, 
membership on the National Committee, that is, the top leadership 
body of the Communist Party, was selected at national conventions. 
In 1957 the so-called "revisionists," such as John Gates, who were 
shocked by the exposure of Stalin's crimes, demanded the introduction 
of some democratic procedure in the party organization. The group, 
which John Gates represented, for the moment seemed to have the 
ascendanc}^ and it obtained certain changes in the constitution, in- 
cluding the right of district conventions such as the convention j-ou 
were holding here in 1959, to select two-thirds of the membership of 
the National Committee. It also obtained the privilege of exercising 

5 Ihui., p. 77. 

6 Ibid., p. 82. 
' Ibid., p. 83. 
8 Ibid., p. 84. 

20-004 — 63 -2 



64 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE .SOUTHERN 

a new right in the Communist Party, which was termed the "right 
of dissent." 

Now, that was the action taken at the National Convention of the 
party in 1957. 

Recent committee hearings have demonstrated that such revisionist 
forces were ousted from control of the national party organization 
early in 1958 after a bitter leadership struggle, and a rigidly disciplined, 
autocratic party operation was restored. 

It is very interesting to follow tlie nature of the fight that was 
conducted, but we haven't time to go into that here. 

As the documents before your convention in November 1959 clearly 
show — I am referring particularly to the documents constituting Ex- 
hibits 4 and 5 — the dominent national leadership of the Communist 
Party did not even wait until the 17th National Convention of the 
party in December 1959 to begin enforcing the traditional para- 
military principles of operation within the party. 

A referendum was conducted by the National Committee a few 
months before the National Convention seeking membership approval 
of a return to the pre-1957 policy of selecting all National Committee 
members at national conventions. As a result, before your district 
convention convened in November 1959, the National Committee 
announced that the change had already been approved and put into 
effect. 

Is that not a correct analysis of the situation that confronted the 
Communist Party here in November 1959? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Won't you agree that the general opposition ex- 
pressed at your convention to the new method of selecting national 
officers was just wheel-spinning because it had already been decided 
by the national leadership even before you held a convention? 

Mr. DoBBs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it not a fact, Mr. Dobbs, that this autocratic 
change made by the leadership, national leadership of the Communist 
Party, gave the dominant national leadership absolute control over 
the makeup of top national bodies of the Communist Party in this 
country? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. It appears from these convention documents that 
district organizations not only do not help formulate party policy, but 
also do not even have any real voice in determining the composition 
of policy-making national bodies. The Communist Party's constitu- 
tion still asserts that every member of the Communist Party "who is 
in good standing has the right to participate in the making of its poli- 
cies and in the election of its leading committees, officers and dele- 
gates," but actually such right is not recognized in practice, is it? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am refusmg to answer that question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, you have made an effort to try to make the 
Communist Party follow at least some democratic procedures, haven't 
you? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. You won't take credit for that? I am -trying to 
give you credit for it. 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 65 

Mr. Tavenner. The party's constitution, then, does not square 
with actual party practices, does it? 

Air. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. From reports and resolutions at the Second Con- 
vention of the Southern California District party organization it 
appears that district and lower-level functionaries were very unhappy 
about the loss of power to elect representatives to the National Com- 
mittee, isn't that so? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. May we have a short break now? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, the committee will stand in recess for 5 minutes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Fine. 

(Short recess.) 

Mr. Doyle. Let the committee reconvene and let the record show 
that all four members of the subcommittee are present and the witness 
and his counsel. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, the investigation by the committee 
reflects that the first resolution described and set forth in Exhibit 4, 
which consists of a series of pre-convention resolutions, was submitted 
by the Southern California District Board to the November 1959 
session of the District Convention, and this resolution expresses the 
firm belief of the District Board that the principle of electing some 
members of the National Committee directly from the district should 
be retained, notwithstanding that the national leadership had already 
decided the question to the contrary. 

As the documents in Exhibit 5 reflect, this was also the view of the 
majority of the party's section representatives who attended the pre- 
convention meetings of the Southern California Districts' Pre-Conven- 
tion Committee on Constitution, Organization, and By-Laws, This 
pre-convention committee agreed with the District Board on the desira- 
bility of electing some National Committee members in the district. 

During the 1959 session of the District Convention, the conven- 
tion's Constitution and Organization Committee also endorsed the 
idea and submitted it to the convention for action. 

So, you had a demand coming from many different directions in 
your convention to insist upon the election of top leadership repre- 
sentatives by the districts. 

Now, did the convention take action on this proposal, Mr. Dobbs? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer on the same grounds, 
Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. We note that among the pre-convention resolu- 
tions submitted to the convention, Resolution No. 4, as set forth in 
Exhibit No. 4, was presented from the West Pico Club and Resolution 
No. 5 from Club No. 2, both clubs being identified as within the 
Beverly-Fairfax Section of the party. 

The West Pico Club resolution calls for "censure" of the National 
Committee for talcing a referendum on a "policy change of great 
significance" just a few weeks prior to the National Convention and 
for giving a "totally confused and distorted presentation of the nature 
of the referendum, and its causes." 

Club No. 2 in the Beverly-Fairfax Section reported: "An over- 
whelming majority of the members of our club voted 'No' on the 
National Referendum" and "We feel that any delegates directly respon- 
sible to the membership is good." 



66 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

The club likewise criticized the National Committee for presenting 
the issue in the referendum in an obscure manner without including 
the pros and the cons. 

Did the Southern California District delegation make known its 
strong opposition during the party's 17th National Convention in 
December of 1959? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were a delegate to that convention, were you 
not? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to examine for a moment the attitude 
of party leaders at the Southern California District Convention 
toward another change in the constitution of the (Communist Party, 
U.S.A. In this case I refer to constitutional changes which luid been 
proposed by the national party leadership m a draft resolution sub- 
mitted to the various party districts. Final action was not scheduled 
until the party's 17th National Convention in December 1959. The 
proposed changes mcluded a deletion from Article IV of the con- 
stitution of the right of party clubs and sections to conduct elections 
for the purpose of naming their own representatives on state and 
district committees of the party. 

A direct voice in the selection of state and district leaders had been 
granted to party clubs and sections at the 16th National Convention 
in 1957. This was during the party leadership dispute, when John 
Giites asserted himself. 

The change proposed by the national party office in 1959 sought to 
restore the traditional method of selecting state and district officers 
at state and district conventions. 

Was not this change, Mr. Dobbs, another step in the direction of 
restoring the autocratic and bureaucratic method of party operation 
which prevailed before factional differences divided the party — and 
by "factional differences" I am referring to those precipitated by 
Khrushchev's revelations of Stalin's brutal tyranny? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wliy is it, Mr. Dobbs, the many reports and 
resolutions of convention committees which have been introduced as 
exhibits do not express approval or disapproval of this important 
change which would obviously make the district leadership less 
responsive to the will of the lower-level party organizations? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was the leadership, that is, the district leadership, 
concerned solely with its own ability to obtain influence in the na- 
tional organization of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am refusing to answer that question on the same 
grounds, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. The 17th National Convention of the party sub- 
sequently formally voted to end the right of lower-level party organ- 
izations to directly elect members of the state and district commit- 
tees of the Communist Party, did it not? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, I now hand you a copy of the pro- 
posed new by-laws for the Southern California District of the Com- 
munist Party which were submitted to delegates at the second session 
of the District Convention and which were formally approved by 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 67 

them on January 31, 1960, and ask that they be admitted in evidence 
and marked Exhibits 6-A» and G-B."' 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. And I call your attention particularly to Exhibit 
6-B. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show the witness and his counsel are 
examining the last exhibits offered by counsel. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were these by-laws adopted by the convention as 
stated? 

Mr. DoBBS. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. These new by-laws clearly show that the method 
of selecting district leaders has been changed to conform with the 
proposal by the national leadership formally ratified at the 17th 
National Convention, do they not? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

^ ^ if: H it! ill i): 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to take up one other important con- 
stitutional change proposed by the national party leadership and 
scheduled for final action at the 17th National Convention. I have 
in mind the proposal to eliminate from the constitution the right of 
Communist Party members to dissent. 

Do you remember back in 1957, after the revelation by Khrushchev 
of Stalin's crimes, the National Committee attempted to put over on 
the public of the United States the impression that it was taking a 
different attitude and it included in the new constitution a provision 
recognizing the right of dissent, which had never existed before in the 
Communist Party? 

The constitutional language permitting party members to dissent 
from decisions which have been made is found in Article VI, Section 1, 
of the party constitution and, as I said, had been introduced at the 
16th National Convention of the party held in February 1957. It 
represented an innovation in the sense that it resulted from pressure 
brought by the "revisionists," who temporaril}^ held a majority, for a 
very short time, in the top national leadership of the party. 

Convention documents already in evidence as Exhibit No. 5 shows 
that the District Pre-Convention Committee on Constitution, Organ- 
ization, and By-Laws, as well as the subcommittee of the Convention 
Committee on Constitution and Organization, approved the removal 
of this "right of dissent." 

Is it not a fact that District Chairman Dorothy Healey also spoke 
on the convention floor on November 22, 1959, in behalf of eliminating 
the right to dissent within the party? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yet Dorothy Healey, your chairman, in the First 
District Convention in April 1957, spoke out rather strongly, did she 
not, for maintaining the right to dissent? In fact, she herself dis- 
sented and caused a great disturbance within your local Communist 
Party and the party almost ousted her from leadership, didn't it? 

Mr. DoBBS. Are you asking me a question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

•Ihid., p. 85. 
10 Ibid., p. 89. 



G8 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee is informed that this constitu- 
tional change was also formally ratified at the 17th National Conven- 
tion of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Dobbs, do you not consider this a warning to all Communist 
Party members that differences of opinion must be suppressed in 
favor of lock-step obedience to party directives emanating from the 
national party organization? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question, too, on 
the same gromids. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I offer m evidence Dobbs Exhibit 
7 entitled ''To the Conventions of the Pacific Coast." " 

Mr. Doyle. It will be received and so marked. 

Mr. Scherer. Your statement, A'Ir. Tavenner, about the organiza- 
tion being against the right of dissent is interestmg when you sum up 
the placards being carried by some of the pickets outside the hearing 
today. They are complaining about the deprivation of the right to 
dissent. 

Mr. Tavenner. And yet that right to dissent, which was written 
into the constitution of the Commmiist Party in 1957, has been 
abolished. 

Mr. Scherer. It would be interesting if some of those yomig 
people who are carrying those signs would be aware of that fact, 
wouldn't it? 

Mr. Tavenner. It certainly would. 

Mr. Scherer. Especially since they are having their right to dissent 
out there this mornmg. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, I hand you this exhibit and ask you 
whether you recognize it as a directive to the conventions of the 
Pacific Coast from the National Executive Committee of the Com- 
munist Party, U. S. A. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the witness and his counsel 
are examining tlie exhibit just offered and received. 

Mr. Tavenner. In this communication, Mr. Dobbs, the National 
Executive Committee congratulates Communists on the Pacific Coast 
and other "Left Progressives" for sustaining publication of the 
People^s World. The communication makes a point of explaining that 
when the People's World was conceived in 1938, the National Com- 
mittee of the party had agreed with Pacific Coast Communists that 
the publication should bear a "united front" character. 

Now, this imited front character of the People's Woj^ld was a 
matter of constant irritation to a number of local Communists, was 
it not? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Tavenner. These local Commmiists objected to the news- 
paper's practice of printing some articles which are "vaguely pro- 
gressive" in outlook and at times even "friendly" to capitalist ele- 
ments. They scoffed at the idea that inclusion of such articles in the 
People's World would increase the part3^'s al^ility to obtain coopera- 
tion from non-Communist groups. Instead of making such 
concessions in the name of a "united front" policy, the People's 
World should emulate The Worker, they said ; present only the official 
Communist view of news events and issues; and propagandize more 

"Ibid, p. 91. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 69 

militantly for a change-over to a Communist system in the United 
States. Doesn't that describe the situation pretty well? 

Air. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Have vou finished with references to the People's 
WorW. 

Mr. Tavenner. No, there will be quite a bit here. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. All right. 

Mr. Tavenner. The National Committee stressed the need for a 
publication with such a united front approach in the present day, 
stating that it is the ''best vehicle through which the largest number of 
workers and others on the Pacific Coast can now be reached with our 
mass political line." 

The National Executive Committee also lauded the People's World 
as one of the "vital institutions" which serve to "extend and cement 
our united front relationships" and to build up a "new and potent 
Left Wing." 

You see, this line to which the Communist Party leadership re- 
ferred was the main point in the political resolution, as it was called, 
the main resolution of the Communist Party in 1959; namely, that 
they extend the united front influence of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Dobbs, was not the utilization of a united front strategy an- 
nounced as the main task for all Communists in the principal political 
resolution which was submitted by the national leadership for dis- 
cussion at district conventions and which was formally adopted at the 
17th National Convention? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. In view of the matters referred to by counsel con- 
cerning the People's World, I think it would be appropriate at this 
point to include in the record those articles in the Saturday, April 21, 
issue of the People's World that relate to these hearings and I so 
move, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received, and marked "Dobbs Exhibits 
8A-D." ^2 

And along that line did you intend 

Mr. JoHANSEN. All of the articles. 

Mr. Doyle. You intended all of the articles, including the article 
on the last page? 

Mr. Johansen. That's right. 

Mr. Doyle. Page 12, which includes quotes from Mr. Dobbs, the 
witness, chargeable to Mr. Dobbs. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, is not the united front a party tactic 
for obtaining non-Communist support? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds, 
particularly, I would say here the fh^st amendment as well as the fifth. 

Mr. Tavenner. Under the united front approach the committee 
understands that the party openly offers to cooperate with and work 
with non-Communist organizations and groups on certain goals, such 
as peace or civil rights, with the hope of eventually manipulating 
such groups for Communist purposes. In an allied "united front 
from below" tactic, individual Communists secretly penetrate non- 
Communist groups and work for immediate goals of the group in order 
to build up to positions of power and influence which can be turned 
to the benefit of the party. Would you agree that this is a correct 

12 Ibid,, pp. 93-99. 



fO "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

description of the main strateo;y of American Communists today, 
Mr. Dobbs? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer tlie question on tlie same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it not also in direct conformity with the state- 
ments made by Gus Hall on January 20, 1960, when he imparted tliat 
line to the rank and fde of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Doyle. What was Gus Hall's position at that time, Counsel? 

Mr. Tavenner. Gus Hall was the general secretary- of the Com- 
munist Party, U.S.A. 

Mr. Scherer. And, Mr. Chairman, I believe there was a memo- 
randum by Gus Hall even later in 1960 which emphasized this same 
united front approach. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, I think that the more the activities of the 
Communist Party are analyzed, the more apparent it will be that it 
constitutes tlie main strategy of the Communist Party today. 

Mrs. Healey's report for the District Board, wlxich opened the 
Second Convention of the Communist Party on November 20, 1959, 
was principally a justification for national leadership policy and dealt 
extensively with the need for stepping up Communist united front 
activity, did it not, Mr. Dobbs? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Doyle. May I ask the witness a question? Did you add 
there "on the same grounds"? 

Mr. Dobbs. Yes — I didn't, but I will at this time— On the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. I didn't hear it. 

Mr. Scherer. So the record will be straight, Mr. Chairman, I 
v.'ould like to ask the witness whether, whenever he says "The same 
answer" or "I refuse," it is in each instance based on the grounds 
including the fifth amendment, is that correct? 

Mr. Dobbs. Yes. 

But I would also like to stress also the first amendment, too, the 
relation to my political views, et cetera, as not properly before this 
committee. In other words, I include the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. We are not asking about your political views, Mr. 
Dobbs. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chau-man, the report of Dorothy Healey to 
which I referred is the same as Dobbs Exhibit No. 3 akeady intro- 
duced in evidence. 

This report, Exhibit No. 3, stated that the "struggle for the united 
front" recognizes a great number of persons have been organized by 
"reformist organizations," and in order for the party to reach those 
individuals, the Communists must also turn to "those organizations 
whose leadership is recognized by the masses." [Emphasis in original.] 

That was a statement by Dorothy Healey. 

Her report reminds Communists of the success of their united front 
strategy in the 1930's. But it takes note of the difficulties faced by 
the party because it is no longer rallying non-Communists under the 
slogan of opposition to Fascist dictators abroad, but nmst convince 
non-Communists that the main enemy is in America. 

Is this a correct summary of the District Board's views, Mr. Dobbs? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
same grounds. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 71 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Repeat that again. 

Mr. Tavenner. This report reminds the Communists of the suc- 
cess of their united front strategy in the '30's, but it takes note of the 
difficulties faced by the Communist Party because the party is no 
longer rallying non-Communists under a slogan of opposition to a 
foreign entity such as the Fascists' dictatorship abroad, but now they 
must convince these non-Communists that the main enemy is in 
America. 

That is the purport of this report. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Does it identify this main enemy that is in America? 

Mr. ScHERER. It is everything we do and say. 

Mr. Tavenner. Let me have the report, Exhibit No. 3. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Possibly the witness could help us with the answer 
to that question, if he would. 

Mr. Tavenner. I think it would be well to ask the witness. 

Will the witness state, please — excuse me, I think I better look at 
this first. 

Mr. Johansen. On the record, Mr. Chairman, certainly it is 
implicit in the statement of Mrs. Healey in which she discusses the 
interest, alleged interest of student groups, that she has addressed — 
"What a Socialist America Would Be." It is imphcit, therefore, 
that the enemy here is anyone who opposes a Socialist America, 
whatever else it might be. 

Mr. ScHERER. Well, it is obviously, too, one of the chief members 
of it. 

It is obvious that one of the chief enemies of the Conmiunist Party 
in America to wliich Mr. Tavenner referred is the Committee on 
Un-American Activities, and the picketing outside today and the 
statements on the signs that are carried by the pickets so indicate. 

Mr. Doyle. You went out and saw them. Congressman Scherer, 
didn't you? 

Mr. Scherer. Yes. 

Mr. Doyle. Why should the Communist Party be opposed to this 
committee? What is there about this committee that the Communist 
Party in America is opposed to, may I ask? 

Mr. Scherer. Because we are 

Mr. Johansen. I would like to hear the witness answer that 
question. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, I am afraid he will just refuse to answer on the 
same ground. 

Mr. DoPBs. You are absolutely right. 

Mr. Doyle. And yet 3^ou are a well-qualified witness in my book, 
Witness. You could help this committee representing the United 
States Congress to very thoroughly understand. 

Mr. Scherer. The answer is simple. This committee is one of 
the roadblocks in the w^ay of the Communist Party to subvert the 
United States from within. 

Mr. Doyle. All right, I think, Mr. Scherer, you will agree with 
me that there are two other roadblocks, the Senate Internal Security 
Subcommittee and F.B.I. 

Mr. Scherer. I certainly agree with the statement and that is 
why the attack of the Communist Parly has not only been directed to 
the Committee on Un-American Activities but the two other agencies 
you mentioned. 



72 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Doyle. I might also point out that the Internal Security Act 
of 1950 basically was the product of many years of intensive hearings 
and study conducted by the Committee on Un-American Activities 
and its predecessors. 

The Subversive Activities Control Board, which was established 
under this Act as a quasi-judicial body, found that the Communist 
Party of the United States was an organization operating in this 
country under Soviet Union control, for the purpose of establishing 
a Soviet-type dictatorship in the United States, and was hence a 
Communist-action organization required to register as such. 

This order of the SACB was upheld by a majority of the Supreme 
Court on June 5, 1961. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, I would like to return for a few 
moments to the communication to the District Convention from the 
National Executive Committee which we introduced as Exhibit 7. 

in its support of the united front character of the People's World, 
the National Executive Committee makes these interesting statements. 

* * * it would be the height of folly for us to * * * [throw] overboard some o^ 
the most valuable traditions and traits of the Peovle's World. * * * 

We also consider it necessary to make it absolutely clear that ever since the 
birth of the People's World we have had a firm understanding with the Pacific 
Coast Party organizations that just as in the rest of the country it was a primary 
obligation of Communists to support and build The Worker, so on the Pacific 
Coast it is the primary obligation of Communists to support and build the People's 
World. 

This has been our policy. This is our policy. And it takes into account the 
unique characteristics of the two papers * * *. To put it most directly, we 
believe it is a primary obligation of our comrades on the Pacific Coast to support 
and build the People's World * * *. 

Actually, Mr. Dobbs, was not the National Executive Committee 
intervening to suppress opposition by a number of California Com- 
munists to the line of the People's World'? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
same grounds. 

]Mr. Tavexner. The pre-convention resolutions submitted to the 
Southern California District Convention and introduced as Exhibit 4 
contain a number of proposals from partj^ clubs and section organiza- 
tions for a change in the policies of the People's World. In general 
these resolutions urge that the West Coast publication emulate The 
Worker and give more attention to the Communist Party itself. 
Even the Professional and Cultural Section of the party in Southern 
California was opposed to the present broad united front coverage of 
the People's World. 

Mr. Dobbs. United front what? 

Mr. Tavenner. I said, even the Professional and Cultural Section 
of the Communist Party in Southern California was opposed to the 
present broad united front coverage of the People's World, isn't that 
true? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Tavenner, do I understand the People's World is 
the West Coast counterpart or the opposite? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, it is a counterpart but seems, on the Com- 
munist Party plan, to perform a function that was not being performed 
by the Daily Worker. The Communist Party, according to these re- 
ports, was using the People's World in a united front approach to the 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMIVIUNIST PARTY 73 

Communist Party, whereas The Worker was more directly confined to 
the party itself. 

Mr. Tuck. The People's World dealt with many more activities 
not directly related to the party than The Worker did? 

Mr. Tavennek. That's right, but in carrying out the united front 
policy of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Tavenner and Members of the Committee, a 
minute ago I mentioned the decision of the Supreme Court on June 5, 
1961. 

In the case of the Communist Party of the United States, Petitioner 
V. Subversive Activities Control Board, 367 U.S. 1, decided on that date, 
the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the registration 
and disclosure provisions of the Internal Security Act of 1950. At 
page 111 f., the wSupreme Court pointed out that the Congress, in 1954, 
enacted the Communist Control Act, 68 Stat. 775, which declares in 
its second section: 

The Congress hereby finds and decLires that the Communist Party of the 
United States, although purportedly a political party, is in fact an instrumentality 
of a conspiracy to overthrow the Government of the United States. . . . [T]he 
policies and programs of the Communist Party are secretly prescribed for it by 
the foreign leaders of the world Communist movement. . . . [I]ts role as the 
agency of a hostile foreign power renders its existence a clear present and continu- 
ing danger to the security of the United States. . . . 

At page 112, the Supreme Court declared: 

First: We have held, supra, that the congressional findings that there exists a 
world Communist movement, that it is directed by the Communist dictatorship of 
a foreign country, and that it has certain designated objectives, inter alia, the 
establishment of a Communist totalitarian dictatorship throughout the world 
through the medium of a world-wide Communist organization, § 2 (1), (4), are not 
open to re-examination by the Board. We find that nothing in this violates due 
process. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, I will return again to the subject of 
the opposition that has been expressed by local members of the Com- 
munist Party to the popular front activity of the People's World. 
The Southern California District Convention, according to its minutes, 
seems to have devoted considerable time and effort to suppressing this 
opposition. 

The committee is informed that durirg the convention sessions in 
January 1960 you, yourself, took the convention floor to extol the 
virtues of the present People's World line. 

That is the line that the national leadership wanted it to follow, 
is that right? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Clarence Hathaway, according to the committee's 
information, chairman of the important New York State organization 
of the party and a guest at this convention, also made a speech in 
behalf of the party's present polic}?' for tlie publication, did he not? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same ground. 

Mr. Tavenner. And People's World editor, Al Richmond, spoke 
at length on the importance to the party of the People's World united 
front approach, isn't that correct? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was not a resolution also presented at the January 
1960 session in which the Cultural Club of the Professional-Cultural 
Section approved the strategy of the People's World and thus took 



74 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

issue with the opposition registered earlier by its own section leaders — 
in other words, there was a division within the section as to how this 
question should be resolved, isn't that true? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I ask that this resolution and a 
number of other documents submitted to the Southern California 
District Convention for the first time at the January 1960 session be 
introduced as Exhibit 9. 

Mr. Doyle. Thev will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. they will be Hsted as 9-A^^ and 9-B.'* 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Off the record for a minute, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. DoYLE. On the record. 

Mr. Tavenner. At its final session on January 31, 1960, the con- 
vention adopted a resolution reflectins: the views of the National 
Executive Committee on the Peoj^Ie's World. 

Mr. DoYLE. May the record show that the witness and counsel are 
examining Exhibits 9-A and 9-B. 

Mr. Tavenner. I now offer in evidence Dobbs Exhibit 10, entitled 
'^Resolution on the People's World." ^^ 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. This resolution includes the following: 

We recognize the valuable contributions of The Southern California Committee 
for the PW as a voice and organizational center to help build broader support for 
the paper. This committee, formed during the crisis period of the paper when it 
was fighting for its life, succeeded in mobilizing forces to help save the paper and 
organized sustained support for it. We pledge go give full support to the So. Calif. 
Com. in its many-sided mass activities as well as to help build it further. 

The resolution then states that district Communists will continue 
"as a necessary and important participant in the general activities" 
of the Southern California Committee for the People's World. 

Now, Mr. Dobbs, is this Southern California Committee an organi- 
zation dominated by the party but enlisting individuals outside of the 
party whose Marxist viewpoints and sympathies lead them to cooper- 
ate with the part}^? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. The convention resolution on the People's World 
also admits that the Southern California District leadership made a 
"mistake" in concentrating all party activity in behalf of the People's 
World on the medium of the Southern California Committee for the 
People's World. 

The resolution pledges to restore, in addition to such activity, its 
own "press apparatus." Club and section press directors, in other 
words, will henceforth meet regularly to help resolve People's World 
fund and circulation problems and to increase party utilization of the 
newspaper. 

Mr. Dobbs, it appears that the district leadership has also been 
prodded by national party leaders into more vigorous apphcation of 
national policies through the People's World, is that not so? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, 

" Ibid , p 100. 
» Ibid , p 103. 
i« Ibid , p 104. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 75 

Mr. Doyle. Do you add "on the same grounds"? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. I beheve that is all I am going to ask about the 
People's World. . 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, in connection with this line of ques- 
tioning in regard to the People's World, I direct the attention of the 
committee to an article on the front page of the Saturday, April 21, 
1962, People's World, under the title "When the Un -Americans Come 
West," and with your permission I would like to read two brief 
paragraphs from that. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. 

Mr. Johansen. I am quoting from this article. 

It is at times like these that the specific value of The People's World becomes 
more manifest. While several large papers in the state have by now expressed 
doubts about HUAC's operations and methods, they do not fathom the true 
depths of the committee's evil. Nor do they undertake the task of supporting, 
encouraging, and dramatizing every form of protest and resistance against the 
committee. 

Here, we submit, is another persuasive reason for ensuring the existence and 
growth of The People's World, a reason for support to the campaign for $62,500, 
which is the essential minimum to carry the paper through 1962. 

And I ask permission to include the entire article in the record at 
this time. 

Mr. Doyle. It has been included. (See Dobbs Exhibits 8A-8D.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, when the Southern Cahfornia District 
Convention reconvened on January 29, 1960, following the party's 
17th National Convention, did not District Chairman Dorothy 
Healey deliver a lengthy keynote report which specified the kinds of 
activity on which Southern California Communists should concentrate? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer and on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I hand to the witness a copy of 
this 14-page report by Dorothy Healey and ask the witness if he 
can identify it. 

Mr. Doyle. What is the number of the exhibit? 

Mr. Tavenner. I ask that it be introduced as Dobbs Exhibit 
No. ll.i« 

Mr. Doyle. May the record show that Exhibit No. 10 was shown 
to the witness and counsel and was examined and returned. 

I didn't have the record show that in regard to Exhibit 10 before. 
I am doing so now. 

Mr. Tavenner. Beg your pardon? 

Mr. Doyle. May the record show that Exhibit 1 1 is being examined 
by the witness and his counsel. 

Mr. Tavenner. And may it be introduced in evidence as Dobbs 
Exhibit No. 11? 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received. 

Mr. Dobbs. What is the question in reference to this document? 

Mr. Tavenner. Whether you can identify that as a copy of the 
14-page report that Mrs. Healey made at the January 29th session, 
1960. 

Mr. Dobbs. As to whether I can identify it? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

»ilbid ,p 106. 



76 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to interject a comment 
at this point regarding Exhibit No. 4, previously admitted and referred 
to. This relates to the proceedings of the Southern California District 
of the Communist Part}^ the District Convention in November 1959, 
and I would like to call attention to Resolution No. 26 submitted by 
the Ed Stone Club of the jSIoranda Smith Section, a resolution in two 
parts, and I want to refer to part 1. It seems to me important that 
it not be lost in the mass of documentations. 

It should be borne in mind that this is in November of 1959 and that 
in the preceding September Mr. Khrushchev was a visitor to the 
United States. 

This resolution — this section reads as follows: 

The visit of Comrade Khruschcv [sic] to the United States has given our Partv 
a tremendous opportunity to further its advocacy of socialism. We, therefore 
urge that his September 27th speech, in which he outlined what it means to live 
in a communist society, be reprinted and disseminated as widely as possible. 

I think it is important, in view of the efforts to disassociate the 
Communist Party, U.S.A. from the Communist Party, U.S.S.R. It is 
highly important that this be highlighted. 

Mr. ScHERER. It was the time of tlie Khrushchev visit that the 
members of this committee— and I thmk almost unanimously — 
opposed the visit of Khrushchev for the very reason it would give to 
the Communist Party in the United States a shot in the arm, and the 
material that was just read by Congressman Johansen indicates that 
the visit of Khrushchev did just that and the Communist Party 
recognized that it did just that. 

Mr. Johansen. And it is undertaking to exploit it to the fullest. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Congressmen Johansen and Scherer. 
That is very appropriate. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, returning to Exhibit No. 11, the 
14-page report of Mrs. Healey, I do not intend to question you 
regarding the many areas of activity dealt with in this report. How- 
ever, in view of the fact that Mrs.' Healey 's report to the November 
1959 District Convention session admittedly failed to tell local Com- 
munists how to carry out policies being proposed by the national 
leadership, is not the appearance of specific instructions m January 
an mdication the district leadership itself awaited orders from the 
17th National Convention of the party before giving such directions? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer on the saine grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was not the main business of the November 1959 
session of the Southern Cahfornia District Convention the approval 
of various resolutions proposed by the party's national leadership for 
final action at the 17th National Convention and the selection of 
delegates to that convention? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. In addition to app7oving the main political resolu- 
tion proposed by national Communist Party Jieadquarters, did not the 
November 1959 session also endorse the main line of the national draft 
resolution formally changing the party line on the Negro question? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. And also establishing party strategy in the trade 
union field? ■ 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer on the same ground. 

(Discussion off the record.) ;".",r 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 77 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Before we adjourn, and in pursuit of the point I 
discussed a moment a^'o, I should like the record also to focus atten- 
tion on the statement in Exhibit No. 11, the keynote report of Dorotliy 
Healey at the January 29 session of tlie Second Southern California 
District Convention of the Communist Party, the statement in her 
opening paragi^aph that: 

The last six months of the decade [which was in 1959] saw the enormous impact 
of Kruschev's [sic] visit to the United States, with the significant lessening of 
world tensions and the greatly enhanced opportunities to guarantee the world of 
peaceful coexistence. 

Mr. ScHERER. For about 2 months tension was relieved. 

Mr. Tavenn'er. I don't recall if it was that long or a little less. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you. Congressman Johansen. 

Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Doyle. Back on the record. 

The committee will stand in recess until 1:45 today and we will all 
return, including the witness who is instructed to return. We will 
all be here by 1:45 today in this same room. 

Mr. Tavenner. If you will go to the witness room, Mr. Dobbs, 
we will call you when we are ready to proceed. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank vou verv much. 

(Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., Tuesday, April 24, 1962, the subcom- 
mittee recessed, to reconvene at 1 :45 p.m., of the same day.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION, TUESDAY, APRIL 24, 1962 

(The subcommittee reconvened at 1:45 p.m., Hon. Clyde Doyle, 
chairman of the subcommittee, presiding.) 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show the subcommittee reconvened and 
a quorum of the subcommittee is present. Mr. Scherer is absent for 
a minute or two, but Messrs. Johansen, Tuck, and Doyle are present 
and the witness and his distinguished counsel are present. 

TESTIMONY OF BEN DOBBS— Resumed 

Mr. Tavenner. I asked a question relating to the changing of the 
party line on the Negro question. The District Convention endorsed 
the new Negro line in spite of opposition by a number of Negro Com- 
munists in the district, did it not, Mr. Dobbs? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
grounds I stated in the early session of the hearing. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, two long discussion articles oppos- 
ing the new Hne were submitted to the November 1959 session of the 
Southern California District Convention by Mimi Alexander and 
Cyril Briggs, and I ask that they be introduced in evidence and marked 
Dobbs Exhibits Nos. 12 '' and 13.^^ 

Mr. Doyle. They will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand you a document entitled, "Report on Party 
Youth Work" by Charlene Mitchell and ask you whether or not it is 
true that the November 1959 session of the District Convention gave 
its approval to this report? 

" Ibid., p. 120. 
I'lbid., p, 131. 



78 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show the witness and his counsel are 
examining the exhibits just offered. 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to offer this document in evidence and ask 
that it be marked Dobbs Exhibit No. 14.'^ 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Dobbs. In reading the document I didn't get your question, 
Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was this document approved by the November 
1959 session of the District Convention? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wasn't Charlene Mitchell a member of the District 
Board and head of the District Youth Commission? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. I now show you another document described as a 
"Resolution on the 1960 Elections," which I desire to offer in evidence, 
and ask that it be marked Dobbs Exhibit No. 15.^° 

Mr. Doyle. So received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. My question is whether or not this is a report 
from the District Board presented to the November 1959 session of 
the convention by Nemmy Sparks? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Sparks was chairman of the District Political 
Commission of the Comnmnist Party, is that not correct? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Here are two other documents, which, according 
to committee investigation, were submitted to the November 1959 
convention, one a "Resolution on Latin America," which I desire to 
offer in evidence and ask that it be marked Dobbs Exhibit No. 16.^^ 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. And the other is a statement on United States 
policy toward Latin America endorsed by the Juarez Club, which 1 
will ask be admitted in evidence and marked Dobbs Exhibit No. 17.^^ 

Mr. Doyle. It is so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Both of these exhibits, Mr. Dobbs, denounce the 
United States policy toward Latin America and defend the Cuban 
revolution, do they not? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Other resolutions submitted to the November 1959 
session of the convention called attention to the presence of an 
estimated 650,000 Mexicans in Southern California and urged a policy 
of concentration to develop the party within the Mexican communitj'-, 
organization of classes on Marxism in the ^Mexican conununity, and 
the reestablishment of a District Mexican Commission. ^^ 

What measures has the district leadership adopted to your knowl- 
edge to build up party influence v>dthin the Mexican and Mexican- 
American communities? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
grounds as previously stated. 

"Ibid., p. 145. 
20 Ibid., p. 150. 
2' Ibid., p. l.Vi. 
" Ibid . p l.-iS 
« See E.xhibit 4, Resolutions 6, 11, and 16. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 79 

Mr. Tavenxer. I hand you two other documents which I will ask 
to be introduced in evidence and designated as Dobbs Exhibits 
18 '* and lO.^^ 

Mr. Doyle. They will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Both of these documents are entitled "The 
Jewisli People." 

Is not the first of these documents, that is No. 18, a resolution 
presented to the November 1959 Convention session by Sanford 
Goldner? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show the witness and his counsel 
examining Exhibits 18 and 19. 

Mr. Johansen. Mr. Chairman, should the record not show that Mr. 
Scherer joined the committee at this point. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record so show. 

Mr. Dobbs. What is your question in relation to these documents? 

Mr. Tavenner. That is whether or not this resolution, which is 
Exhibit 18, was presented to the session by Goldner? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds pre- 
viously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Again does not this first report state that it does 
not attempt to analyze the role of the party in relation to the prob- 
lems of the Jewish people, but merely makes general observations on 
the need for the Communist Party to find ways to achieve influence in 
the large Jewish population in Southern California? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. With respect to Exhibit No. 19, which is the second 
resolution handed you, was not a Communist action program on the 
subject recommended by the Jewish panel at the January 1960 session 
of the District Convention and read to the convention delegates by 
Sanford Goldner and then finally adopted by the convention on 
January 31, 1960? 

Mr. Dobbs. The same answer as previously given on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Does not this resolution adopted by the conven- 
tion call for strengthening the work of Communists in various broad 
Jewish community organizations, giving more party support to left- 
wing Jewish organizations in a united front manner and increasing 
agitation on the subject of anti-Semitism with the blame to be placed 
on American foreign polic}''? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. I now sho%v j^ou three documents submitted to 
the District Convention, according to the investigation made by the 
committee, b}^ the Cultural and Professional Section of the Com- 
munist Party, Southern California District. 

I would like to have them marked Exhibits Nos. 20-A,26 20-B," and 
20-C.28 

Mr. Doyle. Let them be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Would you look at the first two documents, the 
first of \vhich is entitled "A New Approach to the Draft Resolution" 
and the second is entitled "Consider Culture in 'Political Affairs.' " 



21 See committee Report and Appendix, "United Front" Technique of the Southern California District of the 
Communist Party, p. 156. 
25 Ibid, p 158 
2« Ibid., p. 161. 
2' Ibid., p. 174. 
28 Ibid., p. 176. 

20-004—63 3 



80 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. DoBBS. And what is your question? 
Mr. Tavenner. I haven't asked it yet. 

Now, will you look at the thu"d document entitled "Notes on Culture 
and the Party's Program"? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show the witness and his counsel 
are examining the exhibits just offered. 

Mr. Tavenner. These documents which are in the form of reports 
and tentative proposals are not formal resolutions; they have a com- 
mon theme of reminding other Communists that culture [is an im- 
portant weapon for achieving a Communist system in America. 
Do you agree with that? 

Mr. DoBBS. I am going to decline to answer that question on the 
grounds as stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The party's section defines the culture under 
discussion as literature, drama, movies, television, and radio. It 
declares that, "jTAe detailed study and use oj culture is an essential 
part oj the Communist Party's life, and it is impossible to deal with 
American political, social and economic problems without utilizing 
cultural materials.'' [Emphasis in original.] 

Mr. Dobbs, how does the Communist Party utilize the talents of 
its members in the cultiu-al field to further party objectives? 
Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. After the 17th National Convention did not 
Chairman Healey's keynote report to the District Convention warn 
that "culture is today a more effective recruiting tool than it ever 
was in the past"? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. This statement is taken from Exhibit 11, which 
has already been introduced in evidence. 

Mrs. Healey declared that the "economics" of the Communist 
Party was the main appeal during the depression years of the 1930's, 
but that today with "relative prosperity" it is "cultural humanist 
values that more and more define the people's attitude toward both 
domestic and international issues." 

She pointed to people's concern for freedom, for better quality TV 
shows, and so forth, and told the Communists that, "That is where we 
come in. We know the answers, and our job is to communicate 
them." 

Do you recall that? 
Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. The Communist answer, according to Mrs. Healey, 
is the introduction of a Communist system in the United States. And 
Mrs. Healey went on to observe that, since communication is the 
province of the "creative artist," the Communist Party must "make 
use of his gift of eloquence in emotional communication as fully as we 
use the special knowledge of the lawyer, teacher and scientist * * *." 
The role of the party members engaged in cultural endeavors is a very 
important one according to her. Do you agree with that? 
Mr. Dobbs. The same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. I now hand you a document entitled "The Cen- 
tennial of the Civil War in the United States," which I ask to be 
admitted in evidence and marked Dobbs Exhibit No. 21.^^ 

»» Ibid., p. 180. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 81 

Mr, Doyle. So received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, was this document submitted to the 
January 1960 session of the District Convention by the Southern 
Cahfornia Education Department of the party? 

Mr. DoBBS. I decHne to answer that question on the grounds I 
stated prior — to prior questions. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you verify the fact that it is a proposal for 
Communists to study the Marxist version of the history of the Civil 
War and propagate this version by taking part in community programs 
which were held in 1961 in observance of the centennial of the Civil 
War in the United States? 

Mr. ScHERER. I am sorry, Mr. Tavenner, I wasn't paying attention 
when you read the first sentence. Will you read that over again? 

Mr. Tavenner. I asked him to verify the fact that this document 
is a proposal for Communists to study the Marxist version of the 
history of the CivU War and propagate this version by taldng part 
in community programs which were held in 1961 in observance of the 
centennial of the Civil War in the United States. 

Mr. ScHERER. Did you hear that. Governor? 

Mr. Tuck. Yes. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Is there anything in the documents you have that 
would indicate what the Marxist version of the Civil War is? 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to ask the witness to describe the 
Marxist version of the Civil War. 

Mr. DoBBs. And I respectfully decline to answer on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, I now hand you an unsigned letter 
addressed to President Eisenhower, which I will ask to be admitted 
in evidence and marked Dobbs Exhibit No. 22.^° 

Will you admit that in evidence, please? 

Mr. Doyle. It wiU be so received and so marked. 

Let the record show that the witness and his counsel are examining 
the last exhibit. 

Mr. Tavenner. This letter urges the President to commute the 
prison sentence of Morton SobeU, who was convicted for Communist 
espionage activities. 

Mr. Dobbs, is it not a fact this letter was distributed at the January 
1960 session of the Southern California District Convention? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was it not the intent of the party to have many 
such letters mailed to the President under different signatures in 
order to give an impression that there was substantial popular 
sentiment in favor of Sobell's release from prison? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer, same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you also look at this District Convention 
document, which is entitled "Draft Declaration of Aims and Tasks," 
subheading entitled " The Nature of the Communist Party," another 
subheading entitled, "Peaceful Coexistence," another "Progress in a 
Peacetime Economy," another "The Defense of Democracy," another 

30 Ibid., p. 182. 



82 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

^^ The American Road to Socialism," another "Our Socialist Potential," 
which I offer in evidence and ask be marked Dobbs Exliibit No. 23. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Let the record show the witness and his counsel are examining 
Exhibit 23. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, is this one of the draft resolutions 
proposed by the national Communist Party organization for formal 
action at the 17th National Convention? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. ScHERER. May we interrupt and go off the record? 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I would like the document, Ex- 
hibit No. 23, to be retained in the committee files rather than made 
a part of the committee record. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so ordered. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, is not this document on party organ- 
ization another draft resolution submitted to the District Conventions 
and scheduled for action at the 17th National Convention? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to decline to answer that question on the 
same grounds. 

Mr. Johansen. Mr. Chairman, at this point, to clarify the record, 
the 17th Convention that is referred to is the National Convention 
of the Communist Party, U.S.A.? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, held in December 1959. 

(Document marked "Dobbs Exliibit No. 23" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Tavenner. I offer in evidence a document entitled "Resolution 
on Party Organization" and ask that it be marked Dobbs Exhibit 
No. 24 for retention in the committee files. 

Mr, Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Let the record show the witness and counsel are examining Dobbs 
Exhibit 24. 

Mr. Dobbs. What is your question in relation to this particular 
document? 

Mr. Tavenner. There was no question. 

(Document marked "Dobbs Exhibit No. 24" and retained in 
committee files.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, I now refer you to Exhibit 22, which 
you may recall is the letter distributed to the convention delegates 
asking clemency for Morton Sobell. Will you tell the committee, 
please, whether the Communist Party in Southern California has 
agitated or sponsored demonstrations for the release of Sobell? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 
******* 

Mr. Tavenner. Is the Los Angeles Committee for Protection of 
Foreign Born under the control of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Dobbs. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it not a fact that Rose Chernin is executive 
director of the Los Angeles Committee for Protection of Foreign 
Born? 

Mr. Dobbs. I didn't get your question. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it not correct that Rose Chernin is the executive 
director of the Los Angeles Committee for Protection of Foreign Born? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 83 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer as previously stated and on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you aware that Rose Chernin was a delegate 
to the Communist Party convention that we have been discussing? 

Mr, DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether the 
Communist Party directs and controls the programs of the American 
Russian Institute? 

Mr. DoBBS. I decline to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is Reva Mucha ZwoHnski executive director of 
the American Russian Institute? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was she not a delegate to the convention, the 
District Convention, the Second District Convention? 

Mr. DoBBS. Same answer. 

Mr. Doyle. Same grounds? 

Mr. DoBBS. On the same grounds, yes. 

Mr. Okrand. I would suppose it wouldn't be necessar}^ to repeat 
that each time. 

Mr. Doyle. I notice sometunes the witness adds "on the same 
grounds" and sometunes he doesn't add it. 

Mr. ScHERER. Really it should be "I refuse to answer for the same 
reason" because you are not giving an answer. 

Mr. DoBBS. That is the answer, I refuse to answer for the same 
reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. "For the same reason." If you express it that 
way, we understand what you mean. 

Mr. Scherer. Isn't it proper to say, "I refuse to answer for the 
same reason," rather than "Same answer," because it isn't an answer 
but a refusal to answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is right. 

Are you familiar with the Constitutional Liberties Information 
center of Los Angeles? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer the question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is Reuben W. Borough chairman of that organiza- 
tion? 

Mr. DoBBS. I decline to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. What part does the Communist Party play in the 
Fair Play for Cuba Committee? ^^ 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Witness, do you know whether or not the Com- 
munist Party plays any part in connection with the Fair Play for 
Cuba Committee? 

Mr. DoBBS. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Isn't it a fact that the Communist Party supports 
it wholeheartedly? 

31 See testimony of Albert Jorgenson Lewis and Steve Roberts, taken in Los Angeles, Calif., Apr. 26 and 27, 
1962, respectively, and committee report printed separately under title Communist and Trotskyist ActivitV 
Within the Oreater Los Angeles Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. 



84 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OP THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand you a photograph which I offer in evidence 
and ask that it be marked Dobbs Exhibit No. 25.^^ 

Mr. Doyle. So received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you examine it, please, and state whether or 
not it is a picture of a picket line of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee 
in which you are taking part and in which you are holding a placard? 

Mr. Dobbs. I decline to answer the question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the witness and counsel 
examined the exhibit. 

Mr. Tavenner. Does this photograph show that the placard, 
which the man in the light suit is carrying, bears the inscription 
"Cuba Si"? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. And is not that individual you? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer on the same grounds, 

Mr. Scherer. Well, it is obvious, and I think the record should 
show, the photograph I am now looking at is that of the present 
witness. 

Mr. Johansen. And that this photograph is Exhibit No. 25. 

Mr. Doyle. And I am looking at the same exhibit and I look at 
the witness and I submit that I can tell from the picture that the 
witness before us is one and the same man, with his head up in the air, 
holding a sign, and on that sign it says, "Cuba Si." 

What does that "Si" refer to, Mr. Witness? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am still going to refuse to answer on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Johansen. Mr. Chairman, I would like to observe that this 
is a new version of the old Chinese saying. This is a case in which 
one picture is worth a thousand invocations of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. That picture, may I say, is dated at the left-hand 
corner "April 15, 1961." 

Mr. Tavenner. And I would like to ask the witness whether he 
engaged in a picket line activity of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee 
on — what date? 

Mr. Scherer. April 15, 1961. 

Mr. Tavenner. April 15, 1961, in Los Angeles? 

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
grounds as stated. 

Mr. Scherer. For the record, "Si" means what in English? 
"Yes"? 

Mr. Tuck. It means "Yes," "Cuba Yes." 

Mr. Doyle. I think the picture Congressman Scherer is holding 
in his hand clearly shows the witness was, that day, holdmg the sign 
"Cuba Si" and also in the picture are two women also holding signs 
and three men holding signs, apparently picket signs, of the same 
general type as that held by the witness, although with different 
wording than there is on that sign. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, whether one 
of the assignments of the Communist Party in Los Angeles is to 
conduct agitation within the Fair Play for Cuba Committee? 

32 See committee Report and Appendix, " United Front" Technique of the Southern California D' Met of the 
Communist Party, p. 183. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 85 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do members of the SociaHst Workers Party hold 
offices in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Isn't it correct, Mr. Dobbs, that a meeting of the 
Fair Play for Cuba Committee was held in the Severance Room of the 
First Unitarian Church in Los Angeles on February 20, 1961, at which 
time the Communist Party members were ordered to attend and to 
attempt to gain positions of leadership in the Fair Play for Cuba 
Committee? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds pre- 
viously stated. 

Air. Tavenner. Did the Communists fail in their attempt at that 
time? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 
******* 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Scherer. Witness, do you ever use any name other than Ben 
Dobbs? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Were you born "Dobbs," "Ben Dobbs"? 

Mr, Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Where were you born? 

Mr. Dobbs. New York City. 

Mr. Scherer. Does your birth certificate show your name to be 
"Ben Dobbs"? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Scherer. What does the birth certificate show? 

Mr. Dobbs. And I still refuse to answer that question on the 
grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Have you ever seen your birth certificate? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question as well on the same 
grounds. 

Mr, Scherer, Did you ever travel abroad? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question as well on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Scherer. Have you ever made request for passport? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds, 

Mr. Scherer. Did you ever change your name in any court? 

Mr, Dobbs, I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr, Scherer. That is all the questions I have. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, do you know whether Vincent Fraga 
was active in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 



86 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OP THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he a delegate — ^or rather, was he elected as 
an alternate delegate to the 17th National Convention of the Com- 
munist Party? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. You know Vincent Fraga, do you not? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know where he is now? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. You do, as a matter of fact, know that he has 
defected to Cuba, do you not? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. ScHERER. What was the name of the person? 

Mr. Tavenner. Fraga, F-r-a-g-a, Vincent Fraga. 

What are the means, Mr. Dobbs, of dissemination of Communist 
propaganda in Los Angeles? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds 
reviously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is the Progressive Book Shop at 1806 West 
Seventh Street a propaganda outlet for the Communist Party? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is Frank Spector the general manager of the 
Progressive Book Shop? 

Mr. Dobbs. I decline to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was he not a delegate to th-e Southern California 
Communist Party District Convention, the Second Convention? 

Mr. Dobbs. I decline to answer that question for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is there a Communist Party book store located at 
4507 South Central Avenue, sometimes referred to as Gordon's 
Bookshop? ^^ 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Dobbs, the conimittee's investigation shows 
that as late as last night you and Hugh DeLacy and Frank Wilkinson 
were in a meeting at the First Unitarian Church to assist in making 
plans for picketing these proceedings here today; is that correct? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Scherer. Is that the same Unitarian Church of which Stephen 
Fritchman is the pastor? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, it is. 

Mr. Scherer. Is that the same Stephen Fritchman who was before 
our committee a couple years ago and took the fifth amendment when 
asked questions about his Communist Party membership? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, it is. 

Hugh DeLacy is a member of the Communist Party, is he not? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Frank Wilkinson was a paid functionary of the 
Communist Party in Los Angeles, was he not? 

Mr, Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Scherer. I want to pursue this a little farther. I just asked 
if Reverend Fritchman was a witness before us and invoked the fifth 
amendment when asked about his o^vn party membership. Is that 
correct? 

33 Hugh H. Gordon Bookshop. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 87 

Mr. Tavexner. Yes. 

What influence did the Communist Party exercise m the formation 
of the picket lines that are picketing this committee today? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. Would you deny, Witness, that you and other Com- 
munists were not the prime movers in the picketmg of the committee 

todav? , . , 

Mr. DoBBS. And I still refuse to answer the question on the same 

grounds. . i , , • ^r 

Mr. Tavenner. Under what auspices was the meeting held m the 
Unitarian Church last night, which would be April 23, attended 
allegedly by you, Hugh DeLacy, and Frank Wilkinson? 

Mr. DoBBS. I refuse to answer that question as well on the same 

grounds. p . -lo 

Mr. Scherer. When did Wilkinson get out ot jailr' 

Mr. Wheeler. The first week of February. 

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

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. No. 

Mr. Doyle. Governor? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions of the witness, Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. No further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Just one question, please, Witness. t^ , , <, 

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

Mr. Dobbs. I am going to refuse to answer that question on the 
grounds previously stated, Congressman. ^ , r^ 

Mr. Johansen. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 

Party? . , , 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Scherer. Has this witness been identified before this com- 
mittee as a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Scherer. Is that identification of you correct? 

Mr. Dobbs. I refuse to answer that question as — well, I answered 
that long ago. That is, I refused to answer it long ago. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is all. 

Mr. Doyle. You are excused, then, Mr. Dobbs, from the subpena 
and thank you. Counsel. 

Mr. Okrand. Thank you. 
******* 

Mr. Doyle. The subcommittee stands adjourned until tomorrow 

at 8 a.m. ., , , -i. 

(Whereupon at 5:40 p.m., Tuesday, April 24, 1962, the subcommit- 
tee recessed to reconvene at 8 a.m., Wednesday, April 25, 1962.) 



"UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 



WEDNESDAY, APBIL 25, 1962 

United States House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Los Angeles, Calif. 

executive session ^ 

The subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities 
met, pursuant to recess, at 8 a.m., in Room 519, United States Federal 
Building, Hon. Clyde Doyle (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Subcommittee members: Representatives Clyde Doyle, of Cali- 
fornia; Edwin E. Willis, of Louisiana; WUliam M. Tuck, of Virginia; 
Gordon H. Scherer, of Ohio; and August E. Johansen, of Michigan. 

Subcommittee members present: Representatives Clyde Doyle, 
William M. Tuck, Gordon H. Scherer, and August E. Johansen. 

Staff members present: Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., director, and 
William A. Wheeler, investigator. 

Mr. Doyle. The subcommittee will come to ordei". 

Mr. Fred Cannon, please raise your right hand and be sworn. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you ai'e about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole trutli, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Cannon. Yes. 

TESTIMONY OF FRED A. CANNON, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

BENNET OIAN 

Mr. Tavenner. You are Mr. Cannon? 

Mr. Cannon. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you please state your full name? 

Mr. Cannon. Fred A. Cannon. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted you are accompanied by counsel. Will 
counsel please identifv himself for the record? 

Mr. Olan. BennetOlan, 212 South Gale Drive, Beverly HUls. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you reside, Mr. Cannon? 

Mr. Cannon. 11111 Wilmington Avenue. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your occupation? 

Mr. Cannon. I am a printer and siscn painter. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will vou ph>ase tell us the date and place of your 
birth? 



> Released by the committee and ordered to be printed. 



90 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Cannon. I would like to know how this is relevant to the 
hearing. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is a matter of identification of you. 

Mr. Cannon. I was born in 1907, in Nairn, Louisiana, Parish of 
Plaquemines. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Cannon, the committee's investigation dis- 
closes that you attended the Los Angeles County Communist Party 
Convention, wliich was held on January 6, 1957. 

We would like for you to either verify that or explain it, if 3^ou like. 

Mr. Cannon. Before I answer any question, I would like to know 
what the legislative purpose of this hearing is for. 

Mr. Scherer. If we tell you what the legislative purpose is, will 
you answer the question then? 

Mr. Cannon. I prefer to hear the legislative purpose before I 
answer any questions. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, may I read the pertinent part of 
the opening statement that you read at the beginning? 

Mr. Doyle. Proceed, if you will. Counsel, and do that. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's resolution, adopted January 17, 
1962, authorizing these hearings, adequately sets forth the subjects 
and purposes. 

This is a statement that the chairman of this subcommittee made 
at the opening of these hearings. The resolution controlling the first 
phase of the hearings reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American Ac- 
tivities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative 
purpose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress 
in determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in 
a manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United 
States * * *. 

The chau-man of the subcommittee also explained that at the time 
that resolution was passed, on January 17, the staff of this committee 
was assisting him in the preparation of a bill which he introduced 
on January 30th of this year, which is H.R. 9944, which amends the 
Internal Security Act of 1950 — that is, amends the registration pro- 
visions of it — and makes membership in the Communist Party 
unlawful, and that bill has been referred to this committee, and 
these hearings relate to that. 

Now, will you answer the question, please, sir? 

Mr. Cannon. I refuse to answer because it is not a valid legislative 
purpose and because of my rights under the first and fifth amendment, 
under the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. 

Mr. Doyle. I will mstruct you to answer the question. 

Mr. Cannon. I refuse to answer on my right of the fu-st and fifth 
amendment of the Constitution. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you advise the committee, please, whether 
or not you have been the duly constituted representative from your 
Communist Party section to District Council meetings since 1957? 

Mr. Cannon. I refuse to answer under the first and fifth amend- 
ment of the Constitution. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you also attended meetings of the Com- 
munist Party's District Negro Commission in Los Angeles? 

Mr. Cannon. I refuse to answer on the first and fifth amendment. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 91 

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

Mr. Cannon. I refuse to answer under the first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions, Governor? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Congressman Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. Was the witness asked his present occupation? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, and he advised that he did something in 
regard to printing, I believe. 

Mr. Scherer. Yes, I recall now. That is all I have. No further 
questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Air. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. No. 

Mr. Doyle. I have one question. 

Witness, this committee is here, as stated by our counsel and read 
to you under the resolution, the statement made at the opening of 
these hearings, for a legislative purpose which is the legislation which 
relates to subversive activity groups. 

Have you any recommendations in the field of legislation which you 
would give us? 

Mr. Cannon. No, I refuse to answer any questions on my rights 
under the first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. You think any recommendation by you in the field of 
of legislation might subject you to criminal prosecution? 

Mr. Cannon. I am afraid if I answer a question it may invalidate 
my rights under the first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no further questions. 

The witness then is excused. Thank you. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Call the next witness, Mr. Tavenner. 

It might interest you, Counsel, to know that on this subcommittee 
this morning, three of us are lawyers. 

Mr. Olan. I appreciate that fact, Mr. Doyle. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Howard G. Louks, will you please raise your right 
hand and be sworn? 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Louks. Yes. 

TESTIMONY OF HOWARD G. LOUKS, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

FRANK S. PESTANA 

Air. Tavenner. What is your name please, sir? 

Mr. Louks. Howard Louks. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will counsel accompanying the witness please 
identify himself for the record? 

Mr. Pestana. Yes, I am Frank Pestana. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you reside, Mr. Louks? 

Mr. Louks. Sir, I dechne to answer that question on all the grounds 
afforded me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I have a direction that the witness answer? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, I direct you to answer. 

It is merely a matter of identification. 



92 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. LouKS. I decline to answer, sir, on all the grounds afforded me 
by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. ScHERER. Witness, do you honestly believe that to tell this 
committee where you reside might lead to a criminal prosecution? 

Mr. LouKS. Same answer. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, I ask that you direct the witness to 
answer that question, because the courts have said that we have a 
right to test whether he is invoking the fifth amendment in good faith, 
and he must either answer yes or no to that question. He cannot 
invoke the fifth amendment when we ask him if he is invoking the 
fifth amendment in good faith, and that is what I did. 

If he honestly believes that to tell us where he lives might lead to 
criminal prosecution 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question, Witness. 

Mr. LouKS. Sir, I decline to answer the question on the same 
grounds of all of the rights guaranteed me under the Constitution of 
the United States. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you subpenaed to appear before this com- 
mittee as a witness on April 24? 

Mr. LouKS. I decline to answer the question, sir. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question. Witness. 

Mr. Pestana. May I know what the question was, Counsel? 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you subpenaed to appear before this com- 
mittee as a witness? 

Mr. LouKS. What is the pertinency or relevancy of the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. We want to find out who you are. 

You have appeared here in answer to a name, and I want to make 
certain you are the person we subpenaed. 

Mr. LouKS. My name is Howard Louks. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you subpenaed to appear here this morning? 

Mr. Louks. Yes, I was. I have it. 

Mr. Tavenner. I offer in evidence, Mr. Chairman, a copy of the 
subpena, on which Frank Bland, sheriff, by his deputy, W. H. Stone, 
made a return of service at 17636 Santa Ana Avenue, Bloomington, 
California. 

Is that the place of your residence? 

Mr. Louks. The same answer, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. May the copy of the subpena be introduced in 
evidence and marked Louks Exhibit No. 1? 

Mr. Doyle. It will be received. 

(Document marked "Louks Exhibit No. 1" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Scherer. I think there ought to be a direction to answer the 
question as to whether he was subpenaed at that address, Mr. Chair- 
man. 

Mr. Doyle. I will direct you, Witness, to answer the question 
whether or not you were subpenaed at the address which our counsel 
read, shown on the face of the subpena. 

Mr. Scherer. It is obviously an improper invocation of the fifth 
amendment; obviously not invoked in good faith, because it could not 
possibly lead to a criminal prosecution. 

Mr. Doyle. That is correct. You understand my direction, Wit- 
ness and Counsel? 

Mr. Louks. Same answer, sir. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 93 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Louks, were you the duly constituted repre- 
sentative on the District Committee of the Communist Party of 
Southern Cahfornia from the Riverside-San Bernardino Section of the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Louks. I decHne to answer that question, sir, on all the grounds 
afforded me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. ScHERER. Now, in invoking all the grounds afforded you, does 
your refusal include the self-incrimination provision of the fifth 
amendment? 

Mr. Louks. It includes all the grounds of the Constitution, sir. 

Mr. ScHERER. I am asking you whether it includes the self-incrimi- 
nation provision of the fifth amendment? 

Mr. Louks. All of the grounds, sir. It includes all of the grounds 
of the Constitution. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, I asked him a direct question. The 
law specifically says when we want to know whether a witness is in- 
voking the fifth amendment that the witness must answer. 

It is elementary. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer is going at length to make it clear what 
we believe the situation is, and I direct you to answer the question, 

Mr. Louks. I think I answered the question, sir. It's the same 
answer. 

Mr. Doyle. You are making the same answer now that you pre- 
viously made, in spite of my direction that you answer the question? 

Mr. Louks. I decline to answer the question on all the grounds 
granted to me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Scherer. The witness is guUty of contempt. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Louks, were you a delegate to the Second 
Convention of the Communist Party for the Southern District of 
California 

Mr. Louks. I decline to answer the question for the same reasons, 
sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Just a moment. 

— at its first session, held November 20, 21, and 22, 1959? 

Mr. Louks. I decline to answer the question, sir, for the same 
reasons I have given before. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you also attend the second session of that con- 
vention, which was held January 29, 30, and 31, 1960, as a delegate? 

Mr. Louks. I decline to answer, sir, for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation refiects, Mr. Louks, 
that you made a report to the second session of the convention, on 
January 30, 1960, at which time you said that as a result of the reports 
that came out of the National Convention, and given to the people in 
the vSan Bernardino and Riverside areas, the party had commenced 
to grow. 

Did you make that report? 

Mr. Louks. I decline to answer, sir, for the reasons given before. 

Mr. Tavenner. To what extent has the party grown since the 
date of this convention in 1960? 

Mr. Louks. Same answer, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you not elected on January 31, 1960, to 
membership on the new District Committee? 

Mr. Louks. The answer is the same, sir. 



94 -UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Is it correct that ^''oii were a member of the 
Independent Progressive Partv State Central Committee during- the 
period of 1948 to 1952? ' 

Mr. LouKS. The answer is the same, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you attend District C^ommittee meetings of 
the Commimist Party for the Southern District of Cahfornia on the 
following dates: November 1960? 

Mr. LouKS. Same answer. 

Mr, Tavenner. And then the District Council meetings in Jan- 
uary of 1959, April of 1959, and December of 1959? 

Mr. LouKS. Same answer, sir. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you a member of the Commanist Party, 
todaj^? 

Mr. LouKS. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Question, Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Witness and Counsel, you are excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Johansen. Do you have his address to mail the check? 

Mr. Wheeler. Yes. 

Mr. Scherer. He just gave 3'ou his address? 

Mr. Wheeler. No, I had it. 

Mr. Scherer. I heard him say 50 miles. 

Mr. Wheeler. He lives at Bloomington, California, 17636 Santa 
Ana Avenue. 

Mr. Doyle. Mrs. Helen Weingast, witness, will you please rise and 
raise your right hand? 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. Weingast. Yes. 

TESTIMONY OF HELEN WEINGAST, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

FRANK S. PESTANA 

Mr. Tavenner. You are Mrs. Weingast? 

Mrs. Weingast. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you give your full name, please, and spell it? 

Mrs. Weingast. Helen Weingast, H-e-1-e-n W-e-i-n-g-a-s-t. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you use the middle name of Kurst? 

Mrs. Weingast. No. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you also known as Mrs. Sol Weingast? 

Mrs. Weingast. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your middle name — I mean your maiden 
name? 

Mrs. Weingast. My maiden name, K-u-r-s-t,-Kurst. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will counsel accompanying the witness please 
identify himself? 

I believe it is the same counsel? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 95 

Mr. Pestana. Yes, the same Frank Pestana previously with the 
witness just preceding. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where were you born, Mrs, Weingast? 

Mrs. Weingast. I dechne to answer. 

Mr. Doyle. I mstruct the witness to answer. It is a matter of 
identification we are entitled to have, we are sm'e. 

Mrs. Weingast. Where I was born, was Austria. 

Mr. Scherer. I didn't hear the answer. 

Mr. Pestana. Austria. > 

Mrs. Weingast. Austria, where I was born. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you an American citizen? 

Mrs. Weingast. Yes, sh. 

Mr. Tavenner. When were you naturalized and where? 

Mrs. Weingast. July, I believe, 31, 1928, in Brooklyn. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where? 

Mrs. Weingast. Brooklyn. 

Mr. Tavenner. In Brooklyn. Where do you now reside? 

Mrs. Weingast. I decline to answer. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer. Witness. 

We believe it is a matter we are entitled to have. It is a matter of 
identification. 

Mrs. Weingast. You have — ^I decline to answer on all the grounds 
afforded me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Scherer. Do you honestly believe if you told us where you 
live at this time that that might lead to a criminal prosecution? 

Mrs. Weingast. I decline to answer all the question for the same 
reason. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now, when you say that you refuse to answer the 
question on the rights afforded you under the Constitution, does that 
include the self-incrimination provision of the fifth amendment as a 
basis for your refusal to answer? 

Mrs. Weingast. I give you same answer, sir. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, I ask you to direct the witness to 
answer that question. 

Mr. Doyle. Witness, I direct you to answer the qaestion which 
was just asked you by CongTessman Scherer. 

Mrs. Weingast. I still decline to answer on the same basis, on all 
the questions. 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, unless she does answer that question, 
she doesn't avail herself of the protection or the guarantee under the 
provision. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, she has her legal adviser with her. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Weingast, do you appear here pursuant to 
the provisions of a subpena served on you by an officer? 

Mrs. Weingast. Yes, I have a subpena. 

Mr. Tavenner. I offer in evidence a copy of the subpena served 
upon this witness, where the return shows it was served on "Helen 
Weingast at 9510 Mango, Fontana, Calif." 

May it be accepted in evidence? 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received. 

(Document marked "Weingast Exhibit No. 1" and retained in 
committee files.) 

Mr. Tavenner, Were you served at the place of your residence? 

Mrs. Weingast. Same answer, I give you, sir. 

20-004 — 63 4 



96 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you formerly reside at 408 237th Street, 
Wilmington, California? 

Will you answer the question, please? 

Mrs. Weingast. Would you please repeat the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you formerly reside, in fact, in 1944, at 408 
237th Street, Wilmington, Cahfornia? 

Mrs. Weingast. I will decline this question on the same basis as 
I answered the former questions. 

Mr. Tavenner. During the year 1944 were you a member of the 
Communist Political Association in San Pedro, California? 

Mrs. Weingast. I decline to answer any questions, same basis, on 
all groimds of all the questions. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you become a member of the Communist 
Party in New York City in 1935? 

Mrs. Weingast. I decline to answer on all grounds of the same way. 

Mr. Johansen. I couldn't hear the last of that. 

Mr. Pestana. Same way. 

Mr. Johansen. I'm asking the witness, Counsel. 

Mr. Pestana. I was trying to help. 

Mrs. Weingast. Same rule. 

I am hoarse, I decline to answer on the basis which I answered — 
as I answered all the questions. 

Mr. Johansen. Thank you. 

Mr. Tavenner. When did you first become a resident of the State 
of California? 

Mrs. Weingast. I did the same answer, sir, I decline to answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I have a direction? 

Mr. Doyle. I direct j^ou to answer that question. It is a matter 
of identity we believe we are entitled to have. 

Mrs. Weingast. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you become financial secretary in 1951 of the 
Riverside-San Bernardino Section of the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Weingast. I decline to answer on the same grounds on all of 
the questions. 

Mr. Tavenner. And do you hold that position at this time? 

Mrs. Weingast. I decline to answer, sir. I decline to answer, as 
previously — on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you attend the first session of the Second Con- 
vention of the Southern California District of the Commimist Party 
on November 20, 1959? 

Mrs. Weingast. I decline to answer on the same grounds on all 
the questions. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you in attendance at the second session? 

Mrs. Weingast. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you. Witness and Counsel, you are excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Don Matsuda, wiU you please raise your right 
hand and be sworn? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 97 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Matsuda. Yes. 

TESTIMONY OF DON MATSUDA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
ARTHUR A. BROOKS, Jr. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your full name, please, and spell 
your last name? 

Mr. Matsuda. Don M-a-t-s-u-d-a. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will counsel accompanying the witness please 
identify himself for the record? 

Mr. Brooks. Arthur A. Brooks, Jr., 5455 Wilshire Boulevard, Los 
Angeles 36. 

Mr. Tavenner. When and where were you born, Mr. Matsuda? 

Mr. Matsuda. I decline on the basis 

Mr. Brooks. No, no. 

Mr. Matsuda. I was born in Los Angeles, 1924. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you reside? 

Mr. AIatsuda. 1235 South Mariposa. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you speak up a little? 

Mr. Matsuda. 1235 South Mariposa, Los Angeles. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your occupation? 

Mr. Matsuda. TV repairman. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee briefly what your 
formal educational training has been? 

What schools have you attended? 

Mr. Matsuda. Well, I have attended city schools in Los Angeles, 
and a year in the University of Chicago. 

Mr. Tavenner. When did you attend the LTniversity of Chicago? 

Mr. Matsuda. 1946 and 1947. 

Mr. Tavenner. During the investigation 

Mr, Brooks. Mr. Tavenner, I think he wants to enlarge on his 
educational background. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Matsuda. Well, I had military training in the United States 
Army; served in the combat team in the 442 Combat Team, under the 
infantry battalion in Italy. I had a Presidential unit citation with 
two oak leaf clusters and four battle stars. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, that is a very excellent record. We are 
quite proud of the record of that unit in the Army, and I beHeve this 
committee was entertained once in Hawaii by that battle group. 

Mr. Johansen. Isn't that the unit that Congressman Inouye, our 
colleague, served in? 

Mr. Tavenner. I think it is, yes. 

Well I want to congratulate you on your war record. ^ 

When did you return to California from your service in the Armed 
Forces? 

Mr. Matsuda. In 1952, I believe I returned. I didn't return 
immediately to California. 

Mr. Tavenner. Speak up a little. 

Mr. Matsuda. I returned to California in 1952. 

Mr. Tavenner. What has been your employment since 1952? 



98 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

You are now employed in TV service work, I understand. How 
long have you been so employed? 

Mr. Matsuda. Oh, about 5 years. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee, in the course of the investigation 
it conducted in Los Angeles in 1958, learned through its investigation 
that you were a functionary of the Communist Party at that time 
and that you attended a meeting of district organizational secretaries 
of the Communist Party in the year 1958. 

We would like you to tell us whether our investigation is correct ; 
if it isn't, what explanation you have, if you have any? 

Mr. Matsuda. I would like to know what the pertinency of that 
question is to the purposes of the investigation. 

Mr. Tavenner. With the chaii-man's permission 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, Counsel, read that. 

Mr. Tavenner. The chairman of the subcommittee made a state- 
ment at the beginning of the hearings here, which included the 
resolution adopted by the committee on January 17, 1962, authorizing 
the hearings, and the resolution itself pretty fiilly states the purpose'^ 
the subject, and the legislative purpose of the hearings. 

The resolution reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American Ac- 
tivities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate, relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative pur- 
pose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in 
determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a 
manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Partv of the United 
States * * *. 

The chairman of the subcommittee also explained that at the time 
that resolution was passed, on January 17, the staff of this committee 
was assisting him in the preparation of a bill which he introduced 
on January 30 of this year, which is H.R. 9944, which amends the 
Internal Security Act of 1950 — that is, amends the registration 
provisions of it — and makes membership in the Communist Party 
unlawful, and that bill has been referred to this committee, and these 
hearings relate to that. 

Now, will you answer the question, please? 

Mr. Matsuda. I decline to answer on the basis of the privileges 
granted me under the fifth and first amendments to the Constitution. 

Mr. Tavenner. You are referring to that provision of the fifth 
amendment relating to testifying in a matter that might involve 
yourself? 

Mr. Matsuda. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation reflects — that is, 
the present mvestigation — that you attended the second session of 
the Second Convention of the Communist Party of the Southern Dis- 
trict of California on January 29, 1960, at which time you addressed 
the convention. 

Do you recall that? 

Mr. Matsuda. I decline to answer on the same grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you not, in fact, attend that convention and 
address the convention? 

Mr, Matsuda. Same answer. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 99 

Mr. Tavexner. Did you not take the floor of the convention and 
call its attention to the fact that the Japanese people were let out of 
the party during the time that they were not citizens and that the 
party should look into the matter and make an effort to get the Japa- 
nese in the community back into the Communist Party? 

Mr. Matsuda. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you not, on January 31, 1960, elected as one 
of the 30-member District Committee at the second session of the 
Second Convention of the Communist Party of the Southern District 
of California? 

Mr. Matsuda. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you not assigned to recruit Japanese into 
the Communist Party? 

Mr. Matsuda. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you directed by Communist Party head- 
quarters, or did you on your own vohtion join in a picket line spon- 
sored by the Fair Play for Cuba Committee on April 15, 1961, and 
again on April 19, 1961? 

Mr. Matsuda. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer a photograph 
in evidence and have it marked Matsuda Exhibit No. 1.^ 

Mr, Doyle. It will be so received. 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand the witness Matsuda Exhibit No. 1 and 
ask him if the person in the foreground, apparently holding a picket 
sign, is a picture of himself? 

Mr. Doyle. May the record show that the witness and his counsel 
are examining the photograph? 

Mr. Matsuda. I decline to answer on the constitutional grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Please hand the photograph to the chairman and 
ask him to examine the photograph. 

Mr. Doyle. I will ask the other members of the subcommittee to 
examine tiiis photograph with me. 

It has been offered by counsel. 

Mr. ScHERER. It is obvious to me that the picture in this photo- 
graph is that of the witness before us. 

Mr. Doyle. Governor Tuck, what is your observation? 

Mr. Tuck. I would say there is no question about it. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. I certainly agree. 

Mr. Doyle. I agree that he is a good-looking native of California, 
like I am a native son of California. 

Mr. Scherer. Well, let's not compliment him too much, taking 
the fifth amendment on his Communist Party activities. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, I can compliment him on being born in the 
great State. 

I return this photo, and we all agree that it is one and the same. 

Mr. Johansen. Mr. Chairman, I think in response to numerous 
questions the witness has said, "The same answer." 

I assume that he intended to convey in each instance that it was a 
refusal to answer, rather than an answer, and that he based the refusal 

1 See committee Report and Appendix, " United Front" Technique of the Southern California District of the 
Communist Party, p. 183. 



100 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

on the same constitutional grounds that he had previously, or origi- 
nally, invoked, is that correct? 

Mr. Matsuda. That is correct. 

Mr. ScHEEER. And as I recall, the grounds that he invoked involved 
the self-incrimination provision of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. That is my understanding. 

Mr. ScHERER. Is that right? 

Mr. Matsuda. The provision of the fifth amendment which does 
not require a person to testify against himself. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Matsuda, will you tell the committee, please, 
whether or not directives have been issued by the Communist Party 
requiring its membership to cooperate with the Fair Play for Cuba 
Committee? 

Mr. Matsuda. I decline to answer on the grounds of the first and 
fifth amendment to the Constitution. 

Mr. Tavenner. What connection is there between the Communist 
Party and the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in this area? 

Mr. Matsuda. I decline to answer on the basis of the fifth and 
first amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you a member of the Fair Play for Cuba 
Committee? 

Mr. Matsuda. I decline to answer on the basis of the fifth and 
first amendments. 

Mr. Tavenner. I think that's aU, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. Questions, anyone? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have one other question, please. 

I think I have asked the question in another form, but are you now 
an active member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Matsuda. I decline to answer on the basis of the fifth and 
first amendments. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. How many battle stars did you say you were 
awarded. 

Mr. Matsuda. Four. 

Mr. Johansen. No one can fail to recognize and respect courage. 
I wish you had the same courage in the battle we're engaged in now. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. No. 

Mr. Doyle. May I just make this observation to the witness. 

The committee knows that our counsel, asking you the questions 
which he has asked you, would not have asked you about the Com- 
munist Party activities, and so forth, unless we had evidence that 
would substantiate his questions. May I just make this statement 
to you, with all sincerity. The Supreme Court of the United States 
upheld the SACB finding that the Communist Party in the United 
States is an offshoot and an agent of Soviet Russian communism, 
which is an international conspiracy to overthrow our constitutional 
form of government in this country. 

Frankly, I don't understand how a man who has displayed the 
valor you displayed, to get four battle stars, in defense of our freedoms 
in the world can do that and then be identified with an international 
conspiracy that openly says that, if necessary in its judgment, it will 
use force and violence to overthrow this Government of our country. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 101 

I just want to make that observation to you. I don't understand it. 

Mr. ScHERER. Could it be, Mr. Doyle, that at that time Russia, 
or the Soviet Union, was a co-belligerent with the United States? 
Could that have anything to do with it? 

Mr. Doyle. It could, but it isn't any longer, and this man has had 
an education, attended the University of Chicago for a while. I want 
you to think pretty seriously, Matsuda. Aren't you in the wrong 
outfit? Do you belong there? I don't think you do. 

Thank you, Witness and Counsel, you are excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Mrs. Jeanne Katz, will you please rise and be sworn? 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. Katz. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF JEANNEj KATZ, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
ARTHUR A. BROOKS, JR. 

Mr. Tavenner. You are Mrs. Seymour Katz? 

Mrs. Katz. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your first name? 

Mrs. Katz. Jeanne. 

Mr. Tavenner. How do you spell it? 

Mrs. Katz. J-e-a-n-n-e. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted that counsel accompanying the witness 
is the same who appeared with the preceding witness. 

What is your address, please? 

Mrs. Katz. 3811 Tracy Street. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your occupation? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments of the Constitution and also because 
I don't see any pertinency to my reason — I don't know what the 
reason is for my being here. I don't know why the question would 
be pertinent. 

Mr. Scherer. Would you tell her why she is here. Counsel? 

Mr. Tavenner. Of course, that particular question has to do with 
our proper identification. 

But the purpose of the hearings, which I think is what the witness 
is referring to, is set forth in the committee's resolution adopted 
January 17, 1962, which reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American Activi- 
ties, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, CaUfornia, at such time 
as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and ac- 
tivities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative purpose 
of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in deter- 
mining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a manner 
to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United States * * *. 

The chairman of the subcommittee also explained that at the time 
that resolution was passed, on January 17, the staff of this committee 
was assisting him in the preparation of a bill which he introduced on 
January 30th of this year, which is H.R. 9944, which amends the 
Internal Seciu-ity Act of 1950 — that is, amends the registration pro- 
visions of it — and makes membership in the Communist Party unlaw- 



102 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

fill, and that bill has been referred to this committee, and these 
hearings relate to that. 

And you are called here because of an investigation that the staff 
has made, which indicates that you are in a position to give this com- 
mittee a great deal of information relating to Communist Party activi- 
ties in this area. 

Now, will you answer the question, please, as to your occupation? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer on the grounds stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I have a direction? 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you. Witness, to answer that question. 

We believe it has been shown to you that it is pertinent to this 
hearing. 

Mr. Brooks May I have a minute, Mr. Chairman? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds 
stated. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I wonder if the witness would raise her voice. 

Mrs. Katz. Gentlemen, I decline to answer that question on the 
grounds of the fifth and first amendments to the Constitution. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the witness a question? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes. 

Mr. Scherer. Witness, do you honestly believe that to answer the 
question as to your occupation might subject you to a criminal 
prosecution? 

Mrs. Katz. I don't — I would like to stand on those grounds; also 
the fact that I do not believe it is pertinent to the stated purposes. 

Mr. Scherer. I am merely testing the good faith of your invoca- 
tion — your good faith in invoking the fifth amendment, and when we 
have some doubts as to whether you are properly invoking the fifth 
amendment or invoking it in good faith, then the courts say that we 
have a right to ask you and inquire as to whether you honestly believe 
that to answer the question before you — namely, as to your employ- 
ment — might lead to a criminal prosecution, and then the courts say 
you must answer that yes, if you are invoking it in good faith; you 
cannot invoke the fifth amendment to that question. 

Mrs. Katz. Yes, well; I do wish to invoke the first and fifth amend- 
ments, and also I do not believe that it is pertinent to the stated aims 
of the committee or this investigation. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, I again instruct you to answer the question. 

Mrs. Katz. I decline on the grounds stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Are you engaged in any illegal activity at this time, 
since you say that to answer the question might • 

Mrs. Katz. I de — — • 

Mr. Scherer. — 'bring about a possible criminal prosecution? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. When and where were you born, Mrs. Katz? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds that 
I do not see that it is at all pertinent to the stated reason for this 
investigation and also on the grounds of the first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Doyle. Witness, I direct you to answer. 

As a matter of law, we are entitled to know who you are and where 
you were born. It is a matter of identification and rudimentary that 
we are entitled to know that. To say where you were born certainly 
cannot subject you to criminal prosecution. 

Mrs. Katz. Well, I was born in the city of Chicago. I don't see — 
I don't care to sav anything further about it. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 103 

I decline to answer any further questions regarding it. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Even that is not incriminating, even being born in 
Chicago. 

Mr. Tavenner. When did you move to Cahforma? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your maiden name? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask, Mr. Chairman, that you direct the witness. 

Mr. Doyle. I mstruct you to answer. Clearly we are entitled to 
have the identity of a person before us. 

Mr. Brooks. Excuse me just a minute. 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, go ahead. Counsel. 

Mrs. Katz. I decHne to answer that question on the grounds stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Witness, how could telhng us your maiden name 
possibly lead to a criminal prosecution? 

Mrs. Katz. Is that a question, or are you directing me to answer? 

Mr. Scherer. I am asking you a question. 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Scherer. You honestly beHeve that if you told us your maiden 
name, that might subject you m some way to a criminal prosecution? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to' answer the question on the grounds stated. 
I don't believe that it's pertinent to this investigation. I believe it 
is an infringement on my right to freedom of speech, and I invoke tlie 
first and the fifth. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. We are not trying to obstruct your freedom of 
speech. We are trying to get a little 

Mrs. Katz. I feel it is an infringement on my freedom of speech. 

Mr. DoYLE. Well, I am going to make a direction again that you 
answer the question. It is clearly pertinent; I think the record 
shows why it is pertinent. It is also pertinent for a congressional 
committee to know who it is dealing with. 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer the question on the grounds stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you advise the committee, briefly, what your 
formal educational training has been? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to state — to answer the question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Scherer. Well, this is obviously a prostitution of the filth 
amendment by this witness, and she obviously isn't invoking it in 
good faith, and I ask that you du-ect the witness, Mr. Chau-man, to 
answer. 

Mr. DoYLE. I direct you to answer that question. 

Mrs. Katz. Will you repeat the question, please? 

Mr. Tavenner. The question was whether you would advise the 
committee as to your formal educational training. 

Mrs. Katz. High school, graduated, and had approximately 2 
years of college. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where did you have your college work? 

Mrs. Katz. At Crane College m Chicago. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you attended school in California? 

Mrs. Katz. No, I haven't. 

Mr, Tavenner. How long have you been in California, as a resi- 
dent? ^ 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of the 
first and fifth amendments. 



104 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Ta VENNER. Well, you were here in 1942, weren't you? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was your residence in 1942 at 1229 East 36th 
Street? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the ^rounds 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand you an affidavit of res^istration, a photo- 
static copy of such an affidavit, bearing the signature of Mrs. Jeanne 
Katz. 

Will you examine it, please, and state whether that is your signature? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Did the witness look at it before she declined to 
answer the first time? 

Mr. Doyle. No, she did not. I observed. 

Mrs. Katz. I 

Mr. Tavenner. You can't deny it is your signature without 
lookmg at it. 

Mrs. Katz. I am not denying it is my signature. 

I decline to answer the question. 

Mr. Tavenner. You do not deny it is your signature? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline — — 

Mr. Doyle. She just said so. 

Mr. Tavenner. I ofler the document in evidence and ask it be 
marked Katz Exhibit No. 1. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so marked and received. 

(Document marked "Katz Exhibit No. 1" and retained in committee 
files.) 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chau-man, this Affidavit of Kegistration for 
voting purposes was subscribed and sworn to on the 27th dav of June 
1942. -^ 

It states that the affiant is Mrs. Jeanne Katz and that her residence 
is 1229 East 36th Street. 

It also shows the cancellation of her affiliation from Democratic 
and the change to Communist on September 21, 1942. 

Were you a member of the Communist Party on September 21 
1942? ^ 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments to the Constitution. 

Mr. Tavenner. For how long a period, prior to 1942, were you a 
member of the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. John James O'Brien testified before this com- 
mittee on February 11, 1957, at which time he identified you as a 
person known to him to be a member of the Communist Party. 
The date of which would be between the years of 1948 and 1951. 

Were you a member of the Communist Party at any tune during 
that period, that is from 1948 to 1951? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. At this time, you are a member of the Compton 
Club of the Communist Party, is that not correct? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds pre- 
viously stated. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 105 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you have at this time any particular assign- 
ment within the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Katz. I dechne to answer that question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. We have learned during the course of this investi- 
gation of the Communist Party directive to operate in a popular- 
Iront manner. 

We are quite aware of Gus Hall's statement m January ot 1960, 
passing that Communist Party directive down to the rank and file. 

We know of the emphasis placed upon the popular-front activities 
of the Communist Party by its local chairman, Dorothy Healey, and 
the fact that members of the Communist Party have been assigned to 
do that type of work in a great many mass organizations within this 

Were you assigned to engage in that type of work in connection 
with the Women Strike for Peace? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds ot the 
first and fifth amendments to the Constitution. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you attend a meeting at the residence oi 
Betty Willett, at 101 i Rosemont Avenue, Los Angeles, on January 19, 
1962 * * *? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of the 
first and fifth amendments to the Constitution. 

♦ •****♦ 

Mr. Tavenner. Are vou a member of the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Katz. I decline to answer that question on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions, 
r. Doyle. Mr. Tuck? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. No questions. _ 

Mr. Doyle. No further questions. Thank you. Witness and Coun- 
sel. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Schneck, will you please rise and be sworn .^ 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Schneck. Affirm. 

Mr. Doyle. You affirm instead of swear? 

Mr. Schneck. Yes. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record so show. 

TESTIMONY OF MARCO SCHNECK, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

CLAUDE V. WORRELL 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you please state your name and spell it, please, 
both your first and last names? 

Mr. Schneck. My name is M-a-r-c-o S-c-h-n-e-c-k. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted that the witness is accompanied by 
counsel. 



106 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Would counsel please identify himself for the record? 

Mr. Worrell. My name is Claude Worrell. 

Mr. ScHNECK. May I ask the Chair a question? 

I was subpenaed in front of this committee in 1959 and I received 
a telegram postponing me. The day I came, as per telegram, the 
committee had apparently left, and I think I am entitled to the witness 
fee, being as I came and was never informed that I didn't have to 
show up. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I agree with him entu-ely if that 
is a fact. 

Mr. ScHNECK. I have the subpena with me. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you get in touch with the committee about 
it? 

Mr. ScHNECK. I went down to the Statler, I believe, a few minutes 
later and tried to call Mr. Walter, but he wasn't in. 

Mr. Tavenner. I suggest the staff take it up with him and try to 
settle the matter. 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, we will do that and we are glad you called it to 
our attention. 

Mr. Tavenner. You appear here pursuant to a subpena served on 
you? 

Mr. Schneck. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. "\'\Tiere do you reside, Mr. Schneck? 

Mr. Schneck. I'd like to question the legislative purpose or per- 
tinence of this hearing. 

Mr. Doyle. Counsel, will you read the statement? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

The committee's resolution, adopted January 17, 1962, authorizing 
these hearings, adequately sets forth the subjects and purposes. 

This is in a statement that the chairman of the subcommittee made 
at the opening of these hearings. The resolution controlling the first 
phase of the hearings reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative pur- 
pose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in 
determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a 
manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United 
States * * *. 

The chairman of the subcommittee also explained that at the time 
that resolution was passed, on January 17, the staff of this committee 
was assisting him in the preparation of a bill which he introduced on 
January 30 of this year, which is H.R. 9944, which amends the Internal 
Security Act of 1950 — that is, amends the registration provisions of 
it — and makes membership in the Communist Party unlawful, and 
that bill has been referred to this committee, and these hearings 
relate to that. 

Now, if you will proceed to answer the question, please. 

Mr. Schneck. What was the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. The question was. Where do you reside? 

Mr. Schneck. I am going to decline to answer that, first, because 
I think the mandate authorizing this committee is unconstitutional; 
I think the committee is not following the mandate, as stated, in any 
case; and, thirdly, I am going to call on all the rights, responsibilities, 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 107 

privileges, and amenities granted me by the entire Constitution of the 
United States, and most specifically the first, fourth, and fifth and 
ninth amendments to the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer the question, Witness. You 
have heard the statement of the pertinency, and I believe a congres- 
sional committee is always entitled to know he identity of a person 
appearing before the committee. 

Identity is always pertinent, and that is one of the purposes of that 
question. I direct you to answer. 

Mr. ScHXECK. T have answered the question as to my name, thereby 
identifying myself. T am here by virtue of subpena which was served 
on me and I am declining to answer that question on the grounds of 
all the privileges 

Mr. ScHERER. What is the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. His address. 

Mr. Schneck. — guaranteed me by the Constitution, and most 
specificall^T- the first, fourth, fifth, and ninth amendments. 

Mr. Scherer. Witness, do you honestly believe that to answer the 
question as to where you live might lead to criminal prosecution? 

Mr. Schneck. Yes, I do. 

Mr. Scherer. I want to compliment counsel in this case. This is 
the first counsel before us that understood the law with reference to 
that question. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is, the first one during these hearings. 

Mr. Schneck, you stated that you are appearing here pursuant to a 
subpena served on you. 

I hand you what purports to be a copy of the subpena. 

Do you recognize that as a copy of the subpena served on you? 

Mr. Schneck. It looks like it. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I offer the subpena in evidence and 
ask it be marked Schneck Exhibit No. 1. 

I read the return by the deputy sheriff who served the subpena, 
which is as follows: 

I made service of the within subpena by delivering in person [to] the within- 
named person at his home, 3336 Hamilton Wav, Apt. No. 4, Los Angeles, Cali- 
fornia, at 7:00 o'clock, a.m., on the 12th dav of April, 1962. Dated April 12th, 
1962. Peter .J. Pitchess, by D. S. Epperson [Deputy]. 

Mr. Doyle. The subpena will be received and so marked. 

(Document marked "Schneck Exhibit No. 1" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your occupation, Mr. Schneck? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner, Aren't you attending UCLA? 

Mr. Schneck. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Aren't you enrolled in the Preventive Medicine 
Department of the University of California at Los Angeles? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the same grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. When and where were you born? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that question also on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. It manifestly cotild not subject you to criminal 
prosectition to state when and where you were born. 



108 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. ScHNECK. The same answer holds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Weren't you born in Santiago, Chile, on October 3, 
1931? 

Mr. ScHNECK. Would you repeat that, please? 

Mr. Tavenner. Weren't you born in Santiago, Chile, on October 3, 
1931? 

Mr. Schneck. Same answer. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, this is not an answer. In other 
words, if he wishes to decline on the same grounds 

Mr. ScHNECK. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated, and again the constitutional guarantees, and most specifically 
the first, fourth, fifth, and ninth amendments. 

Mr. ScHERER. I think we should have a direction for the witness to 
answer when and where he was born, because I cannot possibly see how 
that might lead to a criminal prosecution. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer the question, Witness. 

Mr. Schneck. I decHne to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. Are you a citizen of the United States, sir? 

Mr. Schneck. I decUne to answer on the groimds previously 
stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask that you direct the witness to answer the 
question. 

I asked whether he was a citizen of the United States; that cannot 
possibly incriminate him. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer the question, Witness. 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you advise the committee, please, what your 
formal educational training has been? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I have a direction that the witness answer 
the question? 

Mr. Doyle. I direct the witness to answer that question. 

Mr. Schneck. Decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Do we have any information, Counsel, as to whether 
this witness is a citizen of the United States? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, sir, I do not. 

Mr. Doyle. Have you asked him whether or not he was natural- 
ized? 

Mr. Tavenner. I have asked him where he was born. 

Mr. Doyle. Witness, what is the name of the community or the 
town in Chile where you were born? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer. It is ridiculous for you to 
undertake to claim the constitutional provision, in our judgment, as 
to where you were born. 

Mr, Schneck. I don't think it's ridiculous and I decline to answer 
on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I think that we might pursue the 
question of his entry into the United States. 

Mr. Doyle. That is right. 

Mr. Scherer. Obviously there must be something wrong. I would 
suggest that counsel for the committee in the investigation make 
inquiry as to whether this man is a citizen of the United States and 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 109 

in view of his testimony here today, if it should develop that he is a 
naturalized citizen, we might consider referring the matter to the 
Justice Department. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you lived in California, Mr. 
Schneck? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. Is this man an exchange student of any kind? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, sir, I don't think so. Our information is that 
his parents live in Los Angeles, which I think would disqualify him 
from being in that category. 

Our investigation does show that he arrived in California in 1944; 
that would also eliminate the matter that you are referring to. 

Mr. Johansen. Does it indicate that his parents are citizens of the 
United States, or natives of the United States? 

Mr. Tavenner. We do not know. 

Mr. Schneck, were you not identified with the American Youth for 
Democracy while that organization was in existence? 

Mr. Schneck. Would you explain, please, what you mean by 
''identified"? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, were you a member of it? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. When the American Youth for Democracy went 
out of existence, were you one of the leading figures in building the 
succeeding organization, known as the Labor Youth League? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. In 1958, did you not become a member of the 
Youth Commission of the Communist Party in the Southern District 
of Cahfornia? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. At the time this committee endeavored to hear 
you in 1959, the investigation disclosed that you had attended the 
First Convention of the newly formed Southern California District 
of Cahfornia, which was held on April 13-14, 1957. 

Was that a correct statement, that you did attend such a con- 
vention? 

Mr. Johansen. That was of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Tavenner. Of the Communist Party, yes. 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated, 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you also attend the second session of the 
Second Convention of the Communist Party of the Southern District 
of California, which was held in January of 1960? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation has disclosed that 
you were elected on January 31, I960, as one of the 30-m ember 
District Committee of the Communist Party for the Southern District 
of California, a newly organized group; is that correct? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Charlene Mitchell, chairman of the Youth Com- 
mission of the Southern California District of the Communist Party, 
delivered a lengthy report on party j^outh work at the first session of 
the Second Convention of the Southern California District of the 
Commimist Party. (See Dobbs Exhibit No. 14.^) 

Are you familiar with the contents of her report? 

2 Ibid., p. 145. 



110 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. ScHXECK. I decline to answer on the grounds previousl;^ stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. This report, which was approved by the conven- 
tion, stated that the organization of young Communists in Los 
Angeles has taken many forms since the dissolution of the Labor 
Youth League, but the present organization was a Communist Party 
youth club. 

Now, were you a member of the Los Angeles Communist Party 
Youth Club? 

Mr. ScHNECK. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The main task for Communist youth, this report 
states, is to master the party's united-front strategy. 

This is explained as finding "ways and means of establishing more 
extensive personal contacts and friendships, and wider formal and in- 
formal organized political relationships" with others. United action 
on certain issues must be sought with left-wing, progressive, middle- 
of-the-road, and even conservative forces, this report states. 

Will you tell the committee, please, what you consider to be the 
purposes of such united-front activities by the Communist youth 
groups? 

Mr. ScHNECK. Are you asking for my opinion? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ScHNECK. I don't choose to give you my opinion on that. 

Mr. Tavenner. I did not mean to ask you for your opinion. I am 
asking for your knowledge of the purposes. 

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

Mr. Tavenner. What purpose would such united-front activities 
serve? What purpose is it sought to serve? 

Mr. Schneck. Is that a question as to my knowledge? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer it on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. By "contact with mass organizations of young 
people" and using the "correct united front approach," the party 
youth organizations seek to recruit other young people into support- 
ing Communist causes and eventually into active party membership; 
is that not true? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The chairman of the District Youth Commission, 
that is Charlene Mitchell, found it an encouraging sign that a large 
delegation from southern California attended the Seventh World 
Youth Festival in Vienna in 1959. 

These festivals are sponsored by the Communist-controlled Inter- 
national Union of Students and the World Federation of Democratic 
Youth, are they not? 

Mr. Schneck. If that is a question, I decline to answer on the 
grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. What preparations have been made for encourag- 
ing a large delegation to the Eighth World Youth Festival, which will 
be held in Helsinki in the summer of 1962? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 111 

Mr. ScHNECK. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously- 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. In fact, a meeting was sponsored by the Helsinki 
Organizing Committee for the Eighth World Youth Festival and was 
held in your home at 3336 Hamilton Way, Los Angeles; was it not? 

Mr. ScHNECK. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The purpose of this Helsinki Organizing Com- 
mittee meeting in your home was to organize a group of Communist 
and pro-Communist students to attend the Festival in Helsinki, was 
it not? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The original name of the Helsinki Organizing 
Committee was changed to the Los Angeles Festival Committee, was 
it not? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. And you were made the chairman of this commit- 
tee, were you not? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, may I offer in evidence as Exhibit 
No. 2 a photostatic copy of a letter bearing date, November 18, 1961, 
bearing the letterhead "Los Angeles Festival Committee, 1283 Re- 
dondo Blvd., Los Angeles 19, Calif." signed — or purportedly signed 
by Marco Schneck, chairman, Los Angeles Festival Committee,^ 

May it be introduced in evidence and marked Schneck Exhibit 
No. 2? 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will the witness please examine the letter and state 
whether or not the signature there is a facsimile of his signature? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did the witness look at the letter before he an- 
swered my question? 

Mr. Doyle. I did not observe him doing so. His counsel 

Mr. Schneck. I saw the letter. 

Mr. Doyle (continuing). His counsel looked at it, the witness 
did not. 

Mr. Schneck. I saw it. 

Mr. Tavenner. You saw the letter, but you did not have an 
opportunity to see the signatiu"e, did you? 

Mr. Doyle. I observed him very carefully. He did not look at 
the exhibit. 

Mr. Schneck. To rest your minds, I see it now and I have the 
same answer. 

Mr. Johansen. I think it's in order to mention — I don't know that 
it's in any way improper — but he's been much more assiduous in 
making notes and sort of do-it-yourself stenographer, apparently, than 
he is in viewing exhibits. 

Mr. Tavenner. I think, Mr. Chairman, it is very significant that 
the witness would refuse to answer the question before he had seen 
the signature that was presented to him. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to read this letter for the infor- 
mation of the committee. 

3 Ibid., p. 184. 



20-004—63- 



112 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

November 18, 1961. 
Dear friend; 

This is to introduce ourselves to you. We are a newly established service 
organization whose purpose is to acquaint young people of the Southern Cahfornia 
area with the VIII World Youth Festival, to be held in Helsinki, Finland in the 
summer of 1962, and to encourage and assist their participation in it. 

We feel that the problem of ensuring peace cannot be ignored by American 
Young people. The events of the Helsinki Festival will help create a basis for 
international understanding, and be a step toward the reduction of existing 
world tensions. 

We are planning a conference on Sunday, Nov. 19, from 1:00 to 4:00 P.M. at 
1251 So. St. Andrews PL L.A. We are inviting both individuals and repre- 
sentatives of various church youth groups, student organizations, cultural groups, 
etc., to attend (without commitment or obligation of course). Our aim is to 
acquaint young people with the Festival and with our Committee. 

We hope to be able to present a film of the 1959 (VII) Festival in Vienna, to 
present our plans for the coming months, and to answer questions. 

Enclosed you will find a fact sheet and a self addressed post card for your early 
remittance. 

Hoping to hear from you soon, 

/s/ Marco Schneck 
Marco Schneck 
Chairman, L.A. Festival Comm. 

Mr. Doyle. The date of that letter? 

Mr. Tavenner. November 18, 1961. 

Mr. Doyle. Is there a return address on the letter? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, it's Los Angeles Festival Committee, 1283 
Redondo Boulevard, Los Angeles 19, California. 

Mr. Schneck, on November 18, 1961, the date of that letter, were 
you a member of the Youth Conmiission of the Communist Party for 
the Southern District of California? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Schneck, you and Paul Rosenstein made a 
trip to Chicago to the United States Festival Committee conven- 
tion, did you not? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The United States Festival Committee is the ad- 
ministrative group organized to handle information and policy of the 
group attending the Eighth World Youth Festival, isn't that true? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Does not the plan for recruitment of young people 
to attend this Festival require that each applicant take and file an 
apphcation with the U.S. Festival Committee before he is allowed 
to attend as a delegate to Helsinki, is that right? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. And the reason for that requirement is that 
those responsible, in your area, for recruiting young people want 
to avoid any possibihty of trouble in the next World Youth Festival 
by attendance of young people who are actually pro-American 
students, instead of pro-Communist students; isn't that true? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 
given. 

Mr. Tavenner. You are engaging now in a plan to attempt to 
eliminate from attendance at this Festival in Helsinki persons that 
you consider are pro-American students? 

Mr. Scherer. And to get those that are pro-Communist'.' 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 113 

Mr. Tavexner. That is right. 

Mr. ScHNECK. I dichi't understand that as a question. 

Mr. Tavexner. Shall I repeat it? 

Mr. ScHXECK. Was it a question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on tlie grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Tliat is tlie freedom of speech he's talking about. 

Mr. Doyle. It is the declination of freedom of speech. 

Mr. Scherer. They prate so much about freedom of speech and 
charge this committee with depriving people of freedom of speech. 
They are the greatest offenders. 

Mr. Schneck. That's your opinion, not mine. 

Mr. Scherer. Is my opinion wrong? Go ahead. 

Mr. Schneck. Thank you. 

Mr. Doyle. You volunteered an observation there, Witness. 

Mr. Scherer asked you a dignified question. What is your answer? 

Mr. Schneck. I don't have to give an answer, Mr. Chairman, 

Mr. Doyle. You volunteered an oral observation there to Mr. 
Scherer. 

Mr. Schneck. I volunteer when I please, as I understand it. 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, you can under the U.S. Constitution, thank God. 
You can't under other regulations. 

Mr. Scherer. I just asked him whether what I said was wrong; is 
it wrong. Witness? 

Mr. Schneck. Mr. Scherer, that was your opinion, and all I said 
was that that was your opinion. 

Now, I don't choose to enter into a long discussion with you; cer- 
tainly not on your territory. 

Mr. Scherer. I asked you the question whether what I said is not 
correct. 

Mr. Schneck. And I said that I don't intend to enter into discussion 
of this sort with you. 

Mr. Scherer. I ask you to direct the witness to answer the ques- 
tion . 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, you are at liberty to answer the question. I 
instruct you to answer the question. 

Mr. Schneck. Would you repeat the question, please? 

Mr. Scherer. The question was whether or not you are engaged 
in a plan, right now, to prevent the attendance of pro-American 
students at the next Youth Festival in Helsinki and to fill that 
delegation with pro-Communists, like yourself, or Communists like 
yourself? 

Now, is anything in that statement I made untrue? 

Mr. Schneck. Mr. Tavenner asked me the same question; I 
answ^ered it; and your question, I answ^ered the same way, for the 
grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Johansen. Let the record show that, on each occasion of the 
reference by counsel or a member of the committee to pro-American 
students, there lias been a very obvious smirk on the witness' face. 
I have observed it very carefully. 

Mr. Doyle. Go ahead, Mr. Tavenner. 



114 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence and ask that it 
be marked Schneck Exhibit No. 3, a flier, making reference to the 
Youth Festival.'' 

May it be received in evidence? 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you hand it to the witness for his examina- 
tion, and I want to state for the benefit of the witness, as well as the 
committee, that the note at the bottom was not part of the original 
flier, but was added onto it by the staff of the committee, because it 
represented the names of the owners of the residence referred to in 
the flier. 

Mr. Doyle. And does it name the owners or just the address? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, the document itself refers to the meeting to 
be held at a certain address. 

The staff has checked this address and found it to be the address of 
the persons named on the document, which the committee has named 
on the document. 

Do you recall sending out that flier? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to read this document, please. 

Hear a report from our representatives to the National Conference being held 
in Chicago this weekend. The Conference is being called to initiate a National 
Festival Committee to insure U.S. participation. 

Travel agents inform us that time is running short for insuring European pas- 
sage. . . 

For specific information. . . . 

COME HERE ALL!! THURSDAY, Oct. 19, (this year)— 1961, 8:00 p.m. 
sharp! ! 

1758 No. Alexandria LA 

labor tearfully donated — For more information call No 40851. 

Now, the "No" notation stands for the Normandy telephone ex- 
change, I am advised. 

The office note placed on the bottom is that the address of 1758 
North Alexandria, LA, is the address of Hugh and Dorothy Forest 
DeLacy. 

Mr. Schneck, in the Youth Report made by Charlene Mitchell at 
the Second Convention of the Communist Party of the Southern 
District of California, reference is made to the ability of district party 
chairman, Dorothy Healey, to obtain speaking engagements on college 
campuses, and this was described as an achievement for the Com- 
munist Party. 

Do you recall that? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you take part in the program of gettifig Doro- 
thy Healey accepted as a speaker on coUege campuses? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The Southern California District Convention, that 
is, the Second Convention, approved the following proposals from its 
District Youth Commission chairman: (1) a party program of "popu- 
larizing the ideas of socialism and the goals and the meaning" of the 
party by issuing printed material, holding forums in the name of the 
party on youth issues, and conducting non-member classes; (2) en- 
couragement of Marxist study groups; and (3) organization of "teen- 
agers who are or who would be close to the movement." 

* Ibid., p. 185. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 115 

What part have you played in the carrying out of this program? 

Mr. ScHNECK. I decUne to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. To what extent has this program been carried out? 

Mr. ScHNECK. I declme to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. In the area of "mass activity", by which is meant 
Communist activity directed toward non-Communist youth, the 
convention approved the report's declai'ation that Communists must 
"join in every activity around the issues confronting the students" — 
issues ranging from academic freedom and opposition to compulsory 
R.O.T.C, to college quota systems and scholarships. 

Have young Communists in the Southern California District 
carried out this program? 

Mr. ScHNECK. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 

stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you participated in carrymg out this pro- 
gram? . 

Mr. ScHNECK. I declme to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The District Youth Commission chairman ad- 
mitted that, as of November 1959, the party had not even begun to 
establish profitable contacts with non-Communist working youth and 
vouth belonging to mmority groups. 

" However, her [Charlene Mitchell's] report boasts that "m a very 
embryonic stage there are developments on the campuses in which 
our young people are very active." 

Will you describe the campus developnients m which the young 
Communists have been said to be very active? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 

stated. , 

Mr Tavenner. A resolution on party youtJi work was also sub- 
mitted to the Southern California District Convention from the 
"District Board and Youth Clubs." That appears, Mr. Chairman, 
in Dobbs Exliibit No. 4, Resolution No. 25.^ 
Are you famihar with this resolution? 
Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 

Mr Tavenner. The resolution takes note of the "rebellionness" 
of youth and states that the party's role is to help "channel" this 
spirit into "constructive activities." . . 

As used here, "constructive activities" would include activity in 
behalf of the Communist Party, don't you agree? , 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 

stated. . fE -ii 

Mr. Tavenner. This resolution, in addition to affarming the 
proposals in the District Youth Commission's report, states the 
party must "start laying the basis for the growth of a leftwmg youth 
movement" bv estabhshing "classes, teen-age clubs, study groups, 
forums, etc." ' The resolution also declares that: "New and exciting 
methods have to be found. If youth groups will listen to us, debate 
with us, talk with us, or what have you, this is all to the good." And 
I am quoting from the report. 

Is not one of the new methods, the appearance ol C ommunist 
leaders before non-Communist student groups? 

« Ibid., p. 72. 



116 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. ScHNECK. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you make it a practice to appear at the instance 
of the Communist Party before non-Communist student groups? 

Mr. ScHVECK. I decline to answer that on tlie grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. May I ask where the witness is a student at the 
present time, at what university? 

Mr. Tavenmer. The witness refused to answer the question when 
I told him it was the committee's information that he was in attend- 
ance at UCLA, and in the Medical Section or Department. 

Mr. Wheeler. He is an employee. 

Mr. Tavenner. Employee, what capacity? 

I may have given the impression that he was a student. 

I am advised now that he is employed in some capacity, and if you 
will bear with me just a moment, I will attempt to find out more. 

Mr. Chairman, all that our investigation reflects in regard to it is 
that the witness is employed in the Preventive Medicine Depart- 
ment of the l^niversity of California in Los Angeles, l^CLA. 

Mr. Scherer. Does our investigation disclose whether that de- 
partment receives any Government grants or has any research proj- 
ects? Will you instruct Mr. Wheeler to make such an investigation 
to determine — to make sure this witness' work is at the university, 
and whether or not he engages 

Mr. Doyle. I am quite sure UCLA receives very substantial sums 
of Federal money. 

Mr. Tavenner. We certainly will, and endeavor to give you an 
answ^er to that question before we leave Los Angeles. 

Mr. Scherer. I would be particularly interested in what type of 
research program for the Federal Government, if any, this witness 
has contact with, and whether he directly or indirectly is the recipient 
of any Federal moneys. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, that investigation will be made, 
and the report made to the subcommittee before it leaves Los Angeles. 
(See pp. 219.") 

Mr. Scherer. They do some classified research work, too, at the 
University of California, do they not, Mr. Wheeler? 

Mr. Wheeler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Doyle. Dr. Stafford 1j. Warren, the head of the medical di- 
vision, is one of the outstanding men in American medicine. I hap- 
pen to know him. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Schneck, this resolution which we have been 
discussing also describes the main task of party youth as the infiltra- 
tion of, and establishment of, party influence in non-Communist 
youth groups, and I quote from the report as follows : 

The establishment of close individual ties with youth groups and organizations 
containing numbers of young people, will be the most important contribution our 
youth can make. It is here, that party youth will make a contribution * * * 
to the establishment of a friendly and receptive attitude towards Socialist thinking 
upon youths part. 

This type of infiltration effort is being made by the Communists at 
this very time, is it not? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 
stated. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 117 

Air. Tavenner. It has been made in connection with these hear- 
ings, has it not? 

Mr. ScHNECK. Will you repeat that, please? 

Mr. Tavenner. It has been made — this type of effort is being made 
now in connection with these hearings? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee has had extensive hearings in 
Washington, from which the Communist Party line has been traced 
down from a foreign source to the Communist Party of the United 
States. 

We are quite aware of the implications from what is known as the 
Main Political Resolution of the Communist Party's last national 
convention and of Gus Hall's January 20, 1960, statement, in which 
he handed down to the rank-and-file membership that Communist 
line, namely, operation on a united-front basis. 

This is also very apparent from the activities of the convention of 
the Southern California Communist Party — the Second Convention, 
held here in Los Angeles. 

Now, I want to ask you whether or not you have participated, in 
line with that Communist policy of united-front activity, in demon- 
strations in Los Angeles? 

For instance, on July 9, 1960, in connection with what was known 
as the "Walk and Rally for Disarmament March," did you take part 
in that demonstration? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you not present on April 30, 1960, at a May 
Day meeting held at the Embassy Auditorium, Ninth and Grand, 
Los Angeles, sponsored by the May Day Connnittee of the Southern 
California District of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that on the grounds previousl}^ 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenxer. Did you not, on November 18, 1961, attend and 
participate in a peace rallv sponsored bv "Help Establish Lasting 
Peace"? 

Mr. Schneck. Was that the end of the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I offer in evidence a photograph, Mr. Chairman, 
and ask that it be marked Schneck Exhibit No. 4.^ 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner, And I will ask you if that is a photograph of you? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the witness and his counsel 
are examining the exhibit. 

Mr. Schneck. Is there a question pending? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, I am asking you if that is a photograph of 
you? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I hand the photograph to the 
committee, so that they may examine it. 

Mr. Doyle. I ask the other three members of the committee to 
observe this photograph, which is offered as an exhibit, of the witness. 

«ilbid., p. 241. 



118 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tuck. It is evident that the man in the photograph is the 
witness before us, one and the same. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, that is my opinion. I am looking at the witness 
and I look at the photograph. 

No question about it, it is one and the same person. It is a pretty 
good picture, Witness. I shouldn't think you'd hesitate to recognize 
yourself as a good-looking lad. 

Mr. ScHERER. No, I don't agree with that conclusion. I don't 
agree with that last statement. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, he takes a fine picture. 

Mr. ScHERER. I don't agree with that. I am disgusted. 

Mr. Tuck. You agree that the photographer did a good job? 

Mr. ScHERER. Photography, period. 

Mr. DoYE. Well, it is good we can all smile at something in con- 
nection with this. 

Mr. ScHERER. I can't even smile. We're at war, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. That is correct. 

Mr. Scherer. I can't even smile. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Schneck, did you participate in organizing the 
committee known as the Walter Reception Committee, when he spoke 
here in Los Angeles on March 19, 1962? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you actively participate in the demonstration 
of that organization on March 19, 1962? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Are you referring to Mr. Walter, the chairman of this 
committee? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, the chairman of this committee. 

Mr. Doyle. Who is not with us today. 

Mr. Scherer. What was that? 

Mr. Tavenner. I asked the witness if he participated in the demon- 
stration of the Walter Reception Committee when Mr. Walter, the 
chairman of this committee, spoke here in Los Angeles, on March 19, 
1962. 

The witness refused to answer the question, and I would now like 
to offer in evidence a photograph and ask that it be marked Schneck 
Exhibit No. 5.^ 

Mr. Scherer. Was that the committee that said, in effect, that 
if we could press Walter far enough, he would end up in a McCarthy 
grave, isn't that the committee that said that? 

Mr. Tavenner. I think not. 

Mr. Johansen. I think that was New York. 

Mr. Doyle. The exhibit will be received and marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you examine Exhibit No. 5 and state whether 
it contains a photograph of you? 

Mr. Schneck. Would you repeat that, please? I didn't catch it. 
I was examining the photograph, 

Mr. Tavenner. Examine the photograph and state whether or not 
it contains a photograph of you. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the witness and his counsel 
are both examining the photograph. 

Mr. Schneck. I decHne to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

' Ibid., p. 186. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 119 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand it to the chairman, the photograph in 
question, as the one of the individual carrying the placard on which 
you can see the words, "No Democracy." 

Mr. Doyle. Boy, his hps are tightly sealed. 

The other members of the committee join me in looking at it. 

Mr. Tuck. I think unquestionably it is the same person. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. It is the same. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. I agree. 

Mr. Doyle. There is no question in my mind. 

We also had a reception committee for this subcommittee the other 
day. We were told there would be as many as 2,000 to 5,000 in the 
line. The newspapers say there never was more than 800, and this 
mornmg there are about 30. Got cold feet, apparently, or else reahzed 
that they should be ashamed of themselves. 

So they quit, even students from UCLA quit. 

******* 

Mr. Tavenner. You were a member of the Independent Student 
Union, weren't you? 

Mr. ScHNECK. I decline to answer that on the groimds previously 
stated. 

******* 

Mr. Tavenner. You yourself are a member of the Youth Com- 
mission of the Communist Party, are you not, right now? 

Mr. ScHNECK. I decline to answer that on the grounds previously 
stated. 

******* 

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

Mr. Doyle. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. No questions. 

Mr, Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no questions. 

Thank vou. Counsel, that completes our questioning at this time. 

The staff will proceed to complete the investigation, which you 
haven't had time yet to complete, with regard to this? 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that this witness be kept 
under subpena and be directed to report back on Friday afternoon of 
this week. 

Mr. Doyle. At what hour? 

Mr. Tavenner. At 2 o'clock. 

Mr. Doyle. Witness, you will be kept, therefore, under the sub- 
pena which you have acknowledged receiving, and the further hear- 
ing in vour matter will be continued to 2 o'clock, Friday of this week. 

Mr.*^ScHNECK. Mr. Chairman, my counsel mforms me he is gomg 
to be in San Diego on that date and that time. It is not going to 
afford me enough time. 

Mr. Doyle. Maybe your counsel needs to appear with you and 
can make other arrangements. 

Three members of this committee are lawyers. We understand the 
obligations of counsel. 



120 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

There is no doubt the court down there will grant a continuance in 
this emergency, if counsel asks it. 

Mr. ScHNECK. Counsel will attempt to be present, but in any case, 
if he is not able, it's not going to afford me reasonable time to get 
additional, other counsel. 

Mr. Doyle. We expe^^t counsel to make arrangements. We are 
experienced with California courts: we know they accommodate 
counsel very graciously, don't they, Counsel? 

Mr. Worrell. Usually. 

Mr. Doyle. Sure they will. We will look forward to liaving 
counsel with us again on Friday. 

Mr. Worrell. Fine. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you, very much, until Friday afternoon at 2 
p.m. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. The committee will stand in recess for 5 minutes. 

(Short recess.) 

Mr. Doyle. I neglected to liave the record show that at the hear- 
ings this morning, all members of the subcommittee were present. 

Let the record show that that is the case. 

Mr. Tavenner. And that they have all been present. 

Mr. Doyle. They have all been present all through this morning's 
proceedings, up to this time. Four members of the subcommittee. 
The only absent member is Mr. Willis of Louisiana. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Rosenstein, will you please rise and be sworn? 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF PAUL ROSENSTEIN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

ROBERT L. BROCK 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your name, please, sir? 

Mr. Rosenstein. My name is Paul Rosenstein. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted that the witness is accompanied by 
counsel. 

Will counsel please identify himself for the record? 

Mr. Brock. Robert L. Brock. 

Mr. Tavenner. When and where were you born, Mr. Rosenstein? 

Mr. Brock. I would like the committee to read a statement of 
pertinency. 

Mr. Tavenner. Very well. 

The chairman of the subcommittee, at the opening of the hearing, 
made an opening statement in which he stated that the resolution 
passed by this committee on January 17, 1962, adequately set forth 
the subjects and the legislative purposes of different phases of these 
hearings. 

And the resolution controlling this phase of the hearings reads as 
follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives, and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative 
purpose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 121 

in determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended 
in a manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Partv of the 
United States * * *. 

The chairiiian of the subcommittee also explained that at the time 
that resolution was passed, on January 17, the staff of this committee 
was assisting him in the preparation of a bill which he introduced 
on January 30 of this year, which is H.R. 9944, which amends the 
Internal Security Act of 1950 — -that is, amends the registration 
provisions of it — and makes membership in the Communist Party 
unlawful, and that bill has been referred to this committee, and 
these hearings relate to that. 

Mr. Brock. Thank you. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now, will you answer the question, please? 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. Well, I'd hke to make clear at this point that 
I refuse to answer any questions put to me by this committee. I refuse 
on the basis of the rights granted me under the Constitution. 

Mr. Tavenner. Just a moment, do not answer at this time what 
position you are going to take about questions which have not been 
asked. 

I think the witness should be confined to the question. 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. I refuse to answer this question — the question 
on the basis that it does not appear to be pertinent to the subject under 
investigation, and I claim all those rights granted to me under the 
Constitution, specifically, the rights granted me under the first and 
fifth amendments. 

Mr. Doyle. May I suggest this to the witness, we, of course, don't 
object to your making notes. 

The previous witness made notes and took them across the hall 
and read his notes to you and the other witnesses who are coming here, 
but don't make such notes that it delays the procedure of the com- 
mittee. 

He made such voluminous notes that he didn't hear questions at 
times and we had to repeat the question. 

Mr. Brock. He won't do that, Mr. Doyle. 

We are here and just as anxious to get out as you are to get us out. 

Mr. Doyle. You get my point — don't slow up the committee by 
making so many notes that you don't hear the questions. 

Mr. Brock. He won't. We'd like to get out of here too. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation indicates that you 
are now employed with Twentieth Century Fox at 1612 W. 20th 
Street. Is that correct? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer on the same grounds previ- 
ously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation also reflects that 
you are presently attending — no, that in 1960 you were attending 
Los Angeles City College. 

Did you attend that college? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. What has been your education — ^formal educa- 
tional training? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, I ask that you direct the witness to 
answer the question. 



122 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer the question, Witness. 

Mr. ScHERER. How could that possibly incriminate him, to tell us 
what his educational background has been? 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. I refuse to answ^er the questions on the same 
grounds, as questions not pertinent to the subject under investiga- 
tion and the rights afforded me under the Constitution do not require 
that I answer this question. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Are you telling the committee that, if you answered 
this question, you would open yourself to criminal action or be in- 
volving yourself in self-incrimination? 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. I've already answered this question adequately. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. You haven't answered my question. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer Mr. Johansen's question he has 
directed to you. 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. I refuse to answer that question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Then I suggest there is very questionable good 
faith in the invocation of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. The record will so show. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a student in the Engineering Depart- 
ment at the University of California at Berkelev between September 
1959— 

Mr. Doyle. Now, Witness, I called your attention — don't be 
wi'iting, please. 

Mr. Brock. He's hearing, Mr. Doyle. 

Mr. Doyle. No, he's writing. He's not even paying any attention 
to the counsel. 

Mr. Brock. I guarantee you, he could repeat the question verbatim 
at this point, Mr. Doyle. 

There hasn't been any delay on your part; there won't be. 

Mr. Doyle. Of course, may I take this — if the witness has made up 
his mind, as he indicated, to not answer any questions, this explains 
that he doesn't have to pay any attention to the question, because 
the stock answer is going to be refusal. 

Mr. Brock. He's paying attention. He heard it. Didn't you? 

(The witness nodded in the affirmative.) 

Mr. Doyle. It is manifest he is not paying attention. 

Mr. Brock. Even I've forgotten it now, may we start again? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, I will repeat the question. 

Were you a student at the University of California at Berkeley — — 

Mr, Brock. I will take the notes so you will know the question. 

Mr. Tavenner. — between September 1959 and January 1960 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse 

Mr. Tavenner. — ^in the Engineering Department? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the questions on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I've already asked you whether you attended Los 
Angeles City College in 1960. 

While you were at Los Angeles City College, did you become the 
financial chairman of the Independent Student Union? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer this grounds on the questions — 
on the basis of the previous statements and my answer before. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you also on the executive council at Los 
Angeles City College and associated with the Student Civil Liberties 
Union, a branch of the American Civil Liberties Union? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 123 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. I refuse to answer this question on the same basis. 

Mr. ScHERER. Were you not at the same time a member of the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. I refuse to answer that question on the same basis, 

Mr. ScHERER. The fact is that you were a member of the Commu- 
nist Party, were you not, at that time? ; ■/:': 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. Same answer. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. You mean the same non-answer. 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. Same answer. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. In other words, you are saying you decUne to 
answer on the grounds stated, is that correct? 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. That is correct. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was the head of the Independent Student Union 
in Los Angeles, up until the time — up until a few weeks ago, a person 
by the name of Franklin Alexander? 

^ Mr. RosENSTEiN. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is Franklin Alexander a brother of Charlene 
Mitchell of the National Committee of the Communist Party of the 
United States? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the questions on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you take part in organization of a group which 
called itself the Walter Reception Committee? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the questions on the same 
basis, 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you participate in a demonstration here in 
Los Angeles on March 19, 1962, put on by the Walter Reception 
Committee? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the questions on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr, Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence a photograph 
which I would like to have admitted in evidence and marked, Rosen- 
stein Exhibit No. 1.^ 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you examine this photograph, please, and 
state whether or not the picture at the left— at your right of the 
photograph is a picture of you? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that counsel and the witness are 
both examining the photograph exhibit, the witness viewing both the 
front and the back thereof. 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the questions on the grounds 
that the picture speaks for itself ; on the basis of my statements earlier. 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand the photograph to the chairman so that the 
subcommittee members may see what the photograph says. As the 
witness says, it speaks for itself. 

Mr. Doyle. It does. 

I am asking the other membei-s of the subcommittee to look at the 
photograph, the young man on the right side of the photograph. 

Mr. Tuck. I thmk he can be easily identified as the same person. 

Mr. Johansen. No question that it speaks for itself and that it is 
the witness. 

s Ibid., p. 186. 



124 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Doyle. I concur, and it speaks loudly, Witness, that you are 
one and the same person shown in this photograph. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is the Independent Student Union now in exist- 
ence under that name? 

Mr. RosENSTEiN, I refuse to answer the questions on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Isn't it a fact that the Union dissolved because of 
the identification of so many members of the Communist Party in its 
activities? 

Mr. RosENSTEiN. I refuse to answer the questions on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now a member of Youth for Peace and 
Socialism? 

Mr. RosENSTEix. I refuse to answer the questions on the same 
grounds. 

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

Air. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the questions on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Didyouparticipateoii July 9, I960, in a demonstra- 
tion known as Walk and Rally for Disarmament? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the questions on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been active in an organization which is 
recruiting attendance of young people at the Helsinki Youth Festival, 
to be held in July and August of 1962? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the question on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is the name of that organization the Los Angeles 
Youth Festival Organization? Excuse me 

Mr. Rosenstein. Same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. — the name is Los Angeles Festival Committee. 

Mr. Rosenstein. Same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you attend a convention in Chicago, along 
with Marco Schneck, of the United States Festival Committee? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now engaged in attempting to carry out 
the Communist Party decisions to work on a popular-front basis 
with mass youth organizations? 

Mr. Rosenstein. I refuse to answer the question on the same 
grounds. 

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

Mr. Doyle. Any questions? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no questions. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. We have no further questions. 

You are excused, thank you, Counsel. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. We will recess until 1 o'clock. 

(Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., Wednesday, April 25, 1962, the sub- 
committee recessed, to reconvene at 1 p.m., of the same day.) 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 125 

AFTERNOON SESSION— WEDNESDAY, APRIL 25, 1962 

Mr. Doyle (presiding). The meeting will be in order. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the committee reconvenes at 
1:10 p.m., and the subcommittee members present are: Representa- 
tives Scherer, Johansen, Tuck, and Doyle (presiding). 

WHl the witness please rise and be sworn? 

Mr. Potash, do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are 
about to give before this committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Potash. I do. 

Mr. Doyle. Be seated, please. 

TESTIMONY OF LEONARD HARRY POTASH, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, CLAUDE V. WORRELL 

Mr. Tavenner. You are Mr. Potash? 

Mr. Potash. Yes, I am. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your full name, please? 

Mr. Potash. Leonard Potash. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you have a middle name? 

Mr. Potash. Yes, Harry. 

Mr. Scherer. Would the witness talk just a little louder? 

Air. Tavenner. It is noted that counsel appearing with the witness 
is the same counsel appearing with a former witness. 
; Mr. Worrell. For the record, my name is Claude Worrell. 

Mr. Tavenner. All right, sir. 

Mr. Potash. May I ask the committee the pertinency of my being 
subpenaed here? 

Mr. Doyle. May I suggest this to the witness, please? 

We feel that in this hearing, that the utmost attention should be 
given by the witness to questions asked, and we feel we are entitled to 
have that attention, and we request that you don't sit there and make 
notes of every question that's asked, and your answer. 

If your counsel makes notes, that's different, but we feel that the 
committee is entitled to your undivided attention, not to make a 
record to produce when you go outside to other witnesses. This is a 
closed meeting. It is an executive session. 

Mr. Potash. Then I am to understand that I am not allowed to 
take notes of your questioning? 

Mr. Doyle. That is our request, that you give your undivided 
attention to the questions. 

Mr. Tavenner. You asked as to the reason for your being called 
here? 

Mr. Potash. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. The chairman of the subcommittee, at the begin- 
ning of these hearings made an opening statement in which he said 
that the resolution adopted on January 17, 1962, authorizing these 
hearings, sets forth the subjects and the legislative purposes of the 
various phases of the hearings. 

The resolution controlling the first phase of the hearing reaas as 
follows : 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 



126 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern California, for the legislative pur- 
pose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in 
determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a 
manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United 
States * * *. 

Chairman Doyle also explained that at the time that the resolution 
was passed, January 17, 1962, the staff of this committee was assisting 
him in the preparation of a bill which he introduced on January 30 of 
this year, which is H.R. 9944, and which amends the Internal Security 
Act of 1950, that is, amends the registration provisions of it, and makes 
membership in the Communist Party unlawful; and that bill has been 
referred to this committee and this hearing relates to that. 

Now, I would like to ask you, please, where you reside? 

Mr. Potash. I don't feel I can answer that question. 

I would like to take my rights under the Bill of Rights, particularly 
the first and fifth amendment. 

I don't feel that this committee has a right to ask me questions of 
behef or association, and I would not answer this question. 

Mr. ScHERER. Where you reside has nothing to do with your beliefs 
or associations. 

Mr. Potash. I just would care not to answer this question on the 
grounds I just stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, I ask that you direct the witness to 
answer the question as to where he resides. 

Mr. Doyle. I so direct you, witness. 

We feel that under the law and the procedures, we are entitled to 
have the identity of the witness before us, your correct name and 
your correct address. 

Mr. Potash. I have given my name in full. The subpena was 
delivered to me, and as I understand it, this committee has a copy of 
that subpena, being delivered at a certain address. 

I further deny the pertinence of this hearing, and my answer re- 
mains I refuse to answer on the grounds of the "first and fifth amend- 
ment and the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Scherer. Just indicates at the very beginning, Mr. Chairman, 
that the witness isn't mvokmg the fifth amendment in good faith and 
doesn't intend to use it in good faith. 

Mr. Tuck. Do you sincerely believe that if you answered the 
question propounded to you, that it would involve you in some kind 
of criminal prosecution? 

Mr. Potash. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence a copy of the 
subpena served upon Mr. Potash, and ask that it be marked Potash 
Exhibit No. 1. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

(Document marked "Potash Exhibit No. 1" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to read the return of the officer 
making service of this subpena: 

I made service of the within subpena by personally serving the within-named 
Potash, Leonard, at 2017 Preston Avenue, Los Angeles, Cahfornia, at 8:15 
o clock, a.m., on the 12th day of April 1962, dated April 12, 1962, E. C. Fogliette. 

When and where you born, Mr. Potash? 

Mr. Potash. I would like to refuse to answer that question on the 
same grounds. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COIVEVIUNIST PARTY 127 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask you dii'ect the witness to answer the question, 
because it couldn't possibly incriminate him to tell this committee 
when and where he was born. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you, Witness, to answer the question. 

Mr. Potash. I feel that this question has no pertinence, and I 
refuse to answer it on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. You have been instructed to answer the question, 
because it certainly does have pertinence. 

The United States Congress is entitled to know the identity of wit- 
nesses appearmg before its dul}^ authorized committees. 

Mr. Potash. I have already identified myself, and I still refuse to 
answer on tlie grounds of the first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. You haven't told us where you were born, which is 
part of your identity that we are entitled to have, we believe. No 
question about it m our judgment. 

Mr. Potash. I still refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Of course, it gives further evidence to us that you came 
into this room determined not to answer any questions, and that's not 
good faith in our judgment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Potash, was the residence at which the officer 
made service upon you, your home? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation shows that you 
were born on November 22, 1936, in New York City, is that correct? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation also discloses that 
you have been a resident of Los Angeles since 1949, is that correct? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you give the committee, please, a brief state- 
ment of your educational background and training, that is, your formal 
educational training. 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer that question on the previous 
grounds stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation discloses that you 
were a student at Los Angeles City College, enrolling there in February 
of 1955, is that correct? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer on the same grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. After enrolling in 1955 at Los Angeles City College, 
did you begin almost immediately in distributing handbills for the 
Los Angeles Sobell Youth Committee? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds 
as previously stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. Does our investigation disclose this witness' current 
occupation? 

Mr. Tavenner. Just a moment, I don't think so. 

Mr, ScHERER. What is your occupation? 

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

20-004—63 6 



128 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. ScHERER. Are you in school or are you engaged in some 
business activity? 

Mr. Potash. Same answer as previously stated. I decline to 
answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you presently engaged as a teacher of music 
at your home at 2017 Preston Avenue, Los Angeles? 

Mr. Potash. May I ask the pertinency of that question? 

Mr. Tavenner. May I ask the witness be directed to answer? 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer the question. Your occupation 
is certainly pertinent to the United States Congress. 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer under the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Chairman, can the committee members please be identified to 
me, since I do not recognize the faces? 

Mr. Doyle. Well, we will proceed in our regular order. 

Your counsel knows who we are. Ask him. He's been in here 
before the committee twice this morning. 

Mr. Scherer. Well, I am not ashamed of my identification. I am 
Gordon H. Scherer, from Ohio. I won't take the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. August E. Johansen from Michigan. I'd appreci- 
ate the same kind of frank response from the witness, and I don't ex- 
pect it. 

Mr. Potash. I am Leonard Potash from California. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Tuck, where are you from? 

Mr. Tuck. I am from Virginia. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Potash, I am from Los Angeles County, Cali- 
fornia. I was born in the State of California; very proud of it. My 
home is at South Gate, and 

Mr. Tuck. I thought we had the witness on the stand to ask him 
questions. Not to reply to questions from him. 

Mr. Doyle. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Potash, in 1958 were you a member of the 
Youth Commission of the Communist Party for the Southern District 
of California? 

Mr. Potash. I refuse to answer this question on the same grounds, 
the first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you, as a member of the Communist Party, 
engaged in the popular front approach sponsored by the Communist 
Party in youth mass movements in this area? 

Mr. Potash. Would you please repeat the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Have you, as a member of the Communist Party, been engaged in 
promoting the popular-front enterprise of the Communist Party 
among mass organizations? 

Are you taking the position you do not understand my question? 

Mr. Potash. Yes, I don't understand it. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, the Communist Party has adopted as its 
policy in this area, according to reports made by various officials at 
the Second Convention of the Communist Party in this area, that it 
would emphasize the popular-front approach in soliciting support for 
the Communist Party causes within mass organizations. 

You understand what I am saying? 

Now, have you engaged in such activities? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 129 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer this question on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. All right. 

You have actually engaged in demonstrations of the Women Strike 
for Peace movement in this area, have you not? 

Mr. Potash. May I ask the pertinency of this question? 

Mr. Doyle. We've already explained the pertinency of these 
hearings. 

Just proceed; answer the question. Don't try to take the time of 
the committee in asking questions of the committee. You already 
know the pertinency of this hearing. 

Mr. Potash. I would decline to answer this question on the 
grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you not, on November 1, 1961, participate 
in a Women Strike for Peace demonstration in Los Angeles? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer this question on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence a photograph 
and ask that it be marked Potash Exhibit No. 2.^ 

Mr. Doyle. Be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Potash, will you examine that photograph 
and state whether or not the photograph of the man appearing in 
the picture is a photograph of you? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the counsel and the witness 
are both closely examining the photograph offered. 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer this question on the same grounds, 
the rights afforded to me by the first and fifth amendment of the 
Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you hand the photograph to the committee, 
please? 

Mr, Doyle. I will ask the subcommittee members to view this 
photograph exhibit with me, carefully. 

if: 4( H: :{::!: 9): lie 

Mr. Tuck. It is obviously he. 

Mr. Doyle. I submit it is obviously the witness before us today — 
without the dark glasses appearing in the picture. — the witness who is 
in the witness chair before us, no question about it. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Potash, were you a member of the Independ- 
ent Student Union in Los Angeles? 

Mr. Potash. Declme to answer this question on the grounds pre- 
viousl}^ stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did individuals who were active in the Inde- 
pendent Student Union sponsor a demonstration by a group known 
as the Walter Reception Committee on March 19, 1962? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer this question on the same grounds. 

• Ibid., p. 186. 



130 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you not engage and participate in that 
demonstration by the Walter Reception Committee? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer this question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party on 
March 19, 1962? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer this question on the grounds pre- 
viously stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. Fact is that on that date, you weren't a student 
either, were you? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer this question on the same grounds. 

Mr. ScHERER. Fact is you participated in that demonstration as a 
member of the Communist Party, is that not right? 

Mr. Potash. I decline to answer this question on the grounds pre- 
viously stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. And as such, urged students to participate in it at 
the direction of the Communist Party, isn't that right? 

Mr. Potash. Same answer as previously stated. 

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

Mr. Potash. Decline to answer this question on the grounds pre- 
viously stated. 

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

Mr. Doyle. Any questions? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no further questions. 

Thank you, counsel and witness. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Will the next witness please remain standing and be 
sworn? 

Mr. Neff, do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about 
to give before tliis committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Neff. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF JACK V. NEFF, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
ANTHONY V. RANDIES 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your name, please, sir? 

Mr. Neff. Jack Neff. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is noted that the witness is accompanied by 
counsel. 

Will counsel please identify himself for the record? 

Mr. Handles. Yes, I am Antliony V. Randies. 

Mr. Tavenner. When and whore were 3'ou born, Mr. Neff? 

Mr. Neff. I'd like to ask if that question is pertinent to this 
inquiry? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, it is pertinent to know wJio you are. 

Mr. Neff. I would like to ask the pertinence of the inquiry so 
that I will be informed. 

Mr. Tavenner. The reason why you are subpened here? 

Mr. Neff. I want to know the pertinence of the inquiry, and also 
the pertinence of that question, please. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, I have certainly advised you as to the per- 
tinency of the question. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 131 

We not only want to Icnow j^our name, but we want to be certain 
of your identification. 

As to the pertinency of the inquiry, as you put it, or in other words, 
the reason for your being subpened, the chairman of the subcommittee, 
at the openmg of this hearing, made a statement for the record as to 
the subject of it, and the legishitive purpose of it. 

He stated that the committee resolutions adopted by the committee 
on January 17, 1962, which authorized these hearings, contain an 
adequate description of both the subject and the legislative purpose, 
as far as this phase of the hearmg is concerned. 

This is the resolution of the committee which describes its pertinency 
and advises you of the subject. The resolution reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern Cahfornia, for the legislative 
purpose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress 
in determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in 
a manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United 
States * * *. 

Chairman Doyle also explained in his opening statement that at 
the time that resolution was passed, on January 17, 1962, the staff 
of this committee was assisting him in the preparation of a bill which 
he introduced on January 30 of this year, which is H.R. 9944, and 
which amends the Internal Security Act of 1950, that is, amends the 
registration provisions of it, and makes membership in the Communist 
Party unla\vful, and that bill has been referred to this committee, 
and this hearing relates to that. 

Now, will you answer the question please, when and where were 
you born? 

Mr. Nepf. I would like to decline to answer that question on the 
following grounds : That it — I question the pertinence of that question, 
and I'd like to also stand on the — -my constitutional rights. 

Mr. ScHERER. I can't hear the witness. Can you speak a little 
louder? 

Mr. Neff. I would like to not to answer that question on the 
grounds that it — I question its pertinence in this inquiry, and that I 
also like to stand on the — my constitutional rights under the first 
amendment and the fifth amendment, which allows me freedom of 
speech under the first, and the fifth amendment, which gives me 
the right not to incriminate myself or possibly intend to incriminate 
myself. 

Mr. Doyle. Manifestly, Mr. NefF, the reading by our counsel in 
answer to your question of the pertinency, made it crystal-clear as to 
the pertinency of the question asked. 

I instruct you to answer the question. 

Mr. Neff. I'd like to decline to answer the question on the grounds 
that I feel that it isn't pertinent to this inquiry or to this specific 
question asked, and that I want to stand on the constitutional rights 
under the first amendment, which gives me the freedom of speech, and 
the fifth amendment, which does not force anyone to testify against 
themselves. 

Mr. Doyle. We understand what the first and fifth amendments 
are, and to save your time and ours, if you wish, you can just state 
that you decline to answer on the same grounds as you previously 
stated. 



132 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Wo will take that substantially so worded as your claim under the 
Constitution. 

That is no sign we agree with it, but to save your time and ours, 
and your counsel's time, it will save you from repeating your prepared 
answer every time, the length of it. 

Mr. Neff. You say it will include the pertinence of the question 
too, that I don't agree with the pertinence of the question? 

Mr. Doyle. We understand that, but we claim it is entirely 
pertinent. 

Now, let's proceed. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I noted that the witness said that 
he would like to decline, or would like to refuse to answer the question. 

That is not a specific answer. I think the witness should be asked, 
and I do ask, whether he does refuse to answer the questions on the 
basis of the reasons that he gave? 

Mr. Doyle. Do you understand, Mr. Witness? 

Mr. Neff. Would you repeat that question, please? 

Mr. Tavenner. My statement was that in your answer you said you 
would like to refuse. I want to know whether you do refuse to answer 
the question. 

Mr. Doyle. Do you understand the question now, Witness? 

Mr. Neff. Well 

Mr. Doyle. Do you understand Mr. Tavenner's suggestions as to 
the form of your answer? 

Mr. Neff. As to the first — the question — the first questions, I do 
decline and my previous statement, and I thought would be construed 
that way. 

It was the phraseology on my part when I said I would like to. I 
mean I do decline to answer, 

Mr. Doyle. All right. 

Mr. Neff. On the grounds, if I 

Mr. Doyle. Well, you have stated the gi-ounds. 

Mr. Neff. On the previous grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. Now that you have made it clear that you intended 
to decline the answer, that is sufiiciently clear to us. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation reflects that you 
were l3orn on March 24, 1923, at Morgan Springs, Tennessee, is that 
correct? 

Mr. Neff. I would like to — I do decline on the previous grounds, 
pertinence, first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Doyle. Just a minute. I instruct 3'ou to answer, Witness. 
That certainly couldn't be any threat to you of criminal prosecution, 
because you were born someplace. That is our position. 

I instruct you to answer the question. We believe Congress is 
entitled to know where citizens have been born; and may I add 
further, counsel, for the purpose of identification of the person testify- 
ing before a congressional committee. 

Mr. Neff. I decline on the previous-stated grounds to answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you reside, Mr. Neff? 

Mr. Neff. 1500 South Broad Acres Avenue. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you lived there? 

Mr. Neff. I decline to answer that question on the previous- 
stated grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. When you said 1500 South Broad Acres, where is 
that located? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 133 

Mr. Neff. Compton. 

All". Tavenner. How are you employed? 

Mr. Neff. 1 decline to answer that on the previous-stated grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. The information that the staff has developed, 
indicates that you are employed by the Bethlehem Steel Company 
at 6000 Alcoa Avenue, Vernon, is that correct? 

Mr. Neff. 1 decline to answer on the grounds of pertinence and 
first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you advise the committee briefly as to your 
formal educational training? 

Mr. Neff. I decline to answer, previous-stated grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee whether as long ago 
as June 26, 1949, you attended the Los Angeles County organizing 
conference of the Labor Youth League, at 4016 South Central Avenue? 

Mr. Neff. I decline to answer that on the previous-stated grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you not a student at L'CLx\ in 1950? 

Mr. Neff. I decline to answer that on the previously stated 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were vou a member of the Labor Youth Leasiue 
at UCLA during 1950? 

Mr. Neff. 1 decline to answer on the previously stated grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. While in attendance at L^CLA, were you a member 
of the Mike Quin Student Communist Club? 

Mr. Neff. I decline to answer on the previously stated grounds. 

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

Mr. Neff. I decline to answer on the previously 

Mr. Scherer. I can't really hear the witness' declination. 

Mr. Neff. I decline to answer on the grounds that I question the 
pertinence of this question and the pertinence of this inquiry, and I 
also stand on my rights under the first and fifth amendments of the 
Constitution, and all other sections of the Constitution which may 
cover this type of rights that I speak of. 

Mr. Tavenner. 1 have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions, Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. No. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no further questions, Counsel. Thank you. 
Witness. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Manes. May I state my client wishes to affirm, rather than 
to be sworn. 

Mr. Doyle. Very well. 

Mrs. Alexander, do you solemnly affirm that the testimony you are 
about to give before this committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. Alexander. I will affirm the truth of my statement. 

TESTIMONY OF MIMI ALEXANDER, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, HUGH R. MANES 

Mr. Doyle. You make the afl^rmation as you want to give it. 
Mrs. Alexander. I will affirm the truth of my statements. 
Mr. Doyle. All right, thank you. 



134 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. ScHERER. You objected to the use of the word "God" by the 
chairman? 

Mrs. Alexander. On the grounds of the first amendment, I object 
to the oath. 

Mr, Tavenner. I am sorry, I couldn't hear you. Would you speak 
a little louder? 

Mrs. Alexander. On the grounds of the first amendment, I 
objected to the oath. 

Mr. Tavenner. You are Mrs. Charles Alexander? 

Mrs. Alexander. My name is Mimi Alexander. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you Mrs. Charles Alexander? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to — I decline to state on the grounds 
that my true name is Mimi Alexander. 

Mr. Scherer. I ask you to direct the witness to answer the ques- 
tion, Mr. Chairman, as to whether she is Mrs. Charles Alexander. 

Mr. Doyle. Witness, I am directing you to answer the question. 
We believe it is clearly pertinent and proper that we know whatever 
name you go by, whatever name you use, before we believe that 
your married name — if it is Mrs. Charles Alexander. It is pertinent 
and proper. We are entitled to know who we are dealing with, under 
whatever name. 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer upon the following grounds: 
1 — the mandate of this committee violates the provisions of the Bill 
of Rights to our Constitution and particularly the first amendment 
thereof, because vague and ambiguous, and abridging speech and 
association of citizens. 

2 — the question is not pertinent or relevant to the mandate of this 
committee, or to the declared purpose of the — this investigation, or 
to any proper inquiry of a legitimate legislative purpose of this 
committee; and 

3 — the question inquires into my beliefs and associations 

Mr. Scherer. Just a minute. 

The question does not inquire as to any belief or association. It 
merely asks for your name. 

Mrs. Alexander. I repeat: No. 3 — ^the question inquires into my 
beliefs and associations and abridges my liberty and rights as granted 
by the first amendment. 

4 — ^upon the further ground that the question calls for me to 
condemn and accuse myself from my own lips. 

Mr. Doyle. Just a minute now. 

Mr. Manes. She is completing her answer. 

Mr. Doyle. Just a minute, we asked a simple question of whether 
or not you are Mrs. Cliarles Alexander, and this manifestly is a 
prepared statement that the witness has brought into this room, in 
other words, you are anticipating possible questions which haven't 
been asked you. 

Now, let me ask a question: Did you write that yourself? 

That statement? 

Mrs. Alexander. This statement? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, did you write it, did you prepare it? 

Mrs. Alexander. I prepared — -I prepared this with the assistance 
of my counsel. 

Mr. Doyle. That is all right, you have a right to, I presume. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 135 

How many pages in that statement, because under our rules, you 
are not allowed to read a statement unless you have given us notice 
you are going to have a long statement. 

Mrs. Alexander. I am not reading a statement. I am objecting 
to the question. 

Mr. Doyle. How many pages to that, how many minutes? 

Mrs. Alexander. If you will bear with me, it is very brief. I 
mean, I have only a little more to finish it. 

Mr. Doyle. Very well, then, proceed promptly. 

Mrs. Alexander. And that it tends to incriminate me, in violation 
of the guarantees of the fifth amendment. 

5 — the committee lacks jurisdiction over me because: 

(A) Of the unlawful exercise of its subpena power; and 

(B) The unlawful delegation of its authority and subpena power. 
Mr, Doyle. Thank you. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, it is noticed that the witness is 
accompanied by counsel. 

Would counsel please identify himself for the record? 

Mr. Manes. My name is Hugh R. Manes. 

Mr. ScHERER. Now, Mr. Chairman, I ask you to direct the witness 
to answer the question propounded by counsel, namely: Is she Mrs. 
Charles Alexander? 

Mr. Doyle. You understand the question, Mrs. Alexander? 

I am directing you to answer. I want to make sure that you recall 
what the question was. 

Mrs. Alexander. Yes, I do. 

Mr. Doyle. All right, I am now directing you to answer that 
question. 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Doyle. All right, that is sufficient in matter of time. 

Mr. Scherer. Well, that doesn't mean we accept her answer. 

Mr. Doyle. Not at all. We don't accept it, but I mean, we accept 
that as sufficient statement of reasons why she doesn't answer, but not 
sufficient so far as we are concerned. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you appearing here pursuant to a subpena 
served on you? 

Airs. Alexander. Yes, I am, subpena served to Mimi Alexander. 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to offer in evidence a copy of the subpena 
served upon this witness, and ask that it be marked Mimi Alexander 
Exhibit No. 1. 

Mr. Doyle. Let it be so received and so marked. 

(Document marked Alexander Exhibit No. 1" and retained in 
committee files.) 

Mr. Manes. May we have leave to examine it a moment? 

Mr. Tavenner. 1 understand that you state that your first name 
is Mimi? 

Mrs. Alexander. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Would you speak up a Httle? I can't hear you. 

Mrs. Alexander. I'm sorry, I am not used to pubfic speaking. 

Mimi, M-i-m-i. I mean, it's a long table. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is that an abbre\iation of your correct first name 
or is that your entire first name? 

Mrs. Alexander. That is my first name. 



136 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavexxer. It is not an abbreviation of a name? 

Mrs. Alexander, I have as my prerogative to change my first 
name as most children, I mean, do not sometimes desire to continue 
to use their name. My name, as recorded on my birth certificate, 
was Miriambel. 

Mr. Tavenner, One word? 

Mrs. Alexander. That's right. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your maiden name? 

Mrs. Alexander. I dechne to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's information is that it was 
Nathanson, is that correct? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to state on the grounds previously 
answered — given . 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you also used the name "Mimi Scott"? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you used the name "Mimi Reser"? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer upon the same grounds, 

Mr. Tavenner. May I have a direction that the witness answer 
the question? 

Mr. Doyle. I direct the witness to answer the last question. 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the previously stated 
objections. 

Mr. Tavenner, Have you used the name "Mimi Wolfson"? 

Mrs, Alexander, Could I have the legislative purpose, Mr, Chair- 
man, of this particular information? 

Mr. Doyle, Mr. Tavenner, our counsel, will read to you the reso- 
lution under which we are operating, showing the pertinency of any 
questions at this hearing. 

Of course. Congress is entitled to know the identity of people it is 
dealing with, purpose of finding your identity. That, of course, the 
United States Congress is entitled to have. 

Mr, Tavenner, I think, Mr. Chairman, this is purely a question 
of identity. 

Mr, Doyle, That is right, 

Mr. Tavenner, May I ask that the witness be directed to answer? 

Mr, Doyle, I direct you again to answer the question, 

Mrs. Alex.\nder, I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated, 

Mr, Tavenner. Where do you reside, Mrs. Alexander? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I would like to read the return on 
the subpena, appearing as ''I made service of the within subpena by 
personal service on the within -named Mimi Alexander at 1116 Fedora 
Street, at 7:15 o'clock, a.m., on the 13 day of April, 1962, W. L. 
Sanchez." ^ ^ 

Was the place of service your residence, Mrs. Alexander? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee is advised that you were born on 
April 7, 1916, at Topeka, Kansas, is that correct? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 137 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you been a resident of Los Angeles? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you advise the committee, briefly, what 
your formal educational training has been? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. According to the committee's investigation, in- 
formation has been received that you were educated in Topeka High 
School, Topeka, having graauated there in 1934; that you majored in 
mathematics and chemistry at the University of Kansas from 1935 
to 1937, is that correct? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Doyle. May I suggest to the witness that we feel we are en- 
titled to undivided attention of the witnesses to these questions 
asked. I notice the witness is not paying attention to the questions 
asked, but is making notes. 

Now, very respectfully, w^e ask you to discontinue. We think this 
is of sufficient importance that this congressional committee is en- 
titled to your full and undivided attention, not to sit there and make 
notes. 

This is an executive session. If counsel wants to do it, that's 
different, because he isn't obligated to answer the questions, except 
to help you. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you resided in the Los Angeles 
area, Mrs. .Alexander? 

Mrs. Alexander. Wasn't that a previous question? 

I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you try to raise your voice a little bit, please? 

The committee's investigation indicates that you came to Los 
Angeles in 1952 from Chicago. What was your employment in 
Chicago? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's information is also that you lived 
in San Diego in 1955 and 1956, is that correct? 

Mre. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you employed by the Los Angeles city 
schools 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline 

Mr. Tavenner. — in 1959? 

Mrs. Alexander. I dechne to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence a photostatic 
copy of an Oath of Allegiance and Questionnaire for Employes in 
Los"^ Angeles City Schools, purportedly signed by Mimi Alexander, 
and sworn to on the 14th day of January 1959, and ask that it be 
marked Mimi Alexander Exhibit No. 2.^" 

Mr. Doyle. Be received and so marked. 

i» Ibid., p. 187. 



138 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you please examine the document? 

Mr. Doyle. May the record show that the counsel and the witness 
are examining the document. 

Mr. Tavenner. And state whether or not the signature appearing 
on the affidavit is your signature? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Tavenner, do we have any evidence that this 
witness actually taught in the public schools? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, sir, the committee's information is that she 
was employed in a clerical capacity in the school. 

I would like to read from this Oath of Allegiance, appearing as 
Alexander Exhibit No. 2. 

I, Mimi Alexander, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and 
defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of 
California, against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith 
and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of 
the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental 
reservation or purpose of evasion ; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the 
duties upon which I am about to enter. 

And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate, nor am I a member 
of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that now advocates the 
overthrow of the Government of the United States, or of the State of California 
by force or violence or other unlawful means; that within the five years imme- 
diately preceding the taking of this oath (or affirmation) I have not been a member 
of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that advocated the overthrow 
of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or 
violence or other unlawful means except as follows: 

And there appears in ink notation the words "No Exceptions." 

and that during such time as I hold the office of certificated employee and/or 
non-certificated employee of the Los Angeles City School Districts I will not 
advocate nor become a member of any party or organization, political or other- 
wise, that advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or 
the State of Cafifornia by force or violence or other unlawful means. 

Signature: "Mimi Alexander. Subscribed and sworn to before me 
this 14 day of January, 1959, Harold J. Ostly, County Clerk, by 
Eleanor Yee, Deputy." Followed by the word "Seal." 

Mrs. Alexander, were you a member of the Comumnist Party on 
January 14, 1959? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Had you been a member of the Communist Party 
at any time during the 5 years preceding the execution of this 
affidavit? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I would like to read to the com- 
mittee from the questionnaire, which appears at the bottom of this 
affidavit : 

(Rule 1907 of the Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles requires a 
"yes" or "no" answer to each of the following questions. If unanswered, or 
answered other than "no," the applicant shall not be employed.) 

State of California, County of Los Angeles. 

1. Are you knowingly a member of the Communist Party or of any organiza- 
tion which to your knowledge is a successor of such party, regardless of its name? 

Answer. "No." 

2. Do you now advocate the support of a foreign government against the 
United States in the event of hostilities? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 139 

Answer. "No." 

3. Will you engage in any of the activities inquired of in the above two ques- 
tions at any time during your employment with any Los Angeles City School 
District? 

Answer. "No." 

Signature: "Mimi Alexander, Home Address: 1116 Fedora Street, 
Los Angeles, Position Title: Inter Clerk-Typist." 

And then, "Sworn and Subscribed to," etc. 

Did you truthfully answ^er those questions, Mrs. Alexander, when 
you answered, "No" to each of the three? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you not in fact at the time of the execution 
of this affidavit a member of the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Were you telling the truth when you signed that 
affidavit? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Scherer. The fact is that you committed perjury when you 
signed that affidavit, did you not? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Alexander, have you traveled in any foreign 
country within the past 2 years? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the gi-ounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you recall the date of the decision handed 
down by the Supreme Court, in the case of the Communist Party of 
the United States v. Subversive Activities Control Board, which upheld 
the registration provisions of the Internal Security Act of 1950, as 
being constitutional? 

Do you recall that date? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the groimds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The date of that decision of the Supreme Court 
was June 5, 1961. 

How soon after June 5, 1961, did you leave for Mexico? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr, Tavenner. Wlien did you return to the United States from 
Mexico? 

Mrs. Alexander. I declme to answer on the groimds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a delegate to the Second Convention of 
the Communist Party for the Southern District of California? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation reflects that you 
were in attendance at the first session of this convention which was 
held in November 1959. 

Is the committee's investigation in error on this? 



140 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you represent at that district convention, the 
Moranda Smith Section of the Communist Party, I mean, represent 
as a delegate? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you represent the Downtown Section of the 
Communist Party at that convention as a delegate? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. As a matter of fact, the two are the same, are they 
not, the Moranda Smith Section and the Downtown Section of the 
Communist Party? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you acquainted with a person bv the name of 
Bill Taylor? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation reflects that Bill 
Taylor is a member of the District Committee, that is the new Dis- 
trict Committee for the Communist Party's Southern California 
District. 

Have you attended meetings, Communist Party meetings, with 
Bill Taylor? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation also reflects that 
Bill Taylor is chairman of the Negro Commission of the Communist 
Party, Southern California District, isn't that correct? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you worked for this commission headed by 
BiU Taylor? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Alexander, the committee is quite aware, 
from its investigation of the party dispute over what has been re- 
ferred to as "The Negro Question." 

The National Committee of the Communist Party in 1958, as shown 
by the committee's investigation conducted here in 1958, reversed 
the Communist Party's 30-year position on the Negro question, the 
position having been that Negro people were entitled to a separate 
nation within the United States, is that correct? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you read the committee's report, released 
on April 3, 1959, entitled "Keport on the Southern California District 
of the Communist Party"? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, pages 16 and 17 of that report, 
issued by the committee, devotes more than a page to the discussion 
of^the reversed party line on the NegTO question. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 141 

Mr. Manes. What was the date of that, Mr. Tavenner? 

Mr. Tavenner. The date of the committee report is April 3, 1959- 

The new resolution adopted by the National Committee entitled 
"Kesolution on the Negro Question" had this to say, "* * * the 
Negroes in the United States are not constituted as a separate nation. 
They have the characteristics of a racially distinctive people or nation- 
ality. They are a component part of the whole American nation * * *. 

"* * * Negroes unite not in order to separate themselves from the 
political, economic, or social life of our country. They unite * * * 
to level all barriers to their fullest integration into all aspects of 
the * * * life of the American people as a whole." 

That was an entirely new Communist Party line, was it not, that 
was subsequently routinely ratified at the party's 17th National Con- 
vention? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. And it is a line which was very strenuously op- 
posed by you, isn't it? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Chairman Healey of the Southern California 
District of the Communist Party, in 1958, according to the com- 
mittee's earlier report, hailed the new Negro policy at District Council 
meetings as a great boon to the Communist efforts to enter and win 
support in non-Communist movements seeking increased representa- 
tion for Negroes in the south, and integration of Negroes into the 
American life. 

That was the position she took in 1958, was it not? 

By "she," I mean Dorothy Ray Healey. 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand you a document, previously introduced in 
evidence as Dobbs Exhibit No. 12, and I will ask you whether or 
not this document was distributed at the Communist Party District 
Convention, the Second Convention, which you attended?!'' 

This document is entitled "Pre-Convention Discussion Article on 
the Negro Question," by "M. A." 

Mr. Johansen. This was at the Southern California District 
Convention? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, the Second Convention, the first session of 
which was in 1959, and the second session in January 1960. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that counsel and the witness are 
examining the exhibit handed to them. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Alexander, I called your attention to the 
fact that there appears under the title, in typewriting, this language, 
''By M" period, ''A" period. 

Do these initials stand for Mimi Alexander? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you not the author of this document, 
identified as Dobbs Exhibit 12? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

» Ibid., p. 120. 



142 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Alexander, I have read this document 
carefully. It shows a great deal of excellent research work coverino; 
a long period of time on the subject, and I think anyone who could 
prepare a statement as full and as well-written as this is, should not 
hesitate to accept credit for it. 

So I again want to ask you if you wrote this report? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. ScHERER. Counsel, what position does this report take with 
with reference to the revised or new Communist Party line on the 
Negro question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Most strenuous opposition to it, most strong oppo- 
sition to the new line of the Communist Party, which reversed the 
30-year Communist Party line, in which the Negro people were 
recognized as having the right of self-determination, that is to form a 
nation of their own within the United States and secede from the 
United States. 

Mr. ScHERER. And this document by this witness opposed that 
position? 

Mr. Tavenner. That position, notwithstanding the fact that the 
Communist Party's National Committee had adopted a different 
approach to this question — a different, entirely different and conflicting 
line. 

In your discussion article, opposition is expressed to the proposed 
•'Resolution on the Negro Question" in the United States, which the 
national party leadership had placed before party districts, and on 
which formal action was scheduled at the 17th National Party Con- 
vention in December 1959, is that not correct? 

Mrs. Alexander. I'm sorry, the question was lengthy. Would 
you repeat it? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. In this discussion article, which I have 
handed you and which the committee has attributed to you — marked 
Dobbs Exhibit No. 12 — vigorous opposition is expressed to the 
proposed "Resolution on the Negro Question" which resolution em- 
bodied this new line that I have been discussing, isn't that correct? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. As I have pointed out, the National Committee 
of the Communist Party had endorsed a new line on the Negro 
question in December 1958. Isn't that true, that the change in line 
was actually effective from that date, that is December 1958, and 
that subsequent approval by the 17th National Convention was 
mere formality? Isn't that correct? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Under the party's system of organization, are 
not policies established by a national leadership clique, and imposed 
on the membership, which has had no opportunity to choose its 
officials, much less participate in policy formulation? Isn't that 
correct? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would also like to call your attention to a state- 
ment on page 9 of Dobbs Exhibit No, 12, which was submitted to 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 143 

the November 1959 session of the Southern California District con- 
vention, and I will quote from it: 

"Around * * * the original draft" — meaning the 1958 draft 
resolution on the Negro question according to this article attributed 
to you — '"there was a dearth of expression either from our leadership 
or membership. * * * Self-criticaUy the writer recognizes the tardi- 
ness of this discussion article. Two questions should be placed. 

(1) Has this question been thrashed out in debate in our Party? 

(2) Is silence to be synonomous with assent?" 

And you then in this article point out that the new line on the Negro 
question has become a "fait accompli — already being taught at the 
Marxist schools * * *." 

Do you not here admit that the new policy on the Negro question 
went into effect even before action was taken by the National 
Convention? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
s ated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The former Communist position held that the 
Negroes in the southern part of the country, in many counties located 
in the south, constituted a disenlranchised nation which will one day 
exercise a right of self-determination and become a separate Negro 
nation. 

The new policy, which you oppose, calls for the "fullest integration" 
of the Negroes into the "life of the American people as a whole," 
isn't that true? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you not believe that this line was changed by 
the National Committee in an effort to make the party more appealing 
to the Negro people in the United States, in order that the Communist 
Party might increase its ability to achieve influence among non- 
Communist Negroes? Isn't that right? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Notwithstanding the quite apparent reason for the 
change in the Communist Party line, you nevertheless were opposed 
to it, weren't you? 

Do you understand? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. On page 8 of your discussion article, you asked this 
question, and I quote: "And is it not peculiar that only a minority of 
the Negro comrades in our District today support the 'withdrawal of 
the right of self-determination'?" 

Let me ask you, is it not a fact that most of the Negroes in the 
Southern California Party are adamantly opposed to the new line on 
the Negro question? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Alexander, Claude Lightfoot, a member of 
the National Committee, who presented the resolution on the Negro 
question for a vote of the 17th National Convention, admitted at 
the Convention, and I quote again, "Here and there over the coun- 
try, there has been great concern in the ranks of our Negro comrades 

20-004—63 7 



144 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

in particular over the dropping of the slogan of the right to 'self- 
determination'." 

It appears, does it not, that the opposition of the Negi-o Communist 
is not confined by any means to the State of California? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The Southern California District Board of the 
Communist Party, and the entire Southern California District Con- 
vention, nevertheless, endorsed the draft resolution on the Negro 
question, notmthstanding yom' strenuous opposition to it, didn't it? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. This action was taken also notwithstanding the 
determined opposition of Cyril Briggs, a prominent member of the 
Communist Party in Southern California? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. In this article, which j^ou submitted to the Southern 
California District Convention, according to the information obtained 
b}^ the committee, did 3"0u not also charge that Communist Party 
members and leaders were guilty of ''white chauvinism," of contempt 
for Negro Communist Party members, and of a deliberate policy of 
keeping Negro Communists out of party leadership, all of which 
appears on pages 5 and 6 of Dobbs Exhibit No. 12? 

Mrs. Alexander. Was that in the form of a question, sir? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, it was. 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Doyle. The committee will recess for a few minutes. 

(Short recess.) 

Mr. Doyle. The committee will come to order again, please. 

Let the record show that Congressman Tuck of Virginia, Congress- 
man Johansen of Michigan, and Congressman Doyle, subcommittee 
chairman, are present; therefore a quorum of the subcommittee. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Alexander, I would like to return for a 
moment to the aflSdavit which was introduced in evidence, as Minii 
Alexander Exhibit No. 2 — the Oath of Allegiance and Questionnaire 
for Employes — Los Angeles City Schools. 

As a result of the execution of that Oath of Allegiance and Question- 
naire, were you employed in 1959 by the Los Angeles Board of Edu- 
cation, as a substitute intermediate typist and assigned to the business 
office division, job accounting, at 1425 San Pedro? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did 3^ou, as a Communist Party member, partici- 
pate in any mass movements interested in various types of peace move- 
ments, peace programs? 

Mrs. Alexander. Have you finished the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you not carry out a Communist Party in- 
struction or an activity which you knew to be a desire of the Commu- 
nist Party, in engaging in a demonstration sponsored by "Help 
Establish Lastins; Peace"? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 145 

Mrs. Alexander, I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I desire to offer in evidence a 
photograph and ask that it be marked Alexander Exhibit No. 3.'^ 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. I hand the photograph to the witness and ask if 
she will identify the figure in the middle as being a photograph of her? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that counsel and witness are 
examining the exhibit just handed to them by Mr. Tavenner. 

Mrs. Alexander. The photograph speaks for itself. 

I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. May the committee please examine the photograph 
and see what the photograph shows for itself? 

Mr. Doyle. What is the opinion of the subcommittee members? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Unquestionably, it is the same person. 

Mr. DoYLE. Unquestionably, the middle figure in the picture is 
Mimi Alexander, the witness before us today. 

Mr. Tuck. I concur in that view. 

Mr. DoYLE. So do I. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you now actively engaged in the work of the 
Communist Party, Mrs. Alexander, as a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mrs. Alexander. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions, Governor? 

Mr, Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Johansen. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no questions, thank you, Counsel. 

Mr. Manes. May the witness be excused? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Manes. I am asked to inquire as to whether there will be a 
transcript made available to the witness at the conclusion of the 
proceedings? 

Mr. Tavenner. This is an executive session, and until the com- 
mittee in Washington acts upon it, there will not be anything made 
public to the witness or anyone else. 

Mr. Manes. At the time, if and when it is made public, will there 
be a transcript available? 

Mr. Tavenner. If it is made available, it will be printed. 

Mr. Manes. In other words, the witness will have to apply? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, if she just writes to us, we will give her a 
printed copy. 

Mr. Doyle. That is according, Counsel, to our long-standing 
printed rules. 

We will have a short recess. 

(Short recess.) 

Mr. Doyle. Mrs. Kessler, will you please raise your right hand 
and be sworn? 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. Kessler. I do. 

12 Ibid., p. 236. 



146 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

TESTIMONY OF SHIRLEY KESSLER, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
CLAUDE V. WORRELL 

Mr. Doyle. Please take the witness chair, Mrs. Kessler. 

Mr. Wheeler. State your name, please. 

Mrs. Kessler. Shirley Kessler. 

Mr. Wheeler. Miss or Mrs.? 

Mrs. Kessler. Mrs. Kessler. 

Mr. Wheeler. Would you advise the committee of the date and 
place of birth, please? 

Mr. Johansen. May we make the notation of identity of counsel? 

Mr. Worrell. Claude Worrell. 

Mrs. Kessler. I refuse — I decline to answer that question on the 
grounds of the first and the fifth amendments. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer, because we believe that we 
are entitled to your identity as a matter of law. 

Mrs. Kessler. I believe I have stated my identity in terms of 
name, and I have been served a subpena. 

Mr. Wheeler. What is your maiden name? 

Mrs. Kessler. I refuse to — I decline to answer that question on 
the grounds of the first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. And your address? 

Do you want to direct her, mere form of identit}'^, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, I direct you to answer. It enters into who you are 
and your identity. 

Mrs. Kessler. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. And what is your current address, Mrs. Kessler? 

Mrs. Kessler. I decline to anwer that question on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer. 

Mr. Tuck. Do you honestly believe that if you answered the ques- 
tion and told the committee your name and your address, that it 
would subject you to criminal prosecution? 

Mrs. Kessler. Yes. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, I would like to place in evidence a 
subpena return, served upon Mrs. Kessler at 1589 Helen Drive, in 
Los Angeles. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received. 

Mr. Wheeler. Is that your current address? 

Mrs. Kessler. I dechne to answer that question on the grounds of 
the previous statement. 

(Document marked as "Kessler Exhibit No. 1" and retained in 
committee files.) 

Mr. Wheeler. A voter's registration indicates you were born in 
New York, is that correct? 

Mrs. Kessler. I decline to answer that on the same grounds, as 
stated previously. 

Mr. Wheeler. How long have you resided in Los Angeles? 

Mrs. Kessler. I refuse — I decline to answer that, as stated previ- 
ously. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mrs. Kessler, you have lived in Los Angeles Coimty 
since 1954, is that correct? 

Mrs. Kessler. I decline to answer that on the same grounds, as 
stated previously. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 147 

Mr. Wheeler. Our investigation has shown that you were a 
delegate to the first session of the Second Convention of the Com- 
munist Party, Southern CaHfornia District, on November 22, 1959. 

Were you present at this convention? 

Mrs. Kessler. I dechne to answer this on the grounds previously 
stated. 

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

Mrs. Kessler. I refuse — I decline to answer that on the grounds 
stated previously. 

I'd like to ask for a statement of pertinence as to the legislative value 
of the questions being asked me. 

Mr. Wheeler. The chairman of the subcommittee covered that 
this morning in his opening statement. 

Part of the resolution adopted by the committee authorizing these 
hearings reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative 
purpose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in 
determinining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in 
a manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United 
States * * *. 

The chairman of the subcommittee also explained that at the time 
that resolution was passed, on January 17, the staff of this com- 
mittee was assisting liim in the preparation of a bill which he intro- 
duced on January 30 of this year, which is H.R. 9944, amending the 
Internal Security Act of 1950 — that is, amends the registration pro- 
visions of it, and makes membership in the Communist Party unlawful, 
and that bill has been referred to this committee, and this hearing 
relates to that. 

Mr. Doyle. That bill was referred to this committee, and we are 
here in connection with this proposed legislation. 

Mr, Wheeler. Are you a member of the City Terrace Club of the 
Communist Party, Southern California District? 

Mrs. Kessler. I decline to answer on the grounds as previously 
stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. We notice from your record, you have been attend- 
ing meetings of the Mexican caucus of the Communist Party, Southern 
District of California, is that cori'ect? 

Mrs. Kessler. I decline to answer that question on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions, Governor? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Obviously she is not going to answer any questions. 

Mr. Joh.\nsen. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no questions. 

You may be excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Worrell. Mr. Chairman, with leave of the committee, please, 
there are a few lawyers outside that would like to appear just for the 
brief statement with regard to the witnesses and the lawyers that 
have been waiting all day. 



148 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

I wonder if the Chair would recognize them for a few moments, so 
they could inquire of the committee what its intentions are with 
respect to the remaining witnesses, and so forth? 

Mr. Doyle. Well, let's hear this witness first, and then we can see. 

We will not take very long. 

Mr. Worrell. Well, it's now 5:20, and, of course, just about all 
of us have been waiting out there all day, without any idea of how 
long we are to wait in the future. 

Mr. Doyle. Let's wait until after this witness and then we will 
take time to do that. 

Mr. Worrell. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. Mrs. Konick, will you be sworn, please? 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. KoNicK. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF HELEN KONICK, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL 

HUGH R. MANES 

Mr. Wheeler. Witness, state your name, please. 
Mrs. KoNicK. Helen Konick. 

Mr. Wheeler. I see you are accompanied by counsel. Will the 
counsel please identify himself for the record? 
Mr. Manes. Yes, my name is Hugh R. Manes. 
Mr. Wheeler. You are Mrs. Sam Konick? 
Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer upon the following grounds: 

1. The mandate of this committee violates the provisions of the 
Bill of Rights to the Constitution, and particularly the first amend- 
ment thereof, because of vague, ambiguous and abridging speech, and 
association of citizens; 

2. The question is not pertinent or relevant to the mandate of this 
committee, or to the declared purpose of this investigation, or to any 
proper inquiry or legitimate legislative purpose of this committee. 

Mr. Wheeler. How long is your statement, Mrs. Konick? 

Mrs. Konick. This is not a statement. It is an answer. 

Mr. Wheeler. Some of it is not. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. How long is it? 

Mrs. Konick. The question inquired 

Mr. DoYLE. How many pages is it, Mrs. Konick? 

Mrs. Konick. A page and a half of double-line space. 

Mr. DoYLE. Well, proceed as rapidly as you can, please. 

Mrs. Konick. 3. The question is not pertinent or relevant to the 
mandate of this committee, or to the declared purpose of this investi- 
gation, or to any proper inquiry or legitimate legislative purpose of 
this committee; 

4. The question inquires into my beliefs and associations, and 
abridges my liberty and rights, as guaranteed by the first amendment; 

5. Upon the further ground that the question calls for me to con- 
demn and accuse myself from my own lips, that is, tends to incrimi- 
nate me in violation of the guarantee of the fifth amendment; 

6. The committee lacks jurisdiction over me because: 

A. Of the lawful exercise of its subpena power; and, 

B. The unlawful delegation of its authority and subpena 
power. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 149 

Mr. Wheeler. This has nothing to do with her husband's name. 

I asked her if she is Mrs. Sam Konick. 

Mr. Tuck. I request that you order and direct her to answer that 
question. 

Mr. Doyle. As long as you have read this statement, we'd hke to 
have the statement left with the committee. 

Now, I direct you to answer the question asked you. 

Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Well now. leave the statement with the committee, 
please. 

Mrs. Konick. This is my property and I would request to keep it. 

Mr. Doyle. Xo, you read it to the committee. We have allowed 
it to go into the record, and we want the statement left with us. 

You are appearing before a committee, and that is your statement, 
so just leave it with our clerk, please. 

Otherwise, we are not going to permit you to refer to it again. 
That statement was written by you with the assistance of your coun- 
sel, wasn't it? 

Nirs. Konick. It was prepared with the assistance of my counsel. 

Mr. Doyle. Certainh*. It's exactly the same statement that one 
of the other witnesses read just a few minutes ago. 

Proceed. Mr. Wlieeler. 

Mr. Wheeler. Will you state your maiden name, please? 

Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the grounds previouslv 
stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, it is a mere question of identifica- 
tion of the Tvitness. 

Mr. Doyle. That's right. 

I instruct you to answer, Witness. 

jMrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

\lr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that you order and direct 
her to answer the question, and that you advise her that she may 
be subjecting herself to some involvement with the Department 
of Justice in connection with defiance of a regularly constituted 
committee of the United States Congress. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question, Witness. 

We believe it is a pertinent and proper question. You have heard 
Governor Tuck's statement in the premise, and he states that on 
behalf of the committee. 

Mrs. Konick. I would like to have a statement as to the purpose — ■ 
of tlie legislative purpose of this committee. 

Mr. Doyle. Counsel, don't take up the time of the committee. 
If she was going to ask that question, why didn't you tell her to ask 
it at the beginning? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. And already passed judgment on the stated pur- 
pose of this hearing. 

Mr. Wheeler. He knows the statement anj^way. It's been read 
to him. 

Mr. Doyle. You had your other witnesses have us repeat that 
opening statement. You know what it is. 

Mr. Manes. Mr. Chairman. I have only been here with one other 
witness. The statement wasn't read, Mr. Chairman, and I have no 
knowledge as to the statement . 



150 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Then wli}^ did youi- witness' statement make a 
statement as to the validity of tiie stated purpose? You can't have 
it both ways. 

Mr. Manes. I am not testifying- here. I am here to advise my 
dient as to her rights; that's alL 

Mr. Doyle. That is right. TJiat's all you're entitled to do. 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, in view of the fact that the witness may 
be subjected to some type of investigation in regard to her defiance 
of the committee, and some proceedings may be taken in regard to 
her being in contempt of the committee, in order to proceed, I would 
suggest that the counsel read the purpose. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Wheeler, will you please read that part of the 
opening statement, that applies? 

Mr. Wheeler. The Committee on Un-American Activities adopted 
the resolution on January 17, 1962, which reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American Activi- 
ties, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such time 
as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and activi- 
ties of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative purpose of 
receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in determin- 
ing whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 ishould be amended in a man- 
ner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United 
States * * * . 

The chairman of the subcommittee has explained that at the time 
that resolution was passed, on January 17, the staflf of this committee 
was assisting him in the preparation of a bill which he introduced on 
January 30 of this year, H.R. 9944, amending the Internal Security 
Act of 1950 — that is, amends the registration provisions of it, and 
makes membership in the Communist Party unlawful, and that bill 
has been referred to this committee, and this hearing relates to that. 

Mr. Tuck. Now, I would suggest that the stenographer read back 
the question, since the counsel has asked it, and see whether or not 
she still refuses to answer questions. 

(Record read by the reporter.) 

Mr. Doyle. I direct the witness to answer the question. It is a 
matter of identity, and we have read to j^ou the pertinency of the 
question. 

Mrs. KoNiCK. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. All right, proceed, Mr. Wheeler. 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that this witness has 
obviously made herself in contempt of this committee. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, the record will show, Governor. 

We can stand on the record, whatever it is, when the time comes. 

Mr. Wheeler. Will you give the committee the date of your 
birth, please, and where? 

Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question, Witness. 

Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the groimds previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Is your maiden name Helen Mendelowitz; and born 
in New York City? 

Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question, Witness. We 
are entitled to have your identity. 

Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated, 

Mr. Wheeler. Is Sam Konick your husband? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COIvIMUNIST PARTY 151 

Mrs. KoNicK. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Give the committee your current address, please. 

Mrs. KoNiCK. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tuck. Do you honestly and sincerely apprehend that if you 
stated to this committee your address and the name of your husband, 
that that would subject you to 

Mrs. KoNicK. I decline 

Mr. Tuck. — to a criminal prosecution? 

Mrs. KoNicK. In my opinion, yes. 

Mr. Doyle. Any other questions? 

Mr. Wheeler. Yes, I have. 

Our investigation, Mrs. Konick, discloses that between January 
29-31, 1960, you attended the second session of the Second Con- 
vention of the Communist Party, Southern District of Cahfornia. 
We would like to ask if you were there? 

Mrs. KoNiCK. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

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

Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce the 
subpena return in the record as Konick Exhibit No. 1, which indicates 
the subpena was served at 1067 Sentinel Avenue, Los Angeles. I 
would like to ask you if you reside at that address? 

Mrs. Konick. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Under what name was the subpena served, please? 

Mr. Wheeler. Helen Konick. 

Mr. Doyle. Very well, we will receive it, mark it as an exhibit. 

(Document marked ''Konick Exhibit No. 1" and retained in 
committee files.) 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that if we are through 
with the witness, and I have no questions, that we call in one more 
witness, and then that we recess until tomorrow morning at 8 
o'clock. 

Mr. Doyle. There are some attorneys out there. Governor, who 
want to know when they can expect to appear. 

Mr. Tuck. I am making that suggestion so that you can send word 
out. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. 

Now I am asking you to leave your statement. The rules of the 
committee are if you read a statement, you file the statement with the 
committee. 

Mr. Manes. With all due deference, Mr. Chairman, it is not a 
statement. 

Mr. Doyle. It is a statement that she read to this committee. 

Mr. Manes. It is the property of this witness, and it is sin-ply 
to help her in giving the answer to the committee, not designed to 
make any kind of a statement to the committee. She desires to 
keep it. 

Mr. Doyle. You know better than that, Counsel. You helped her 
draw that as her answer to this subpena. 

Well, certainly it is an answer. It is not just a statement. It is 
an answer to the subpena. 



152 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

]Mr. Maxes. She desires to keep it, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, we want it filed with the committee, under the 
rules of the committee. 

Mr. Manes. I do believe, Mr. Chairman, that without her consent, 
it would be abridgment of her right to have her own property and to 
keep it. 

Mr. Doyle. The next time you come before this committee as an 
attorney for the witness, j^ou follow the rules of the committee. 

Mr. Manes. I always try to. 

Mr. DoY'LE. Well, you haven't in this case. 

Mr. Manes, May we be excused, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, you are excused. 

Mr. Manes. Thank you. 

(Witness excused.) 

Sir. Doyle. Let's have the next witness — Mr. Beyea. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Beyea. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF FRANK BEYEA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEI, 

HARRIETT BUHAI 

Mr. Wheeler. Will the witness state his name, please? 

Mr. Beyea. Frank Beyea. 

Mr. Wheeler. Would you spell the last name? 

Mr. Beyea. B-e-y-e-a. 

Mr. Wheeler. I notice you are represented by counsel. Would the 
counsel identify herself for the record? 

Miss Buhai. Harriett Buhai. 

Mr. Wheeler. Would you state your residence, please? 

Mr. Beyea. I stand on my constitutional rights and refuse to 
answer this question, stand on the first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Wheeler. It is merely a matter of routine identification of 
the witness. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Beyea, I instruct you to answer. We feel thai 
Congress is entitled to know the identity of any person appearing 
before a congressional committee. That is why we are asking j^ou 
this question. 

Mr. Beyea. I am here in answer to a subpena, and I think this is 
sufficient information. 

Mr. Doyle. In other words, you think the subpena contains your 
address, is that it? 

Mr. Johansen. The witness answered in the affirmative as to that. 
Is that correct? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, he shook his head manifestly. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, I have the subpena return, which 
indicates it \vas served at 2425 North Keystone Street, Burbank, 
California. 

Is that your residence address? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer; take my rights under the first and 
fifth amendment of the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Wheeler. I introduce the subpena-return in the record. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be received as an exhibit. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 153 

(Document marked ''Beyea Exhibit No. 1" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Wheeler. Would you tell the committee your occupation? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. I don't see 
the pertinence of it. 

Mr. Wheeler. It is still a matter of identification. Ai-e you a 
carpenter? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer on the grounds of the first and fifth 
amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. Will you tell the committee the date of your birth, 
please? 

Mr. Beyea. I fail to see the pertinence of this or the relevance of it. 

I refuse to answer on the ground of the first and fifth. 

Mr. Wheeler. Will the chairman please direct the witness to 
answer? 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answ^er. It certainly couldn't involve 
you in anj'- possible criminal prosecution because you were born, could 
it? You had nothing to do with it. 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer. I take the same grounds, first and 
fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. You feel an answer to this question would incrim- 
inate you, and might lead to criminal proceedings by the Govern- 
ment against you? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tuck. You refuse to answer that question. 

The only way in which he can avail himself of the protection of the 
fifth amendment, would be to answer the last question ''yes," in the 
affirmative. 

Having refused to do so, he denies himself any privileges that he 
might have by reason of the fifth amendment, and therefore I request 
3^ou to order and direct him to answer the question. 

Mr. Doyle. All right, I will be glad to do so, and let the record so 
reflect. 

Witness, I instruct you to answer that last question, 

Mr. Beyea. I don't understand the question. 

Mr. Tuck. The question was, as I understand it, whether or not 
you honestly apprehend that if you told the committee your address 
and 3^our occupation, would that subject you to some type of criminal 
prosecution? 

Mr. Beyea. I don't understand the pertinence of the question. 

Mr. Wheeler. Certainly this committee has a right to know jour 
identity, and the only way that you can avail yourself of the fifth 
amendment, of the protection that the fifth amendment affords 
American citizens, would be for you to be in a position where you 
could honestly and sincerely state that in your opinion, an answer 
to that question would subject you to a criminal prosecution, 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer the question because the answer 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Doyle. Proceed. 

Mr. Beyea. Stand on the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Beyea, have you been known under any other 
name? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer on the grounds of the first and fifth 
amendment of the Constitution of the United States. 



154 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question. The United 
States Congress is entitled to know the identity of witnesses appearing 
before congressional committees. That is all these questions are, 
questions of identity, Counsel. 

Mr. Beyea. I still refuse to answer under the first and fifth amend- 
ment. I am subpenaed and I am present. 

Mr. Wheeler. When did you join the Communist Party? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer that question, as I stand on the 
ground of the first and fifth amendment of the Constitution, a lack 
of relevancy. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, during the investigations in Cali- 
fornia, we acquired a membership list of the Communist Party of 
Los Angeles County. 

This is a membership for 1937. I refer to this record, and see here 
the name, Frank Beyea; party name, Francis Bellamy. 

Do you recall using that name as a party name in the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer the question on the first and fifth 
amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. The address given at that time was 3115 North 
Kenwood, Burbank. Did you live at this address in 1937? 

Mr. Beyea. I stand on the first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. This information reflects that you joined the Com- 
munist Party on July 14, 1936, is that correct? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the grounds of the 
first and fifth amendment of the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Wheeler. At that time, you were 28 years of age, according 
to the records of the Communist Party. This would mean you were 
born in 1908, is that correct? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tuck. Do you deny the accm-acy of the information which 
counsel has just revealed to this committee? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this committee on the same grounds 
previously. 

Mr. Wheeler. Yom- occupation was given as a copy holder. I 
don't exactly know what a copy holder is. Would you enlighten the 
committee on this particular job? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer the question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. It also states on Conmiunist Party records that 
you were a member of the American Civil Liberties Union, correct? 

Mr. Beyea. Same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Also, a member of the International Labor Defense? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the first and fifth 
amendment. 

Air. Wheeler. And you were recruited into the Communist 
Party by Adam Boose. Do you know Mr. Boost?.? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the same grounds 
as before. 

Mr. Wheeler. And that you were assigned to Unit L-5 in the 
San Fernando Section, Communist Party, is that correct? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the grounds of the 
first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Beyea, do you know or did you know at any 
time, a man by the name of William Kimple? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 155 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the grounds of the 
first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. For tlie record, Mr. Kimple was a member of the 
Los Angeles Police Department for a number of years and assigned to 
work undercover in the Communist Party. He acquired the position 
of assistant membership director of the Communist Party of Los 
Angeles County. He's testified at length before the committee in 
executive session. I refer to his testimony of April 18, 1955. And 
Mr. Kimple was reviewing a list of the Workers Alliance of America 
and Mr. Beyea's name appeared as a member of Workers Alliance. 

Were you a member of Workers Alliance at that time, this goes back 
to 1937? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the grounds of the 
first and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Kimple was asked to identify people he knew 
as members of the Communist Party from the Workers Alliance, and 
he identified Frank Beyea, 3115 Kenwood, Burbank, California. Was 
Mr. Kimple correct in his identification of you as a member of the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Kimple further testified on April 21, 1955, 
that he knew Frank Beyea as a member of the CommunistParty, 
and also indicated that your party name was Francis Bellamy, as 
indicated on the party records, to which I previously referred. Was 
Mr. Kimple correct? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the same grounds, as 
previously. 

Mr. Tuck. In your refusal to answer the questions, are we to under- 
stand that you dispute the accuracy of any part or all of the informa- 
tion which has been brought to light before the committee in your 
presence? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question under the same 
grounds, the first and fifth amendments of the Constitution of the 
United States. 

Mr. Wheeler. Ai-e you now the organizer of the Valley Section 
of the Communist Party, Southern District of California? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the grounds of the 
fij-st and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you not the Valley Section representative 
to the Communist District Committee before it was dissolved in 
June 1961? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Why was the District Committee dissolved? 

Mr. Beyea, I refuse to answer on- the same grounds, as previously, 
the first and fifth amendment of the United States Constitution. 

Mr. Wheeler. Isn't it a fact it was dissolved shortly after June 5, 
after the Supreme Court decision requiring members of the Communist 
Party to register? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. That was June 5 of last year? 

Mr. Wheeler. June 5 of last year. 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer on the same grounds, the first and 
fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. You registered with the Department of Justice? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this on the grounds of the first and 
fifth amendment of the constitution. 



156 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OP THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Wheeler. I notice from our records that you were a member 
of the Independent Progressive Party in 1954, is that correct? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this also on the same grounds as 
previously. 

Mr. Wheeler. Ai-e you now a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the same grounds 
first and fifth amendment. ' 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Beyea. I refuse to answer this question on the same grounds 
as previously. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no questions, Counsel, thank you. 

Mr. Doyle. Witness excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. When the committee recesses, as we are doing now, we 
will reconvene tomorrow morning at 8 o'clock. 

(Whereupon, at 5:50 p.m., Wednesday, April 25, 1962. the sub- 
committee recessed, to reconvene at 8 a.m., Thursdav, April 26 
1962, in the same location.) ^ ' 



XNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 



THURSDAY, APRIL 26, 1962 

United States House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Los Angeles, California. 

executive session ^ 

The subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities 
reconvened at 8:15 a.m., pm:suant to recess, in Room 519, United 
States Federal Building, Representative Clyde Doyle (chairman of 
the subcommittee presiding) . 

Subcommittee members: Representatives Clyde Doyle, of Cali- 
fornia; Edwin E. Willis, of Louisiana; William M. Tuck, of Virginia; 
Gordon H. Scherer, of Ohio, and August E. Johansen, of Michigan. 

Subcommittee members present: Representatives Doyle, Tuck, 
Scherer, and Johansen. 

Staff members present: Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., director, and 
William A. Wheeler, investigator. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that the subcommittee reconvened 
April 26, at 8:15 a.m., with subcommittee members Messrs. Tuck, 
Scherer, Johansen, and Doyle present. 

Mr. Bissey, do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are 
about to give before this subcommittee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Bissey. I do. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you. Please be seated. 

TESTIMONY OF WESLEY A. BISSEY, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, ANTHONY V. RANDLES 

Mr. Wheeler. State your name, sir. 
Mr. Bissey. Wesley Bissey, B-i-s-s-e-y. 
Mr. Wheeler. Where do you reside? 

Mr. Bissey. I fail to see the pertinence of such a question, sir. 
Mr. Wheeler. Was a subpena served on you at 8741 Elm Avenuej 
San Gabriel? 

Mr. Bissey. I have a subpena. 
Mr. Wheeler. Do you have it with you? 
Mr. Bissey. No, I don't have it with me. 
Mr. Wheeler. Does your attorney have it? 
Mr. Bissey. No. 

1 Released by the committee and ordered to be printed. 

157 



158 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Wheeler. Was the subpena served upon you at this address? 

Mr, BissEY. I think the subpena, sir, speaks for itself. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, do you have the subpena with you? 

Mr. BissEY. No, sir. 

Mr. Doyle. I will introduce a copy. 

Mr. Wheeler. I ask, Mr. Chairman, he be instructed to answer the 
question. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct jou to answer the question. 

Clearly, the Congress is entitled to have your identity, and that is 
what this question goes to. Now, we have accommodated your coun- 
sel and you this morning by calling you first ; and if you want to take 
all the time you can, technically, of the committee and of your counsel 
and yourself, why, that's okay with us. 

Mr. BissEY. That is right, sir. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. The answer is, "That is right, sir." 

Mr. Doyle. What question are you answering? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. About the subpena being served. 

Mr. BissEY. What was the question? I answered it, didn't I? 

Mr. Doyle, Thank you very much. Let's proceed, then. 

Mr. Wheeler. Would counsel identify himself, please? 

Mr. Randles. Anthony V. Randies, R.-a-n-d-1-e-s. 

Mr. Wheeler. Yom- occupation, Mr. Bissey? 

Mr. Bissey. I don't see any pertinency as to my occupation in this 
hearing. If there is such, I would like to hear it. 

Mr, Doyle. I would suggest, Mr. Wheeler, you read the resolution 
and we will save everyone's time. 

Mr. Wheeler. The resolution is pertinent to the question I asked. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, I know, but he will raise the question. He 
raised it twice and he will keep on raising it until you read it. 

Mr. Wheeler. On January 17, 1962, the Committee on Un- 
American Activities in Washington, D.C., passed the resolution, 
which reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern CaUfornia for the legislative pur- 
pose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in 
determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a 
manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United 
States, and that the staff of the Committee be authorized to conduct investiga- 
tions deemed reasonably necessary in preparation for said hearings. 

You understand the resolution? 

Mr. Bissey. I think so. 

Mr. Wheeler. Will you give us your occupation? 

Mr, Bissey. I refuse to answer, sir, and I base my refusal on the 
lack of pertinency and also on the first amendment and the fifth 
amendment of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question. 

Mr. Bissey. Sir? 

Mr. Doyle. I say, I instruct you to answer the question. 

Mr. Bissey. I refuse to answer, and I base my refusal on lack of 
pertinency and I also take advantage of my privilege by refusing on 
the first amendment and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you born in Lamont, Oklahoma, September 9, 
1903? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 159 

Mr, BissEY. I refuse to answer the question because of lack of 
pertinency and also refuse on the basis of the first amendment and 
the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer that question. 

It is always pertinent to the United States Congress to know where 
people were born and who they arc. This goes to the question of 
identity and, certainly, it couldn't possibly bring you into the area of 
criminal prosecution to tell where you were born. It certainly has no 
association with criminal prosecution — the fact that you were born 
some place. I just make that statement for your information, showing 
the justification of this question going to identity. I want the record 
to show that. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Doyle. I know counsel and witness realize we are in conference 
a few minutes on a serious question for us to decide. 

We have here a record of the witness' birth and a photograph 
showing certain information; and the question is whether or not we 
should place it in the record. 

Mr. Tuck. I might add that the witness might not like to hear 
this next question asked; that the committee would not ask the 
question if he had identified himself properly. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Bissey, I hand you a police record photograph 
indicating FBI No. 98 868, and ask if that is your picture? 

Can you identify that picture of yourself? 

Mr. Bissey. I refuse to answer the question, sir, and I base my 
refusal to answer on the previously stated reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. I ask this be introduced in evidence as Bissey 
Exhibit No. 1. 

Mr. Doyle. May I compare it, please? 

I ask the subcommittee to view this picture. 

Mr. Tuck. I have looked at the picture and I am looking at the 
witness, and the picture and the witness are obviously one and the 
same person. 

Mr. Johansen. I concur in that judgment. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be received in the record. 

(Document marked "Bissey Exhibit No. 1" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr, Bissey, I hand you a second document, which 
I wish to introduce as Bissey Exhibit No, 2, from the United States 
Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. It purports 
to be a criminal record of a W, A, Bissey, Wesley A, Bissey, alias 
James Snyder, S-n-y-d-e-r, 

I would like to state that FBI No, 98 868 on this document, is 
the same number as the one on Bissey Exhibit No, 1. 

On the third page of this exhibit is the description: "Race: White. 
Sex: Male. Height: 5'10". Weight: 163. Hair: Grey brown. 
Eyes: Blue. Birth: 9-9-03 at Lamont, Oklahoma." 

And I would Hke to ask you if this is your criminal record? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that counsel and witness are 
examining the exhibit and that the exhibit was handed to them by 
Mr. Wheeler. 

Mr. Bissey. I refuse to answer the question, sir, on the same 
reasons as previously stated. 

20-004—63 8 



160 "UNITED FROXT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

(Document marked "Bissey Exhibit No. 2" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Doyle. I just wish to make this observation at this point: 
You can't say, Witness and Counsel, before this identification was 
used, that I didn't endeavor to make it clear to the witness that it 
was purely a question of identification. We were entitled to know his 
place of birth, and he stood on his constitutional rights, but he also 
has the right to put us to proof, and I think we have proven who he is. 
We regret we had to use this method, but this was the only method 
at our disposal to prove who this witness is. 

Mr. Wheelee. How long have you resided in California, Mr. 
Bisscy? 

Mr. BissEY. I refuse to answer the question, sir, for the same 
stated reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. Our investigation developed information and the 
fact that you have been here at least since 1945, when in that year 
you were a member of the San Gabriel Valley Club of the Communist 
Political Association; is that correct? 

Mr. BissEY. I refuse to answer the question, sir, for the previously 
stated reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. You have likewise been an instructor of ZVlarxist 
classes in San Gabriel intermittently over a period of years, is that 
correct? 

Mr. Blssey. I refuse to answer the question for the same reasons 
as previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. In 1958, were you a delegate on the Southern 
California District Council of the Communist Party, representing the 
San Gabriel Section of the party? 

Mr. BissEY. I refuse to answer that question for the same reasons 
as previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Bissey, we have made considerable inc[uiries 
into the operation of the Communist Party, Southern California 
District, and we feel that you are in a position to help us, if you would. 
It appears that you will not. However, we have had under inquiry 
at this hearing, a convention of the Communist Party — ^that is, the 
Second Convention of the Communist Party's Southern California 
District. 

Our records disclose that on November 22, 1959, you were in 
attendance at the first session of the Second Convention of the Com- 
munist Party, Southern California District, and I would Uke to ask 
you if you would help us develop information on what occurred at 
that convention? WUl you help us? 

Mr. Bissey. I guess I don't understand your question, sir. 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, were you present at this convention? 

Mr. Bissey. I refuse to answer the question based on the same 
reasons as I have previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Then you are declining 

Mr. Bissey. I am declining. 

Mr, Wheeler. — to help this committee in its legislative work? 

Mr. Bissey. For the same reasons, sir, as previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are vou presentlv a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Bissey. I refuse to answer that question for the same reasons. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 161 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Have vou ever been a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. BissEY. I refuse to answer that question for the same reasons 
as I have previously given. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Bissey, were you a member of the Independent 
Progressive Party here in the State of Cahfornia? 

Mr. Bissey. I refuse to answer that question, sir, for the same 
reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. We have considerable evidence in the record, Mr. 
Chairman, that the Independent Progressive Party was a brain child 
of the Communist Party and it was through the Communist Party's 
endeavor that it was placed upon the ballots of the State of California. 

I have here an Independent Progressive Party petition which was 
circulated by various individuals in Los Angeles. The Communist 
Party also was instructed to circulate these petitions. I identify 
this petition as No. 4985, bearing the date of February 1, 1948. It 
appears that the petition was circulated by Wesley A. Bissey. 

Now, your middle name is Arthur; is that correct? 

Mr. Bissey. I refuse to answer the question, sir, based on the same 
reasons as previously given. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Wheeler, in this Federal Bureau of Investigation 
Report No. 98 868, the following names appear in the column titled 
"Name and Number" with reference to this witness: Wesley Alex- 
ander Bissey, W. A. Bissey, Wesley A. Bissey, Wesley Abraham Bissey, 
James Snyder, Wesley Arthur Bissey. So, apparently, this witness 
was Imown in the Department of Justice by each and all of those differ- 
ent names. 

Mr. Wheeler. Yes, sir. 

I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. None. 

Mr. Tuck. None. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no further questions. 

Thank you, sir. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Call the next witness. 

Will you be sworn, Airs. Burgess. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help vou God? 

Mrs. Burgess. I affirm to tell the truth. 

Mr. Doyle. Will you notice the witness affirms? Let the record so 
show. 

TESTIMONY OF MARGARET CARL BURGESS, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, IRVING RAY 

Mr. Wheeler. Will the witness kindly state her name? 
Mrs. Burgess. Margaret Carl Burgess, B-u-r-g-e-s-s. 
Mr. JoHANSEx. Would you please speak up? It's a Httle hard to 
hear. 

Mr. Wheeler. Will counsel please identify himself? 
Mr. Ray. Irving Ray, R-a-y. 



162 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Wheeler. And you are in the legal profession in Los Angeles? 

Mr. Ray. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Wheeler. Will the witness state her maiden name, please? 

Mrs. Burgess. I have identified myself. I will stand on the 
gromids of the first and the fifth. 

Mr. Wheeler. You previously stated your maiden name. You 
said Margaret Carl Burgess. 

Mrs. Burgess. My name is Margaret Carl Burgess. 

Mr. Wheeler, Isn't your maiden name Carl? 

Mrs. Burgess. The same. 

Mr. Doyle. I might state this: The question goes to the identity 
of the witness and that is the pm-pose of this question. We feel 
Congress, under the law, is clearly entitled to know the identity of 
every witness before any congressional committee, and that is the 
purpose of the question. It only goes to that one purpose, 

Mrs, Burgess, My name is Margaret Carl Burgess. 

Mr, Johansen. And yoiu' maiden name is what? 

Mrs. Burgess. I will give the same answer. 

Mr, Johansen, Well, I ask the chairman to direct the witness to 
answer my question, 

Mr. Doyle. There is no possible basis of self-incrimination in 
identification of the witness. 

Mrs. Burgess. I have stated my answer. 

Mr. Doyle. That is your complete answer? 

Mrs. Burgess. That is my complete answer. 

Mr. Doyle. Let's proceed, Mr. Wheeler. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you Mrs. Walter Kenneth Burgess? 

Mrs. Burgess. I — -Am I directed to answer the question? 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer the question. 

Mrs. Burgess. My name is Margaret Carl Burgess. That's the 
name I received the subpena under and that's my name. 

Mr. Doyle. Do you go by any name other than the name under 
which you were subpenaed? If you do, by what name? 

Mrs. Burgess. Well, am I asked to answer the question? 

Mr, Doyle, Yes, 

Mrs. Burgess. I refuse respectfully to answer that question on 
the grounds of the first and the fifth. 

Mr. Doyle. Let's proceed. 

Mr. Wheeler. When and where were you born? 

Mrs. Burgess. I would answer that by taking the first and the 
fifth, and I would like to ask the pertinency of the question. 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, the pertinency of the question is just mere 
identification. We have the right to identify for the record the indi- 
vidual whom we subpenaed. 

Mrs. Burgess. I would like it shown in the record that I question 
the pertinency of these questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I suggest, Mr. Wheeler, then, you read the text of the 
resolution under which this committee operates, and if you want to 
take your time and counsel's time and our tune for that, all right, 
let's do it. 

Mrs. Burgess. Will you read the 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 163 

Mr. Wheeler. The Coniinittee on Un-American Activities on Jan- 
uary 17, 1962, met in Washington, D.C., and passed this resolution 
which reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative 
purpose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in 
determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a 
manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United 
States, and that the staff of the Committee be authorized to conduct investiga- 
tions deemed reasonably necessary in preparation for said hearings. 

That is the text of the resolution. 

Mrs. Burgess. Thank you. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, when and where were you born? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question so the record 
will clearly show what the situation is. 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chau'man, I would like to make one observation 
for the record. 

It seems to be a uniform practice of the witnesses in these hearings 
to object to questions relating solely to identification, questioning the 
pertinency of these questions, and to invoke the claim of freedom from 
self-incrimination. I think the record ought to make very clear the 
hypocrisy of this sort of a tactic. There is no one, more so than 
these witnesses, who would exultantly capitaUze on any case of mis- 
taken identity by this committee. They do their best to exploit it, 
and make it out as a case against the committee. Therefore, this 
committee is being meticulous in its efforts to estabhsh identity. And 
I just think the record ought to point up that complete hypocrisy of 
such witnesses. 

Mr. Doyle. Of course, it was seen by myself and others yesterday 
that when a witness has left this hearing room mth counsel — for in- 
stance, the first witness that we had yesterday — they go where the 
remaining witnesses gathered and use theh* notes to inform the wit- 
nesses what the proceedings here were, so that by agreement and 
arrangement, they would know what to do. 

Proceed, Mr. Wheeler. 

Mr. Wheeler. Is this date correct for your birth: November 8, 
1903, Ortonville, Minnesota? 

Mrs. Burgess. I refuse to answer on the grounds of the first and 
the fifth, and vou will notice that I mentioned the first, as well as the 
fifth. 

Mr. Johansen. Oh, yes, we noticed. 

It is obvious, Mr. Chairman, that this witness couldn't possibly 
adversely affect herself in anyway, in any charge that may be brought 
against her, by revealing her identity to this committee, and I suggest 
that you order and direct her to answer that question. 

Mr. Doyle. This, I do. Witness. I direct you to answer that 
question. Manifestly, you couldn't possibly be subject to criminal 
prosecution because you were born, could you? Do you believe that 
if you honestly answered that question that you would place yourself 
subject to criminal prosecution, the possibility? 

Mrs. Burgess. I refuse to answer on the grounds of the first and the 
fifth. 



164 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you again to answer that question.. 

Mrs. BuKOEss. Yes, 1 do believe it would tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. Let's proceed, Mr. Vv'heeler. 

Mr. Wheelek. Previous to your marriage to Mr. Walter Burgess, 
were you married to Arthur Evans? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the same grounds 
of the first and fifth. 

Mr. AVheeler. Would you give the committee your occupation, 
please? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and the fifth. 

Mr. Wheeler. The witness is a designer. I see where she has 
worked for some rather prominent companies. 

I hear from your reputation you are quite a good designer. Don't 
you want to discuss your emploj^ment background with the commit- 
tee? Again, this is an identification question. 

Mrs. Burgess. Am I ordered to answer the question? 

Mr. Doyle. I do order you. 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and — -Is it all right if I smoke? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, indeed. 

Mr. Wheeler. Where do you reside, Mrs. Burgess? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and the fifth. 

Mr. Wheeler. The subpena return, Mr. Chairman, shows the 
subpena was served on Margaret Carl Burgess at 6733 Carmelita, 
North Hollywood, on the 12th day of April 1962. 

I may note time of service w^as 7 a.m. 

Was this served at your residence? 

Is this your residence address? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. What hour of the day is that? 

Mr. Doyle. 7 a.m. 

What hour does it show that subpena was served, Mr. Wheeler? 

Mr. Wheeler. 7 a.m. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, apparently the witness was at that place at^that 
time. 

Mr. Johansen. I think she should answer this question, Mr. Chair- 
man, as to whether it was served at her residence. 

Mr. Doyle. You heard that question. Witness? 

Mrs. Burgess. Yes, I heard it. 

Mr. Doyle. What is your answ^er? 

Mrs. Burgess. Are 3^ou ordering me to answer? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes. If you want me to order you every time, let us 
have an understanding. I w^ill do it. It takes your time and your 
counsel's. 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, I mentioned in yesterday's hearings 
that the committee in its investigations had acquired a great many 
Communist Party records for the year 1937 w^hich were introduced 
during the executive testimony of WilHam Kimple, who was a member 
of the Los Angeles Police Department and infiltrated the Communist 
Party at the direction of the police department. Included in these 
records is a card indicating Margaret Carl joined the Communist 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COSOirXIST PARTY 165 

Party 1934; occupation, designer; member of the "Women's Council"; 
at that time, 31 years of age; and she was assigned to the San Fernando 
Section, Unit L-2. 

Now, is this information correct? Did you join the Communist 
Party in 1934? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and fifth. 

Mr. Doyle, Well, apparently, Mr. Wheeler, this witness is the 
same person whose records you just gave to the committee as Margaret 
Carl. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mrs. Burgess, were you a delegate to the Communist 
Party District Council from the Vallev Section of the Communist 
Party in the years 1958, '59, '60, and '61? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfulh^ refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Wheeler. We have 3^ou recorded as attending a great number 
of the meetings of the District Council during that period of time. 
Is that correct? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you acquainted with an organization called 
Women Strike for Peace? 

Mr. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you in a peace demonstration sponsored by 
Women Strike for Peace on November 1, 1961, here in Los Angeles 
in front of the City Hall? Did you receive instructions from the 
Communist Party to participate in this demonstration? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments of the United States Constitution. 

Mr. Doyle. What time of day was that demonstration? Do you 
know? 

Mr, Wheeler, It was in the morning, sir. 

Mr, Doyle, During working hours? 

Mr. Wheeler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, of course, if it was during working hours that 
this witness was in the demonstration, she could not have been on 
the job too, could not have been on the job where she was emploj'ed 
and also in that alleged peace demonstration. But that is what the 
Communist Party does, you know. It requires its members to sac- 
rifice everything — money, time, strength, brains, and even loyalty 
to the United States of America. 

Mr. Wheeler. Our files reflect that on July 9, 1960, there was 
another peace demonstration. This demonstration was called Walk 
and Rally for Disarmament. You likewise participated in that 
demonstration, did you not? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments of the Constitution. 

Mr. Wheeler. Was this by direction of the Communist Party, 
your participation in the peace demonstration? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse on the grounds of the first and 
fifth amendment of the Constitution. 

Mr. Wheeler. You know, Mrs. Burgess, a lot of these peace 
organizations, the majority of them, are probably in good faith. 
I wonder if they appreciate the support of the Communist Party? 



166 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Did the organizers of these demonstrations know of your member- 
ship in the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of the 
fifth and first amendments of the Constitution. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you presently a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments of the Constitution. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mrs. Burgess. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds of 
the first and fifth amendments of the Constitution. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. None. 

Mr. Tuck. I have none. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no further questions. 

Thank you very much. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Snider, do you solemnly swear that the testimony 
you are about to give before this committee shall be the truth, the 
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Snider. I do. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you. Please take the witness chair. 

TESTIMONY OF IRVING A. SNIDER, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

ROBERT L. BROCK 

Mr. Wheeler. Will you state your name, please. 

Mr. Snider. Irving Snider. 

Mr. Wheeler. You are accompanied by counsel. Will counsel 
state his name? 

Mr. Brock. Robert L. Brock. B-r-o-c-k. 

Mr. Wheeler. Give us your residence address, Mr. Snider. 

Mr. Brock. Could we have the statement of pertinency read first, 
please? 

Mr. Chairman, I don't mean to interrupt, but may I repeat the 
suggestion made yesterday: While everybody is here, just read it once? 

Mr. Doyle. We w^ould rather do it individually. I know it takes 
our time and yours, too. 

Mr. Brock. I could make another copy and hand it out to each 
of the witnesses ahead of time. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Of course, it is then not on the record. 

Mr. Brock. We would then come in and admit we have read it. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I suggest we proceed in the regular order. 

Mr. Wheeler. The House Committee on Un-American Activities 
met on January 17, 1962, in Washington, D.C., and passed this reso- 
lution which reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American Activ- 
ities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such time 
as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and activities 
of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative purpose of 
receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in determining 
whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a manner to 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 167 

make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United States, and 
that the staff of the Committee be authorized to conduct investigations deemed 
reasonably necessary in preparation for said hearings. 

Now, your residence address, Mr. Snider? 

Mr. Doyle. Before that question is answered, will you excuse me 
to answer the phone just a minute, please? 

(Short recess.) 

Mr. Wheeler. We have a question without an answer. 

(Record read.) 

Mr. Snider. I decline to state on the grounds that the pertinency 
of this, to my appearing here at this hearing, is not evident to me 
and also on the grounds of the protection afforded to me by the first 
the fifth amendments of the Constitution of the United States and 
any other protection that might be pertinent. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question. Witness. It 
goes to the question of your identity. 

We believe that Congress is entitled to loiow the accurate and 
honest identity of every witness that appears before any congressional 
committee. Therefore, I instruct you to answer the question. 

Mr. Snider. I am the man that has been subpenaed here, and my 
answer remains that I do not believe the pertinency of my appearance 
here before this committee or my rights imder the first and the fifth 
and other amendments of the Constitution would be served by my 
answering the question. 

Mr. Wheeler. You are the same Irving Snider who is a member 
of the Compton Club of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Snider. I decline on the same grounds as the previous question. 

Mr, Wheeler. Mr, Chairman, I have the subpena return which 
discloses Irving Snider was served at 623 Palmer Avenue, in Comp- 
ton, Calif. 

Is this your address, sir? 

Mr. Snider. I have already declined to answer that particular 
question, sir. 

Mr. Wheeler. Will you give us your State of birth, please? 

Mr. Snider. I don't feel that is pertinent to this hearing or my 
appearance here, and I decline on the same grounds. 

Mr. Johansen. It is pertinent to establish yoiu* identity and you 
would be among the first to protest if this committee were guilty of 
an error of identity in a witness called before it. 

Mr. Wheeler. We would never hear the end of it. 

Mr. Johansen. Of course, we wouldn't. 

Mr. Snider. I feel that inasmuch as my identity has already been 
established and this information would not further establish my 
identity, I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. Do you believe if you honestly answered that question 
that you would be subjecting yourself to possible criminal prosecution? 

Mr. Snider. I have already answered on the same grounds, su". 

Mr. Doyle. All right. Let the record show what the witness' 
answer was. 

Mr. Wheeler. Does the date of February 19, 1922, recall any 
particular event in your life? 

Mr. Snider. My memory doesn't go back that far. 

Mr. Wheeler. How about February 19, 1962? Would that recall 
any particular event in yoiu* life? 

Mr. Snider. Decline to answer. 



168 "UNITED FROXT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Wheeler. Is that your birthday? 

Mr. Snider. I have answered previously, sir, I think, covering that 
particular question. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. You mean you decline to answer? 

Mr. SxiDER. That is right. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you born in Chicago, Illinois? 

Mr. Snider. Answer on the same grounds — decline to answer on 
the same grounds, rather. 

Mr. Wheeler. What is yoiu- educational background? 

Mr. SxiDER. Decline on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, would this be correct: In 1934-1939, you 
attended John Marshall High School in Chicago; 1941 to 1949. Illinois 
Institute of Technology in Chicago, majored in electrical engineering; 
1949-1951, University of California at Berkeley, where, again, you 
took work in electrical engineering. 

Mr. SxiDER. I decline to answer on the same grounds, su-. 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, you are an electrical engineer; is that right? 

Mr. Snider. I don't: see that that is pertinent, and I decline to 
answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. It is still a matter of identification. 

Does the Compton Section of the Communist Party mean anything 
to you? 

Mr. Snider. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Have you held an}' official position in the Compton 
Section of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Snider. I decline to answer on the aforementioned grounds, 
sir, previously stated grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Within the recent past, haven't you been section 
representative to the District Council of the Communist Party repre- 
senting the Compton Section? 

yh. Snider. I decline to answer on the previously stated grounds. 

^Ir. Wheeler. Then, you are at the present time a member of the 
Compton Club of the Communist Party; is that correct? 

^Ir. Snider. I decline to answer on the previously stated grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have no further questions. 

^h\ Doyle. Does the committee have any questions? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. No questions. 

Mr. Tuck. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no questions. 

The witness is excused . 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Air. Mandel, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. M.andel. I do. 

Mr. Doyle. Have the witness chair, please. 

TESTIMONY OF PIERRE MANDEL, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

ROBERT L. BROCK 

Mr. Brock. I will state to the committee, and as far as my clients 
are concerned, we will assume it has been read to them. 
Mr. Wheeler. You should identify yourself for the record. 
Mr. Brock. Robert L. Brock for Pierre Mandel. 
Mr. Wheeler. Will the witness state his name, please? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 169 

Mr. Mandel. Pierre ]Slandel. 

Mr, Wheeler. Is that your true name, the name you were born 
with? 

Mr. Mandel. I dedine to answer under the protection of the first 
and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer, Witness. Clearly, Congress 
is entitled to know the identity, honestly and fully, of any witness 
appearing before any of its congressional committees. Therefore, I 
instruct you to answer whether or not that is your true name. 

Mr. ]\iANDEL. I decline to answer for three reasons: First, I don't 
see the pertinency of the question; second, because of the first amend- 
ment; and thirdly, because of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. Now, at this point, you heard your counsel a minute 
ago stipulate with us that as far as you, as one of his clients, were 
concerned it might be stipulated that this resolution showing perti- 
nency had been read. 

Mr. Brock. Mr. Doyle, I didn't stipulate that it shows the perti- 
nency, but I stipulated that it had been read. 

Mr. Doyle. Therefore, I want the witness to make clear that that 
stipulation 

Mr. Mandel. I would prefer to hear the resolution of pertinency. 

Mr. Brock. I tried to save time. I am sorry. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I know. We appreciate it. 

Mr. Wheeler. On January 17, 1962, at a meeting of the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities in Washington, D.C., the fol- 
lowing resolution was adopted: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American Activ- 
ities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such time 
as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and activities 
of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative purpose of 
receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in determining 
whether the Internal Security Act of 19.50 should be amended in a manner to 
make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United States, and 
that the staff of the Committee be authorized to conduct investigations deemed 
reasonably necessary in preparation for said hearings. 

Mr, Doyle. Now that the resolution has been read, may I have 
your answer to the question: now tiiat this has been read in your 
presence? 

Mr. Mandel. I don't accept the pertinency as presented and, 
because of that, I, for the same three reasons, I decline to answer. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. Proceed. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Now, when you say "for the same three reasons," 
are you saying that you invoke your rights under the fifth amendment? 

Mr. Mandel. The three reasons are pertinency, first amendment, 
and fifth amendment. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, will you answer my question as to whether 
you are declining to answer on the basis of your rights under the fifth 
amendment? 

Mr. Mandel. As I said, my answer is for three reasons: pertinency, 
first amendment, and fifth amendment. 

Mr. Johansen. Well, I hold, Mr. Chairman, that is not a proper 
invocation of the fifth amendment. 

I am asking you to invoke the fifth amendment in a manner that 
protects your rights. Now, why do you want to quibble with me 
about it? 



170 "XJNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tuck. Unless he does, I suggest that he be ordered and directed 
to answer the question which is one, plainly, of identity. He could 
not possibly mvolve himself in any kind of criminal prosecution or 
serve any disadvantage to himself in any way. 

Mr. Doyle. Again, Witness, I instruct you to answer the question. 

Mr. Mandel. On the same grounds, I decline to answer for three 
reasons. 

Mr. Doyle. Will you state the three grounds? 

Mr. Mandel. Pertinency, the protection of the first amendment 
to believe the things, to associate freely; and the fifth amendment, 
for my own protection. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. It was hard to get it out of him, but we found it. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you born Peretz, P-e-r-e-t-z Mandelman, 
M-a-n-d-e-1-m-a-n, June 20, 1919, Kiev, Russia? 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct the witness to answer that question. 

We believe it is the law that congressional committees are entitled 
to know the identity, fully and positively, of any witness before this 
committee or any other House committee. I instruct you to answer 
the question as to where you were born. It clearly couldn't subject 
you to criminal prosecution, the fact that you were born. 

Mr. Wheeler. In this case, it might. 

Mr. Brock. It certainly might. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. It certainly might in this case, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, let the record speak for whatever it is. 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer because of the pertinency of the 
question, the first amendment, and the fifth amendment. 

■Mr. Wheeler. Are you also known as Peter Mandelman, Frenchy 
Mandelman, and Peter Mander, M-a-n-d-e-r? 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Brock. We will stipulate he was born, Congressman. 

Mr. Doyle. I am glad to get that stipulation by the witness. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, you attended school in Warsaw, Poland; is 
that correct? 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. In 1937 you entered France illegally, were arrested 
by the French police, and served time in prison; is that not so? 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you not put in a concentration camp by the 
Germans during World War II? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. You were in the French resistance movement, is 
that correct, during the war? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. From 1945 to 1948 you were a member of the 
Communist Party in France, is that correct? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. On February 7, 1948, you entered New York 
City on the SS America, is that correct? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. From 1948 to 1955 you resided in Chicago, Illinois? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. You have never filed for citizenship, have you? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer on the same grounds. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 171 

Mr. Doyle. How many years has he been in this country without 
fiUng for citizenship? 

Mr. Wheeler. I have the date here. He entered February 7, 
1948, and went immediately to Chicago. 

Is it correct you never filed for citizenship? 

Mr. Mandel. I dechne to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer, Witness, that question 
whether or not you have ever apphed for American citizenship. 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, in Chicago, from 1948 to 1955, our records 
show that you were quite active in the Labor Youth League, the 
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born, Jewish Peoples Fraternal 
Order, International Workers Order. 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Also, that during this period of time you were a 
member of the Communist Party in Chicago ; is that correct? 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, you moved to Los Angeles in 1955; right? 

Mr. Mandel. Dechne to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. And your Communist Party membership was trans- 
ferred from Chicago, Illinois, to Los Angeles, California? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, I don't know because I have only a 
superficial knowledge of the constitutional law. It occurs to me that 
if this man is not a citizen he is not entitled to invoke any of the 
constitutional grounds upon which he may refuse to answer. I 
simply raise that question. The question of citizenship is before this 
committee. He may automatically try to benefit from our constitu- 
tional protection available to American citizens. 

Mr. Doyle. WeU, I would expect, as an American citizen, that any 
man who had been born in a country other than the United States, if 
he had been in my United States for 14 years and had been declared 
an American citizen, he would be proud enough of it to say so. That 
is my impression. That is my very definite position. 

Mr. Tuck. I suggest you ask whether or not he is an American 
citizen. 

Mr. Doyle. And if he is ashamed of it, that's another thing, or if 
he is afraid of something in connection with his American citizenship, 
that's another thing. 

But the committee feels, Mr. Wheeler, that the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service ofiicers should be clearly advised about this 
man's declaration as to American citizenship, and I think there ought 
to be an exhaustive examination as to circumstances surrounding this 
man who refuses to claim American citizenship. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you an American citizen? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer that question. 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tuck. You mean to state to this committee that if you stated 
whether or not you are an American citizen that you might subject 
yourself to criminal prosecution? 

Mr. Doyle. What is your answer, Witness? 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. I instruct you to answer the question asked 
by Mr. Tuck. 



172 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. Proceed, Islr. Wheeler. 

Mr. Wheelee. In 1958 you were a member of the District Council 
of the Communist Party, Southern California District; is that correct? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, on November 20, 21, and 22, 1959, the 
Southern California District of the Communist Party held a first ses- 
sion of their Second Convention. Were you not a delegate at that 
convention? 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, didn't 3'ou speak at this convention of the 
Communist Party as a delegate? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Do you recall saying that the party is starting to 
regroup itself with a new spirit and the members should look forward 
toward the future in planning a party of the working class. Did you 
not also recommend that the delegates to the National Convention be 
instructed to support all resolutions which had come before the Dis- 
trict Convention and were acted upon, and also the ones which had 
come before the convention but time w^ould not permit action on? 

Do you recall making such statements at the convention? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, the second session of the convention was held 
January 29, 30, 31, 1960, here in Los Angeles, at Park Manor. You 
were in attendance at the second session; were you not? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, do you recall addressing the delegates at this 
convention from the floor? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Do you recall stating that there recently had been 
passed a resolution calling for the removal of Chief Parker from oflBce 
and that a petition had been printed and that the Communist Party 
should support the petition calling for the removal of Chief Parker 
from ofl&ce? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. It refers to William B. Parker, chief of pohce of 
Los Angeles. 

You were present at these convention sessions; were you not? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to ansM^er under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. On February 1, 1958, our records show you at- 
tended the West Coast Labor Conference of the Communist Party 
held at 3138 Grove Street, Berkeley, California. Now, at this con- 
ference there was drafted a program for furthering Communist 
Party objectives in the labor movement, including the continued 
infiltration of labor organizations. Did you attend such meeting? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. We would be interested in hearing about this draft 
on labor, Mr. Mandelman, if you want to assist this committee. 

Mr. Doyle. How can you infer that this witness might want to 
help this committee when he doesn't even claim, publicly, American 
citizenship? 

Mr. Wheeler. I had hoped there might be a change of mind. 

In February 1959 were you in attendance at a number of meetings, 
Communist Party meetings in Berkeley, Cahfornia? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 173 

Mr. Wheeler. You are known to the Communist Party in Berkeley 
as Frenchy Mandelman; is that correct? 

^Ir. Mandel. Decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tuck. Known as what? 

Mr. Wheeler. Frenchy Mandelman. He spent considerable time 
in France. 

Have you participated in an}^ public demonstration in the city of 
Los Angeles? 

Mr. Mandel. Declme to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Weren't you in a demonstration of Women Strike 
for Peace on November 1, 1961? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you instructed by the Communist Party to 
participate in this demonstration? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Mandel, on April 17, 1961, you were a picket 
in a demonstration sponsored by the Fan* Play for Cuba Committee, 
here in front of the Federal Building. Is that correct? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were these instructions given by the Communist 
Party to participate in this picket line? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, I have a photograph of Mr. Mandel 
in this picket line and Mr. Tavenner has it in another file. We would 
like to introduce the photograph when Mr. Tavenner gets here. I 
am sure you will remember the witness and we can properly identify 
the picture at that time, or we can hold him over if you want to until 
Air. Tavenner arrives. 

Mr. Brock. I would like to know what time he is expected to arrive. 

Mr. Doyle. He is due at 10 a.m. 

Mr. Johansen. I would like to suggest that the witness be held 
over in order that he uislj be shown this picture. 

Mr. Wheeler. All right. We wUl do that. 

Mr. Johansen. I think it is extremely important in this case. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, Mr. Mandel, you are not even a citizen. You 
are not registered to vote in the County of Los Angeles. 

Why are you engaging in political activities within a major political 
party? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Tuck. What major political part}'? 

Mr. Doyle. Communist Party is not major. 

Mr. Wheeler. I am talkmg about — the following questions will 
tie it up. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. 

Mr. Wheeler. Aren't you a member of the C.D.C., California 
Democratic Council? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you not a delegate to their convention in 
Fresno in this year? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. And aren't 3''ou active in the east side in supporting 
various candidates running for political office? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. You may want to explore this a little, Mr. Do3'le. 
He is quite active in politics. 



174 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, may the record show that Mr. 
Scherer entered the hearing room. 

Mr. Doyle. It may show that. 

Are you a member of some Democratic club here in California? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. Are you an officer of any Democratic club in Cali- 
fornia? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. Were you elected as a delegate from some Democratic 
club in California to the C.D.C. convention either this year or last 
year? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. Were you on any of the study groups or groups 
studying issues at the C.D.C. convention either this year or last year? 

Mr. Mandel. Decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. I am informed by Mr. Wheeler that the record shows 
that you are not an American citizen, that you are not even registered 
to vote in Los Angeles County. 

Mr. Johansen. Are those two statements correct? 

Mr. Mandel. I decline to answer under the same grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. I want to say to you, as an American citizen, I am 
going to see that the C.D.C. knows that you are not an American 
citizen. 

I very much resent a person not an American citizen participating 
in a convention of either of the major political parties in the State of 
California, Republican or Democratic. If you aren't proud enough 
to become an American citizen, why, in my book you are not entitled 
to legally claim the right to participate in a convention of either of 
the two major political parties in my State. I don't want any question 
as to my position as United States Congressman from the State of 
California. I don't want it to be misunderstood by you. 

Mr. Johansen. Mr. Chairman, I think the matter goes even fur- 
ther, and I strongly suggest that the chairman request or instruct the 
staff to direct this case to the attention of the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service of the Department of Justice in view of the 
evidence concerning his Communist Party activities before he came 
into the United States and subsequent party membership and activi- 
ties. 

Mr. Doyle. I am glad to do that, Mr. Johansen. I indicated 
a few minutes ago that is the way I felt about it, and I du'ect the 
staff to do just that. I think it might be well for this subcommittee 
to formally adopt that. 

Mr, Scherer. I so move. 

Mr. Johansen. I support the motion. 

Mr. Tuck. I so move. 

Mr. Doyle. All those in favor say "Aye," 

Mr. Tuck. Aye, 

Mr. Johansen. Aye. 

Mr. Doyle. Oppose? 

Therefore it will be the unanimous mstruction of this committee. 

Mr, Scherer. Aye. 

Mr. Doyle. And in that connection, Mr. Wheeler, I instruct 
that a copy of the testimony of this witness at this hearing be fur- 
nished to Immigration authorities in the Department of Justice or 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 175 

any other official body of the U.S. Government or the Government 
of the State of California, and also, if there is no objection, I would 
like to see a copy of that furnished to the Democratic Party in the 
State of California, to the C.D.C., and to the Democratic club that 
we have a record of this man's claimed membership in ■ 

Mr. Tuck. I think it had better be left up to the Immigration 
Service. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. 

Mr. Tuck, We are not concerned with politicking. 

Mr, Doyle. Yes, but it is either majority — either party. 

Mr. Tuck. I think the Immigration authorities 

Mr, Doyle. All right. And the other testimony will not be 
released to the other groups unless the testimony is published by the 
committee. 

Mr. Tuck. Are you through with this witness? 

Mr. Doyle. Is there any other question? 

Mr. Wheeler. You are going to hold the witness until Mr. 
Tavenner arrives? 

Mr. Doyle. That is right. 

Mr. Brock. All right. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. The witness is continued under this subpena? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes. 

Mr. Brock. He won't leave. 

(Witness temporarily excused.) ' 

Mr. Doyle. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will 
give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, 
so help you God? 

Mr. Freed. I do. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you. Take the witness chair, 

Mr, Brock. This is Mr. Harry Freed. I am Robert L. Brock. 

I did explain the pertinency of what they read to the other \vit- 
nesses. Are you satisfied with that? 

Mr, Freed. Yes. Yes. 

TESTIMONY OF HARRY FREED, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

ROBERT L. BROCK 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Freed, will you state your fuJI name, please? 

Mr, Freed, My name is Harry Freed, 

Mr. Wheeler. And when and where were you born? 

Mr. Freed, I don't think that is pertinent to the question, 

Mr, Johansen. Mr. Freed, would you speak a little louder? 

Mr. Brock. Speak right up. 

Mr, Freed. I said I don't think it is pertinent to this question, and 
I refuse to answer that on the question — on the grounds it is not 
pertinent and under my rights given bj^ the Constitution of the 
United States, including the first and fifth amendments thereto. 

Mr, Doyle, Mr, Freed, I reahze you are reading from a memo- 
randum as you gave that answer, which is all right, but I want to 
inform you that we believe the law clearly is that any witness appear- 
ing before this committee, or any other congressional committee, that 
those committees are entitled to know the identity of the witness. 
This is a question of identity. It goes to that question. That is why 

1 The hearings were terminated without recalling the witness. 
20-004—63 9 



176 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

we are asking it. We believe we are entitled to know whether or not 
you are who you say j^ou are and whether or not you are the person 
we think j'ou are. 

Mr. Freed. Well, I received the subpena. 

Mr. Wheeler. The subpena bears the name Harry Freed. You 
responded to it. 

I\Ir. Freed. [No response.] 

Mr. Doyle. When was it served and where? 

Mr. Wheeler. 7 a.m. on the 12th day of April, at 5936 Allston 
Street, East Los Angeles. 

Is this 3"our residence? 

]\Ir. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Wheeler. What type of business are you in, Mr. Freed? 

]Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that on the previous grounds that 
I mentioned? 

Mr. Wheeler. You o^^^l Freed's Launderette at 5851 Whittier 
Boulevard, Los Angeles? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that under the previous grounds I 
mentioned. 

j\lr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, we do have a problem of identifica- 
tion in this particular case. Harry Freed is a rather common name; 
and, if possible, I would like to get furtlier identification of tlie sub- 
ject — his birth and identification Cj(uestions. 

Mr. ScHERER. Let's proceed, then; I think we should. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, I have observed the previous witness to Mr. 
Freed. That person, such as you, Avould be the first to violently 
protest if, through careless and lax procedures by this committee, 
we were guilty of a case of mistaken identity. Now, it goes to no 
matter of substance, it is not any basis of self-incrimination to estab- 
lish that 3^ou are the person that's been subpenaed before this com- 
mittee and that you are tlie person that's supposed to be questioned 
in respect to the matters subsequently to be brought up. 

So I ask, Mr. Chairman, that the witness be instructed to answer 
the questions as a matter of proper identification. 

Mr. ScHERER. Do you think we should pursue the matter on each 
question, and 

Mr. Wheeler. -Well, the problem is that we have a Harry Freed 
with quite a bit of Communist Party background starting back a 
number of years, and it would be clarified if the witness would respond 
to some of the questions, whether it is the same Harry Freed or not. 

Mr. Doyle. We will hesitate a minute while counsel is conferring 
with his witness. 

Mr. Wheeler, now that counsel and witness are through conferring, 
so that they can hear your statement just made to the committee, 
will you repeat that statement for their benefit? 

Mr. Brock. We heard it. 

Mr. Doyle. Did you? 

Mr. ScHERER. May I ask the witness a couple of questions? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, indeed. 

Mr. Scherer. Witness, where do you live? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, I ask that you direct the witness to 
answer the question. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 177 

Mr. Doyle. I direct the witness to answer that question. 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. ScHERER. Do you honestly believe that if you were to answer 
the question just propounded to you — namely, where you live- 
that that might lead to a criminal prosecution? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. It is obvious that you can't use the fifth amendment 
in answering my question, because the courts have said whenever the 
committee is in doubt as to whether a witness is properly invoking the 
fifth amendment, it is then incumbent upon the committee to ask 
the witness whether he honestly believes that invoking the fifth amend- 
ment to a particular question might lead to a possible criminal prose- 
cution, and you must answer. If you are invoking the fifth amend- 
ment in good faith you can only ansAver "Yes" to that question. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, the witness has answered it. 

Mr. Tuck. And the answer he just made is under the protection 
of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Doyle. Go ahead, Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Scherer. Now, Witness, when and where were you born? 

Mr. Freed. I was born August the 28th, 1901. 

Mr. Scherer. And where were you born? 

Mr. Freed. At that time I think it was the Ukraine. Russia. 

Mr. Scherer. Are you a naturalized citizen? 

Mr. Freed. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scherer. And when and where were a^ou naturalized? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that on the previous grounds that 
I mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. Were you naturalized? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that on the previous grounds that 
I mentioned. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question, Witness. 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that on the previous grounds that 
I mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. Arc you in this country legally? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that on the previous grounds that 
I mentioned. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct j'ou to answer the question, Witness. 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that on the previous grounds that 
I mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. How long have you been in the United States? 

Mr. Freed. Decline to answer that on the previous grounds. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer that question. 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. How long have you been in the State of California? 
" Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question. Witness. 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer that on tbo previous grounds tluit 
I mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. What is your present occupation or business? And 
I am asking that question solely for the purpose of identification in 
view of the statement made by our investigator, Mr. Wheeler. 



178 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Freed. Decline to answer that on the previous grounds that 
I mentioned. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask that you direct the witness to answer. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct the witness to answer that question. 

Mr. Freed. I decHne to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. ScHERER. Witness, do you honestly believe that to tell this 
committee what your present occupation is, that that might lead to 
a criminal prosecution? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask you to direct the witness to answer. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer. 

Mr. ScHERER. Because obviously the invocation of the fifth amend- 
ment to that question is improper and the courts have so stated. 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, may the record show that Mr. 
Tavenner is present? 

Mr. Doyle. It may so show. 

Mr. ScHERER. Are you engaged in any illegal activity at this time? 

Mr. Brock. [Laughter] 

Mr. ScHERER. Well, that is not funny. Counsel. 

Mr. Brock, It is, Mr. Scherer. 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer under the previous grounds that 
I mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. If you think it is funny, just don't laugh, then, 
because I think that you should have advised your client to answer 
"Yes" to the question of whether he was invoking the fifth amend- 
ment in good faith. 

Mr. Doyle. The record speaks as to what happened. 

Any other questions, Mr. \^Taeeler? 

Mr. Wheeler. Yes. 

Have you traveled outside of the United States? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer under the previous grounds that 
I mentioned. 

Mr. Wheeler. I believe he was asked how long he had been in 
California and he declined? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes. 

Mr. Wheeler. Did you ever live in Chicago? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. DoYLE. I instruct you to answer the question. Witness. Mr. 
Wheeler's information is that there is a problem of identity that we are 
trying to clear up for the record. It may be that some other person 
by the name "Harry Freed" is entitled to be cleared, or it may be that 
some of the record that we have pertains to you. So we want to have 
it entirely clear. But, if you don't care to help us, why, we will just, 
have to use the record that we have, in spite of your refusal to help us, 
to determine whether or not you are the person we think you are. If 
you are not that person we want to know it. For your protection, too. 
But if you don't care, why — 

Go ahead. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 179 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Freed, are you a member of the Compton Sec- 
tion of the Communist Party, Southern Cahfornia District? 

Mr. Freed. I refuse to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Wheeler. The Conununist Party, Southern California Dis- 
trict, held a convention here in Los Angeles in two sessions. The 
second session opened on Januar}^ 29, 1960. Our records show that 
you attended tliis convention as a delegate representing the Wliittier 
Section of the Comnumist Party; is that correct? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Wheeler. You are a member of the Wliittier Club of the 
Communist Part}^; is that correct? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Wheeler. You know Marlene Kagan? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are vou a current member of the Communist 
Party? 

Air. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous gi'ounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. Were you ever a member of the Armed Forces of the 
United States? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer under the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, I ask you to direct the witness to 
answer that question because I can't see how being a member of the 
Armed Forces of the United States can possibly incriminate him. 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer as to whether or not you were 
ever a member of the Armed Forces of the United States. 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer under the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Schefer. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions, Governor? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. Mr. Witness, Congressman Scherer asked you a few 
minutes ago if you were presently engaged in any illegal activities. 
Are you aware of the decision of the Supreme Court last year requiring 
registration by members of the Communist Party with the Attorney 
General? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Scherer. I ask you direct the witness to answer. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer that question. 

Mr. Scherer. It couldn't be incriminating if he was aware of a 
provision. 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. Johansen. Are you a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Freed. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 



180 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. -ioHAXsKX. Have \'ou over bocui a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. FiiKKD. I decliae to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentionoil. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Have you registered witii tlic Attorney General as 
a member of tlie Communist Partv as required by law, which law 
was upl.eld by the Supreme Court last year? 

Mr. Frekd. I decline to answer on the previous grounds that I 
mentioned. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions, Mr. vSchcrer? 

Mr. SCHERER. No. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no furtlier questions. 

The witness is excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Brock. I should apologize. I didn't mean to be rude when 
I laughed. It did strike ]iie funny. If you asked the witness if he 
was doing sojuetJiing illegal, that he should answer. 

Mr. Doyle. Of course, we contend that all people who are identified 
Comnmnists and who have failed to register are doing sometliing 
illegal. 

Mr. ScHERER. That wasn't the reason he was asked that question. 

Mr. Doyle. That wasn't the purpose? 

Mr. ScHERER. He was asked about his employrnent and he said he 
wouldn't answer it on the grounds it might incriminate him which 
answer, on its face, indicates that he was engaged in some illegal 
activity. 

Mr. Doyle. That is right. 

Mr. Tuck (presiding). Mrs. Kagan, will yon stand and raise your 
right hand and be sworn. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this subcommittee of a committee of the House of Representa- 
tives of the United States will be the truth and nothing but the truth, 
so help you God? 

Mrs. Kagax. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MARLENE KAGAN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

HARRIETT BUHAI 

Mr. Wheeler. Witness, state your name. 

Mrs. TvAGAN. Marlcne Kagan, and I am here under subpena. 

Mr. Wheeler. Is it Aiiss or Mrs.? 

Mrs. Kagan. Mrs. 

Mr. Wheeler. Would the attorney identify herself, please? 

Mrs. Buhai. Harriett Buhai, B-u-h-a-i. 

Mr. Wheeler. Tell the committee tlie date of your birth, please. 

Mrs. Kagan. I must respectfully refuse to answer that question 
because I believe this committee is prohibited by the fii-st amendment 
from inquiring into such matters because the answ^er might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. ScHERER. I ask the Chair to direct the witness to answer the 
question. The question is being asked for the purpose of identifica- 
tion, and it couldn't possibly incriminate her. 

Mr. Tuck. The witness is ordered and directed to answ^er the 
question. 



CALIFORXIA DISTRICT OF THE COMIVIUXIST PARTY 181 

Mrs. Kagan. I must stand on the first and fifth amenchnents. 

Mr. ScHERER. Do you honestly beheve that to tell this committee 
when and where you were born would lead to a possible criminal 
prosecution? 

Mrs. Kagan'. It might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Wheeler. Tell the committee your maiden name, please. 

Mrs. Kagax. I must decline to answer that question on the previous 
groimds. 

Mr. Scherer. For the same reason, Mr. Chairman, I ask you to 
direct the witness to answer the question. The question being asked 
obviously is for the purpose of identification. 

Mr. Tuck. The witness is ordered and directed to answer the 
question. 

Mrs. Kagax. I wish to consult with counsel. 

Same answer, same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. Is your maiden name Sniderman? 

Mrs. Kagax. I refuse to answer that question on previous gromids. 

Mr. Wheeler. Where do you reside, Mrs. Kagan? 

Mrs. Kagax". Same answer, my previously stated grounds. 

Mr. Tuck. The witness is ordered and directed to answer the 
question. 

Mrs. Kagax. I am here before this committee under subpena and 
the subpena states where I was served. 

Mr. Johaxsext. Was that your residence where you were served? 

Mrs. Kagax. I must decline to answer that question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, I have a subpena return indicating 
service was made April 12, 1961, at 7:00 a.m. in the morning, Marlene 
Kagan, at 9446 Brookpark Road, Downe}', California. 

Is that your residence? 

Mrs. Kagax. Same answer, same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. How long have you lived in the Downey section? 

Mrs. Kagax. I must refuse to answer that question on the same 
grounds previously stated. 

Mr. JoHAXSEX. Mr. Chairman, I don't want to quibble over words, 
but when the witness says she must decline to answer on the same 
grounds — -You don't, of course, mean to imply that there is any com- 
pulsion that you decline to answer? In other words, you simply do 
decline to answer on the same grounds. Is that correct? 

Mrs. Kagax. That is correct. 

Mr. Wheeler. Have you lived in Downey about 3 years? 

Mrs. Kagax". I must respectfully decline to answer that question 
on the same grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. In early 1959 our records show that you were a 
member of the Western Section of the Communist Party, Southern 
California District; the Western Section being the Bay cities, Santa 
Monica, everything out west, all the cities out there, and that you 
were the Western Section representative to the District Council of 
the Communist Party, Southern California District; is that right? 

Mrs. K.\GAX. I decline to answer on grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. You became a member of the Communist Party in 
1955? 

Mrs. Kagax. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 



182 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Wheeler. And you are now a member of the Compton Section 
of the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Kagan. I must respectfully decline to answer on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Aren't you a current member of the Whittier Club 
of the Communist Party? 

Mrs. KIagan. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Tuck. Do you have any? 

Mr, ScHERER. No questions. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. No questions. 

Mr. Tuck. The witness is excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Jacob Lutz. Please raise your right hand to be 
sworn. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Lutz. Yes, su*. 

Mr. Tuck. You may be seated. 

TESTIMONY OF JACOB LUTZ, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
HARRIETT BUHAI 

Mr. Wheeler. Will the witness state his name, please? 

Mr. Lutz. Jacob Lutz. 

Mr. Wheeler. Do you reside at 2162 Princeton Avenue, Los 
Angeles? 

Mr. Lutz. I would like to know the pertinency of this investigation. 

Mr. Wheeler. Read the resolution? 

Mr. Tuck. You may read the resolution. 

Mr. Wheeler. On January 17, 1962, the House Committee on 
Un-American Activities in Washington, D.C., adopted the resolution 
which reads as follows: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative pur- 
pose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in 
determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a 
manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United 
States, and that the staff of the Committee be authorized to conduct investiga- 
tions deemed reasonably necessary in preparation for said hearings. 

Now, the question, I believe — Would you repeat the question? 

(Record read.) 

Mr. Lutz. I have given my name and I was subpenaed, and I am 
here and I think this is proper identification. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, I ask you direct the witness to answer 
the question being asked for the purpose of identification. 

Mr. Tuck. The witness is ordered and directed to answer the 
question. 

Mr. Lutz. I do not want to answer this question because I do not 
think it is pertinent to the investigation at hand. 

Mr. Tuck. The committee is the judge of the pertinency. You are, 
therefore, ordered and directed to answer the question. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 183 

Mr. LuTZ. I will not answer this question because I think it is my 
right under the fifth amendment to protect myself from possible 
incrimination. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Are you invoking that provision of the fifth 
amendment? 

Mr. LuTZ. Yes, I am. 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, you are here in response to the subpena 
served upon you; is that correct? 

Mr. LuTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Wheeler. The record shows, or the subpena return shows that 
at 8:25 a.m. on the 12th day of April, Mr. Lutz was served with a 
subpena at 2162 Princeton Avenue, Los Angeles. 

You are retired; is that correct? You are not employed? 

Mr. Lutz. I refuse to answer on grounds that this is an invasion of 
my rights under the first and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Wheeler. Would retirement be 

Mr. Johansen. That is a new one on me. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, I ask that you direct the witness to 
answer the question as to whether he is retired. 

Mr. Tuck. The witness is ordered and directed to answer the 
question. 

Mr. Lutz. I decline to answer on the grounds that I am protected 
under the first and fifth amendments from answering this question. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you a citizen of the United States? 

Mr. Lutz. I decline to answer on tlie grounds that — -I take protec- 
tion under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, to answer whether he is a citizen 
of the United States cannot possibly incriminate this witness. It is 
obvious he is invoking the fifth amendment in bad faith; therefore, 
I ask that you direct the witness to answer the question. 

Mr. Tuck. The Chair so orders and so rules. The Chair, therefore, 
orders and directs you to answer the question as to whether or not 
you are an American citizen. 

Mr. Lutz. I decline on the same grounds as stated before. 

Mr. Wheeler. You were born in Russia; were you not? 

Mr. Lutz. I decline on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you a naturalized citizen? 

Mr. Lutz. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you a member of the Echo Park Section of the 
Communist Party, Southern District of California? 

Mr. Lutz. Decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Do you know Dorothy Healey? 

Mr. Lutz, I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. On July 27, 1961, were you not present at a recep- 
tion honoring Dorothy Healey at Park Manor, 607 Western Avenue, 
Los Angeles? 

Mr. Lutz. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. What is May Day to the Communist Party, the 
1st of May? 

Mr. Lutz. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. On May 7, 1961, you were in attendance at a May 
Day meeting at the Zenda Ballroom, 937 West Seventh Street. This 
meeting was sponsored by the committee to celebrate 75 years of 
May Day. Were you there, sir? 

Mr. Lutz. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 



184 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Wheeler. Are j'oii familiar with the organization, Women 
Strike for Peace? 

Mr. LuTZ. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. On November 1, 1961, according to our information, 
you participated in a picket line sponsored by Women Strike for 
Peace. This was in front of the Los Angeles State Building. Were 
you present? 

Mr. LuTZ. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you instructed by the Communist Party to 
participate in this peace movement? 

Mr. LuTZ. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Our records disclose that on February 18, 1962, 
you were in attendance at a meeting honoring Gus Hall at 607 Western 
Avenue. Were you present at that meeting? 

Mr. LuTz. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Gus Hall is general secretary of the Communist 
Party, U.S.A.; is he not? 

Mr. LuTz. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, on January 5 and 6, 1957, the Communist 
Party, Los Angeles County, held a convention at 607 Western Avenue, 
Los Angeles. Our information refects that you were a delegate to 
this convention. Is this information correct? 

Mr. LuTZ. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. In 1957 you were a member of the Gomez Club of 
the Communist Party? 

Mr. LuTz. I decline to answer on the same groimds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Didn't the Gomez Club sponsor parties and various 
other functions to raise money to support the Peo])le\s World? 

Mr. LuTz. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, the Second Convention of the Connnunist 
Party, Southern California District, was held in two sessions. The 
first session was November 20, 21, and 22, 1959. Our information is 
to the effect that you were a delegate to this convention. Is that 
right? 

Mr. LuTZ. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. You were a delegate representing the Echo Park 
Section of the Communist Party; is that correct? 

Mr. LuTZ. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

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

Mr. LuTZ. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Johansen. Have you ever been a member of the Connnunist 
Party? 

Mr. LuTZ. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Tuck. Do 3-ou have any questions? 

Mr. Scherer. I have no questions. 

Mr. Tuck. The witness may stand aside. 

(Witness excused.) 

^.Ir. Doyle. Mrs. Willett will you please raise your right hand and 
be sworn? 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. Willett. I do. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 185 

TESTIMONY OF BETTY WILLETT, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

HUGH R. MANES 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your full name, please? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. Betty'Willett. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you ever used the name Naomi, N-a-o-m-i, 
Willett, W-i-1-l-e-t-t? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to state for the following reasons 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, just a moment. I wonder, so we 
won't miss it, if counsel shouldn't identify himself? 

Mr. Manes. Oh, 3^es, certainly. My name is Hugh R. Manes, 
M-a-n-e-s. 

Mrs. Willett. May I have a statement of the legislative purpose 
at this time? 

Mr. Doyle. Not yet. 

Mr. Tavenner. Fu-st, we want to find out who you are. 

Have you ever been known by the name of Naomi, N-a-o-m-i? 

Mrs. Willett. In order to answer the question, I would like to have 
the statement of relevancy. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I ask for a direction of the committee to 
answer? 

Mr. Doyle. T instruct the witness to answer the question as to 
her identity. 

Mrs. Willett. I respectfully decline to answer upon the following 
grounds: That the mandate of this committee violates the provisions 
of the Bill of Rights to our Constitution, especially the lirst amend- 
ment, because the mandate is vague and ambiguous and abridges the 
rights of speech and association. 

Mr. Doyle. As you read the statement, will you put the microphone 
high enough so we can hear your voice. 

Mrs. Willett. And secondly, the question is not pertinent or 
relevant to the mandate of this committee or to the declared purpose 
of this investigation or any proper or legitimate proper purpose of this 
committee; and thirdly, the question inquires into my beliefs and 
associations and abridges — • — • 

Mr. Tavenner. May I interrupt? The question as to her name 
has nothing in the world to do with lier ideas or her beliefs. 

]Mr. Doyle. That is correct. And I think it is wasting time. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I think it is a dilatoiy tactic. It is completely 
purposeless, and I am sure counsel knows it is. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, Witness 

Mrs. Willett. I would 

Mr. DoY'LE. I am directing you to answer the question. We are 
not going to permit 3'ou to take more time of the committee to read 
this long statement. 

Mrs. Willett. I am giving mv objections to the question. I would 
like- 
Mr. Doyle. Wliat is it? 

Mrs. Willett. I am giving my objections to the question. 

Mr, Doyle. No, no, you are not reading objections to this question 
about your name. That long treatise has nothing to do with your 
name. 

Mr. Scherer. Furthermore, the witness under no circumstances is 
permitted to object to the questions. She has a right to decline to 
answer for certain constitutional reasons. 



186 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Doyle. That is right. 

Mrs. Wtllett. I decline to answer on the ground that the question 
calls for nie to condemn and accuse myself — ■ — ■ 

Mr. Doyle. No, no. 

Mrs. WiLLETT. — out of my own mouth — that is, it tends to in- 
criminate me in violation of the provisions of the fifth amendment of 
the Constitution. 

Mr. ScHERER. How could it possihly incriminate you to tell us 
whether you were ever known by a name other than Betty? 

Mr. Manes. May the witness complete her answer for the record, 
please? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. Finally, the committee lacks the jurisdiction over 
me because of the unlawful exercise of the subpena power send the 
unlawful delegation of its authority and its subpena power. 

Mr. DoYLE. Now, is that all of it? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. Yes. 

Mr. Doyle. Now, I direct you to answer the question asked you 
before by Mr. Tavenner as to your name. 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline upon the previous grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you ever go by the married name of Auxter, 
A-u-x-t-e-r? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the previous grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. How are you employed, Mrs. Willett? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the previous grounds as 
already stated upon the provisions of the first amendment and the 
fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state for the committee, please, what 
your formal educational training has been? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the previous grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you a native of the State of Indiana? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the previous grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you now reside in Los Angeles? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the ground previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you not appear here pursuant to a subpena 
served upon you at 1011 Rosemont Avenue, Los Angeles? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I am here pursuant to a subpena. 

Mr. Tavenner. Served upon 3^ou? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. Served upon me. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, without introducing it into evi- 
dence, I will read the return on the subpena: 

I made service of the within subpena by personally serving her with original 
[the within-named Betty Willett] at 1011 Rosemont Ave., Los Angeles. 

Peter J. Pitchess. 

Mr. Doyle. What date was that, sir? 

Mr. Tavenner. 7:02 a.m. on the 12th of April. 

Mr. Doyle. Just about breakfast time. 

Mr. Tavenner. You have been a member of the Communist 
Party, haven't you, Mrs. Willett, for a long period of time, at least 
back as early as 1939? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer for all of the reasons heretofore 
given . 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I oflfer in evidence a voter's 
affidavit of registration and ask that it be marked Willett Exhibit 
No. 1. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 187 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. I will hand this to the witness and ask her whether 
or not this document, sworn and subscribed to on the 9th day of June, 
1938, before the Los Angeles County Deputy Registrar of Voters, 
bears her signature? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show, please, that counsel and witness 
are examining the exhibit offered regarding her signature. 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for all the reasons previously 
given. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, the document shows that Mrs. 
Betty Willett registered as Communist on the date mentioned. 

Mr. Doyle. It is received. 

(Document marked "Willett Exhibit No. 1" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Tavenner. I ofTer an additional affidavit of registration and 
ask it be marked Willett Exhibit No. 2. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so marked and received. 

Mr. Tavenner. This document was sworn and subscribed to on 
the 15th day of July, 1942. 

Mrs. Willett, will you examine it and state whether or not the 
signature of the affiant is yours? 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show the counsel and witness are 
examining the document. 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to state on the previous grounds. 

(Document marked "Willett Exhibit No. 2" and retained in 
committee files.) 

Mr. Tavenner. This document, Mr. Chairman, shows that the 
witness registered as a Communist on the date mentioned. 

Were you a member of the Communist Party in 1939 and in 1942? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to state on the previous grounds. 

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

Mrs. Willett. I decline to state on the previous grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Willett, at the second session of the Second 
Convention of the Communist Party's Southern California District, 
the chairman, Dorothy Healey, gave a report to the convention, pre- 
viously introduced in evidence as Dobbs Exhibit No. 11. 

In this report, Dorothy Healey stressed the need to propagate the 
Soviets' fraudulent "peace" propaganda. She also made it clear that 
this was to be accomplished by Communists taking an active part in 
non-Communist organizations and inducing the organizations to take 
action in support of the Soviet "peace" line. In this connection, she 
made the following statement: 

At the Echo Park Section Convention, Betty, the comrade assigned by the 
section to be responsible for bird-dogging all peace activities, gave a resume of the 
local peace organizations. (It would be a step forward if in each section we had a 
comrade doing the job that she does — 

Were you the Betty mentioned by Dorothy Healey in her report? 
Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer upon the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Continuing with the quotation, I read as follows: 

knowing the various peace activities going on, helping individual comrades to 
relate their general mass activity to the specific peace issues, etc.) The Metho- 
dists have decided that 1960 will be their all out year on peace. They have issued 
an appeal that the initiative for the prevention of war must be seized. 



188 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Were yoii engjiged, after Uiat convention in 1900, in lielping Coni- 
nmnists carry on activities within non-C.onnnnnist organizations? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the gTOimds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. What particular action have you taken, Mrs. 
Willett, relating' to the peace movement in the United States? 

Mrs. ^YILLETT. T decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. There vcas a peace organization develoj)ed at the 
home of Mrs. Daginar Wilson in Georgetown in the District of 
Columbia. As a result of this meeting at th.e WilsoTi residence a peace 
program was developed which gained considerable momentinn known 
as Women Strike for Peace. 

Are you familiar with this movement? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 
******* 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to bring to your attention a meeting 
which was held at 1011 Rosemont Avenue on January 19, 1962. Do 
you recall that meeting? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. You refused to state the address of your resi- 
dence. Does your refusal to so state result from your knowledge that 
you would be asked about this meeting? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The residence that I mentioned to you is your 
home; is it not? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer on the same grounds, 

Mr. Tavenner. It is the residence at which you were served. 

Mrs. Willett. I decHne to answer. 

Mr. Doyle. I think you said it was about 7 o'clock in the morning, 
according to the subpena return. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 
******* 

Mr.|TAVENNER. Now, will you tell the committee whether Eliza- 
beth Spector was present? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer on the same previous grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Was Elizabeth Spector knoAvn to you as a member 
of the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer on the same grotmds. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation indicates that there 
was also present at this meeting Milhcent Hellman and that she is the 
wife of John Hellman. Do you recall her presence? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Both John Hellman and his wife, Millicent, are 
members of the Communist Party; are they not? 

Mrs. Willett. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Also at that meeting was Jeanne Katz, according 
to the committee's information. Mrs. Willett, it has been indicated 
here from the committee's investigation that Mrs. Katz is a member 
of the Compton Club of the Communist Party. Was she in attend- 
.ance at this meeting in your home? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 189 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the previous grounds. 

Mr. Tavenxer. Will you ad^ase the committee how the Women 
Strike for Peace was organized in Los ^Vngeles and by whom? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the previous reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. About a month before this meeting that I have 
referred to — in fact, on November 1, 1961, according to the com- 
mittee's investigation — the first demonstration occurred in Los 
Angeles by the Women Strike for Peace; is that not correct? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you have anything to do with organizing 
Communist participation m that demonstration? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the previous reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you assist in obtaining the cooperation of 
various individuals in that demonstration? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were acquainted with Rose Chernin Kusnitz; 
were you not? 

Mrs. W^iLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. She is executive director of the Los Angeles Com- 
mittee for Protection of Foreign Born; isn't she? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. And a well-loiown Communist in Los Angeles 
wiio has been identified as such before this committee on a number of 
occasions. You knew that, did you not? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the above reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you have anything to do with obtaining her 
cooperation in that demonstration? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Pierre Mandel, who has been a witness today be- 
fore this committee, was also active in that demonstration; was he 
not? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Rose Rosenberg, an attorne}^, and a person known 
to you to be a member of the Communist Party, also took part; did 
she not? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons given pre- 
viously. 

Mr. Tavenner. Jacob Lutz, who was on the witness stand here this 
afternoon, was a participant; was he not? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 

* ^ * * ^ * 4: 

Mr. Tavenner. Leonard Potash was also present; was he not? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the reasons stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Leonard Potash is active in the youth circles of the 
Communist Party; is he not? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Helen Blair was present; isn't that right? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Janet Stevenson was likewise engaged in the 
demonstration • 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer for the same reasons. 



190 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Because of the announcement by Mrs. Healey 
congratulating Betty for "bird-dogging" these peace organizations, I 
think there are a few other questions I would like to ask you about 
Communist activities in this field. 

***** =f! * 

Documents from the Southern (/'alifornia District Convention of 
November 1959 and January 1960 indicate that the national leadership 
of the party has given so-called "peace" issues top priority in Com- 
munist agitation and propaganda. I would quote a few references 
made in those documents. 

A statement by the party's National Executive Conmiittee circulated 
at the convention, includes this language: 

Of paramount importance in our work is the elevation of the cause of peace 
and disarmament to the place of first rank which it deserves. 

This document also declares: 

The Communist Party * * * must support and give leadership to these 
struggles * * *. 

Now, weren't you actively engaged in giving leadership to local 
Connnunist "peace" struggles? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Then District Chairman Dorothy Healey, in her 
keynote report to the January 1960 convention, specifically named 
various "peace" issues which Communists were expected to exploit. 
Now, you, as a devoted Communist, were doing everything that you 
could to build up support for Soviet foreign policy through such 
so-called peace efforts; were you not? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to state on the grounds previously stated. 
I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Actually, the Communist Party was not primarily 
interested in peace; was it? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. We have found a very interesting notation in the 
party convention document which has been introduced as Dobbs 
Exhibit 5-A. I take these words from that exhibit: 

There was concern on the part of some members of the Committee that the 
present wording [of the party constitution on a peaceful road to socialism] might 
possibly infer a strictly pacifistic attitude on the [part of the] Party. 

The Communists in this area were not sincerely interested in 
pacifism, per se, were they? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the previous grounds. 

Mr. Johansen. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Khrushchev, I think, made it 
rather clear j^ou can't be a total pacifist and be a Communist. Isn't 
that right? 

Mr. Tavenner. That is right. 

Mr. Johansen. I would like to ask the witness. Isn't that correct? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the previous grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mrs. Healey's report pointedly called attention to 
activities on the subject of peace conducted by non-Communist 
organizations, such as the Methodist Church and the American 
Friends Service Committee; and she then said to the delegates: 

You might enjoy Betty's report of the church leaders saying that finally the 
American people are waking up to the need to fight for peace, and therefore the 
churches won't be so isolated! 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 191 

Did you make that report? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to state for the reasons previously noted. 

Air. Tavenner. Would you care to further explain that reference? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to answer on the previous grounds. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. We hear before this committee so much about this 
committee abridging freedom of speech, and here we are inviting the 
witness to elaborate on this statement, and free speech is abridged 
by the witness. 

Mr. Tavenner. Let me ask this question : Did the Communists in 
your section of the Communist Party — under your guidance — have 
any success in carrying out Communist Party General Secretary Gus 
Hall's admonition to bring the Communist "peace" line into "every 
church"? 

Mrs. WiLLETT. I decline to state for the reasons previously given. 
tt ***** * 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions? 

Mr. ScHERER. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Questions? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. No questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no questions. 

That is all. Counsel. 

Mr. Manes. Thank you. 

Mr. Doyle. The witness is excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Tuck (presiding). Mrs. Spindel, do you solemnly swear that 
the testimony you are about to give before this committee wiU be the 
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. Spindel. I do. 

Mr. Tuck. The witness may be seated. 

Mr. Brock. I am Robert L. Brock, appearing with the witness. 

I have explained to her the statement of pertinency that has been 
read, and we will not ask to have it read again. 

Mr. Tuck. Proceed. 

TESTIMONY OF BLANCHE ZWILLINGER SPINDEL, ACCOMPANIED 
BY COUNSEL, ROBERT L. BROCK 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your full name, please? 

Mrs. Spindel. My name is Blanche Spindel. 

Mr. Tavenner. Miss or Mrs.? 

Mrs. Spindel. Mrs. Blanche Spindel. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was your maiden name? 

Mrs. Spindel. Blanche Zwillinger. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where were you born? 

Mrs. Spindel. I was born in Brooklyn, N.Y. 

Mr. Tavenner. When did you come to the State of California to 
make it your place of residence? 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline to answer this question on the grounds of 
the pertinency of this investigation and on the grounds of the first 
and fifth amendments guaranteed in the Constitution and the Bill of 
Rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, j^ou are a resident of the State of California; 
are you not? 

20-004—63 10 



192 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of 
the first amendment and the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you appear here pursuant to the provisions of 
a subpena served upon you? 

Mrs. Spindel. Yes; 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to offer into evidence a copy of the 
subpena served upon this witness and ask that it be marked Spindel 
Exhibit No. 1. 

Mr. Tuck. The exliibit will be thus marked and it is ordered to be 
filed in the record as a part of these proceedings. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to read the return, which says: 

I made service of the within subpena by personally serving the within-named 
Blanche Spindel at 226 Isabel St., at 7:30 o'clock, a.m., on the 12th day of April, 
1962. James G. Nichols, LAPD [Los Angeles Police Department]. 

(Document marked "Spindel Exhibit No. 1" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

What is your occupation, Mrs. Spindel? 

Mrs. Spindel. I refuse to answer this question on the grounds of 
the pertinency of this investigation and on the groimds of the first 
and fifth amendments. 

Mr. Tavenner. In 1960 were you a member of the Zapata Section 
of the C'Ommunist Party for the Southern District of California? 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline to answer this question on the grounds of 
tlie first and the fifth amendments and the pertinency of this investi- 
gation. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Joe Hill Club of that 
section? 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline on the grounds — -on the same grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee has learned a great deal through 
hearings that it conducted in Washington last fall and the hearings 
conducted here on this occasion, regardmg the Communist Party 
purpose to increase its activities of a imited front natui'e. The com- 
mittee has received information in the course of its investigation that 
as late as this year, 1962, you have been assigned to do work of that 
sort in mass organizations, and the organizations to which you w-ere 
assigned were the Emma Lazarus Jewish Women's Clubs in Los 
Angeles. Is that correct? 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline to answer this question on the grounds as 
previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. You are a member of the Communist Party; are 
you not? 

Mrs. Spindel. I refuse to answer this question on the previous 
gromids. 

Mr. Tavenner. Wasn't your specific assignment to make available 
Communist speakers at the clubs I mentioned? 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline to answer this question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. According to the committee's information resulting 
from its investigation did you, on Januar}^ 10, 1962, attend a Women 
Strike for Peace meeting at the University Methodist Church in 
Los Angeles? 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline to answer this question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. As a result of this meeting at the University 
Methodist Church was a protest rahy held on January 15, 1962, at 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COM^IUXIST PARTY 193 

Hancock Park which was a demonstration by the Women Strike for 
Peace? 

Mrs. Spixdel. I decline to answer this question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you placed specifically in charge, in fact 
made Los Angeles area chamiian, of the "'Balloon Barrage," — by which 
I refer to the release of thousands of balloons at this Women Strike 
for Peace demonstration? 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline to answer this question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavexner. Were \'ou given a plane ticket for travel to Wash- 
ington, D.C., on January 4. 1953, to participate in a demonstration 
there, and was your participation sponsored by the Los Angeles 
Committee To Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case? 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline to answer that question on the same 
grounds as previously stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. An examination of the January 13, 1953, issue of 
the Daily People's World reflects an article captioned ''Congressmen 
Learn Facts About Clemency for Rosenbergs," in which article 
Blanche Spindel is identified as a delegate who participated in a 
White House round-the-clock clemenc}* vigil the previous week. Are 
you the Blanche Spindel referred to in this article? 

Mrs. Spindel. I decline to answer this question on the same grounds 
as previously stated. 

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

Mr. Tuck. Do you have any questions? 

Mr. ScHERER. I have no questions. 

Mr. JoHAXSEN. No questions. 

Mr. Tuck. The witness may stand aside. 

(Witness excused.) 

(Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., Thm'sday, April 26, 1962, the sub- 
committee recessed, to reconvene at 1 p.m., of the same day.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION, THURSDAY, APRIL 26, 1962 

Mr. Tuck (presiding). The subcommittee will come to order, 
please. 

Mr. Lopez, do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give 
before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Lopez. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF FRANK SAVAS LOPEZ, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, ROBERT W. KENNY 

Mr. Tavenner. Will j^ou state yom- name, please, sir? 

Mr. Lopez. Frank Lopez. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is your middle name S-a-v-e-s? 

Mr. Lopez. No, it is not. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you have a middle name? 

Mr. Lopez. Yes, I do. 

Mr. Tavanner. What is it? 

Mr. Lopez. S-a-v-a-s. 

Mr. Tavanner. Are you a Junior? 

Mr. Lopez. No. 



194 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavanner. Will counsel please identify himself? 

Mr. Kenny. Robert W. Kenny, K-e-n-n-y, Los Angeles. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you reside, Mr. Lopez? 

Mr. Lopez. I do not understand the pertinency of the question. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is a matter of identification. 

Mr. Kenny. I think we can stipulate the question is pertinent. 

Mr. Scherer. I can't hear either the witness or counsel. 

Mr. Kenny. I was suggesting, Mr. Scherer, that we could stipulate 
that the question was a pertinent one and that the witness will give 
his address. 

Mr. Lopez. 2839 Avenel Street. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Lopez, I will read you the committee resolu- 
tion which authorized this phase of our hearing here today. This 
is one of the resolutions passed on January 17, 1962, by the Com- 
mittee on Un-American Activities. It reads as follows: 

WHEREAS, the Committee, on September the 22, 1961, adopted the following 
resolution : 

BE IT RESOLVED, That a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Washington, D.C., or at such 
other place or places as the Chairman may designate, on the 2nd day of October 
1961, and to be continued to such date or dates as the chairman may determine, 
relating to Communist conspiratorial techniques and propaganda used in promot- 
ing the objectives of the Communist Party of the United States, with special 
reference to the utilization of organizations under concealed control of the Com- 
munist Party, in opposition to laws enacted by Congress which are designed to 
strengthen and protect the security of the United States, and with reference to 
the extent and objects of Communist involvement in the creation, manipulation, 
or control of the National Assembly for Democratic Rights and its sponsoring or 
supporting organizations and groups, the legislative purpose being to keep the 
Congress informed of the extent, character and objectives of Communist propa- 
ganda activities in the United States that it may be prepared to enact remedial 
legislation in the national defense and for internal security. 

AND WHEREAS, the Committee desires to conduct such investigation and 
hearings in Los Angeles, California; 

NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved that the said hearings authorized on Sep- 
tember 22, 1961, be continued and held in Los Angeles, California on such date 
as the Chairman ma.y determine and that the Staff of the Committee be authorized 
to conduct such investigation as may be necessary for said hearings. 

Are you an American citizen? 

Mr. Lopez. I do not consider this question pertinent and I 
refuse to answer on the grounds of the first and under the fifth amend- 
ments. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you born in Mexico City on December 5, 
1910? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to ansAver for the previously stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. \^Tien did you come to the United States? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer for the previously stated reasons. 

Air. Tavenner. You have given j^our address as a resident of Los 
Angeles. Will you tell the committee, please, how long you have 
been a resident of Los Angeles? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer for the previously stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Lopez, the committee received testimony in 
executive session on January 24, 1952, that in a prior period you were 
a member of the Communist Party. Were you a member of the 
Communist Party prior to 1952? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer the question for the previously 
stated reasons. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 195 

Mr. Tavenner. Air. Chairman, I desire to offer in evidence and 
ask that it be marked Lopez Exhibit No. 1, a document entitled 
"Constitutional Liberties Information Center." May it be received 
in evidence? ^ 

Mr. Tuck. The exhibit is ordered to be received and thus marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. I will hand the document to the witness and ask 
him to examine it and state whether he is a member of the Consti- 
tutional Liberties Information Center? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer for the previously stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you not a delegate from the Constitutional 
Liberties Information Center to the National Assembly for Demo- 
cratic Rights held in New York City on September 23 and 24, 1961? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. Did you attend that convention — that is, the 
convention of the National Assembly for Democratic Rights? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer for the previously stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. May I have that document back? I handed it to 
the witness. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Kenny. If we can cure anything by stipulation I will be glad 
to do it. 

Mr. Tavenner. No. 

I refer you now to a handbill which I desire to introduce in evidence 
and have marked as Lopez Exhibit No. 2.^ 

Mr. Tuck. It is ordered that the exhibit be received and thus 
marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. This document announces a "Defend the BUI of 
Rights Rally," under the auspices of the Constitutional Liberties 
Information Center, of which Reuben W. Borough is designated as 
the chairman. In this flier it is stated that among the "Outstanding 
speakers" will be Frank Lopez, "Delegate to National Assembly for 
Democratic Rights." 

Mr. Lopez, will you examine the document and state whether or 
not that flier is in error in naming you as a delegate to the conference, 
the National Assembly for Democratic Rights? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer for the previously stated grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you also look at the document and ascertain 
whether or not, at the bottom, it is not stated that the rally was 
being sponsored by the Constitutional Liberties Information Center? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. Referring now to Exhibit No. 1, it is noted that 
the officers of Constitutional Liberties Information Center are listed 
as chairman, Reuben W. Borough; vice chairman, Hugh DeLacy; 
secretary, Robert C. Travis; and treasurer, Morton Newman. 

Will you examine it again, please. 

Mr. Tuck. Miss Reporter, each time that he is examing a document 
you make a note of it, please. 

' See committee Report and Appendix) , "United Front" Technir/tie of the Southern California District of the 
Communist Party, p. 188. 
' Ibid., p. 190. 



196 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman. I observe that the witness lias not 
examined it. He has not looked at it and he has done that with other 
documents, so I am going to object to any statement that he is exam- 
ining it when he obviously hasn't 

Mr. Tuck. I didn't make the statement that he was. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I am not criticizing the Chair, but the witness is 
not examining the document. 

]Mr. Tavenner. Is Hugh DeLacy, named in the document as vice 
chairman, known to be a member of the Communist Party? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. Is Robert C. Travis, named as secretary in the 
document, known to you to be a member of the Communist Party? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. And was Morton Newman, designated as treasurer, 
known to you to have been a member of the Communist Party? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. Are you acquainted with Helen Blair? 

yir. Lopez. I refuse to answer that question for the previously 
stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is she not the office manager and secretary for the 
organization? 

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

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

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

Mr. Tavenner. When was the Constitutional Liberties Informa- 
tion Center formed, ^Ir. Lopez? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to ansvrer that question for the previously 
stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, the PeojAc's World issue of August 26, 1961, 
page 3, announced that it was "formed recently" and that its purpose 
was "to oppose the application of the McC^arran Act on the grounds 
that it abridges the freedom of all citizens.'' Do you agree that that 
was the purpose of the organization? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. "Application of the McCarran Act" means enforce- 
ment of the registration provisions of the Subversive Activities Control 
Act; does it not? 

Air. Lopez. I refuse to answer that question for the previously stated 
reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. The constitutionality of the registration provisions 
of the Internal Security Act had been upheld by the United States 
Supreme Court in Jime 1961. The October 1961 term of the Court 
was scheduled to consider the Commmiist Party's petition for rehear- 
ing of its case. Did not these actions in the Supreme Court influence 
the formation of the Constitutional Liberties Information Center? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 197 

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

Mr. Tavenner. What was the relationship between the Constitu- 
tional Liberties Information Center hi Los Angeles and the Citizens 
Committee for Constitutional Liberties in New York City? 

Mr, Lopez. I refuse to answer that question for the previously 
stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. The Committee on Un-American Activities has 
conducted investigations and hearings on this subject wliich disclosed 
that the Citizens Committee for Constitutional Liberties in New York 
was organized on or about June 12, 19G1, to f miction as the 
party's defense committee and to raise funds for propaganda purposes 
to comiteract the Supreme Court decisions of June 5, 196L 

Was not the Constitutional Liberties Information Center, for which 
you served as a delegate to a conference in Xew York, the counterpart 
of the Citizens Committee for Constitutional Liberties in New York? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. And did it not have the same functions as its 
counterpart in New York? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer that question for the previouslj^ 
stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you aware of the fact that the executive 
secretary of the Citizens Committee for Constitutional Liberties, 
Miriam Friedlander, was also a member of the National Committee 
of the Communist Party, U.S.A.? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation shows that the 
Citizens Committee in New^ York served as a coordinating and organ- 
izing group for the National Assembh' for Democratic Rights which 
w^as finally held in New York City on September 23 and 24, 196L 
Did not the Constitutional Liberties Information Center of Los Angeles 
serve as an organizer of support in the Los Angeles area for the 
National Assembly for Democratic Rights? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. You are aware, are you not, that Joseph Brandt 
was chairman of the opening session of this Assembly — that is, the 
National Assembly for Democratic Rights in New York and served as 
spokesman for the Assembly? 

Are you aware that this Joseph Brandt has been one of the top 
officials in the Communist Party of Ohio; that in 1955 he was con- 
victed along with other Ohio party leaders of violating the Smith Act, 
a conviction which was reversed on appeal in 1958? Are you aware of 
these facts? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer for the previously stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. The committee's investigation which was made in 
October of last year developed that the National Assembly for Demo- 
cratic Rights was dominated and controlled by members and officials 
of the Communist Party. 

Now, Mr. Lopez, you are aware, are you not, that the National 
Assembly for Democratic Rights continued after October of 1961 to 
function as an organization having its headquarters at 118 East 28t]i 
Street, New York City. You are aware of that; are j^ou not? 



198 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer for the previously stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I desire to offer in evidence as 
Lopez Exhibit No. 3 a letter signed by Simon Schachter, secretary, on 
the letterhead of the National Assembly for Democratic Rights, New 
York City, and ask that it be marked as I suggested.* 

Mr. Tuck. The exhibit will be thus marked and will be part of the 
record of the proceedings. 

Mr. Tavenner. The document bears the date of January 1962, 
Mr. Chairman, and appeals to all supporters and participants of the 
National Assembly for funds to mail out copies of statements made 
at the Assembly meeting which was held the previous September, 
and the letter also asks for funds to guarantee that ''your organizing 
committee can continue to develop major campaigns and national 
activities, rallying all Americans against the McCarran Act." 

Now, Mr. Lopez, did the Constitutional Liberties Information 
Center of Los Angeles continue to work with the National Assembly 
for Democratic Riglits? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. I offer in evidence a second letter by Mr. Simon 
Schachter, bearing date of January 1962 on the letterhead of National 
Assembly for Democratic Rights and, ask that it be marked Lopez 
Exhibit No. 4.^ 

Mr. Tuck. The exhibit will be thus marked and it is noted for the 
record that it will be made a part of the record of the proceedings of 
this hearing. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Lopez, from this letter, I quote the following 
paragraph: 

We call on all existing committees to once again review the "Program of Action," 
discuss its application in your area and initiate new and additional forms of organ- 
ized activities with the aim of alerting the majority of the American People to the 
dangers inherent in the McCarran Act and to join in a common battle against it. 
[Emphasis in original.] 

Attached to the letter is a list of so-called "Functioning Civil 
Liberties Committees." The sixteenth item on this list is "Consti- 
tutional Liberties Information Center, 1213 North Highland, Los 
Angeles 38, California." That indicates, does it not, Mr. Witness, 
that your organization here in Los Angeles was and is cooperating in 
carrying out the purpose of the National Assembly for Democratic 
Rights in New York City? 

Mr. Lopez. I refuse to answer for the previously stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you acquainted with Simon Schachter who 
signs his name as secretary for the National Assemblv for Democratic 
Rights? 

Mr. Lopez. 1 refuse to answer for the previously stated reasons. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to refresh the committee's recollection 
regarding Mr. Schachter. He was subpenaed in October 1961 as a 
witness in Washington but he presented a medical certificate indicat- 
ing that he was too ill to testify, but he seems to have engaged in a lot 
of correspondence since that time. 

Mr. Scherer. Like most of the medical certificates. 

Mr. Johansen. I recall that instance of nonappearance. 

« Tbid., p. 191. 
» Ibid., p. 192. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 199 

Mr. Tuck. Yes, I recall that too. 

Mr. ScHERER. You recall, Mr. Counsel, some of us didn't want to 
accept that medical certificate. 

Mr. Tavenner. That is correct, yes, sir. We had a closed session 
to determine whether or not to call him. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. In Governor Tuck's ofiice, as I recall. 

Mr. Tavenn'er. That is right. 

Rather than to take up time in discussing each item, J also desire 
to offer in evidence, as Lopez Exhibit No. 5, an article from page 7 of 
the December 5, 1961, issue of The Worker. 

Mr. Tuck. The article will be so marked and it is ordered filed as 
an exhibit in the record. 

(Document marked "Lopez Exhibit No. 5" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Tavenner. As Lopez Exhibit No. 6, an article on page 3 from 
the January 15, 1962, issue of the National Guardian. 

Mr. Tuck. The article will be so marked and it is ordered filed as 
an exhibit in the record. 

(Document marked "Lopez Exhibit No. 6" and retained in com- 
mittee files.) 

Mr. Tavenner. May I add that Lopez Exhibits Nos. 5 and 6 con- 
tain articles regarding the Citizens Committee for Constitutional 
Liberties which appeared in The Worker, December 5, 1961 and the 
National Guardian, January 16, 1962, respectively. 

As Exhibit No. 7, "AN OPEN LETIER TO THE PRESIDENT 
OF THE UNITED STATES"— that is, the proposed form of one. 

Mr. Tuck. The document will be so marked and made a part of 
the record.^ 

Mr. Tavenner. As Lopez Exhibit No. 8, a flier issued "as a public 
service" by the Comite Pro Libertades Constitucionales. 

Mr. Tuck. The document will be thus marked and made a part of 
the record.^ 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Lopez, I have a copy of a letter dated Decem- 
ber 15, 1961, carrying the letterhead of the Los Angeles Committee 
for Protection of Foreign Born. I notice from the officers listed, j'ou 
are the public relations director. 

I offer it in evidence and ask it be marked as Lopez Exhibit No. 9.^ 

Mr. Tuck. It will be thus marked and ordered to be printed as an 
exhibit in the record. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you still hold that position? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. On March 25, 1961, the 11th Annual Conference 
of the Los Angeles Committee for Protection of Foreign Born was held 
at Park Manor, 607 South Western Avenue. Did you attend this 
conference? 

Mr. Lopez. Would you repeat the question? 

Mr. Tavenner. I said, there was a conference, the 11th Annual 
Conference of the Los Angeles Committee for Protection of Foreign 
Born held on March 25, 1961. Did you attend that conference? 

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



6 Ibid., p. 194. 

7 Ibid., p. 195. 
• Ibid., p. 196. 



200 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I have various documents here 
which I desire to introduce into evidence but because of the shortness 
of tijue will not undertake to outline the purposes for it at this time. 
I should give some description of them. 

I would like to introduce as Lopez Exhibit No. 10 the "Conference 
x4.genda" — and all these exhibits relate to what occurred at that 
meeting.^ 

The document titled "Proceedings" of the 11th Annual Conference 
of the Los Angeles Committee for Protection of Foreign Born consti- 
tutes Exhibit il, and sununarizes the first and second sessions of the 
Conference. '° 

I will, in connection witli this, Lopez Exhibit No. 11, ask the witness 
if he opened that meeting. 

yh'. Tuck. Let the documents be thus marked and it is ordered 
that they be filed as exhi'oits in the record. 

Mr. Tavenner. All right, sir. 

Lopez Exhibit No. 12 is the Annual Report by Rose Chernin to the 
11th Annual Conference.'^ 

Lopez No. 13 is a Legislative Report to the third and final session 
by Cleve Harris. '- 

Lopez No. 14 is the Nationalities Panel Report by Frank Lopez. '^ 

Lopez No. 15 is the Report of the Credentials Committee by Rose 
Spector.^* 

Lopez No. 16 is the Defense Panel Report by Harry Carlisle. ^^ 

Lopez No. 17 is a Brief Resume of the Main Resolutions Submitted 
and Passed at the 11th Annual Conference of the Los Angeles Com- 
mittee for Protection of Foreign Born reported by Lennie Ludel.'^ 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, may the record show that Chair- 
man Doyle entered the hearing room at this time. 

Mr. Tavenner. Exhibit No. 18 is the program of the 12tli Annual 
Conference of the Los Angeles Committee for Protection of Foreign 
Born, the Conference chairman being Frank Lopez, and the date is 
March the 31st, 1962.i- 

Lopez Exhibit No. 19 is the Annual Report delivered at the 12th 
Annual Conference on ALarch 31. 1962, by Rose Chernin.^^ 

Lopez Exhibits 20 and 21 are documents distributed by the Los 
Angeles Committee for Protection of Foreign Born at its 12th Annual 
Conference. Exhibit 20 is the text of an amendment to the Immigra- 
tion and Nationality Act dealing with "Judicial Review of Orders of 
Deportation and Exclusion"; this amendment was enacted into law in 
1961.^^ Exhibit 21 is a legislative proposal which the Los Angeles 
Committee is promoting; the organization wants the Immigration 
and Nationality Act amended to prohibit deportation or denaturaliza- 
tion of any alien who has resided in the United States for five years 
or more. 2" 

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

» Ibid., p. 197. 
1' Ibid., p. 199. 
" Ibid., p. 202. 

12 Ibid., p. 208. 

13 Ibid., p. 210. 
1* Ibid., p. 212. 
n Ibid., p. 216. 
i« Ibid., p. 218. 
1' Ibid., p. 220. 
1' Ibid., p. 222. 
19 Ibid., p. 22«. 
Mlbid., p. 231 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COIVIMUXIST PARTY 201 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions, Governor? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you. counsel. 

Mr. Kenny. The witness may be excused? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Call your next witness. Counsel. 

Mr. Tavenner. Beverly Radcliffe. 

Mr. Doyle. Do you solemnly swear that the testmiony you are 
about to give before this committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I do. 

Mr. Doyle. Be seated, please. 

TESTIMONY OF BEVERLY DELL RADCLIFFE, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, FRANK S. PESTANA 

}^Ir. Tavenner. Will you state your name, please. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. Beverly Radcliffe. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you spell your name? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. R-a-d-c-1-i-f-f-e. 

Mr. Doyle. Will you speak up just a little louder, if you can. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. Are you Miss or Mrs.? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer that on all of the grounds 
afforded me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Johansen. We can't hear you? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. Would you like me to repeat it? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on all of the gromids afforded 
me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Doyle. Mrs. Radcliffe. I instruct you to answer that cjuestion 
because we believe that this committee is entitled to an identity of 
the witnesses before it. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I am the same Beverly Radcliffe who was sub- 
penaed to come here and I refuse to answer any further questions on 
the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now, I will ask you to raise your voice a little. 
It is a little difficult with the fans on for us to understand at this end 
of the table. 

You are not a citizen of the United States, are you? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer that on the same grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were quite anxious, though, to request the 
protection of the provisions of the Constitution. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. Same answer. 

Mr. Johansen. Mr. Chairman, excuse me a minute, but the only 
invocation that has been made has been the very vague and general- 
ized one of all the safeguards of the Constitution. I wonder if there 
shouldn't be a Httle more specific statement of the basis on which the 
witness declines to answer. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, the witness is here with a legal counsel and she 
is referrino; to notes that were made before she came into the room. 



202 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I guess the chairman is right. I withdraw the 
point. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you born in Alberta, Canada, on February 
28, 1938? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. Same answer. 

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

Mrs. Radcliffe. Same answer. 

Mr. Tavenner. What do you mean by "same answer"? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on all of the grounds afforded 
me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Tavenner. Does that include the provisions of the fifth 
amendment? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. Same answer. 

Mr. Scherer. I ask Mr. Chairman, that you direct the witness to 
answer that question. 

Mr. Doyle. Witness, listen to me a minute: I direct you to answer 
the question. Now, if you want to refer to your notes in answering 
the question, go ahead and do it, but we want your answer expressly 
to these questions. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer the pending question on all of 
the grounds afforded me bj- the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Scherer. Does that include the fifth amendment? 

Mrs. Radcliffe, Same answer. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, there is a court decision that says 
that when a committee is not sure whether the witness is relying on 
the self-incrimination provision of the fifth amendment, that it is 
required to ask the witness specifically whether or not she is relying 
on those provisions. 

Mr. Doyle. Do you understand. Witness, Mr. Scherer's observa- 
tion? I instruct you to answer as to whether or not you are specifically 
relying on the self-incrimination provision of the fifth amendment to 
the United States Constitution. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. Yes, I do understand; and I am refusing to 
answer on all of the grounds afforded me by the Constitution of the 
United States. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Independent Student 
Union in Los Angeles? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. Same answer. 

Mr. Scherer. Now, Mr. Chairman, that isn't an answer. She is 
refusing to answer. 

I submit we do not accept her statement "same answer," because 
it's not an answer; it's a refusal to answer. 

Air. Doyle. I wish to make it clear. Witness, it's not just as simple 
as you are maldng it — "same answer." I am sure your counsel can 
give you the wording that you should use if you are refusing to answer. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you become the chairman of a demonstration 
conducted by the Walter Reception Committee in Los Angeles on 
March the 19th, 1962? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the same grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you participate in that demonstration by the 
Walter Reception Committee? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 203 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence a photograph 
and ask that it be marked RadcHffe Exhibit No. 1. I ask the witness 
if the woman appearing in the center of the photograph is herself.^' 

Mr. Doyle. So ordered. Let the record show that counsel for the 
witness and the witness are both examining the photograph, the 
exhibit offered. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Will you look at this, Governor, and in the foreground 
is a young lady. 

Mr. Tuck. It is obvious, very obvious that the lady in the photo- 
graph and the witness before us is one and the same person. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Scherer, will you take a look at the young lady 
witness and then the picture in the photograph. 

Mr. Scherer. Obviously it is a photograph of her. 

Mr. Johansen. I agree. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you participate in a demonstration on March 
7, 1962, known as the Women's International Strike for Peace held in 
front of the office of the Atomic Energy Commission, 3325 Wilshire 
Boulevard? 

Mr. JoHANSEN. That's here in Los Angeles? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, Los Angeles. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you directed by the Communist Party or 
any of its officials, or did you, by your own volition, as a member of 
the Communist Party, engage in that demonstration? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chau-man, I offer in evidence a second 
photograph and ask it be marked Radcliffe Exhibit No. 2 

Mr. Doyle. It is so marked and received. 

Mr. Tavenner. — showing a pari of the demonstration known as 
the Women's International Strike for Peace. I will ask the witness 
if the woman appearing in the left of the pictm^e is herself? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

(Document marked "Radclift'e Exhibit No. 2" and retained in 
committee files.) 

Mr. Doyle. Governor, does that picture 

Mr. Tuck. Yes. The woman in the picture and the w^itness are 
the same. 

Mr. Doyle. The woman is carrying the placard ''Disarm," 
D-i-s-a-r-m. 

Mr. Scherer? I believe it is a photograph of this witness. 

Mr. Johansen. I concur. 

Mr. Scherer. I think that's right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Witness, did you, on December 20, 1961, partici- 
pate in a peace demonstration picket line in front of the Federal 
Building sponsored by Student Peace L'nion? 

21 Ibid., p. 232. 



204 "UNITED FROXT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mrs. Kadcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. On November 18, 1961, did you participate as 
a demonstrator in a demonstration held bj" "Help Establish Lasting 
Peace" in front of the Palladium on Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I offer in evidence a photograph and ask it be 
marked Radcliffe Exhibit No. 3. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

Mr. Tavenner. And this is a picture taken of that demonstration 
or part of it. 

Will the witness state whether or not it is a photograph of herself. 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

(Document marked "Radcliffe Exhibit No. 3" and retained in com- 
mittee files). ^^ 

Mr. Doyle. Will 3'ou look at this? 

Mr. ScHERER. It is obviously a photograph of the witness. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Obviously, correct. 

Mr. Doyle. Same person. Today she appears without glasses and 
at the time of the photograph, she wore dark glasses. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been active in the * * * Independent 
Student L^nion? 

Mr. Pestana. Is that a question? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mrs, Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previouslj' 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. On July 23, 1961, did you attend a picnic sponsored 
by the Fair Play for Cuba Committee? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. To what extent was the Communist Party 
interested in having its members cooperate in the formation and 
in the activities of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee? 

Mrs, Radcliffe, I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated, 

Mr. Tavenner. Did a^ou, on April 17. 1961, participate as a picket 
in a demonstration sponsored b}' the Fair Play for Cuba Committee? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. On March 23, 1961, were j-ou a participant in a 
farewell part}^ for Frank Wilkinson? 

Mrs. Radcliffe, I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated, 

Mr. Tavenner, Were you aware that Frank Wilkinson was a 
member of, and paid functionarv in. the Communist Party before he 
became executive director of tlie Los Angeles Citizens Committee 
To Preserve American Freedoms? 

Mrs, Radcliffe, I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

M This document was also introduced as "HELP Exhibit No. 16" and appears In Report and Appendix, 
"United Front" Technique of the Southern California District of the Communist Party, p. 240. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COIVEVIUNIST PARTY 205.' 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been active in the work of the organiza- 
tion recruiting young people for the Eighth World Youth Festival at 
Helsinki? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you participate on April 19, 1961, in a picket 
line sponsored by the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in front of the 
Federal Building? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have the various activities about which I have 
questioned you, been activities in which the Communist Party has 
instructed its members to participate in keeping with the party's 
"united front" technique? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Johansek. Mr. Chairman, I am wondering whether I missed 
it. Did we get coimsel's name into the record? 

Mr. Pestana. Frank Pestana, P-e-s-t-a-n-a. I don't know whether 
he did or not. I believe j^ou didn't. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I do not recall. We should. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to ask, I believe, another question: 

How long have you been in the United States? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the gromids previously 
stated. 

Mr. Scherer. Do we have any evidence as to the witness' na- 
tionality, Mr. Taveimer? 

Mr. Tavenner. We know she was born in Canada. We under- 
stand she is not an American citizen. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, she knows. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, certainly. 

Mr. Doyle. If she is naturalized she ought to be proud enough of it 
to tell us the fact, but we will find out very quickly. 

May I ask, have 3^ou become a naturalized citizen of the United 
States of America? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Do you honestly feel that if you answer that question 
you would subject yourself to the possibility of criminal prosecution, 
that 3^ou became a citizen of the United States? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds pre^'iouslj'^ 
stated. 

Mr. Scherer. She might subject herself to criminal prosecution in 
another country if she became a citizen of the United States. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions, Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. None. 

Mr. Doyle. May I ask, have j^ou registered with the United States 
Attorney General as a member of the Communist Party as required 
by law of the United States? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Johansen. ]May I ask a further question: Are you now a 
member of the Communist Party? 



206 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. JoHANSEX. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Were you a member of the Communist Party prior 
to your entry into the United States? 

Mrs. Radcliffe. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. JoHAXSEX. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the matter of her 
entry into the United States should be checked with the Immigration 
and Naturalization Service of the Department of Justice. 

Mr. Doyle. I agree. It certainly will. 

I would think that any person who is proud of citizenship of the 
United States would feel very uncomfortable leading public parados 
against the Government of the United States. I should think such a 
person would feel very uncomfortable even if not a citizen. 

Mr. ScHERER. Not if she is a dedicated Communist, she wouldn't be. 

Mr. Doyle. Oh, no. 

Have you any other questions? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, sir. 

Mr. Doyle. The witness is excused and counsel is excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Mrs. Blumen, do you solemnly swear you will tell the 
truth, the whole truth and nothing but tlie truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. Blumex. So help me God. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you. 

TESTIMONY OF BESSIE (BESSIA) BLUMEN, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, FRANK S. PESTANA 

Mr. Wheeler. Will you please state your name. 

Mrs. Blumex. Bessie Blmnen, B-1-u-m-e-n. 

Mr. Wheeler. Would you advise the committee of your maiden 
name? 

Mrs. Blumex. I would like the pertinency of this hearing, 

Mr. Wheeler. I will read to you a resolution adopted by the House 
Committee on Un-American Activities, January 17, 1962: 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American Activ- 
ities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such time 
as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and activities 
of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative purpose of 
receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in determining 
whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a manner to 
make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United States, and 
that the staff of the Committee be authorized to conduct investigations deemed 
reasonably necessary in preparation for said hearings. 

Now, your maiden name, Mrs. Blumen. 

Mrs. Blumex. I refuse to answer on the grounds afforded to me by 
the Constitution of the United States and all the rest. 

Mr. Wheeler. Question of identilication, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Doyle. I couldn't quite understand the lady's answer. 

Mrs. Blumex. I refuse to answer any question on the grounds 
afforded to me bv the Constitution of the United States. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 207 

Air. ScHERER. Any question that's going to be asked, she says she 
is refusing to answer. It is obvious that she is invoking the fifth 
amendment in bad faith when at the outset she says she is not going 
to answer any questions. I submit that she ah-eady phices herself 
in contempt by that answer. 

Mr. Doyle. May I understand, Witness, are you refusing to answer 
any questions? 

Mrs. Blumex. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Doyle. This question. 

Mr. Wheeler. Your given name is Bessia. B-e-s-s-i-e is the way 
we spell it; however, the correct spelhng is B-e-s-s-i-a; is that not 
correct? 

Mrs. Blumen. Refuse to answer it on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Is it true that you were born in Russia? 

Mrs. Blumen. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. You were naturalized in Newark, , New Jersey, 
February 28, 1942? 

Mrs. Blumen. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. How long liave you been in California? 

Mrs. Blumen. I refuse to ansv/er on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mrs. Blumen, liave you received any du'ectives — 
first, I would like to ask you, are you a member of tlu^ Communist 
Party? 

Mrs. Blumen. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Have you received any directives from the Com- 
munist Party this year requesting you to participate in any demon- 
strations? 

Mrs. Blumen. 1 still refuse to answer. On the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Did j^ou participate in a demonstration, Women 
Strike for Peace, on January 15, 1962? 

Mrs. Blumen. I refuse to answer on the same gj'ounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Our information is that you did participate in 
such a demonstration on that particular date, and we would like 
to know if you were there on your own initiative or on request of the 
Communist Party of tliis area. 

Mrs. Blumen. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you now a member of the Comnmnist Party? 

Mrs. Blumen. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have no further questions. 

Mr. ScHERER. When did you say, Mr. Counsel, that this woman 
was naturalized? 

Mr. Wheeler. February 28, 1942, Newark, New Jersey. 

Mr. ScHERER. Were you a member of the Communist Party at the 
time you were naturalized? 

Mrs. Blumen. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. ScHERER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the testimony of this 
witness and the investigative files of our staff be referred to the De- 
partment of Justice in order that it might determine whether proceed- 
mgs for denaturalization should be conmienced. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Johansen? 

Mr. Johansen. I agree, and I second the motion. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. The motion is carried and the staff is so 
instructed. 

20-004—63 11 



208 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OP THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Wheeler. May the witness be excused? 
Mr. Doyle. Are there any questions? 
Mr. JoHANSEN. No questions. 
Mr. SCHERER. No. 

Mr. Doyle. Tliank you. 

(Witness excused.) 

Air. DoYLt:;. Mrs. Barry, do you solemnly swear that the testimony 
you will j;'ivc will he the truth, the whole truth and nothing hut the 
truth, so help you God? 

Mrs. Barry. Yes. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you. You may be seated. 

TESTIMONY OF EDITH H. BARRY, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

FRANK S. PESTANA 

Mr. Wheeler. Will the witness state her name, please? 

Mrs. Barry. Edith Barry. 

Mr. Wheeler. Miss or Mrs.? 

Mrs. Barry. Mrs. 

Mr. ScHERER. Will llie witness please speak a little louder. T can't 
hear for some reason. 

Mr. Doyle. There is noise coming in the window, believe it or not. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you Mrs. Bernard S. Barry? 

Mrs. Barry. I will not answer that question on all the grounds 
afforded me by the Constitution. 

Mr. Scherer. I am sorry, I can't hear. 

Mrs. Barry. I i"ei"use to answer that question on all the grounds 
afforded me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Johansen. What was the question? 

Mr. Wheeler. The first question was if it was Miss or Mrs. Barry 
and she said Mrs. ; and I asked her if she was the wife of Bernard Barry 
and she invoked the whole Constitution. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, in view of your first answer I instruct 3'ou to 
answer that question. 

Mrs. Barry. Same answer. On the same grounds. 

Mr. Scherer. Do you honestly apprehend that to answer th.e 
question as to whether you are tlic wife of Bernard Barry might lead 
to a criminal prosecution? 

Mrs. Barry. Same grounds for tlie same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. Was your maiden name Hoffman, H-o-f-f-m-a-n? 

Mrs. Barry. The same grounds for the same reasons. 

Mr. Scherer. Well, if the witness is going to invoke her constitu- 
tional privileges, let's have it invoked instead of saying: "Same 
grounds for same reasons," which doesn't make sense. 

Mr. Doyle. Will j^ou instruct her 

Mr. Pestana. J have already, Mr. Chairman. 

Mrs. Barry. 1 refuse to answer the question on all the grounds 
afforded me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Wheeler. What is your current address, Mrs. Barry? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer that on all the grounds guaranteed 
me by the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Scherer. Mr. Chairman, I ask that you direct the witness to 
answer the question because it is asked for the purpose of identifi- 
cation. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 209 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you, Witness, to answer that question. As 
Mr. Scherer says, it is asked you specifically on the point of identifi- 
cation. We believe we are entitled to that as a matter of record. 

Mrs. Barry. I am Edith Barry who was subpenaed and, as for 
the rest of it, I refuse to answer afforded me on the grounds by the 
Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Wheeler. Wliere were you served with the subpena? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer on all the grounds afforded me by 
the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you a bookkeeper for the Mica Corporation? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer on all the grounds afforded me by 
the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Wheeler. At 4031 Elenda Street, Culver City? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same grounds for the same 
reasons. 

Mr. Scherer. How could it [)ossibly incriminate you if you told 
us whether or not you were the bookkeeper for this corporation? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Scherer. Were you engaged in any illegal activity at that 
company tliat causes you to invoke the self-incrimination provision 
of the fifth amendment? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. Do you reside at 1536 Sherbourne Drive, Los 
Angeles? 

Mrs. Barry. Same answer, for the same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. Does the date August 10, 1918, have any meaning 
to you? 

Mrs. Barry. Same answer, same reasons. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, the witness can't properly say 
"vSame answer," because it isn't an answer. It is a refusal to answer. 

Mrs. Barry. 1 refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Scherer. Wliat significaiice does that date have? 

Mr. Wheeler. It is her birth date. I thought she might recall it. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, she was there. 

Mr. Wheeler. You were born in New York C^ity on that date; were 
you not? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. You have lived in California since 1947? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. Our records disclose that you were a delegate to the 
Second Convention of the Comnumist Party, Southern California 
District; is that correct? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. 1952-54, were you not assigned to the West Adams 
Club of the Independent Progressive Party? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. In 1959, is it not a fact that you were a member of 
the West Adams Club, Aloranda Smith Section of the Communist 
Party, Southern California District? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. Were a^ou not a delegate from the Moranda Smith 
Section to the convention I previously mentioned? 

Mrs. Barky. I refuse to answer for tlie same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you still engaged in j)olitical activities on behalf 
of the Communist Party? 



210 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for tlie same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. In 1955 you held the position of chairman of the 
Political Action Committee of the Baldwin Gardens Democratic 
Club; did you not? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are you presently a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer for the same reasons. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have nothing further Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Johansen. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mrs. Barry. I refuse to answer that for the same reasons. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, I wish to say T hope you are not a Communist 
and also a member of a Democratic chib. 

Mr. ScHERER. That's just what she is. Because she is infiltrating 
the Democratic club as an agent of the Communist apparatus. It 
is as clear as the day is long. 

Mr. Doyle. I am afraid so. And tlie Democratic club isn't and 
doesn't welcome -the Democratic Party in California doesn't welcome 
you Communists, and you know it. The Commimist Party always 
uses anything for the aims of commimism instead of the principles of 
either the Republican or the Democratic Party, it is my belief, 

Mr. Wheeler. I have nothing further, Mr. Doyle. 

Mr. Doyle. Any other questions? 

Mr. Johansen. No. 

Mr. Scherer. None. 

Mr. Doyle. No other questions, Counsel. Thank you. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Large, (k:» you solemnly swear that you will tell 
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Large. I do. 

Mr. Doyle. Will you please take the witness chair. 

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT WALTER LARGE, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, HUGH R. MANES 

Mr. Wheeler. State your name, please. 

Mr. Large. Ro])ert Large. 

Mr. Wheeler. L-a-r-g-e? 

Mr. Large. That is right. 

Mr. Wheeler. And where do you reside, Mr. Large? 

Mr. Large. I believe that I should decline to answer that for 
some reasons that I have noted here. Do you wish me to read them? 

1 decline to answer on several grounds: One, the authority from 
the House under which this committee operates violates the first and 
other of the amendments in the Bill of Rights in that it is vague, 
ambiguous and results in abridging the freedom of speech and associ- 
ation fiierein guaranteed to all citizens. 

'J'wo, the question is not pertinent and j-elevant to the assignment 
of this coniinittce or to the declared ])Ui-])ose of this investigation or 
any pro])er inquiry on legislatui-e -or legislative purpose. 

Three, the question inquires into my beliefs and associations a.nd 
abridges my rijilits as guaranteed by the first anicndment. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 211 

Mr. Wheelek. Your address does that? 

Mr. Large. What? 

Mr. Wheeler. Asking your address violates that section you are 
reading? 

Mr. Large. Should I answer the first question? 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, I don't think this is in answer to the question. 

Mr. Doyle. It is a prepared statement. 

Mr. Wheeler. It is a matter of identification. 

Mr. Johansen. I am constrained to say, Mr. Chairman, if there is 
any abridging of freedom of speech this afternoon it will be the 
witness that does it. 

Mr. Doyle. Wcll^— 

Mr. Large. And, fourth, upon tlie further ground that the question 
calls on me to condemn and accuse myself from my own lips — that 
is, tend to incriminate me in violation of the fifth amendment. 

Mr. vScHERER. It tends to incriminate you, sir, to give the address? 

Mr. Manes. May the witness finish his answer, please? 

Mr. ScHERER. I can interrupt. 

Mr. Manes. He is trying to give an answer to the first question 
asked. 

Mr. ScHERER. I want to know how giving his address would tend 
to incriminate him. 

Mr. Large. Because, A: — Sorry — -The committee lacks juris- 
diction over me because, A: The unlawful exercise of its subpena 
power; and, B, the unlawful delegation of its subpena power. 

Mr. Doyle. Now, are you through. Witness? 

Mr. Large. This is my statement. 

Mr. Doyle. Did you write that? Did you write that yourself? 
Did you*prepare that or did your lawyer prepare it? 

Mr. Large. Partly both. 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, I thought so. 

Mr. Scherer. It's all right. 

Mr. Doyle. It's all right, but I just want the record to show what 
the fact is. 

Mr. Wheeler. Are we accepting the entire statement or the por- 
tion of the fifth amendment on self-incrimination? 

Mr. Scherer. I ask that you direct the witness to answer the 
question. It is obviousl}^ an improper invocation. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer the question. 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the grounds stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Now, just a minute. 

Counsel, yesterday when you were in I made it clear to you that 
when one of your clients came in here and read a statement that state- 
ment must be filed with the committee. Now, I am going to require 
that or we will strike the whole thing from the record. 

Mr. Manes. Mr. Chairman, that was an answer and not a state- 
ment. 

Mr. Doyle. Yes, it was an answer. 

Mr. Manes. He is allowed to give an answer to a question in which 
he is proclaiming his constitutional rights for the record. That is all 
he is doing. 

Mr. Doyle. This is a statement that he's made with your help, and 
the rules of the committee require statements to be filed with the 
committee. 



212 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Manes. W tlic chaii'iiuui please, the only position which 1 
believe the witness would take is that this is a statement that was — an 
answer to a question that was prepared with the assistance of counsel, 
which is the constitutional rights guaranteed under the rules; and 
furthermore, to take the statement without his consent would not 
only be a violation of the fourth amendment, to take away his property 
without consent, but additionally, it would be an abridgment of con- 
stitutional right to counsel. 

Mr. Doyle. We are not going to permit you to take any time to 
argue before this committee. 

Mr. Wheeler. May I go ahead? 

Mr. Manes. These people are not articulate, you see, and they 
need help. 

Mr. Doyle. Just a minute. You advise your client of his consti- 
tutional rights, and that is all you do. Our rules don't permit counsel 
to argue with us, the way you are trying to do. 

Witness, you are instructed to answer the question. 

Mr. Large. I decline upon the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Go ahead, Mr. Wheeler. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Large, are you the same Robert Large who 
resides at 5939 North Vista, San Gabriel? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer as stated — grounds previously 
stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. You responded to a subpena served upon you at 
that address, at 7 a.m., on April 12, did you not? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the grounds stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Why are you present? 

Mr. Large. In response to that subpena. 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, then you did receive the subpena at the time 
I indicated? 

Mr. Large. No question. 

Mr. Wheeler. Well, then, you do reside at 5989 North Vista, 
San Gabriel. You liave already answered the question. 

Mr. Large. Well, I decline to answer the question on the grounds 
previously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Well, he didn't hear the legal counsel's advice, 
evidently. 

So, go ahead, Mr. Wheeler. 

Mr. Wheeler. When and where were ,you born, Mr. Large? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Our records show that you were born on Jul}^ 26, 
1896, at Bethalto, Illinois. Is that correct? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer that as stated. To answer as 

Mr. Wheeler. What is your occupation? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer as stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, this person is a retired railroad 
worker. Now, is retirement self-incriminating? 

Mr. Doyle. Well, could be. Depends on what he is doing when 
he claims to be retired. 

Mr. Wheeler. Will you instruct him to answer the question? 

Mr. Doyle. I instruct you to answer the question. Witness. 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the grounds I have previously 
stated. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 213 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Large, you have been a member of the Com- 
mmiist Party in the San Gabi'iel Section for many years; have you 
not? 

Mr. Large. I decline — May I ask what the legislative purpose of 
the committee in this question might be? 

Mr. Wheeler. Certainly. 1 will be pleased. 

Mr. Scherer. If we tell 3^ou what the legislative purpose is, are 
you going to answer the question? 

Mr. Large. I would decline to answer that question as stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Go ahead, Mr. Wheeler. Read it because counsel 
wants him to hear that. 

Mr. Wheeler. On January 17, 1962, the Committee on Un- 
American Activities in Washington, D.C., passed this resolution 
which reads as follows : 

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or a subcommittee thereof, be held in Los Angeles, California, at such 
time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and 
activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative pur- 
pose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in 
determining whether the Internal Security Act of 19.50 should be amended in a 
manner to make unlawful membership in the Commvmist Party of the United 
States, and that the staff of the Committee be authorized to conduct investiga- 
tions deemed reasonably necessary in preparation for said hearings. 

I believe the question was. You have been a member of the C^om- 
nmnist Party for a considerable number of years in San Gabriel; is 
that correct? 

Mr. Large. I — May I have you repeat tlie c{uestion with regards 
to the — that is, tlie legislative purpose with regards to dates? 

Mr. Scherer. Oh, now, counsel read and told liim wliat the legis- 
lative purpose was. Let's not be made fools of by a (bmmunist like 
this one. 

I ask you to direct the witness to answer the question. 

Mr. Doyle. You are directed to answer the question. 

Mr. Large. I decline to state on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Our investigation has disclosed that in 1944 you 
were educational du'ector for the San Gabriel Valley Communist 
Party clubs; is that correct? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the grounds that I have previ- 
ously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. You were a member of the Lidependent Progressive 
Party in 1948 to 1954; were 3^ou not? 

Mr. Large. I decline to state on the grounds that I have previously 
stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Weren't you assigned to tlie San Gabriel Club of the 
Independent Progressive Party? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the grounds previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Now, information has been received to the effect 
that you have been active in the National Negro Labor Council in 
Los Angeles; is that correct? 

Mr. Large. I decline to state on the grounds I liave previously 
stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. The Communist Part}^, Southern California Dis- 
trict, held a convention in November 1959 and January I960. Were 
you not in attendance at this convention? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the grounds — -decline to answer 
on the ground I have previously stated. 



214 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Wheeler. Were you not a delegate to this convention repre- 
senting the San Gabriel Section of tlie Communist Party? 

Mr. LyVRGE. I decline to state on the grounds I have already 
mentioned. 

Mr. Wheeler. And referring Inick to the Independent Progressive 
Party, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the witness if he circulated 
a petition bearing the date January 'SI, 1948. 

This petition was circulated to qualify the Independent Progressive 
Party as a legal party in the State of California. 

I will ask you to look at page 3 of tliis document, Mr. Large, and 
tell us if it bears your signature. 

Mr. Johansen. May the record show, Mr. Chairman, that the 
witness and counsel are viewing the exhibit? 

Mr. Doyle. It is so noted. 

Mr. Large. I decline to state on the ground I have — -I decline to 
answer — ^I am sorry — ^on the grounds I have previously stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Wliat is 3^our reaction to the Fidel Castro govern- 
ment in Cuba? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the grounds I luive previously 
stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Do you support Mr. Castro and his government? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer as stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. Have you heard of the Fah' Play for Cuba Com- 
mittee? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have a photograph here, Mr. Large. I would 
like to show you — carrying a sign. 

I would like to ask you if this is a picture of yourself? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the grounds i^reviously stated. 

Mr. Doyle. Let the record show that counsel and witness inspected 
the exhibit. 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Chairman, this is a photograph of Mr. Large 
taken on April 19, 1961, in front of the Federal Building here. This 
demonstration and picket line was sponsored by the Fair Play for 
Cuba Committee. I would like to mtroduce this as Large Exhibit 
No. 1.23 _ 

Mr. Johansen. Obviously it is a photograph of the witness. 

Mr. Doyle. It is admitted, and will be so marked. 

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

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the ground I previously stated. 

Mr. Johansen. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr, Large. I decline to answer on the ground I have previously 
stated. 

Mr. Wheeler. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Schcrer? 

Mr. ScHERER. I have none. 

Mr. Doyle. Have you registered, Mr. Large, under the laws, 
with the Attorney General of the United States as a member of the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Large. I decline to answer on the ground I have previously 
stated. 

'2 See committee Report and Appendix, "United Front" Technique of the Southern California District of the 
Communist Party, p. 232. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 215 

Mr. Doyle. I have no further questions, Counsel. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I don't know whether we identified 
counsel. 

Mr. Manes. Hugh R. Manes, M-a-n-e-s. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Mr. Martinez do you solemnly swear to teU the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Martinez. I affirm. 

Mr. Doyle. May the record show that the witness affirms. 

TESTIMONY OF GUILLERMO M. MARTINEZ, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, ROBERT L. BROCK 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your full name and spell it, please. 

Mr. Martinez. Guillermo Martinez, G-u-i-1-l-e-r-m-o M-a-r-t-i-n-e-z. 

Mr. Tavenner. Now, will counsel please identify himself? 

Mr. Brock. Robert L. Brock, B-r-o-c-k. 

I have explained to the witness your statement of legislative 
purpose. 

Mr. Tavenner. All right. Thank you. 

Mr. Martinez, you were born January 27, 1920, in Arizona; your 
present address is 2873 Sunset Place, Los Angeles; and your occupa- 
tion is salesman for the Western Auto Association, 2122 North Broad- 
way, Los Angeles, is that correct. 

Mr. Brock. There is no objection to answering the first three of 
those questions, Counsel, if you wouldn't compound them by putting 
four things together. 

Mr. Tavenner. Very well, sir. 

Then, you answer afl&rmatively all those questions except your 
occupation? 

Mr. Martinez. That is correct. 

Mr. Tavenner. Why do you not answer the question with regard 
to your occupation? 

Mr. Martinez. Because I do not think it is pertinent and because 
I stand on the first and fifth amendments of the Constitution. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you attend Marxist classes taught by John 
Hellman in November 1959? 

Mr. Martinez. I decline to answer that question on the grounds 
stated before. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you later become a member of the Echo Park 
Section of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Martinez. I decline to answer your question on the previous 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Have you participated in the activities of the 
Fair Play for Cuba Committee? 

Mr. Martinez. I decline to answer your question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you and Frank Lopez attend the Latin 
American Conference for National Sovereignty, Economic Emanci- 
pation and Peace in Mexico City? 

Mr. Martinez. I decline to answer your question on the previous 
grounds. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, the staff has procured a letter from 
Mexico dealing with this conference. It is in Spanish and has been 

20-004 — 63 12 



216 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

translated into English. The letter was signed by Vicente Lombardo 
Toledano, under date of January 13, 1961, and I desire to offer it in 
evidence and ask that it be marked Martinez Exhibit No. 1. 

Mr. Doyle. It will be so received and so marked. 

(Document marked "Martinez Exhibit No. 1" and retained in 
committee files.) 

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

Mr. Doyle. Questions, Mr. Scherer? 

Mr. Scherer. None. 

Mr. Tavenner. I asked you a question about joining the Echo 
Park Section of the Communist Party. Possibly I should also ask 
you, are you a member of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Martinez. I decline to answer your question on the previous 
grounds. 

Mr. Johansen. Have you ever been a member of the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Martinez. I decline to answer your question on the previous 
grounds. 

Air. Johansen. No further questions. 

Mr. Doyle. Have you registered as a member of the Communist 
Party under the law requiring Communists to register? 

Mr. Martinez. I decline to answer your question. 

Mr. Doyle. All right. 

No other questions. Counsel? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, sir. 

Mr. Doyle. The witness is excused. 

[Witness excused.] 

Mr. Doyle. May the record show that the committee recessed at 
6:10 p.m. to convene at 8 a.m. tomorrow. 

(Whereupon, at 6:10 p.m., Thursday, April 26, 1962, the subcom- 
mittee recessed, to reconvene, Friday, April 27, 1962, at 8 a.m.) 



"UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 



FRIDAY, APRIL 27, 1962 

United States House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Los Angeles, Calif. 
executive session' 

The subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities 
reconvened at 8 :15 a.m., pursuant to recess, in Room 519, U.S. Federal 
Building, Representative Clyde Do3de (chairman of the subcom- 
mittee) presiding. 

Subcommittee members: Representatives Clyde Doyle, of Cali- 
fornia; Edwin E. Willis, of Louisiana; William M. Tuck, of Virginia; 
Gordon H. Scherer, of Ohio; and August E. Johansen, of Michigan. 

Subcommittee members present : Representatives Doyle, Tuck, and 
Johansen. 

Staff members present : Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., director, and William 
A. Wheeler, investigator. 

Mr. Doyle. WiU the witness please rise and be sworn. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 
before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Alexander. I do. 

Mr. Doyle. Thank you, be seated. 

TESTIMONY OF CHAUNCEY A. ALEXANDER, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, ALLEN NEIMAN 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your name, please? 

Mr. Doyle. Just a minute — I recessed the committee for just a 
minute. 

Let the record show the committee reconvened and the thi-ee 
members of the subcommittee are present. Representatives Tuck, 
Johansen, and Doyle; therefore, a quorum of the subcommittee is 
present. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your name, please, Mr, Alexander? 

Mr. Alexander. Chauncey A. Alexander. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will counsel accompanying the witness please 
identify himself? 

Mr. Neiman. Yes, Allen Neiman. 

* Released by the committee and ordered to be printed. 



218 "UNITED FRONT" 'I'ErHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Tavenner. "When and where were you born, Mr. xilexander? 

Mr. Alexander. I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the following grounds : 

The first amendment, fifth amendment, and the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Doyle. I direct you to answer the question, Witness. This 
question goes solely to the question of identification of the person 
and there is no question in our minds about its justification. Legally 
Congress is entitled to know the identity of people it's dealing with 
in any congressional liearing. 

This question goes only to that one question of identifying the 
witness. 

May I further suggest this, that certainly it couldn't submit you 
to the possibihty of criminal prosecution because j^ou were born. 

Mr. Neiman. I think Mr. Doyle's statement is well taken. There 
is no objection to the witness answering that question. 

Mr. Alexander. Could you ask me again then, Mr. Tavenner? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, su-, when and where were you born? 

Mr. Alexander. I was born May 11, 1916, in Kansas City, Mis- 
souri. 

Mr. Tavenner. Where do you now reside? 

Mr. Alexander. 5036 Rosewood Avenue, Los Angeles 4. 

Mr. Tavenner. How long have you been a resident of Los Angeles? 

Mr. Alexander. I respectfully refuse to answer on the following 
grounds : 

First amendment, fifth amendment, and the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. Will you advise the committee, please, as to what 
your formal educational training has been? 

Mr. Alexander. I respectfully refuse to answer on the following 
grounds: 

The first amendment, fifth amendment, and the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. Do you honestly believe that it would tend to in- 
criminate you if you advise the committee as to what your educational 
training has been, your formal educational training? 

Mr. Alexander. I respectfully refuse to answer on each of the 
following grounds : 

First amendment, fifth amendment, and the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. What is your occupation? 

Mr. Alexander. I respectfully refuse to answer on each of the 
following grounds : 

The first amendment, the fifth amendment, and the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have received a communication, as late as April 
25, advising me that you are a member of the board of the Citizens 
Committee to Preserve American Freedoms. Is that correct, that 
you are? 

Mr. Alexander. I respectfully refuse to answer on each of the 
following grounds: 

First amendment, fifth amendment, and the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. I am advised in the same communication that 
you are the executive director of the Los Angeles County Heart 
Association, is that correct? 

Mr. Alexander. I respectfully refuse to answer on each of the 
following grounds : 

The first amendment, the fifth amendment, and the Bill of Rights. 

Air. Tavenner. Were j'ou a member of the Communist Party 
from 1939 until 1947? 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COIVIMUNIST PARTY 219' 

Mr. Alexander. I respectfully refuse to answer on each of the 
following grounds : 

The first amendment, the fifth amendment, and the Bill of Rights. 

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

Mr. Alexander. I respectfully refuse to answer on each of the 
following grounds: 

First amendment, fifth amendment, and the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, there are other matters that I 
desire to question this witness about, but in view of the position he 
has taken in answer to the questions I have asked, I see no point in 
following the matter further at this time, though I may want to recall 
him at some later time. 

So, that's all I desire to ask. 

Mr. Doyle. Then is it j^our request that the witness be excused at 
this time? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Doyle. Excused from the subpena at this time? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Doyle. Any questions. Governor? 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. Johansen. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no questions. 

Thank you, Counsel, the witness is excused. 

Mr. Neiman. Thank you, very much. 

(Witness excused.) 



AFTERNOON SESSION 

» * * « « ♦ * 

Mr. Doyle. May the record show that the subcommittee recon- 
vened at 1:30 p.m., and that Messrs. Johansen, Tuck, and Doyle are 
present, therefore, a quorum of the subcommittee. 



Mr. Wheeler. Before we call the next witness, I have a short 
report to make to the committee, if it pleases the counsel. 

Mr. Chairman, I was directed by the Chair to ascertain certain 
information concerning Marco Schneck, who appeared as a witness 
here on Wednesday, and he was directed to reappear this afternoon 
at 2 o'clock. 

Marco Schneck is employed by the UCLA Preventive Medicine 
Department of the University of California in Los Angeles, and I was 
to ascertain if this particular unit at UCLA had a Government grant. 

I have talked to the person who is the head of this department and 
I have been advised that they do have a grant from the Government 
and it is from the National Listitutes of Health. There is a consider- 
able grant for equipment, and they are doing research on making or 
developing some type of medical computer. 

Now, it is unclassified. There are 20 persons emploj^'ed under this 
grant. The witness, Marco Schneck, is one of the 20 employed under 
the grant. 

I have been further advised by the department head that the em- 
ployment of Marco Schneck will be terminated May 1. 



220 "UNITED FRONT" TECHNIQUE OF THE SOUTHERN 

Mr. Doyle. Do you have any knowledge as to why Marco Schneck 
will be terminated from his employment on May 1? 

Mr. Wheeler. Mr. Schneck has requested a leave of absence start- 
ing May 1, and the department head advised mc that there is nothing 
exceptional about Mr. Schneck's work and lie will be terminated 
rather than granted leave of absence on that date. 

I might mention that Marco Schneck is the chairman of the Los 
Angeles Festival Committee, w^iicii is handling the transportation 
and obtaining the passports for the World Youth Festival in Helsinki, 
so we can probably reach the conclusion he has taken the leave of 
absence to go to Helsinld. 

Mr. Schneck is here. He was directed to return at 2 o'clock today. 
The subcommittee can determine what they wish to do. 

Mr. Doyle. Do you want the record to show anything more than 
we now have? 

Mr. Tavenner. Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Doyle, The committee will come to order. May the record 
show that the Messrs. Tuck and Johansen and Doyle are present, 
therefore, a quormn of the subcojnmittee. 

Proceed, Counsel. 

TESTIMONY OF MARCO SCHNECK, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
CLAUDE V. WOEEELL— Resumed 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Schneck, you were requested by the committee 
to report back this afternoon. 

The committee has made a further investigation regarding your 
employment, and you should be reminded that you are still mider oath. 

Mr. Schneck. This is continuing testimony? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. As a result of this investigation, it has been 
learned that you are employed in a department of UCLA known as 
the Preventive Medicine Department; that that department is re- 
ceiving a substantial grant from the Government of the United States 
for work being done; and that you are one of 20 persons who are 
engaged in the work involved as a result of that grant. Is that 
correct? 

Mr. Schneck. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of 
all the privileges, responsibilities, immunities, and guarantees offered 
by the Constitution of the United States, and most particularly the 
first, fourth, fifth, and ninth amendments. 

Mr. Tavenner. It has also been learned by the committee that 
you have applied for leave of absence beginning May 1, so I want 
to inquire from you whether you have made application for a passport 
to engage in foreign travel? 

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

Mr. Tavenner. Do you propose to engage in foreign travel within 
the next 6 months? ^ 

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

1 Mr. Sohneok had bpen issued a passport on Dpcpiiiber 2, IQSO, which was valid until the end of 1962. 
He had, nevertheless, applied for a new passport in 1961, and this application was rejected by the State 
Department. He did not go to the Eighth World Youth Festival in the summer of 1962, although the 
committee had received information that he originally planned to travel to Helsinki as a member of the 
southern California delegation. 



CALIFORNIA DISTRICT OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 221 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I ask that the Chair direct the 
witness not to take notes during the testimony. 

Mr. Doyle. That is right; his counsel is doing it. One ought to 
be enough. 

Mr. ScHNECK. Are you directing me not to take notes? 

Mr. Doyle. Yes. I think the questions being directed to you 
deserve your fullest attention, and you certainly are not giving it 
when you are sitting there scribbling notes. 

Your counsel is also taking notes and that ought to be sufficient. 
We are entitled to your attention. 

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. I have no questions. 

Mr. Doyle. I have no questions. 

Witness is excused. Thank you, Counsel. 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Doyle. Is there anything else, Counsel, that you wish? If 
not, the subcommittee is in recess. 

(Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the subcommittee closed the Los 
Angeles hearings on Friday, April 27, 1962.) 



INDEX 



INDIVIDUALS 



Alexander, Charlene. {See Mitchell, Charlene.) Page 

Alexander, Chauncey A 217-219 (testimony) 

Alexander, Franklin 123 

Alexander, Mimi (Miriambel) (Mrs. Charles Alexander; formerly Mrs. 

Robert Scott; Mrs. Louis Wolfson) 77, 133-145 (testimony) 

B 
Barry, Bernard S 208 

Barry, Edith H. (Mrs. Bernard S. Barry; nee Hoffman) 208-210 (testimony) 

Bellamy, Francis. (See Frank Beyea.) 

Benson, Elizabeth. (See Spector, Elizabeth Leach Glenn.) 

Beyea, Frank (also known as Francis Bellamy) 152-156 (testimony) 

Bissey, Wesley A. (alias James Snyder) 157-161 (testimony) 

Blair, Helen (formerly Mrs. Helen B. Stewart) 189, 196 

Bland, Frank 92 

Blumen, Bessie (Bessia) 206-208 (testimony) 

Boose, Adam 154 

Borough, Reuben W 83, 195 

Brandt, Joseph 197 

Briggs, Cyril Valentine 77, 144 

Brock, Robert L 120, 166, 168, 175, 191, 215 

Brooks, Arthur A., Jr 97, 101 

Buhai, Harriett 152, 180, 182 

Burgess, Margaret (Mrs. Walter Kenneth Burgess; formerly Mrs. Arthur 

Evans; nee Carl) 161-166 (testimony) 

Burgess, Walter Kenneth 162, 164 

C 

Cannon, Fred Allen 89-91 (testimony) 

Carlisle, Harry 200 

Castro, Fidel 214 

Chernin, Rose. (<See Kusnitz, Rose.) 

D 

DeLacy, Dorothy Rose Forest (Mrs. Hugh DeLacy; formerly Mrs. James 

Frederick Forest; nee Baskin) 114 

DeLacy, Hugh 58, 59, 86, 87, 114, 195, 196 

Dobbs, Ben 53-87 (testimony) 

E 

Eisenhower, Dwight D 81 

Epperson, D. S 107 

Evans, Arthur 164 

F 

Fogliette, E. C 126 

Forest, Dorothy Rose. {(See DeLacy, Dorothy Rose Forest.) 

Fraga, Vincent 85, 86 

Freed, Harry ._ 175-180 (testimony) 

Friedlander, Miriam 197 

Fritchman, Stephen H 86 

i 



ii INDEX 

G 

Page 

Gates, John (W.) (alias Irving Regenstreif) 63, 66 

Goldner, Sanford 79 

Gordon, Hugh H_._ 86 

H 

Hall, Gus (alias for Arva Halberg) 70, 105, 117, 184, 191 

Harris, Cleve 200 

Hathaway, Clarence A 73 

Healey, Dorothy Ray (Mrs. Philip Marshal Connellj^; nee Rosenblum; also 

known as Dorothy Ray) 57, 

59, 61, 67, 70, 71, 75-77, 80, 105, 114, 141, 183, 187, 190 

Hellman, John 188, 215 

Hellman, Millicent (Mrs. John Hellman) 188 

K 

Kagan, Marlene Sniderman 179, 180-182 (testimony) 

Katz, Jeanne (Mrs. Seymour Katz) 101-105 (testimony), 188 

Kenny, Robert W 193 

Kessler, Shirley (Mrs. Irving Kessler) 145, 146-148 (testimony) 

Khrushchev, Nikita Sergeevich 66, 67, 76, 77, 190 

Kimple, William Ward (also known as William Wallace) 154, 155, 164 

Konick, Helen (Mrs. Sam Konick; nee Mendelowitz) 148-152 (testimony) 

Konick, Sam 150 

Kusnitz, Rose (Mrs. Paul Kusnitz; nee Chernin) 82, 83, 189, 200 

Kykyri, John 57 

L 

Large, Robert Walter 210-215 (testimony) 

Lewis, Albert Jorgenson 83 

Lightf oot, Claude 143 

Lombardo Toledano, Vicente 216 

Lopez, Frank Savas 193-201 (testimony), 215 

Louks, Howard G 91-94 (testimony) 

Ludel, Leonard (Lennie) 200 

Lusher, Bernard 58 

Lutz, Jacob 182-184 (testimony), 189 

M 

Manes, Hugh R . 133, 148, 185, 210 

Mandel, Pierre (born Peretz Mandelman; also known as Peter Mandelman, 

Frenchy Mandelman, Peter Mander).'. 168-175 (testimony), 189 

Mandelman, Peretz. {See Mandel, Pierre.) 

Martinez, Guillermo M. (also known as WiUiam Martinez.). .215-216 (testimony) 

Martinez, William. {See Martinez, Guillermo M.) 

Matsuda, Don 96, 97-101 (testimony) 

Mitchell, Charlene (Mrs. William Mitchell; nee Alexander) 57, 

59, 77, 78, 109, 110, 114, 115, 123 
Monroy, Solomon P 57 

N 

Neff, Jack Veach 103-133 (testimony) 

Neiman, Allen 217 

Newman, Morton 195, 196 

Nichols, James G 192 



O'Brien, John James 104 

Okrand, Fred 53 

Clan, Bennet 89 

Ostly, Harold J 138 



INDEX iii 

P Page 

Parker, William B. (BiU) 172 

Perrv Pettis _ ___ ___ _ ___i. 58 

Pestana, Frank'sII.III_].I.I I.I.I 91,94, 201,206, 208 

Pitchess, Peter J 107, 186 

Potash, Leonard Harry 125-130 (testimony), 189 

R 

Radcliffe, Beverly Dell (Mrs. David Louis Radcliffe; nee Blades) 201-206 

(testimony) 

Randies, Anthony V 130, 157 

Ray, Irving 161 

Richmond, Al 73 

Roberts, Steve 83 

Rosenberg, Rose S. (Mrs. Sol Rosenberg) 189 

Rosensteiu, Paul 112, 120-124 (testimony) 

S 

Sanchez, W. L : 136 

Schachter, Simon 198 

Schneck, Marco (also known as Monty) 105-120 

(testimony), 124, 219, 220-221 (testimony) 

Silver, Sophie (nee Chelnick) 68 

Snider, Irving A 166-168 (testimony) 

Sobell, Morton 81, 82 

Sparks, Nemmy (born Nehemiah Ish-Kishor) 58, 78 

Spector, EHzabeth Leach Glenn (Mrs. Frank Spector; nee Benson) 188 

Spector, Frank 86 

Spector, Rose 200 

Spindel, Blanche (Mrs. Mitchell Spindel;nee Zwillinger)___ 191-193 (testimony) 

Stalin, Josef (losif Vissarionovlch Dzhugashvili) 63, 66, 67 

Stevenson, Janet 189 

Stone, W. H 92 

T 
Taylor, William (Bill) 57, 59, 140 

Toledano, Vicente Lombardo. (See Lombardo Toledano, Vicente.) 

Travis, Robert C ._ 195, 196 

W 
Warren, Stafford L 116 

Weingast, Helen K. (Mrs. Sol Weingast; nee Kurst) 94-96 (testimony) 

Wheeler, William A 116 

Wilkinson, Frank 86, 87, 204 

Willett, Betty (Naomi) (Mrs. George Lawrence Willett) 105, 

184, 185-191 (testimony) 

Wilson, Dagmar (Mrs. Christopher Bernard Wilson; nee Saerschinger) 188 

Worrell, Claude V 105, 125, 146, 220 

Y 
Yee, Eleanor 138 

Z 
-Zwolinski, Reva (Mrs. Eugene Zwolinski; nee Mucha) 83 

ORGANIZATIONS 

A 

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). {See also Student Civil Liberties 
Union) 154 

(American) Committee for Protection of Foreign Born 171 

American Friends Service Committee. {See Religious Society of Friends.) 
American Russian Institute (for Cultural Relations with the Soviet Union).. 83 

American Youth for Democracy 109 



iv INDEX 

B Page- 
Bethlehem Steel Co. (Vernon, Calif.) 133 

C 

California Democratic Council. {See Democratic Party, California Demo- 
cratic Council.) 

Citizens Committee for Constitutional Liberties (CCCL) 197, 199 

Citizens Committee To Preserve American Freedoms (CCPAF) 204, 218 

Comite Pro Libertades Constitucionales. {See eatvy under Constitutional 
Liberties Information Center.) 

Communist Party of the United States of America 59, 73^ 

National Structure: 

National Committee 62-69, 123, 140-143, 197 

Executive Committee 68, 69, 72, 74, 190 

National Conventions and Conferences 

Sixteenth Convention, February 9-12 1957, New York City.. 63, 66, 67 
Seventeenth Convention, December 10-13, 1959, New York City., 58 
62, 64, 66-69, 75, 80, 82, 86, 93, 141-143, 172 
Districts: 

Southern California District 53-219 

District Structure: 

Coordinating Councils 60 

District Committee 58, 59, 93, 94, 99, 109, 140, 155 

Executive Board.. 56, 57, 59, 61-63, 65, 70, 78, 115, 144 

District Council {see also District Committee) 57, 

58, 90, 94, 141, 160, 165, 168, 172, 181 
District Commissions: 

Education Commission 58, 81 

Labor Commission 58 

Mexican Commission 57, 78 

Minorities Commission 58 

Negro Commission 57, 90, 140 

Press Commission 57, 58 

Political Commission 58, 78 

Youth Commission 57, 

78, 109, 110, 112, 114, 115, 119, 128 
District Conventions and Conferences: 

First Convention, April 13-14, 1957, Los Angeles, Calif. 56, 

67, 109 
Second Convention, November 20-22, 1959 and January 

29-31, 1960, Los Angeles, Calif 58, 

60-83, 86, 90, 93, 96, 98, 99, 109, 114, 115, 117, 128, 
139-144, 151, 160, 172, 179, 184, 187, 190, 209, 213. 

Committee on Constitution and Organization 65, 67 

Pre-Convention Committee on Constitution, Orga- 
nization, and Bj'-Laws 63, 65, 67 

Bay Cities Section 57, 59 

Beverly-Fairfax Section 57, 59, 65 

Club No. 2 65, 66 

West Pico Club 65 

Boyle Heights Section 59 

Boyle Heights-City Terrace Section 57 

Building Trades Section 57, 59 

Centinella or 46th Assembly District Section (Los Angeles 

County) 57, 59 

City Terrace Section 59 

City Terrace Club 147 

Compton Section 57, 59, 16S, 179, 182 

Conpton Club 104, 133, 167, 188 

Whittier Club 179, 182 

Cultural Section 57 

Cultural and Professional Section 59, 72, 73, 79, 80 

Cultural Club 73 

Echo Park Section 57, 183, 184, 215, 216 

Convention, 1960... 187 

PJcho Park Club 187 

Gomez Club 184 



INDEX V 

Communist Party of the United States of America — Continued 
Districts — Continued 

Southern California District — Continued Page 

Far East Section 59 

Fifty-seventh Assembly District Section 57 

Fifty-eighth Assembly District Section 57 

Harbor Section 57 

Industrial and Miscellaneous Section 57 

Juarez Section : 59 

Long Beach Section 59 

May Day Committee 117, 183 

Mexican caucus 147 

Miscellaneous Trade Unions Section 59 

Monterey Park Section 59 

Moranda Smith Section 57, 59, 140, 209 

West Adams Club 209 

Needle Trades Section 57, 59 

Orange County Section 57 

Pasadena Section 57, 59 

Professional Section 57 

Professional and Cultural Section. (See Cultural and Pro- 
fessional Section.) 
San Bernardino County and Riverside County Section-. 57, 93, 96 

San Diego County Section 57, 59 

San Gabriel Valley Section 57, 59, 160, 213, 214 

Silverlake Section 57 

Twenty-fourth Congressional District Section 59 

Valley Section 59, 155, 165 

Valley 21st Section (21st Congressional District) 57 

Valley 22nd Section (22nd Congressional District) 57 

Ventura-Santa Barbara Section 57 

Western Section 181 

Whittier Section 57, 179 

Youth Clubs 115 

Youth Club, Los Angeles County 110 

Zapata Section 192 

Joe Hill Club 192 

Juarez Club 78 

States and Territories: 
California : 

Convention, January 19-20, 1957, Los Angeles, Calif 56 

Los Angeles County 56, 154, 155 

Convention, January 5-6, 1957 (Los Angeles, Calif.). 56, 184 

San Diego County 60 

San Gabriel Valley 213 

Ohio 197 

Communist Political Association (May 1944 to July 1945) 96 

States: 

California : 

San Gabriel Valley Club 160 

Constitutional Liberties Information Center 83, 195-198 

Comite Pro Libertades Constitucionales 199 

D 
Democratic Party, California: 

California Democratic Council 173-175 

Los Angeles: 

Baldwin Gardens: 

Political Action Committee 210 

E 
Emma Lazarus Jewish Women's Clubs, Los Angeles 192 



vi INDEX 



F Page- 
Fair Play for Cuba Committee 83, 85, 100, 204 

Greater Los Angeles Chapter 83, 84, 99, 173, 204, 205, 214, 215 

First Unitarian Chnrch (Los Angeles). (See Unitarian Church, First.) 

Freed's Launderette (Los Angeles, Calif.) 176- 

G 

Gordon Book Shop. (See Hugh H. Gordon Bookshop.) 

H 

Help Establish Lasting Peace (HELP) 117, 144, 204 

Helsinki Organizing Committee for the Eighth World Youth Festival. 

(See entry under World Youth Festivals, Eighth World Youth Festival.) 
Hugh H. Gordon Bookshop (Los Angeles, Calif.) (also known as Gordon 

Book Shop) 86 



Independent Progressive Party. (See Progressive Party, California.) 

Independent Student Union 119, 122-124, 129,202,204 

International Labor Defense 154 

International Union of Students (lUS) (see also World Youth Festivals)-. 110 
International Workers Order 171 

J 

Jewish Peoples Fraternal Order, International Workers Order 171 

L 
Labor Youth League 109, 110, 133, 171 

Latin American Conference for National Sovereignty, Economic Emanci- 
pation and Peace, March 5-8, 1961 (Mexico Citv) 215' 

Los Angeles City College (Los Angeles, Cahf.) 121, 122, 127 

Los Angeles City Government, Board of Education 138, 144 

Los Angeles Committee for Protection of Foreign Born 82, 189, 199 

Eleventh Annual Conference, March 25, 1961, Los Angeles 199,200 

Twelfth Annual Conference, March 31, 1962, Los Angeles 200 

Los Angeles County Heart Association 218 

Los Angeles Fair Play for Cuba Committee. (See Fair Play for Cuba 
Committee, Greater Los Angeles Chapter.) 

Los Angeles Sobell Youth Committee 127 

Los Angeles Youth for Peace and Socialism 124 

M 
Methodist Church 190 

Mica Corp. (Culver City, Calif.) 209 

Mike Quin Student Communist Club. (See entry under University of 
California (Los Angeles) (U.C.L.A.).) 

N 

National Assembly for Democratic Rights (Sept. 23-24, 1961, New York 

City) 194, 195, 197, 198: 

National Committee To Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case : 

Los Angeles Committee To Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case 193 

National Institutes of Health 219 

National Negro Labor Council, Los Angeles Chapter 213. 



Political Action Committee of the Baldwin Gardens Democratic Club. 

(See entry under Democratic Party, Cahfornia.) 
Progressive Book Shop, Los Angeles 86 



INDEX vii 

Progressive Partv: Page 

California (Independent Progressive Party) 15G, 161, 213, 214 

Central Committee 94 

San Gabriel Club 213 

West Adams Club 209 

R 
Religious Societ}- of Friends, American Friends Service Committee 190 

S 

Socialist Workers Party 85 

Southern California Committee for the People's World 74 

Student Civil Liberties Union 122 

Student Peace Union 203 

T 
Twentieth Century Fox Studios. 121 

U 

Unitarian Church, First (Los Angeles) 85-87 

United States Festival Committee. {See entrv under World Youth 
Festival, Eighth Youth Festival, July 29-August 6, 1962, Helsinki, 
Finland.) 
U.S. Government: 

Justice Department: 

Immigration and Naturalization Service 171, 174, 206 

Subversive Activities Control Board 59, 72, 73 

University of Cahfornia (Berkeley): 

Engineering Department 122 

University of California (Los Angeles) (UCLA) 107, 133, 218 

Mike Quin Student Communist Club 133 

Preventive Medicine Department 107, 116, 219, 220 

W 

Walter Reception Committee 118, 123, 129, 130, 202 

Western Auto Association (Los Angeles, Calif.) 215 

Women Strike for Peace (also referred to as Women's International Strike 
for Peace) : 

Los Angeles 105, 129, 165, 173, 184, 189, 192, 193,203,207 

Washington office r 188 

Workers Alliance of America 155 

World Federation of Democratic Youth (WFDY) 110 

World Youth Festivals: 

Seventh Youth Festival, Julv 26-August 4, 1959, Vienna, Austria 110 

Eighth Youth Festival, Julv 29-August 6, 1962, Helsinki, Finland ._ 110-114, 

124, 205, 217, 220 
Helsinki Organizing Committee for the Eighth World Youth 

Festival 111 

Los Angeles Festival Committee 111, 112, 124, 220 

United States Festival Committee (1961-62) 112, 124 

Y 
Young Communist League 56 

Youth for Peace and SociaUsm. {See Los Angeles Youth for Peace and 
Socialism.) 

PUBLICATIONS 

People's World 68, 69, 72-74 

Worker, The 68, 72, 73 

O 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 9999 05706 3107 



c