[107 Senate Committee Prints]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
S. Prt. 107-84
EXECUTIVE SESSIONS OF THE SENATE
PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INVESTIGATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE
ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
=======================================================================
VOLUME 3
__________
EIGHTY-THIRD CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
1953
MADE PUBLIC JANUARY 2003
Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs
________
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
83-871 WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
107th Congress, Second Session
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan FRED THOMPSON, Tennessee
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TED STEVENS, Alaska
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
MAX CLELAND, Georgia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah
MARK DAYTON, Minnesota JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois
Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Staff Director and Counsel
Richard A. Hertling, Minority Staff Director
Darla D. Cassell, Chief Clerk
------
PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Chairman
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois TED STEVENS, Alaska
ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
MAX CLELAND, Georgia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah
MARK DAYTON, Minnesota JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois
Elise J. Bean, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Kim Corthell, Minority Staff Director
Mary D. Robertson, Chief Clerk
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
83rd Congress, First Session
JOSEPH R. McCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, Minnesota
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
EVERETT McKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan ALTON A. LENNON, North Carolina
Francis D. Flanagan, Chief Counsel
Walter L. Reynolds, Chief Clerk
------
PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
JOSEPH R. McCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas \1\
EVERETT McKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington \1\
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri \1\
Roy M. Cohn, Chief Counsel
Francis P. Carr, Executive Director
Ruth Young Watt, Chief Clerk
assistant counsels
Robert F. Kennedy Donald A. Surine
Thomas W. La Venia Jerome S. Adlerman
Donald F. O'Donnell C. George Anastos
Daniel G. Buckley
investigators
Robert J. McElroy
Herbert S. Hawkins James N. Juliana
G. David Schine, Chief Consultant
Karl H. W. Baarslag, Director of Research
Carmine S. Bellino, Consulting Accountant
La Vern J. Duffy, Staff Assistant
----------
\1\ The Democratic members were absent from the subcommittee from
July 10, 1953 to January 25, 1954.
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Volume 3
Security--United Nations, September 14........................... 1807
Testimony of Julius Reiss; and Florence Englander.
Security--United Nations, September 15........................... 1833
Testimony of Paul Crouch; Dimitri Varley; Abraham Unger; and
Alice Ehrenfeld.
Security--United Nations, September 16........................... 1877
Testimony of Frank Cerny; and Helen Matousek.
Security--United Nations, September 17........................... 1889
Testimony of Abraham Unger; Vachel Lofek; and David M.
Freedman.
Communist Infiltration in the Army, September 21................. 1899
Testimony of Igor Bogolepov; Vladimir Petrov; Gen. Richard C.
Partridge; and Samuel McKee.
Communist Infiltration in the Army, September 23................. 1913
Testimony of Louis Budenz; Harriett Moore Gelfan; and Corliss
Lamont.
Korean War Atrocities, October 6................................. 1923
Testimony of Edward J. Lyons, Jr.; Lt. Col. Lee H. Kostora;
Maj. James Kelleher; Lt. Col. J. W. Whitehorne, III; Gen.
Fenn; and John Adams.
Korean War Atrocities, October 31................................ 1943
Korean War Atrocities, November 30............................... 1965
Testimony of 1st Lt. Henry J. McNichols, Jr.; Sgt. Barry F.
Rhoden; Capt. Linton J. Buttrey; Sgt. Carey H. Weinel; Col.
James M. Hanley; Pfc. John E. Martin; Capt. Alexander G.
Makarounis.
Korean War Atrocities, December 1................................ 2043
Testimony of Lt. Col. John W. Gorn; Lt. Col. James T. Rogers;
Cpl. Lloyd D. Kreider; Sgt. Robert L. Sharps; William L.
Milano; Sgt. Wendell Treffery; Sgt. George J. Matta; Cpl.
Willie L. Daniels; Sgt. John L. Watters, Jr.; Sgt. Orville
R. Mullins; and Donald R. Brown.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 8........... 2119
Statements of Paul Siegel; Jerome Corwin; Allen J.
Lovenstein; Edward J. Fister; William P. Goldberg; and
Jerome Rothstein.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 9........... 2201
Statements of Alan Sterling Gross; Dr. Fred B. Daniels;
Bernard Lipel; James Evers; Sol Bremmer; Murray Miller;
Sherwood Leeds; Paul M. Leeds.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 12.......... 2275
Statements of Louis Volp; William Patrick Lonnie; Henry F.
Burkhard; Marcel Ullmann; and Herbert F. Hecker.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 12.......... 2303
Testimony of Marcel Ullmann; Morris Keiser; Seymour
Rabinowitz; Rudolph C. Riehs; and Carl Greenblum.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 13.......... 2329
Testimony of Joseph Levitsky; William Ludwig Ullman; Bernard
Martin; Louis Kaplan; Harry Donohue; Jack Frolow; Bernard
Lewis; and Craig Crenshaw.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 14.......... 2389
Testimony of Harold Ducore; Aaron H. Coleman; Samuel
Pomerentz; and Haym G. Yamins.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 14.......... 2457
Testimony of Harold Ducore; Jack Okun; and Maj. Gen. Kirke B.
Lawton.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 15.......... 2487
Testimony of Vivian Glassman Pataki; Eleanor Glassman Hutner;
Samuel I. Greenman; Ira J. Katchen; Max Elitcher; Eugene E.
Hutner; Col. John V. Mills; Maj. James J. Gallagher; Marcel
Ullmann; Benjamin Zuckerman; and Benjamin Bookbinder.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 16.......... 2563
Testimony of Maj. Gen. Kirke Lawton; Maj. Gen George I. Back;
Maj. Jenista; Col. Ferry; John Pernice; Karl Gerhard; Carl
Greenblum; Markus Epstein; and Leo M. Miller.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 17.......... 2625
Testimony of Alfred C. Walker; Joseph Levitsky; and Louis
Antell.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 22.......... 2649
Testimony of Fred Joseph Kitty; Jack Okun; Aaron Coleman; and
Barry S. Bernstein.
Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 22.......... 2697
Testimony of Benjamin Wolman, Harvey Sachs, Leonard E. Mins,
and Sylvia Berke.
SECURITY--UNITED NATIONS
[Editor's note.--With the Senate Internal Security
Subcommittee already conducting an investigation of American
Communist infiltration of the United Nations, the Permanent
Subcommittee on Investigations confined its inquiry to ``an
employee of the United Nations not attached to that part of the
United Nations scrutinized by the Internal Security
Subcommittee.'' Julius Reiss (1907-1979) was an American
employed by the Polish Delegation to the United Nations. He had
also been an instructor for the U.S. Army during the Second
World War. In both this executive session and in a public
session on September 17, 1953, Reiss declined to answer
questions relating to Communist party membership and
activities. Florence Englander (1907-1981), who also testified
on September 14, did not testify in public.]
----------
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met at 10:40 a.m., in room 128 of the
United States Court House, Foley Square, Senator Joseph R.
McCarthy, presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Francis P. Carr, executive director; Roy M.
Cohn, chief counsel; G. David Schine, chief consultant; Baline
Sloan, member, Legal Department, U.N.
The Chairman. Mr. Remes, will you stand and be sworn.
Mr. Reiss. My name is Reiss.
The Chairman. In this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, nothing but
the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Reiss. I do.
TESTIMONY OF JULIUS REISS (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, ROYAL W.
FRANCE)
Mr. Cohn. Can we get the name of counsel for the record.
Mr. France. Royal W. France, 104 East 40th Street.
Mr. Reiss. Excuse me, sir. I didn't quite get the name you
used when you asked me.
The Chairman. You give us your name, will you?
Mr. Reiss. Julius Reiss.
Mr. Cohn. What is your address, sir?
Mr. Reiss. 741 Westminister Road, Brooklyn, New York.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you employed?
Mr. Reiss. At the Polish Delegation to the United Nations.
Mr. Cohn. What is that address?
Mr. Reiss. 151 East 62 Street.
The Chairman. I wonder if you would try and speak louder,
please.
Mr. Reiss. 161 East 62 Street. New York City.
Mr. Cohn. And what is the telephone up there?
Well, that is all right. Let me ask you this, sir. For how
long a period of time have you been employed at the Polish
Delegation to the United Nations?
Mr. Reiss. Approximately three years.
Mr. Cohn. Approximately three years?
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, you went there in 1950, is that
right?
Mr. Reiss. At the end of 1950 sometime.
Mr. Cohn. End of ?
Mr. Reiss. Sometime.
Mr. Cohn. Will you just tell us generally what you do
there?
Mr. Reiss. I am a documentation clerk.
Mr. Cohn. What does that mean?
Mr. Reiss. I handle United Nations documents, file them. I
make abstracts, digests of them. I handle press end periodicals
and books and do research in the press, periodicals and books.
Mr. Cohn. Did you generally work along those lines?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Is your salary paid by the Polish Delegation?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What is your salary?
Mr. Reiss. It is about $3900 a year. I think about $325 a
month.
Mr. Cohn. Is that net of taxes or----
Mr. Reiss. That is before taxes.
Mr. Cohn. What do you do, pay your own income tax?
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Is that reimbursed to you in any way by----
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, you are paid a straight salary?
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You are. Are you paid in United States currency?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What did you do immediately prior to going with
the Polish Delegation?
Mr. Reiss. Directly prior to that?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Reiss. I was out of work.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time? Just
approximately?
Mr. Reiss. May I ask my counsel a question?
Mr. Cohn. Sure, you can ask your counsel anything you want.
Mr. Reiss. I think it may have been about two months or so.
Two or more, I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. Directly prior to that, what did you do?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds of the Fifth
Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. On the grounds the answer may tend to incriminate
you, on the Fifth Amendment?
Mr. Reiss. On the grounds the answer may tend to
incriminate me, on the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time will you claim a
privilege as to your employment? In other words, we are back to
two months prior to the time you went with the Polish
Delegation.
You can consult with counsel if you want. I don't want to
go back month after month.
Mr. Reiss. I think back to about 1935.
Mr. Cohn. Back to 1935?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever worked for the United States
government?
Mr. Reiss. I was in the army.
Mr. Cohn. As a soldier?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. During what years?
Mr. Reiss. 1942 to 1945.
Mr. Cohn. Did you serve in this country and overseas?
Mr. Reiss. Just in this country.
Mr. Cohn. Just in this country. Where were you stationed?
Mr. Reiss. I was stationed in Aberdeen, Maryland.
Mr. Cohn. Aberdeen, Maryland?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Aberdeen Proving Ground?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir. It had nothing to do with it.
Mr. Cohn. What was the particular assignment in the army
that you had?
Mr. Reiss. I was--I taught pedagogy.
Mr. Cohn. You taught pedagogy in the army?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. What the hell is that?
Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. Would you expand on that just for a
little bit?
Mr. Reiss. Yes. You have a lot of men who went through
cadre school and who you had to teach how to repair machine
guns and ammunition clerical work and so forth. They had to
teach. Well, I taught these men the technique of teaching.
Nothing to do with the material.
Mr. Cohn. I understand.
Mr. Reiss. Just the pure technique.
Mr. Cohn. All right, now, are you today a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Have you--in 1950, were you secretary of the
National Youth Commission of the Communist party of the United
States?
Mr. Reiss. May I consult with my counsel?
I refuse to answer on the grounds previously stated.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been known by the name of Julius
Remes?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been assistant editor of the
Political Affairs Monthly, theoretical publication of the
Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer, on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr Cohn. Have you been a paid functionary of the Communist
party of the United States?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Have you served on the enlarged National
Committee of the Communist party of the United States?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Do you contribute any of the salary that you
receive now to the Communist party?
You can consult with counsel any time you want.
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You do not?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you contribute any money to the Communist
party of the United States?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You do not. Did you ever?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Did you last year?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever taught at the Jefferson School?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Now, were you in 1937 and 1938 an organizer for
the Communist party in Michigan and Louisiana?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Is it a fact that when you went to--is it not a
fact that when you joined the Polish Delegation to the United
Nations, became associated with it, you were instructed by the
Communist party not to continue in open association with the
party but to go in the underground?
Do you want to read that back, if the witness has
difficulty understanding the question?
[Question read.]
Mr. Cohn. Again, I say--I see you hesitate--you can consult
with counsel any time you want.
Mr. Schine. Proceed.
Mr. Reiss. I am just thinking.
Mr. Cohn. What?
Mr. Reiss. Thinking.
Mr. Cohn. Are you prepared to answer?
Mr. Reiss. I am just thinking for a minute.
Mr. Cohn. You want to think for a minute?
Mr. Reiss. Just for a minute.
Mr. Cohn. Oh, sure. Take all the time you want.
Mr. Reiss. Could I smoke?
Mr. Cohn. Oh, certainly.
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. That is not true. Do you know a man by the name
of Andy Remes?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. He is your brother, is he not?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Can you tell us whether or not he is in the
Communist party underground?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Can you state where he is today?
The Chairman. May I interrupt, Mr. Counsel? I do not
believe he can refuse to answer as to personal relationship,
whether he is his brother or not.
Mr. Cohn. All right.
Mr. Reiss. I can't refuse?
The Chairman. Uh-huh.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have any brothers?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the same grounds.
The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, I think that the chair will
order the witness to answer. There can be nothing incriminating
about the fact he has or has not brothers.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever worked for----
The Chairman. He was ordered to answer the question.
Mr. Cohn. I am sorry. You were directed to answer the
question as to whether or not you have any brothers.
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You do have brothers. How many?
Mr. Reiss. Living?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Reiss. Two.
Mr. Cohn. And what are their first names?
Yes, sir?
Mr. Reiss. I was asked the question before and I refused to
answer.
The Chairman. I understand the witness refuses to answer as
to the names of his brothers.
Mr. Reiss. Sir----
The Chairman. I think in view of the fact----
Mr. Reiss. No, sir, I am just thinking.
Mr. Cohn. He is just hesitating.
The Chairman. Oh.
Mr. Cohn. Senator McCarthy, this is Mr. Sloan.
The Chairman. I am glad to know you, Mr. Sloan.
Mr. Sloan. How do you do, sir. I am just here as an
observer.
The Chairman. I understand. You are not responsible for
anything we do here.
Mr. Reiss. Well, I have one brother whom I haven't seen for
many years.
Mr. Cohn. What is his first name?
Mr. Reiss. Many years. Solomon Reiss.
Mr. Cohn. What about the other brother? What is his name?
And Solomon, what is his last name?
Mr. Reiss. Reiss.
Mr. Cohn. Reiss, yes. And what is your other brother's
first name, Mr. Reiss? Sir?
Mr. Reiss. I have a--yes.
Mr. Cohn. What is his first name?
Mr. Reiss. Andrew Remes.
Mr. Cohn. Andrew Remes?
Mr. Reiss. His legal name.
Mr. Cohn. His legal name?
Mr. Reiss. His legal name as far as I know.
Mr. Cohn. Where is your brother?
Mr. Reiss. May I just--Mr.----
Mr. Cohn. Sure.
Mr. Reiss. On purely--well, I hesitated speaking--may I say
this and then can I stop, and then I will repeat the same thing
word for word to----
Mr. Cohn. You want to say something off the record?
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Go ahead.
[Discussion off the record.]
The Chairman. Have the record show the witness, on his own
request, was allowed to give the committee some information off
the record. He desires not to have it on the record. It will
not be on the record in this case; but this will be the only
case in which we will go off the record.
Mr. Reiss. Thank you very much.
Mr. Cohn. Where is your brother, Andrew Remes, now?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. When did you see him last?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Is it not a fact he is a member of the Communist
underground and out of circulation at the moment?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds stated.
Mr. Cohn. Now, you draw any pay from the Communist party at
this time?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have any identification entitling you to
admission to the United Nations zone and grounds and building?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir. I have an identification card.
Mr. Cohn. Could we examine that, please?
Mr. Reiss. I do not have it with me.
Mr. Cohn. You haven't got it with you?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do your duties ever take you over to the United
Nations building?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, of course.
Mr. Cohn. About how frequently?
Mr. Reiss. There is no regularity involved. I may go down
three times in one week. I think in the last three months I
have been down there--I really don't know--maybe once or twice.
Mr. Cohn. It hasn't been in session a good deal of the
time.
Mr. Reiss. But I don't go down there just during sessions.
Mr. Cohn. When you go down there, do you confer with
various people?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You do. Now, do you know any member--do you know
any persons employed by the secretariat of the United Nations?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know any American citizens employed by the
secretariat?
Mr. Reiss. I know some people there.
Mr. Cohn. Could you name the ones you know?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know any Americans employed by the United
Nations secretariat who are members of the Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
The Chairman. May I just ask a couple of questions?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
The Chairman. Do you believe that the Communist party is
dedicated to the overthrow of this government by force and
violence?
Mr. Reiss. I do not.
The Chairman. You do?
Mr. Reiss. I do not.
The Chairman. You do not. Let me ask you the question again
in a slightly different form. Do you believe it is dedicated--
strike that.
Do you believe the Communist party is dedicated to the
overthrow of this government by force and violence if a
Communist government cannot be imposed on this nation by
peaceful means?
Mr. Reiss. Will you repeat that, please?
Mr. Cohn. Would you read it?
[Question read.]
Mr. Reiss. Seems to me that the answer to that was embraced
in the question that I just answered.
The Chairman. I am going to ask you to answer this
question. It is in slightly different form.
Mr. Reiss. Uh-huh!
Mr. France. Do you understand the question?
Mr. Reiss. It is a question of some difficulty for me to
grasp. I am not quite sure.
Mr. France. I wonder if the----
Mr. Cohn. I don't agree with that. You have taught at the
Workers School, haven't you?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. You have taught courses in Marxism and Leninism.
You can answer the question.
The Chairman. It is a very simple question. You can take
all the time you want, but it is a question I am going to order
you to answer.
Mr. France. Would you like the question repeated?
Mr. Reiss. No.
The Chairman. If you want the question read again, you may
have it read to you.
Mr. Reiss. Would you read the question to me?
[Question read.]
Mr. Cohn. Is that so difficult?
The Chairman. I will be back in a minute. Let the witness
think it over, and I will be back.
Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir.
[Whereupon, the chairman withdrew from the hearing room.]
Mr. Cohn. Do you want to answer?
Mr. Reiss. I will, yes.
Mr. Cohn. You are still meditating?
Mr. Reiss. Yes. Not as easy as it sounds. Do you mean----
[Whereupon, the chairman returned to the hearing room.]
Mr. Cohn. He is still thinking. Still thinking of the
answer to that question. Huh.
Mr. Reiss. You see, I am trying to envision the possible
circumstances involved in this question.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this preliminary question.
The Chairman. I think he should answer now.
Mr. Cohn. I want to know how much they paid you at the
Workers School to teach Marxism and Leninism.
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated. I have been trying to envision the possible
circumstances under which that question would arise and----
The Chairman. We will give you until 2:30 this afternoon
and you think it over and----
Mr. Reiss. I can answer.
Mr. Cohn. We have other witnesses and can't sit here all
day for you to think it out.
Mr. Reiss. I think my attorney won't be here, and I would
like to answer the question now.
Mr. Cohn. We will have to have you back this afternoon
anyway.
The Chairman. Okay. If he wants to answer now----
Mr. Reiss. If I have to be back this afternoon, I will wait
until this afternoon.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this question. Who obtained your
job for you at the Polish Delegation to the United Nations?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Was that obtained for you through the
intercession of the American Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Was it obtained by you--for you through the
intercession of any functionary of the American Communist
party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer.
The Chairman. Was there anything illegal in connection with
your obtaining that job, as far as you know?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
The Chairman. Was--to your knowledge, did you do anything
in connection with your obtaining that job that was either
directly or indirectly in violation of the laws of the United
States?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
The Chairman. You are then ordered to answer the question
propounded by counsel. If there was nothing illegal in
connection with your getting the job, if you are guilty of no
illegal activities in connection with your getting the job, you
are not entitled to the privilege under the Fifth Amendment, so
you answer the question.
You can discuss the matter with counsel at any time you
care to, Mr.----
Mr. Cohn. Sir?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer.
Mr. Cohn. Now.
The Chairman. Have the record show--I believe it is clear,
and if I am incorrect in this, counsel, you correct me. I
believe the record now shows the witness has stated that he is
aware of nothing illegal in connection with his obtaining the
job, that he feels he does not know of any law of the United
States which he violated either directly or indirectly in
obtaining the job. Have the record show that after that
appeared I turned and ordered the witness to answer; that the
witness consulted with counsel and has again refused to answer
the question.
We will let you go until 2:30 this afternoon. We had hoped
to finish up with your testimony this morning, but it has taken
so much time to get answers to very, very simple questions from
you that we will have to let you go now and take some of the
other witnesses whom we promised to handle this morning.
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. 2:30 this afternoon, and in case we are late
in that, we have other matters which we have to take care of,
you will be instructed to wait until we get to you.
Mr. Cohn. I would like to have you answer one last
question. I don't know whether I asked it before or not. Did
you work for Abraham Unger in 1950?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Did you--were you engaged in any activities
connected with the defense of the indicted Communist leaders?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer.
Mr. Cohn. Were you paid money for those activities by the
Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer.
Mr. Cohn. Okay.
Mr. France. It appears that all these refusals are based on
the same reason as before.
Mr. Cohn. The answers--the ground the answers might tend to
incriminate him.
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
The Chairman. Yes. I think, just off the record----
[Discussion off the record.]
Mr. Reiss. I should like to state that all my refusals have
been on the basis of my privilege under the Fifth Amendment to
the Constitution.
[Witness excused.]
TESTIMONY OF FLORENCE ENGLANDER
The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand.
This matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, so
help you God?
Miss Englander. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Could we have your full name?
Miss Englander. Florence Englander.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you employed?
Miss Englander. At the United Nations.
Mr. Cohn. In what capacity?
Miss Englander. My title is social affairs officer.
Mr. Cohn. Social affairs officer. And for how long a period
of time have you been employed at the United Nations?
Miss Englander. Exactly seven years.
Mr. Cohn. Seven years?
Miss Englander. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What is your salary?
Miss Englander. I think it is $6200. I am not exactly sure.
Mr. Cohn. Is that net of taxes?
Miss Englander. That is my gross salary.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been a member of the Communist
party?
Miss Englander. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. During what years?
Miss Englander. I think 1935 to 1940.
Mr. Cohn. 1935 to 1940?
Miss Englander. Yes. The----
Mr. Cohn. Did you have any associations with the Communist
party after 1940?
Miss Englander. None at all.
Mr. Cohn. None whatsoever?
Miss Englander. None whatsoever.
Mr. Cohn. Have you had any association with any Communists
since 1940?
Miss Englander. On one occasion.
Mr. Cohn. What was the name of that Communist?
Miss Englander. Louise Schatz.
Mr COHN. Will you spell that?
Miss Englander. S-c-h-a-t-z.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Miss Englander. In 1940. Well, she mentioned to me in
1947----
Mr. Cohn. What was the nature of your association with her?
Miss Englander. Well, I didn't know at the time, you see,
we shared an apartment together, and one day she just felt
inclined to tell me this.
Mr. Cohn. With that one exception, have there been any
other Communists with whom you have been associated?
The Chairman. May I interrupt off the record?
[Discussion off the record.]
Mr. Cohn. Will you be back at 3:30?
Miss Englander. Here?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
[Witness excused.]
[Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m. a recess was taken until 2:30
p.m.]
afternoon session
[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m. this day, the hearing was resumed
pursuant to the taking of the recess.]
TESTIMONY OF JULIUS REISS (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, ROYAL W.
FRANCE) (RESUMED)
Mr. Reiss. Mr. Senator, I would like to make a statement.
The Chairman. Will you please try to speak louder?
Mr. Reiss. I would like to make a statement on one of the
questions I answered this morning.
The Chairman. You may.
Mr. Reiss. I would like that answer, that I did not know
anything illegal about my appointment--I wish to make it clear
that I know of nothing illegal about an American citizen
obtaining a position with any delegation to the United Nations
and in so stating, I did not state that discussions of any
associations which may have led to my being recommended to the
Polish Delegation might not tend to incriminate me, and that
was the basis for my refusing to answer, as to who recommended
me.
The Chairman. I don't understand. I frankly don't
understand what you said at all.
Mr. Reiss. I can just repeat it.
The Chairman. Read it a little louder.
Mr. Cohn. Let's see if I can explain it off the record.
The Chairman. Let's take it on the record. Everything
should be on the record.
Mr. Cohn. All right.
Is this what you are trying to say, that you did state
there was nothing illegal about your obtaining employment, the
manner in which you obtained it, or about your continuing the
employment, you said in your knowledge, you had no knowledge
about anything illegal; but you went on and claimed a Fifth
Amendment privilege on whether or not your job was obtained for
you by a top functionary of the American Communist party. You
are now saying your claiming of the privilege as to which
individual got the job for you and what discussion preceded
getting the job was not meant in any way to indicate there was
anything illegal about your obtaining the job. You decline to
answer who got the job for you because of the possibility of
Communist associations tending to incriminate you; is that
substantially accurate?
You may confer with counsel.
Mr. France. May I make a statement?
The position that the witness takes is, as I understand it,
that in stating that he knew nothing illegal about his being
appointed as an employee of the Polish Delegation, he did not
state that there might not have been recommendations made which
would involve associations which might tend to incriminate him
and, therefore, when the question came about the
recommendations, he felt that that was a different question.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this question: Do you know of
anything illegal on your part in connection with your getting
this job--any illegal activities on your part, not on the part
of someone else?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the ground of the Fifth
Amendment.
The Chairman. Do you feel that if you told the truth, that
answer might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Reiss. I think that in the light of the----
The Chairman. Will you try to speak louder? I can't----
Mr. Reiss. Yes, in the light of the situation and the
connotations thereof, I would have to refuse to answer on the
ground that it might tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. The question is, are you refusing because you
think a truthful answer might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Reiss. No. I would like to repeat the answer that in
the light of the present general political situation I feel
that any answer that I might give might tend to incriminate or
degrade me.
The Chairman. You will not be allowed the privilege under
those circumstances. If you say any answer, that means you
commit perjury. You know that. The question is: Do you think
that a truthful answer to the question would tend to
incriminate you?
Mr. Reiss. I say that in the answer--that I included in the
answer the idea of the truth of the answer.
The Chairman. I can't hear.
Mr. Reiss. I say that I included the idea of the truthful
answer.
The Chairman. I am asking the question: Do you feel that a
truthful answer would tend to incriminate you? The answer is
yes or no.
Mr. Reiss. I think that as I said before, that the answer
might tend to incriminate me under present circumstances.
The Chairman. A truthful answer.
Mr. Reiss. That a truthful answer might tend to incriminate
me under the present circumstances.
The Chairman. Then you are entitled to the privilege.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Reiss, may I ask you this?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You are employed by the----
The Chairman. Can I ask one question?
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
The Chairman. What was your baptismal name?
Mr. Reiss. Julius Reiss.
The Chairman. Julius Reiss?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. I believe you refused to answer this
question, I am not sure. Did you later change your name to Joel
Remes?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer.
The Chairman. Has Julius Reiss always been your legal name?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Pardon me.
Mr. Cohn. Joel Remes was and is your Communist party name,
is it not?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Now, sir, you work for the Polish Delegation.
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. The Polish government is of course under
Communist domination today; is that correct? That is a
historical fact, is it not?
Mr. Reiss. I would like to ask a question: what you mean by
Communist?
Mr. Cohn. What do you think?
Mr. Reiss. As far as I know, there is a legally elected
government.
Mr. Cohn. I see.
Mr. Reiss. In which members of the Communist party
represent, and I think also other parties. I can't remember the
names exactly, but there are other parties.
Mr. Cohn. I see.
The Chairman. I just recall one of the reasons we gave this
morning for the recess was to let him consider his answer to
the question which had been propounded this morning. Have you
arrived at an answer to that yet?
Mr. Reiss. Could you repeat that?
Mr. France. Wants to know whether you are ready to answer.
The Chairman. The question was--I will re-ask the question.
Do you believe that the Communist party advocates the overthrow
of this government by force and violence if a Communist form of
government cannot be imposed upon this nation by peaceful
means?
Mr. Reiss. I said I do not feel that that question can be
answered yes or no. To discuss it would lead me into a long
discussion of Communist theory, which might involve questions
as to the basis of my knowledge or beliefs, and that might tend
to incriminate me. I also feel that that question that you ask
is outside the scope of the congressional committee, and in my
refusal to answer that question and other refusals, I invoke
the protection of the First and Fifth Amendments.
The Chairman. In other words, you refuse to answer on the
grounds that a truthful answer might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You are entitled to the privilege.
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Now, let me ask you this, Mr. Reiss: In your opinion, who
was responsible--who was the aggressor in the Korean War?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. I see. If you were called upon--If you had been
called upon during the Korean War to fight in opposition to the
Communist forces, would you have done so?
You can consult with counsel.
Mr. Reiss. I am an American citizen. I did serve before and
I think if called upon, I will naturally serve.
Mr. Cohn. Including bearing arms against the Communists?
Mr. Reiss. That would have been my--necessary under the
Constitution of the United States.
The Chairman. If you could try to speak up.
Mr. Reiss. I am sorry, sir.
The Chairman. I can't hear you.
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir. As I did previously in the other war,
I would have done it here.
The Chairman. In other words--if I may, counsel--do I
understand then that if today or tomorrow we get into a war
with Communist Russia and you were called upon to bear arms
against Communist Russia and fight for the United States, your
testimony is that you would do that?
Mr. Reiss. I am sorry, sir. Could you repeat that question
once more?
Mr. Cohn. Would you read the question?
[Question read.]
The Chairman. Note for the record that the witness consults
with counsel.
Mr. Reiss. Senator, it seems to me that involves a great
many hypothetical questions.
The Chairman. Uh-huh!
Mr. Reiss. But I think it is clear that since I am an
American citizen subject to the laws of the United States, if I
were called into the army of the United States and to serve in
it, I would have to do so.
The Chairman. Would you be willing to do so if we were
fighting Communist Russia?
Mr. Reiss. On the question, I am not sure I know what you
mean by the word ``willing.''
The Chairman. Would you refuse to do so?
Mr. Reiss. I have already stated if I were called upon to
enter the United States Army, I would do so.
The Chairman. Even if we were fighting Communist Russia?
Mr. Reiss. I believe that that, again I believe that
involves so many hypothetical questions as to a possible war
between the United States and Russia, a war which I certainly
do not hope will take place and which I personally feel
peaceful desires both of the United--American people and the
Russian people will prevent from coming into existence because
It would be certainly a disaster for the entire world. But I
think it is clear that if in the event of such a war as in the
case of a war against Germany, when I was drafted into the
army, I entered into the army and performed my duties. If I
were drafted into the army, I would perform my duties there.
Mr. Cohn. Do you believe in our form of government or do
you believe in communism?
Mr. Reiss. Seems to me that--is that one or two questions?
Mr. Cohn. Let's break it down. Do you believe in communism?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the basis of the Fifth
Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Do you believe in our form of government? Do you
believe in a capitalistic democracy?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the basis of the First and
Fifth Amendments.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Have you--when were you last in
consultation with any functionaries of the Communist party of
the United States?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated--on the ground of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Were you in consultation within the last six
weeks with any functionaries of the Communist party of the
United States concerning the forthcoming meetings of the United
Nations General Assembly?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Very specifically, within the last two weeks were
you in consultation with any functionaries of the Communist
party of the United States concerning the General Assembly of
the United Nations which was to commence this month?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Specifically, were you in consultation with any
functionaries of the American Communist party concerning the
formulation of policy concerning an issue which was to arise in
the General Assembly of the United Nations?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. I will ask the same question specifying were you
in consultation with functionaries of the American Communist
party concerning formulation of policy on the handling of the
Korean peace issue at the meeting of the General Assembly?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Now, have you ever been in Poland, by the way?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been abroad?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You have not. Now, let me ask you this question:
Do you know----
Mr. Reiss. May I interrupt?
Mr. Cohn. Yes, sure.
Mr. Reiss. When you say abroad, do you mean Canada, for
example?
Mr. Cohn. Any place outside the Continental United States.
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir. I was. I was in about 1925 or 1926. I
went to Canada.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever had any connection with the United
States Treasury Department in any way?
Mr. Reiss. United States Treasury Department? So far as I
know, no.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know William Z. Foster, national chairman
of the Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Have you held any position in the United States
government in any agency other than your army service at any
time?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Whether or not you ever worked for any agency of
the United States government? I don't understand that, you
refuse to answer that.
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What agency?
Mr. Reiss. I was on relief for WPA.
Mr. Cohn. You were on relief, drawing relief funds?
Mr. Reiss. Of WPA.
Mr. Cohn. Were you an employee?
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. And what--during what years?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. When you were with the WPA, were you a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
The Chairman. Do I understand the witness refuses to tell
what years he worked for the WPA?
Mr. Cohn. Apparently.
The Chairman. Are you refusing to tell us what years you
worked for the WPA?
Mr. Reiss. That was the answer.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to answer that question.
I will be glad to hear, if your counsel thinks you are entitled
to the privilege.
Mr. France. I understand the position the witness has
stated, that he feels that to answer about his employment from
the years--what was it? From 1936 on--might tend to incriminate
him.
Mr. Reiss. 1934.
Mr. France. And that any employment that he had during that
period might lead to questions about other matters or
associations which might tend to incriminate him even though
the mere fact of being on relief with WPA itself would not tend
to do. That is what I understand to be his position.
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
The Chairman. I may say that while the Fifth Amendment, Mr.
Counsel, is very broad and very liberally interpreted, it is
the position of the chair that he is not entitled to refuse to
tell us what dates he worked for the government.
If we start questioning him about any activities which
might be considered illegal, he could refuse to answer, but as
far as the dates and the agency, I believe he would not be
entitled to the Fifth Amendment privilege. It is all a matter
of record. I am going to order him to answer the question.
I may say for counsel's benefit it will lead to other
questions as to what other agencies of the government he worked
for.
Mr. Reiss. Well, sir, I can't remember the exact dates. It
was sometime--sometime in 1935 and 1936, and as far as I can
recollect, it was sometime in 1939 and 1940.
The Chairman. In other words, from 1935 or 1936 until 1939
or 1940.
Mr. Reiss. No, no. It was during 1935 and 1936 and during
1939 and 1940.
The Chairman. In other words, two periods of time?
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
The Chairman. Did you work for any other government agency?
Mr. Reiss. Outside of the army, let's see. No, sir. Except
the army, of course.
The Chairman. You were drafted into the army. You spent how
many years in the army?
Mr. Reiss. From May 1942 to June--to September of 1945.
The Chairman. And you were teaching the technique of
teaching at that time?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever attempt to indoctrinate your
students with the philosophy of communism?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir. That was a purely technical subject,
and I taught nothing except the subject itself.
The Chairman. Did you ever solicit any of your students to
join the Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
The Chairman. We are not discussing your testimony.
Mr. Reiss. This isn't that funny.
Mr. Cohn. No. It certainly isn't.
I had asked you originally about William Z. Foster. You
claimed the privilege.
The Chairman Can I ask one more question?
Mr. Cohn. Sure.
The Chairman. At the time you were teaching the technique
of teaching in the army, did you attend Communist party
meetings?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds of the
Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. Did you during that period of time attend any
Communist party meetings which were attended by your students
also?
Mr. Reiss. I think that since I have already invoked the
privilege on the question of whether or not I attended any
other--any Communist meetings, I would have to invoke it here,
too.
The Chairman. In other words, you feel if you told us the
truth as to whether you attended Communist party meetings which
were attended by your students while you were teaching in the
army, that truthful answer might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Reiss. I think I would like to repeat just what I said
a moment ago, that since I have already invoked the Fifth
Amendment in regard to the question of whether or not I
attended any Communist meetings during that period, I would
have to invoke it also on this same question.
The Chairman. May I say you can only invoke it if you think
a truthful answer would tend to incriminate you. This is an
entirely different question. The other question is whether or
not you attended Communist meetings. You refused to answer
that. The question is now, did you attend Communist meetings in
that period of time which were also attended by your students?
If you did not attend such meetings, of course, the answer
could not incriminate you.
If you did attend, such meetings, then it is possible that
your answer might tend to incriminate you. So when you say you
are invoking the privilege because you refused to answer a
previous question, that is not sufficient ground. The only
ground upon which you can invoke it is if you feel a truthful
answer might tend to incriminate you. If you feel that a
truthful answer might tend to incriminate you, you can refuse
to answer.
So the pending question is: Do you feel that a truthful
answer to that question might tend to incriminate you?
May I say for counsel's benefit that the chair takes the
position that you are not entitled to the privilege if you feel
that perjury might incriminate you; that you are only entitled
to the privilege if you honestly feel that a truthful answer
might tend to incriminate you. That is why I asked the
question, so we can determine whether or not he is entitled to
the privilege.
Mr. Reiss. On that basis, I would say that I have no
knowledge of any student of mine having attended a Communist
meeting.
The Chairman. Did you ever attempt to--strike ``to.''
Did you ever discuss the Communist philosophy--strike that
again, I am sorry, Mr. Reporter.
Did you ever try to in effect sell the Communist philosophy
or sell communism or indoctrinate the young men who were your
students outside of the classroom? You already said you did not
try to indoctrinate them in the classroom. The question is, did
you try to do it outside the classroom?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds of the Fifth
Amendment.
Mr. Chairman. You are entitled to it.
Mr. Cohn. Now, you are--I asked you about Mr. Foster. Now,
did you at any time serve as aide to William Z. Foster in the
Communist party.
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Did you accompany him constantly during any
period of time?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Eugene Dennis?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Simon Gerson?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been arrested or convicted of a
crime?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Were you in the year 1936 in the state of
Michigan?
Mr. Reiss. 1936?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Were you there in 1937?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a Communist party organizer in the year
1937?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a Communist party organizer in Louisiana
during part of the year 1937?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Were you arrested on May 26, 1937 in New Orleans,
Louisiana, for Communist activities?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Were you at that time, secretary of the Communist
party in Louisiana?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer.
Mr. Cohn. At 130 Chartres Street?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Did you give your New York address as the
headquarters of the Communist party of the United States on
12th Street?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Were you convicted of a violation of Section 1436
of the Michigan Penal Code in 1937? Sir?
Mr. Reiss. Just trying to rack my brain.
Mr. Cohn. Or Act 1--rather Section 902 of Act 107, both?
Mr. Reiss. What was that? I don't know what those----
Mr. Cohn. Section 107--the charge was no visible means of
support and vagrancy and specifically--well, let's say that is
the charge.
Mr. Reiss. Where was this?
Mr Cohn. New Orleans, Louisiana.
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. I will show you a document, which I will deem
marked Exhibit 1, and ask you to examine that and then tell us.
Mr. Reiss. I have read it.
Mr. Cohn. Does that refresh your recollection? I will ask
you the question again: Is your answer the same?
Mr. Reiss. The answer is the same.
Mr. Cohn. I will now show you a picture which I will deem
marked Exhibit 2 and ask you whether or not that is your
picture.
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated. On the same grounds. Pretty.
The Chairman. Is 35 East 12th Street, New York City, the
headquarters of the Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr Cohn. Interpreting this question broadly, Mr. Reiss,
have you ever engaged in any espionage activities against the
United States?
Mr. Reiss. What do you mean, ``broadly''?
Mr. Cohn. I will just ask the question: Have you ever
engaged in any espionage activities against the United States
in connection with the Polish Delegation to the United Nations
or to the Polish Government?
Mr. Reiss. Never.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Reiss. Never.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever engaged in sabotage?
Mr. Reiss. What do you mean by sabotage?
Mr. Cohn. You know what sabotage is.
The Chairman. May I?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
The Chairman. Mr. Cohn, you asked whether or not he engaged
in espionage or--was it for the Polish Government? I would like
to reframe that and say: Have you ever engaged in any espionage
activities in this country?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
The Chairman. Are you aware of any espionage activities on
the part of anyone in this country?
Mr. Reiss. Shall I answer that now or wait for the senator?
Mr. Cohn. No. You can answer.
Mr. Reiss. I will say I am aware of the--from the press--
that people----
Mr. Cohn. No, no. Have you any personal knowledge?
Mr. Reiss. Personal knowledge of espionage activities?
Mr. Cohn. That is right.
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you any personal knowledge of activities
seeking to bring about the establishment or a Communist
government in the United States?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Have you in cooperation with any member or anyone
connected with the Polish Delegation engaged in any activities?
Mr. Reiss. To establish a Communist----
Mr. Cohn. That is right, toward establishing the Communist
government in the United States?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You say you have not?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Would you read that last question and answer,
please, Mr. Reporter?
[Record read.]
Mr. Cohn. Have you----
The Chairman. What did the witness have to say about it?
About what activities, espionage activities--
Mr. Cohn. He says he has no knowledge of that.
The Chairman. In other words, do I understand you are not
aware of any espionage activities on the part of anyone?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
The Chairman. Have you ever discussed, Mr. Reiss, either
past or potential espionage activities on the part of any
members of the Communist party with other members of the
Communist party, that is? If you don't understand----
Mr. Reiss. Yes, I don't quite understand that.
The Chairman. Let me rephrase it. Have you ever discussed
with any members of the Communist party or heard discussed at
any Communist party meetings any espionage activities on the
part of any individuals?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In public testimony on September 17, Julius Reiss answered:
``As I have stated, I have never been at any meeting where I have heard
espionage advocated.'' Senator McCarthy then read Reiss' refusal to
answer the question in his executive session testimony, and said: ``The
grounds previously stated were that a truthful answer might tend to
incriminate you. You tell us today that you did not here discussed any
espionage activities. Therefore when you appeared in executive session
and told us that a truthful answer might tend to incriminate you, you
were not properly invoking the fifth amendment, which of course makes
you in contempt of the committee. This is a very important
constitutional right which you nor any other Communist can play around
with, and you don't play around with it with this committee.
I will ask the committee to cite you for contempt or perjury
because you were not telling the truth when you told us that a truthful
answer would tend to incriminate you. Today you said you were not
present when such activities were discussed.
I may say there will be some delay in getting the citation. Can't
take it up until the Senate meets. But I am getting very sick of you
men engaged in the Communist conspiracy who come before this committee
and abuse the privilege granted under the fifth amendment. It is a very
important privilege. You are not going to use it to cover up your
conspiracy, if I can help it. You will be entitled to use the privilege
wherever you have the right.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever transmitted any information from
the American Communist party to any official of the Polish
Delegation of the United Nations?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever transmitted any information from
any member of the Polish Delegation to the United Nations to
the American Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. Who is your immediate superior up at the Polish--
--
Mr. Reiss. My superior? The permanent representative of the
delegation.
Mr. Cohn. Who is that?
Mr. Reiss. Mr. Henryk Birecki.
Mr. Cohn. Is he a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Reiss. I have no knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. You have no knowledge?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever discussed communism?
The Chairman. May I just off the record----
[Discussion off the record.]
Mr. Cohn. Were you born here or a naturalized citizen?
Mr. Reiss. I was born here.
Mr. Cohn. What is your date of birth?
Mr. Reiss. October 24, 1907.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you born?
Mr. Reiss. New York City.
Mr. Cohn. Are you married, by the way?
Mr. Reiss. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Is your wife a member of the party?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Cohn. What is your wife's maiden name?
Mr. Reiss. Gertrude Weixel.
Mr. Cohn. Gertrude what?
Mr. Reiss. W-e-i-x-e-l.
Mr. Cohn. By the way, what was your rank when you were
discharged from the army?
Mr. Reiss. Technical sergeant.
The Chairman. Were you under--pardon me, counsel.
Mr. Cohn. Go right ahead.
The Chairman. Were you under orders from the Communist
party at the time you were teaching in the army?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
The Chairman. I am going to show you a number of copies of
the Daily Worker. The first one is dated April 12, 1947, page
5, and there is an ad here which reads:
Tonight. Tonight 8:15 p.m. Joel Remes, Secretary National
Youth Committee, Communist Party, Assistant Editor Political
Affairs, speaks on Marxism and Liberalism. Admission 25 cents.
201 Second Avenue. Henry Forbes
--is that the section? ``Henry Forbes section.'' I believe
the other word is.
I am going to show this to you and see if--and then ask
whether this Joel Remes described in that ad is you.
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds of the
Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. I wonder if you would hand it back? I have
some other questions I want to ask you.
I call your attention to the Daily Worker of May 3, 1946,
page 13, an article entitled ``New Pamphlet on Socialism,
Weapons for Same,''and the subhead, ``Socialism: What's In It
For You?'' by A. B. Magill, New Century Publisher, 10 cents.''
The next subhead, ``Reviewed by Joel Remes.''
I want to hand that to you and ask you if that Joel Remes
is you.
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
The Chairman. I have several other questions to ask you
about articles in the Daily Worker, and I perhaps could
dispense with asking them; you would repeat your answer. But to
make the record complete, I will go through the motion of
asking. I also----
Mr. Reiss. Do you want to ask them all and then give them
back to me?
The Chairman. I think that is a good suggestion. One dated
November 5, 1946, page 11:
Communist Party on Theory and Practice, reviewed by Joel
Remes.
Another one is dated--another issue of the Daily Worker
dated June 25, 1941, page 5.
I believe I will have to ask you about each one
individually because the matter is different.
May I ask whether the Joel Remes referred to in the
November 5, 1946 articles, ``Communist Party on Theory and
Practice reviewed by Joel Remes'' is that Joel Remes is you?
I assume you refuse to answer that?
Mr Reiss. Yes. I wanted to look at it. I refuse to answer.
Just let me take a look at the others.
The Chairman. The next one has no significance. The one
after that.
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
The Chairman. I may say, Mr. Counsel, just off the record--
--
[Discussion off the record]
The Chairman. Have the record show the witness indicates
that he merely refuses, unless he states some other ground, the
ground is the Fifth Amendment.
I have page five of the Daily Worker dated June 25, 1941,
an article entitled, ``Workers School offers course in world
politics.'' This is in the nature of a news story, and it
states that Joel Remes will conduct the class which will be one
of twenty classes offered during that summer.
Number one: Did you conduct such a class and are you the
Joel Remes referred to therein?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
The Chairman. I have the Daily Worker dated June 14, 1941,
page--I believe it is page eight--an article entitled
``Registration opened for special Marxist summer courses to
begin July 7.'' Is this Joel Remes referred to in here?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
The Chairman. This story also refers to Joel Remes of the
Workers School faculty.
Question: Is this Joel Remes referred to herein you, and,
No. two, did you conduct such classes?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
The Chairman. I wonder if you will stay here a second and
save the trouble of passing it back and forth.
I also have the Daily Worker dated Tuesday, September 30,
page three, an article entitled, ``Keep on your toes at Workers
School,'' subhead, ``Special course for outstanding teachers
and additions to curriculum,'' and Joel Remes is referred to
again in this. Is that Joel Remes you?
Mr. Reiss. I refuse to answer under the grounds previously
stated.
The Chairman. One final question on this Daily Worker of
September 24, 1941, page three. ``Workers School course to
study Socialist State.''
I don't see----
Will you strike the last one, Mr. Reporter. I think that is
all.
Mr. Counsel, have you any further questions?
Mr. Cohn. No, Mr. Chairman.
I was saying to the senator we will definitely want Mr.
Reiss back probably sometime in the course of tomorrow. There
is no use making him sit around all day, so the best thing for
him to do. We are hearing other witnesses concerning his case,
and there will come a point where we will have to call him back
to get additional information.
Mr. France. I wonder, Senator, if I might ask this favor. I
am engaged with out of town people tomorrow morning. I wonder
if this could be tomorrow afternoon?
Mr. Cohn. We will certainly try to accommodate you.
The Chairman. I think we will give you the definite promise
he will not be called tomorrow morning.
Mr Cohn. You know at all times where you can get him. We
will wait until we need him and then we will get in touch with
you. We will skip tomorrow morning in deference to your
request.
The Chairman. You understand, Mr. Reiss, instead of having
you sit around in the outer room waiting until you are called,
we will leave it that when we need you, we will call your
counsel.
Mr. France. Thank you.
The Chairman. And let him know where you are at all times
so he can get you in a half hour's notice.
Mr. Reiss. In terms of time, it will be in the daytime?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Reiss. Between what hours?
The Chairman. Never be before ten; never be after at the
very latest 4:30. In other words, you need not worry about it
before ten o'clock and need not be worried after 4:30. In fact,
I would say four o'clock. Let's make it four o'clock. After
four o'clock we won't be calling you.
Mr. France. Excuse me. For your information, my telephone
number is MU 6-0450.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Reiss, I forgot to ask you this. Confirmatory
of something. How many other American citizens work in the
Polish Delegation?
Mr. Reiss. How many others?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Reiss. I really can't answer that, I am sorry.
Mr. Cohn. Will you name the ones? Would you name the ones
that you know of?
Mr. Reiss. You mean the ones I actually know on the
permanent staff there?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Reiss. I don't know their names. Right now I think
there is a chauffeur named Sal.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell it?
Mr. Reiss. S-a-l. That is a chauffeur.
Mr. Cohn. Who else?
Mr. Reiss. Employed there now?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Reiss. There is a cleaning woman who comes in there and
I don't know who she is employed by.
Mr. Cohn. Let's forget about the cleaning woman for the
moment.
Mr. Reiss. Employed in the office of the permanent
delegation?
Mr. Cohn. I don't know about permanent or temporary or
anything like that; but any other American citizen working for
the Polish Delegation.
Mr. Reiss. The only one I know of is this fellow Sal.
Mr. Cohn. You know of no others?
Mr. Reiss. No.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know of any Americans employed by any
other foreign delegations?
Mr. Reiss. By my other office?
Mr. Cohn. Specifically, do you know of any American
employed by the Czechoslovakian Delegation?
Mr. Reiss. No, sir, I don't know whether they employ them
or not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know of any other American employed by
another foreign delegation to the United Nations?
Mr. Reiss. Any other American employed by foreign
delegations?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Reiss. Frankly, I don't know. I might have bumped into
somebody, any of the other delegations, and it is possible I
might know, but at the moment it doesn't strike me.
Mr. Cohn. Okay. Thank you.
The Chairman. One final question. Did you ever make
arrangements for or accompany any Polish delegate to the
Communist headquarters where he spoke to a group?
You are not clear on that?
Mr. Reiss. Yes, I understand the question.
No, sir.
The Chairman. I have nothing further.
Mr. Cohn. Okay.
Mr. France. Good night.
[Witness excused.]
TESTIMONY OF FLORENCE ENGLANDER (RESUMED)
The Chairman. Just one or two questions.
Miss Englander. Yes.
The Chairman. I understand from our chief of staff that you
are willing to give the FBI any information you have about
the----
Miss Englander. Yes.
The Chairman. [continuing]. Communist activities?
Miss Englander. Yes.
The Chairman. I think, Frank, what you ought to do is
inform Mr. Hoover and tell him if they want to have a young
lady drop in on this young lady, she will give any information
she can, and you can arrange if possible at her convenience----
What hours do you work?
Miss Englander. 9:30 to 6:00, five days a week.
The Chairman. Have you any further questions?
Mr. Cohn. No. I think what we can do, Mr. Chairman, in view
of the fact the witness desires to be cooperative, we can work
with her on this and go over everything and we won't have to
bother.
The Chairman. Your name will not be given to the press,
incidentally, unless you give it to them. No one will know you
are here unless you tell the press.
The young man here from the United Nations, Mr. Sloan----
Miss Englander. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And he has been told he has the freedom to
discuss it with you as your superior but not any member of the
public. I merely mention to clear you on it, your name will not
be given out publicly unless you give it out.
Let me ask this. I assume, having worked some five years in
the Communist party having attended meetings and that sort of
thing, you will be able to give the FBI a sizeable number of
names?
Miss Englander. Yes, I will, whatever I recall.
The Chairman. I don't think we should go into that now, if
she is willing to give that to the FBI. That should be
sufficient.
You are not excused yet from the subpoena. I don't think we
will want you further, but consider yourself under the subpoena
in case we need you for some further information.
Miss Englander. Goodbye.
The Chairman. Good luck to you.
Miss Englander. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
SECURITY--UNITED NATIONS
[Editor's note.--Paul Crouch (1903-1955) had been court-
martialed by the U.S. Army in 1925 for attempting to form a
Communist League among soldiers in Hawaii. In his defense he
testified: ``I am in the habit of writing letters to my friends
and imaginary persons, sometimes to kings and other foreign
persons, in which I place myself in an imaginary position. I do
that to develop my imaginary powers. That is why this letter
was written. Part of it is true and part of it is not.''
Convicted, he served two years at Alcatraz. On his release, he
became active in the Communist party and remained a member
until 1942, after which he served as an expert witness in
numerous judicial and congressional proceedings against alleged
Communists. Crouch's memorandum on ``Communist Infiltration of
the American Armed Forces'' was one of the factors leading to
the subcommittee's investigation at Fort Monmouth.
In 1954, the newspaper columnists Joseph and Stewart Alsop
branded Crouch as a ``powerful imaginer,'' who fabricated many
of his allegations. They asserted that ``the Government has a
duty to investigate the reliability of the informers it
hires.'' After the Justice Department launched an
investigation, Crouch was dropped as a paid consultant in
deportation cases for the Immigration and Naturalization
Service. Crouch then wrote to J. Edgar Hoover, demanding that
the FBI investigate the attorney general and his staff for the
``frame-up conspiracy'' against him. He also filed a libel suit
against the Alsops, claiming that his reputation ``as an expert
witness, writer, lecturer, and researcher into communism and
Communist infiltration in the Untied States had suffered.'' The
case never went to trial. Crouch testified in public session on
September 17, 1953.
Abraham Unger (1899-1975), a founder of the National
Lawyers Guild, had appeared as counsel for Communist party
leaders accused of violating the Smith Act, and Jacob Reiss had
worked as a researcher for that case. In his testimony,
Although Unger did not invoke the Fifth Amendment, he adopted a
strategy that the chairman compared to filibustering. During
Unger's appearance at a public session on September 18, Senator
McCarthy ordered him removed from the hearing room. On August
16, 1954, the Senate cited Unger for contempt for his failure
to answer questions on the grounds that the the subcommittee
had ``no authority to inquire into the political beliefs and
opinions of any other person.'' On July 27, 1955, Judge Edward
Weinfeld dismissed the charges against Unger. The U.S. Court of
Appeals unanimously upheld the dismissal, finding that the
subcommittee lacked legislative authority to investigate
subversive activities by individuals outside the government.
Speaking to reporters after this executive session, Senator
McCarthy said that a $12,000-a-year American ``high official''
of the UN secretariat had admitted friendship with Communists
and had contributed to organizations listed by the attorney
general as Communist fronts. Despite the chairman's demands
that the UN dismiss this ``high official,'' Dimitry Varley
(1906-1984) remained in his position as an economist at the UN;
nor were any charges of perjury brought against him. Alice
Ehrenfeld [Weil] (1925-1996) later became the first woman
assistant secretary general at the United Nations, and director
of the UN's General Legal Division. Neither Varley nor
Ehrenfeld testified in public.]
----------
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, N.Y.
The subcommittee met (pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953) at 10:30 a.m., in room 128, of the
United States Court House, Foley Square, New York, Senator
Joseph R. McCarthy, presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Francis P. Carr, executive director; Roy M.
Cohn, chief counsel; and G. David Schine, chief consultant.
TESTIMONY OF PAUL CROUCH
The Chairman. Will you stand and raise your right hand,
please?
In the matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Crouch. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Crouch, were you at one time a member of the
Communist party.
Mr. Crouch. I was.
Mr. Cohn. During what years?
Mr. Crouch. From 1925 until early 1942.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a top functionary of the party?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, I was a top functionary throughout that
period, and a full-time organizer for fifteen years.
Mr. Cohn. What were some of the positions you held in the
Communist party?
Mr. Crouch. I was a representative of the Young Communist
League and the Communist party of the United States to the
meetings of the executive committee of the Communist
International, Young Communist International, Moscow; I was a
student and lecturer at the Frunze Military Academy and an
honorary officer of the Red Army; I was the head of the
Communist party's National Department for Infiltration of the
Armed Forces in the United States, national editorial director
of the Young Communist League, member of the editorial staff of
the Daily Worker, district organizer for the Communist party in
Virginia, New York and South Carolina, Tennessee and Utah;
member of the district bureau of the Communist party in the
Alabama district and the California district, Alameda County
organizer, 1941.
I was editor of the New South, Communist organ for the
southern States, 1937 to '39, and had been a member of the
editorial board of its predecessor paper, the Southern Worker,
since 1934.
I was a member of the Negro Trade Union Agricultural Anti-
Imperialist, Anti-Militarist Commissions of the Central
Committee of the Communist party of the United States, and
participated in the work of the Central Committee from 1927
until 1941. Those are some of the major positions.
Mr. Cohn. I don't know how you could have had time for
more. Now, Mr. Crouch, since the time you have left the party,
particularly in recent years, you have, under subpoena and at
the request of the United States government, testified at
various trials held in this courthouse and elsewhere throughout
the country for the government, and have given them what
information you have as a result of your membership and
activity in the party; is that right?
Mr. Crouch. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Cohn. I recall, of course, you were a witness in the
trial in which Mr. [William] Remington was convicted in this
building.
Now, Mr. Crouch, when you were in the Communist party, did
you know a man named Joel Remes?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, I knew him from about 1934 until 1940 or
'41.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Remes, when you knew him, was he a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, he was.
Mr. Cohn. Was he more than a member of the party?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, he was an official of the party throughout
the period I knew him, including such positions as
organizational secretary of the Communist party for the
Louisiana district, headquarters at New Orleans, and was----
Mr. Cohn. About when was that?
Mr. Crouch. That was, as nearly as I can recall, from about
late 1936 until 1948, approximately, and he was at that time in
charge of the Communist book store called the People's Book
Store at 130 Chartres Street in New Orleans, and in that
capacity he handled the distribution of the New South, of which
I was editor, and I had correspondence with him from time to
time regarding the distribution of the New South and regarding
supplying editorial material in it.
Mr. Cohn. Now I am going to show you a picture, Mr. Crouch,
and ask you if you can identify that as Mr. Remes.
Mr. Crouch. Yes, this is the Joel Remes I knew in the
Communist party.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Crouch, at that time, around 1937, in those
years, did you have any connection with the Communist party
counterpart of the Daily Worker down South?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, I was the editor of it.
Mr. Cohn. What was that called?
Mr. Crouch. It was first called the Southern Worker, and
then the New South, changing its name to the New South in 1937.
Mr. Cohn. Now, were you in charge of subscriptions to that
Communist publication?
Mr. Crouch. I was.
Mr. Cohn. And you kept a little cardboard box containing
the cards with names of subscribers throughout the years; is
that right?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, a box that I brought in and was introduced
as evidence in the trial of William Remington.
Mr. Cohn. That is the box in which you produced the card
showing William Remington was a subscriber to this Communist
publication, received at the official post office box of the
Communist party; right?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And in that same box, did you find a card
indicating that you had shipped twenty-five copies of this
Communist publication to the People's Book Store, at 110
Chartres Street, New Orleans, Louisiana?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir. The original is in a box which is in
the custody of the government, and I have a photostat prepared
at the time of the Remington trial, and one of the photostats
shows the bundle order going to the People's Book Store at 130
Chartres Street, of twenty-five copies per month.
Mr. Cohn. Was Remes the man you were dealing with there?
Mr. Crouch. He was.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know any relatives of Remes in the
Communist party?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, his brother, Andy Remes, was one of my
closest friends in the Communist party over many years. I had
long, detailed discussions on many matters--and incidentally,
his brother, Andy Remes, played a very important role both in
my decision to leave the party and increasing my fear of the
consequences of leaving, as a result of his connections with
the whitewash of what was unquestionably a G.P.U. murder of
Laura Law, of Aberdeen, Washington, about January 4, 1940.
Mr. Cohn. Was Laura Law any relation to Joel Remes and
Andrew Remes?
Mr. Crouch. No, she was--she and her husband had been
members of the Communist party under Andy Remes' jurisdiction
as secretary for the Northwest district. She broke with the
Communist party in the fall of 1939 and informed the party that
she was going to the government and tell what she knew about
the party. Shortly thereafter her body was found with her head
crushed in, and her chest and back covered with brutal stab
wounds--unquestionably a G.P.U. murder to silence her, to
prevent her from telling her extensive knowledge of the party
apparatus throughout the northwest.
Andy Remes played a leading part in the whitewash of this
case, and as he described it to me, by taking the offensive and
charging that industrialists had Laura Law murdered because of
her husband's union activities.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, will you receive this photostatic
copy of this card in evidence and have it deemed marked as
Exhibit 1?
The Chairman. Yes, it is received.
Mr Cohn. And the picture of Remes which was identified by
Mr. Crouch we will have deemed marked as Exhibit 2.
And this criminal record, a certified copy of which we
received, we will have deemed marked Exhibit 3. We received a
certified copy from the police department at New Orleans,
Louisiana.
The Chairman. Mr. Crouch, there is something we have often
wondered about, and maybe you can enlighten us. In the trial of
this Scientist X, as I recall, you had considerable information
and evidence on him. Why weren't you called by the Justice
Department in that case, if you know?
Mr. Crouch. I was called as an expert witness in rebuttal,
but was not permitted to describe my knowledge of him as a
member of the party, or to describe the closed meetings of the
Communist party I had attended. And my wife [Sylvia Crouch],
who was under subpoena in the trial, was not called at all, and
I was advised informally to the effect that it was impossible
for us to give our testimony without bringing in the name of an
internationally famous scientist who was also a member of the
Communist party, who had been present at the meetings with
Scientist X.
The Chairman. Who in the Justice Department told you you
could not be used to testify about your knowledge of Scientist
X, his Communist activities?
Mr. Crouch. Mr. Cunningham, of the Justice Department, and
Mr. Hitz, assistant United States attorney, advised me that I
would not be questioned because our testimony would bring in
his name.
The Chairman. Bring in the name of Robert Oppenheimer?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir. Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer.
The Chairman. Both you and your wife, I understand, then,
were available; the Justice Department knew you had attended
Communist party meetings with Scientist X, and one of the
issues was whether or not he was a Communist?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And the jury found him not to be a Communist,
ultimately?
Mr. Crouch. They found him not guilty due to lack of
sufficient identifying witnesses who had been in closed
meetings with him, that is, witnesses who could testify to that
effect.
The Chairman. Just for the record, was he being tried for
perjury?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And one of the counts was that he committed
perjury when he said he was not a Communist?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And because of lack of evidence, he was
acquitted?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And both you and your wife, when members of
the Communist party, had attended these closed Communist party
meetings with him, and you were informed by two Justice
Department lawyers that you would not be used because if you
were used and you were examined as to who else was there, you
would have had to identify Robert J. Oppenheimer; is that it?
Mr. Crouch. To that effect, yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did they say who had given them those
instructions?
Mr. Crouch. No, sir, they did not, they did not indicate it
in any way.
The Chairman. When was this trial held?
Mr. Crouch. Last year.
The Chairman. What was the date of that trial, Roy?
Mr. Cohn. I don't know the exact date.
The Chairman. And Scientist X, who has been identified, as
Scientist X, what is his name again?
Mr. Crouch. Dr. Joseph Weinberg.
The Chairman. Is there any doubt in your mind that
Oppenheimer was a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Crouch. No, sir, none whatever. I met him in a closed
meeting of the Communist party in a house which was
subsequently found to have been his residence at the time,
although I did not know it then, and following that I met him
at quite a number of Communist party affairs in Alameda County.
The Chairman. I noticed with some interest Oppenheimer's
articles in regard to the H-bomb, for example; he vigorously
opposed our proceeding with any experimentation in the
development of the H-bomb. When he lost out in that, he now has
taken the position that we should not have an air force capable
of delivering that bomb. Maybe I am simplifying it a bit, but
in fact that is his argument. His argument has been that we
should build a screen of defense around this nation.
From your knowledge of the working of the Communist party,
do you know whether or not that was the policy of the Communist
party at that time?
Mr. Crouch. His position, in substance, his efforts have
corresponded with the efforts of the Communist press throughout
this period. The Communist press has sought to prevent the
development of the H-bomb. They have sought to obtain a U.S.
pledge not to use the atomic bomb, first in time of war, and
their policy has coincided with the public statements of Dr. J.
Robert Oppenheimer and the authoritative press accounts of J.
Robert Oppenheimer's position as appeared recently in Fortune
magazine, Life, and others.
The Chairman. Just to refresh my recollection and to get
the record straight on this, is it correct that after you
notified the FBI that you had attended a closed Communist
meeting with Oppenheimer that they drove you around the city of
Los Angeles to find the house in which you had attended that
meeting?
Mr. Crouch. Not Los Angeles--in Berkeley, California.
The Chairman. In Berkeley?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir. FBI Agent Brush, and another FBI
agent----
The Chairman. Brush?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. B-r-u-s-h?
Mr. Crouch. Yes.
The Chairman. Do you know his first name?
Mr. Crouch. I don't recall.
The Chairman. Do you know the other agent's name?
Mr. Crouch. Modehouse, or a similar name.
The Chairman. In any event, they drove you around Berkeley
to see if you could find the house in which you had attended
the meeting with Oppenheimer; is that correct?
Mr. Crouch. That's right.
The Chairman. And you drew a diagram for them of the inside
of the house?
Mr. Crouch. Exterior and interior, before the house was
located.
The Chairman. So that before the house was located you gave
them a drawing of the interior of the house in which you
attended the meeting, and you described the exterior of the
house; you didn't know the address, so they drove you around
until you found the house?
Mr. Crouch. That's correct. All I knew was the house was in
the hills around Berkeley, overlooking the bay. That's all I
knew. I gave these drawings to the FBI and to the California
Un-American Activities Committee.
The Chairman. Now, when someone from the FBI later went
into this house, did they find that your drawing of the
interior was an accurate drawing of the house?
Mr. Crouch. I don't know whether the FBI went into the
interior or not, but they told me they had obtained information
regarding the interior, and that the interior corresponded to
my drawings and description.
The Chairman. Was it discovered then also that at the time
the meeting was held in this house, the meeting which you
attended, that he was living in that house?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. In other words, that was his home?
Mr. Crouch. That was the first information I obtained that
that was the home of J. Robert Oppenheimer, was from the FBI,
from Agent Brush.
The Chairman. How many Communist meetings would you say you
attended with Oppenheimer?
Mr. Crouch. I attended one closed meeting restricted only
to party members, where I gave an official report. I attended a
number, at least six, social affairs arranged by the Communist
party, where he was present, one being at the home of Kenneth
May, one being an affair arranged to raise funds for the
Spanish Communists.
Incidentally, I talked with Dr. Oppenheimer last year in
the presence of Justice Department officials and Dr.
Oppenheimer recalled one of these occasions, the one to raise
funds for Spain, and placed the date of it as the night before
Pearl Harbor, in the presence of Mr. Cunningham and Mr. Hitz.
As for the other affairs, he said, in substance, he attended so
many Communist-arranged affairs, he couldn't recall how many;
he might well have been at the one at Kenneth May's home. He
could not recall the closed meeting at his own home or my
report there. He did recall one meeting at which Mr. William
Schneiderman was present in 1941.
The Chairman. Now, there are two Oppenheimers, both rather
famous, and I think we should have the record clear that you
are speaking about the Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer.
Mr. Crouch. Yes, I knew both. I knew his brother, Frank as
a Communist, also, and identified Frank as a Communist in
testimony before the House Committee on Un-American Activities
in May of 1949.
The Chairman. Did your wife attend the closed meetings with
Oppenheimer?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, she did.
The Chairman. Do you know of anyone besides you and your
wife who can testify as to Oppenheimer's membership in the
Communist party?
Mr. Crouch. Not offhand.
The Chairman. I might say it is important beyond words, and
dangerous, of course--I am sure you will agree with me--if our
top atomic scientist is a member of the Communist conspiracy.
It would be extremely important if we could get additional
witnesses who were present physically and knew he was a member
of the party.
Mr. Crouch. I might say, Senator, that in my work with the
California Un-American Activities Committee I learned that
military intelligence has a vast amount of evidence regarding
his membership in the Communist party and his Communist
activities, and that the California Un-American Activities
Committee has a great deal of information which, of course,
would be at the disposal of this committee.
The Chairman. Do you know why the Justice Department and
the California committee have apparently shied off at the
exposure of Oppenheimer?
Mr. Crouch. The California committee has tried to go into
this. They brought out a great deal of information, including
testimony by both myself and my wife, Sylvia, in their
published report for the year--reported in 1951, covering the
year 1950. They gave a great deal of information in this report
on the background of both J. Robert Oppenheimer and his wife,
who--one of whose husbands was killed in Spain while fighting
with the Communist forces there, and during the California
hearing the state committee out there in California issued a
public invitation to Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer to appear before
the committee, as an invitation to both Dr. Oppenheimer and his
wife, Katherine, to appear before the committee, and both Dr.
Oppenheimer and his wife ignored the invitation. The California
committee had no power of subpoena and has been unable to
follow up on the matter.
The Chairman. Do I understand you to say that his wife's
former husband was killed in Spain fighting on the Communist
side?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, I might say further, so there should be no
confusion, that his wife, Katherine, was born Katherine
Puening, in Germany; came to the United States and is a citizen
by virtue of her father's naturalization while she was a minor.
She was first married to a man named Ranseyer. According to
many people in intelligence, her second husband was the one
killed in Spain, named Joseph Dallet, who had been a Young
Communist League organizer in Ohio. Her third husband, after
this husband was killed in Spain in 1936 or early 1937, her
third husband was Richard Stewart-Harrison, of Great Britain,
from whom she was divorced in January 1940, and married Dr. J.
Robert Oppenheimer in November of 1940.
The Chairman. I missed your last few words. Did you say
that this husband was a Communist?
Mr. Crouch. Yes.
The Chairman. The third husband?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, the one killed in Spain. I don't know
whether the other two previous husbands were Communists, or
not, but the one killed in Spain was a Communist and a very
close friend of Steve Nelson.
Incidentally, according to many public statements, Mrs.
Oppenheimer introduced her friend, Steve Nelson, to J. Robert
Oppenheimer, who was a frequent guest at the Oppenheimer home
during the 1940 to 1942 period when Dr. Oppenheimer was in
charge of work on the atomic bomb.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this: Is there any doubt in
your mind but what Oppenheimer was under Communist party
discipline at the time you were attending these Communist
meetings with him?
Mr. Crouch. No, sir, none whatever.
The Chairman. And if he were under Communist party
discipline, he, of course, would be bound to turn over any
atomic secrets to them that he had available?
Mr. Crouch. That the party directed.
The Chairman. And naturally they would be interested in any
atomic information he had?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir. Just as a matter of fact, the
Communist party might have chosen to direct him to turn over
the information; they might have chosen to direct him to
appoint other Communists to key positions who would in turn
turn over the information. It is a matter of record that Dr.
Oppenheimer has appointed many Communists to key positions in
the atomic energy program. For example, Lloyd Lehman, who had
been associated with Dr. Oppenheimer, in the Communist party
around 1940, was given a job at Dr. Oppenheimer's
recommendation in the radiation laboratory in California around
1942. Later, Lloyd Lehman left the laboratory and became the
open Communist party organizer for Alameda County in
California.
Another man who has admitted former membership in the
Communist party, Dr. Hawkins, was brought from California to
Los Alamos, although he was not a physicist, made historian for
the project, and given access to virtually all classified and
confidential matters there.
There are many other Communists who were employed by Dr.
Oppenheimer and also, according to the California committee's
information, Dr. Oppenheimer was active in urging atomic
scientists to join a Communist espionage apparatus called the
FAECT--Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists, and
Technicians--headed by Marcel Scherer, who had been trained in
the espionage schools in Moscow and who had been in charge of
infiltration of scientists since 1928, to my personal
knowledge.
The Chairman. This FAECT was headed by a man who went to
the Moscow School of Espionage and Sabotage?
Mr. Crouch. Yes.
The. Chairman. That is the Lenin school?
Mr. Crouch. Yes.
The Chairman. Where is he now, do you know?
Mr. Crouch. He is in New York City at the present time.
The Chairman. Is he connected with atomic work now, do you
know?
Mr. Crouch. I don't know.
The Chairman. What is his name?
Mr. Crouch. Marcel Scherer.
The Chairman. Oh, yes.
Mr. Crouch. I personally participated in discussions that
set up this apparatus for scientific espionage in 1928 and was
present at discussions between Scherer and William Z. Foster,
and Scherer and Communist international representatives from
Moscow, when this project was approved.
The Chairman. That will be all, then, for today.
[Witness excused.]
TESTIMONY OF DIMITRY VARLEY (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, HERMAN
A. GRAY)
The Chairman. Will you stand up and raise your right hand,
please?
In this matter now on hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Varley. I do.
The Chairman. Mr. Varley, you have the right to consult
with your counsel at any time you care to, advise with him
whenever you think it is necessary. If you care to, I will be
glad to give you a private room in which to have a conference,
if anything comes up of sufficient importance that you think
you require that. Counsel is not allowed to take part in the
proceedings other than that.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Varley, what is your position?
Mr Varley. I am employed by the United Nations as an
economist.
Mr. Cohn. Talk a little louder, and tell us specifically
what your position is.
Mr. Varley. I am a senior economic affairs officer in the
Department of Economic Affairs in the United Nations.
Mr. Cohn. What is your salary?
Mr. Varley. Gross salary is $12,000.
Mr. Cohn. $12,000 a year?
Mr. Varley. I think $12,000 and a few odd dollars.
Mr. Cohn. Yes, $12,000 and some odd dollars.
Mr. Varley. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How long have you been with the United Nations?
Mr. Varley. Since the fall of 1946.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you before that?
Mr. Varley. I was with UNRRA.
Mr. Cohn. You were with UNRRA before that?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Who was director general of UNRRA when you were
appointed?
Mr. Varley. Mr. Lehman.
Mr. Cohn. Was Mr. Weintraub in UNRRA when you came there?
Mr. Varley. He was.
Mr. Cohn. Did you work with him in UNRRA?
Mr. Varley. I was working with him in the same bureau.
Mr. Cohn. And Mr. Lehman was the director general?
Mr. Varley. Right.
Mr. Cohn. Or director-whatever you call it?
Mr. Varley. I think it is director general.
Mr. Cohn. Director general.
Now, where were you before you went with UNRRA?
Mr. Varley. I was in the army.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time were you in the
army?
Mr. Varley. For approximately one year and six months.
Mr. Cohn. What were your duties in the army?
Mr. Varley. I started with the air force, and then I was
attached to the Office of Strategic Services.
Mr. Cohn. OSS? What did you do with OSS?
Mr. Varley. I was attached to the research branch, which I
believe was called Russian Economic Analysis. I am not sure
about the exact title of the branch.
Mr. Cohn. What rank did you hold in the army, by the way?
What was your rank in the army?
Mr. Varley. I was a sergeant in the army.
Mr. Cohn. A sergeant. Now, have you ever contributed any
money to any Communist front organization?
Mr. Varley. Will you explain your question? May I ask my
lawyer?
Mr. Cohn. Surely. You can ask anything you want.
[Whereupon, Mr. Varley consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Varley. Could you tell me what you mean by ``Communist
front organization''?
Mr. Cohn. Surely. For one example, I will give you an
organization listed by the attorney general as subversive.
Mr. Varley. I never saw or consulted the list. I know some
of them.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this: Did you and your wife ever
contribute to the American Committee for the Protection of
Foreign Born?
Mr. Varley. I did.
Mr. Cohn. When? In 1950?
Mr. Varley. Yes, I think last time I did was in 1950.
Mr. Cohn. How about the Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln
Brigade?
Mr. Varley. I might have. I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. Isn't it a fact that you did in 1947 contribute
to the Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade?
Mr. Varley. Well, I don't clearly remember whether I did.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever hear of the Veterans of the Abraham
Lincoln Brigade?
Mr. Varley. I did.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think you gave them any money?
Mr. Varley. I might have, but----
Mr. Cohn. Now, is 1950 the last time when you contributed
to the American Committee for the Protection of the Foreign
born?
Mr. Varley. I think so. That is, to my best recollection,
yes. Might have been 1950--I mean, it might have been, let us
say, first month of 1951.
Mr. Cohn. Well, around '50, '51?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You are clear you did not contribute in '52?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever a member of the State, County, and
Municipal Workers Union, Local 28?
Mr. Varley. I was.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know that was under Communist domination?
Mr. Varley. No.
Mr. Cohn. When did you find that out?
Mr. Varley. Pardon me? Will you repeat the question?
Mr. Cohn. Read the question, please.
[Whereupon, the last question was read by the reporter.]
Mr. Varley. To my best knowledge, it never was under
Communist domination.
Mr. Cohn. You have never heard that?
Mr. Varley. I heard subsequently, after I left the union,
that it was referred as left wing CIO union.
The Chairman. Who got you your job originally? Mr.
Weintraub?
Mr. Varley. Where?
The Chairman. In the UN.
Mr. Varley. The UN? Yes, he recommended me to the United
Nations.
The Chairman. Did you know that Weintraub was a Communist?
Mr. Varley. No.
The Chairman. When did you first hear that he was?
Mr. Varley. I never heard that he was a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. You never heard that he was?
Mr. Varley. Well, I have seen the reference in the papers,
accusations, but that is--even there I am not sure he was--he
said that he was a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. Did you read Whittaker Chambers' testimony?
Mr. Varley. No.
The Chairman. Did you and he ever talk over the affairs of
the Communist party?
Mr. Varley. Excuse me, may I just come back to that
question?
Mr. Cohn. Surely.
Mr. Varley. Did I read Whittaker Chambers' testimony?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Varley. Well, I have seen some bits of it, I mean here
and there in the papers, but I haven't seen his testimony about
Mr. Wetntraub.
The Chairman. Did you and Mr. Weintraub ever discuss the
work or the objectives of the Communist party?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never did?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never had any reason to believe he was a
Communist?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, have you ever been a registered member of
the American Labor party?
Mr. Varley. I was.
Mr. Cohn. Up through what year?
Well, the election records show you were a registered
member of the American Labor party in 1937, 1938, 1939, 1940,
'41, '43, '44, '49, '50, '51; is that right?
Mr. Varley. I couldn't have possibly registered in 1951,
because I think I wasn't in the country in 1951, at that time.
Mr. Cohn. At what time?
Mr. Varley. Well, last time I could have registered would
be at the time of primary registrations or elections. It would
be '49 or '50.
Mr. Cohn. Well, the last time you did register, say in
1950, did you register American Labor party?
Mr. Varley. Yes, I did, last time.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know the American Labor party had been
named as a Communist front by the House committee?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you know it was----
Mr. Varley. You mean that was named as a Communist
organization?
Mr. Cohn. Did you know that that was under Communist
domination and had been officially listed as a Communist front
by the House committee?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You did not. Hadn't you heard that it was under
Communist control?
Mr. Varley. May I consult----
Mr. Cohn. Surely.
[Whereupon, Mr. Varley consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Varley. I have seen reference to that fact in the
newspapers, particularly during the election campaign.
The Chairman. Did you think it was Communist-controlled?
Mr. Varley. No, sir. My whole contact with American Labor
party amounted to my registering with American Labor party.
The Chairman. The question is: Did you think it was
Communist-controlled?
Mr. Varley. I really don't know.
The Chairman. Did you have any reason to believe that you
were registering in a front for the Communist party?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You did not think it was Communist-
controlled?
Mr. Varley. Senator, if I would have thought it was
Communist-controlled, I wouldn't have registered.
The Chairman. The question is: Did you think it was
Communist-controlled? It is a very simple question.
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You did not?
Mr. Varley. No.
The Chairman. You appeared before the grand jury, didn't
you?
Mr. Varley. I did appear before the grand jury.
The Chairman. Several times?
Mr. Varley. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And you know there is a recommendation to the
UN that your services be dispensed with; is that correct?
Mr. Varley. I don't know of this.
The Chairman. Didn't you hear that there was a
recommendation that you be fired? You were told that, weren't
you?
Mr. Varley. The grand jury recommended that I would be
fired? No, sir.
The Chairman. It was in the presentment of the grand jury,
was it not, that you should be removed from the UN?
Mr. Varley. No, sir, I never heard that.
The Chairman. You never heard that?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never knew anything about it?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. No one ever told you that?
Mr. Varley. The grand jury recommended that I would be
fired? No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know they made a recommendation
concerning you?
Mr. Varley. The grand jury?
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Never heard it?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. No one ever told you that?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you read the presentment?
Mr. Varley. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you see any reference to yourself in the
presentment?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You understand, the grand jury presentment did
not mention names. Didn't you see a very clear description of
yourself in there? I mean, can you tell us honestly that you
read that presentment and didn't see any portion which you
thought referred to you?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Oh, really?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. What was the occasion of your reading the
presentment? Were you looking for references to yourself?
Mr. Varley. Well, I read the presentment when it appeared
in the newspapers.
The Chairman. Were you looking for references to yourself?
Mr. Varley. I can't answer that question in that way, sir,
because I just read whatever was in there, and now the counsel
asks me a question whether I found any----
The Chairman. When you read the presentment--you say you
read it--my question is very simple: Were you looking for
references to yourself, you having appeared before that grand
jury?
Mr. Varley. Could I put it this way--that I did not expect
to find reference to myself, and therefore I didn't look for
reference to myself.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Varley, as a matter of fact, to put it
frankly here, you are not very careful about telling the truth,
are you?
Mr. Varley. I think I do tell the truth.
Mr. Cohn. Well, now, you were before a grand jury, and I
asked you, before the grand jury, whether or not you had ever
been arrested or convicted, and you denied it at first and then
admitted it later; isn't that a fact?
Mr. Varley. I don't know what--[consulting with counsel].
Would you mind repeating the question?
Mr. Cohn. Read the question, please.
[Whereupon, the last question was read by the reporter.]
Mr. Varley. I never admitted that I was arrested.
Mr. Cohn. You never admitted that you were arrested?
Mr. Varley. No.
Mr. Cohn. You still don't think you were arrested?
Mr. Varley. That's right.
Mr. Cohn. I see. You got some good legal opinions about
that; is that right?
The Chairman. Is it your testimony that you had never been
arrested?
Mr. Varley. That's right, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What do you think, the records of the New York
Police Department are forged?
Mr. Varley. Well, I asked my lawyer to consult the records
and also tried to recollect the matter, and all my recollection
was that I was summoned before the court of magistrates.
Mr. Cohn. Isn't it a fact that--I regret the necessity of
going into this again--but isn't it a fact that you were found
by members of the New York City Police Department in the men's
room and 50-something Street and Lexington Avenue on December,
29, 1941, arrested on a morals charge, and that you pleaded
guilty and paid the fines, or you were given an alternative of
a fine or a jail sentence and you paid the fines, not only for
yourself but for the other man who was taken in along with you,
a man named Leonardo Boronek? Isn't that a fact?
Mr. Varley. Would you give me the question?
[Whereupon, the last question was read by the reporter.]
Mr. Cohn. Before you get to that, would you please add
this, Mr. Stenographer: the names of the policemen were
Valentine Piccirilli and William Vogel. Now, would you answer
that question?
Mr. Varley. This is not a fact.
Mr. Cohn. Tell me where it isn't a fact.
Mr. Varley. I was never arrested, and I was never convicted
on a morals charge.
Mr. Cohn. Tell us what happened.
The Chairman. Were you picked up by the policemen?
Mr. Varley. I was.
The Chairman. You were picked up by the policemen?
Mr. Varley. The policemen did talk to me, but I was not
arrested.
The Chairman. Did they take you along with them?
Mr. Varley. The policemen told me that----
The Chairman. Did they take you along with them?
Mr. Varley. No, they didn't. The policemen told me, as I
recollect it, that after we had very brief discussion, ``Let
the magistrate's court figure that out,'' words to that effect.
The Chairman. Did they take you down to the magistrate?
Mr. Varley. We went to the magistrate's court, all
together.
The Chairman. The policemen picked you up, they took you
down to the magistrate; is that right?
Mr. Varley. He didn't pick me up. He said that ``Well, let
all of us go to the magistrate court.''
The Chairman. All right. When I say ``picked you up,'' what
do you understand that I mean?
You said he didn't pick you up. What do you think it means
to get picked up?
Mr. Varley. What the counsel says, to be arrested.
The Chairman. And the policeman came in and took you to the
magistrate; is that right?
Mr. Varley. He said, ``Let's go to the magistrate.'' He
didn't say, ``You are arrested.'' I didn't resist----
The Chairman. Did he take you down in a police car? Did
they take you down in a police car?
Mr. Varley. I think it was an ordinary automobile.
The Chairman. They took you down in their car, did they?
Mr. Varley. We went in their car.
The Chairman. All right. They took you to the magistrate?
Mr. Varley. We went down to the magistrate's court.
The Chairman. They took you in their car to the magistrate,
is that correct?
Mr. Varley. May I say how I remember what happened?
The Chairman. No, you answer my questions. I may say that
if the policeman's testimony is correct, you have perjured
yourself about three times now. You can keep on if you want to,
or you can tell us the truth.
I will repeat the question: Did they take you in their car
to the magistrate? Either yes or no?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
The Chairman. They did, all right. Did they file charges
against you?
Mr. Varley. Yes, there was a summons by a policeman.
The Chairman. All right. And were you found guilty?
Mr Varley. I pleaded guilty.
The Chairman. You pleaded guilty?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
The Chairman. You paid a fine?
Mr. Varley. I paid a fine.
The Chairman. And did you pay the other man's fine, too?
Mr. Varley. I did.
The Chairman. You say you were never arrested?
Mr. Varley. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Mr. Cohn, I want this transmitted to the U.S.
attorney, a clear case of perjury.
Have you ever been arrested at any other time?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did the policemen ever pick you up at any
other occasion?
Mr. Varley. In the same sense as in that case, in
connection with automobile incidents, yes.
The Chairman. How many times?
Mr. Varley. Several times.
The Chairman. On the same type of charge?
Mr. Varley. Well, the charge dealt with some violation of
traffic, but I do not recall what exactly was the nature of the
charge. It was some kind of an offense, similar charge.
The Chairman. How many times did policemen pick you up on
any other charges? How many times?
Mr. Varley. You mean bring me to the magistrate's court
directly?
The Chairman. Do you understand what I mean? You can keep
on perjuring yourself, if you want to.
Mr. Varley. I am trying to do my best and not to try to
evade the question, but in the first case you said, did the
policeman pick me up and bring me to the magistrate's court.
Well, I had summons given to me before by the policemen.
The Chairman. All right. How many times?
Mr. Varley. Well, I recall at least one case in the state
of Connecticut, when there was minor traffic accident and we
went to a police station.
The Chairman. And what were you charged with?
Mr. Varley. I know I paid a fine of about, around $15, I
think.
The Chairman. What were you charged with?
Mr. Varley. I don't remember the charge, sir.
The Chairman. You don't remember?
Mr. Varley. No. It was some kind of offense in the state of
Connecticut.
The Chairman. Were you charged with drunkenness?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You were not?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Are you sure of that?
Mr. Varley. I am positive.
The Chairman. Have you ever been charged with drunkenness?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Have you ever been found guilty on a morals
charge?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. No?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Have you ever pleaded guilty on a morals
charge?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never have?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never have been either convicted or
pleaded guilty to any charge involving morals?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Your answer is no?
Mr. Varley. That's right.
The Chairman. You are sure of that?
Mr. Varley. I am sure of that, sir.
Mr. Chairman. Mr. Cohn, we want the magistrate's record and
the policeman in here who arrested him before he was found
guilty. This is a clear case of perjury.
Mr. Cohn. What do you think you were picked up for by the
policemen at the time you were taken down to court in the
policemen's car? Didn't they tell you?
Mr. Varley. It was a charge of loitering.
Mr. Cohn. With another man; is that right?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. No? Was there another man there? You paid another
man's fine, didn't you?
Mr. Varley. I paid the other man's fine.
Mr. Cohn. Yes, you paid your own fine and you paid his
fine, too, didn't you?
Mr. Varley. When he pleaded guilty and he said he had no
money to pay, I felt sorry for the guy, and paid his fine.
Mr. Cohn. How long had you known this other man?
Mr. Varley. How long what?
Mr. Cohn. How long had you known the other man? You know,
you make it very difficult, Mr. Varley. This isn't the kind of
thing----
Mr. Varley. I didn't know the man.
Mr. Cohn. You met him in the men's room, then, didn't you?
Mr. Varley. I didn't meet him. He was in the men's room.
The Chairman. So it was a man whom you never knew, whom you
never met, and you paid his fine; is that correct?
Mr. Varley. That's right.
The Chairman. You will return at 2:30 this afternoon. You
are excused until 2:30.
[Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., a luncheon recess was taken
until 2:30 p.m.]
afternoon session
TESTIMONY OF ABRAHAM UNGER (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, BERNARD
JAFFE)
The Chairman. Will you stand and raise your right hand,
please?
In this matter now on hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Unger. I do.
Mr. Jaffe. May I ask the senator something?
Mr. Unger. I was served with this subpoena yesterday. I
haven't had a chance to talk to him until about noon or so
today, and I was wondering whether or not we could possibly
adjourn this hearing so that I could have an opportunity to
look into the matter.
The Chairman. Well, how much time would you want?
Mr. Jaffe. Well, I would like a week, if possible.
Also, whom am I speaking to? I know you; you are Mr. Cohn.
Who is this gentleman?
Mr. Cohn. I am Mr. Cohn, counsel for the committee. This is
Senator McCarthy.
This is Frank Carr, executive director of the committee.
This gentleman here is from the legal division of the United
Nations.
Mr. Unger. I see. I make that same request. I think it is a
reasonable request which should be granted, if at all possible.
But in addition, I think you ought to indicate to me what the
purpose of the examination is so that I might have some idea
why it is that you are calling me as a witness. What is the
object of this inquiry by this senatorial committee? Those are
the two things we address to you.
The Chairman. I think your second request is certainly
reasonable, that you be notified why you are called. Obviously,
you are entitled to that. I believe until you know why you are
called and what information the committee wants from you, it
will be impossible for you to know from you whether you need a
day, or a week, or how much adjournment you need. You are
called in connection with an investigation of Communist
influence in the UN and in connection with alleged Communists
working there, one of whom, Mr. Remes, or Mr. Reiss. I think
his name now is Mr. Reiss--according to our information, worked
either for you or in your office, and I think the information
we want to get from you principally is with regard to this
fellow Remes. Now, I would suggest----
Mr. Unger. You are off on the wrong track, I want to tell
you that right now.
The Chairman. May I say this, that after Roy starts
questioning you, if you feel that you need a week's time to
discuss the matter with your lawyer, that is something that can
certainly be considered. I am inclined to think that the
questions will be of such a very simple nature that you won't
need any additional time on them.
Let me say this: I will let counsel proceed, and if after
he asks certain questions you think that you need additional
time, I am sure we can work that out.
Mr. Jaffe. Let me say this, Senator: I am a lawyer; I don't
know anything about the questions you are going to ask or
anything else. As far as I am concerned, whatever the problem
is, I would need time, because I don't know what the entire
situation is. Now, it may be that Mr. Unger wants to go ahead
without that. I mean, as far as I am concerned, you tell me
this; the names that you refer to don't mean anything to me.
Whether they mean anything to Mr. Unger, I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. You are not the witness.
Mr. Jaffe. I understand that. What I would like to do is to
have an opportunity to consult with him before I can advise him
about anything.
The Chairman. I think that is a reasonable request. You can
use the private office to discuss the matter, and then we will
take----
Mr. Cohn. There is only one name, Joel Remes, also known as
Julius Reiss.
Mr. Unger. I certainly would defer to counsel in the
suggestion that you make to confer together, and as we are told
here, it can be done privately.
But I will say this, so that there will be no question
about it. We are being given representation here that is the
purpose of the inquiry in so far as this witness is concerned.
On that representation, I see no reason why we can't ascertain
what it is that they are inquiring about as indicated here, and
then if any situation arises which requires conferring, we will
confer.
The Chairman. I think that is a good suggestion. If
something arises which makes you feel it is necessary to have a
conference, or a postponement, we can work it out. I am sure.
We will have no trouble about that.
Mr. Cohn. Could we have your full name, please?
Mr. Unger. I gave it to the stenographer--Abraham Unger.
Mr. Cohn. And you gave your address?
Mr. Unger. I did.
Mr. Cohn. Fine. What is your profession, Mr. Unger?
Mr. Unger. Lawyer.
Mr. Cohn. You practice in New York?
Mr. Unger. I do.
Mr. Cohn. You are admitted to the bar in New York?
Mr. Unger. I am admitted to the bar in New York.
Mr. Cohn. And to the federal court?
Mr. Unger. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Have you practiced before any government
agencies?
Mr. Unger. Do I practice? Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Which one?
Mr. Unger. Immigration. I don't recall that I practiced
before any other at this time--workmen's compensation,
perhaps--one being federal, one being state.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Unger, we have had testimony here that a man
by the name of Joel Remes, also known as Julius Reiss, has
worked under your supervision; is that true?
Mr. Unger. It is not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Joel Remes?
Mr. Unger. If it is the person referred to in the press, in
the newspaper yesterday, I assume it is the same person who is
identified as Mr. Reiss----
Mr. Cohn. That's right.
Mr. Unger. I know who he is, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever met him?
Mr. Unger. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Under what circumstances?
Mr. Unger. He has come to our office, consulted with us. He
has also done some research work in or about or out of the
office of a perfectly innocent nature, such as of a kind that I
would consider not even important enough to remember, the sort
of thing that anyone--that you might do, that you might come to
the office and ask to look at a file--rather at a record on
appeal, or a case, and I would show it to you, and I wouldn't
even remember whether you had been there or not.
Mr. Cohn. I don't quite understand that. Was he in your
employ?
Mr. Unger. He was not. I have answered that question
already.
Mr. Cohn. I don't quite understand the situation as you
give it to me.
Mr. Unger. I said to you he came to my office to consult
with us on occasion.
Mr. Cohn. About what?
Mr. Unger. As a client.
Mr. Cohn. As a client?
Mr. Unger. I have no recollection what matter it was.
Again, it was of no significance, absolutely of no
significance.
Mr. Cohn. You say he came to your office to consult with
you on an attorney-client basis concerning a legal matter; is
that right?
Mr. Unger. That's right.
Mr. Cohn. Concerning how many legal matters did he consult
with you?
Mr. Unger. I have no recollection.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Unger. I have no recollection.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever work for you?
Mr. Unger. He did not.
Mr. Cohn. He did not work for you in any respect?
Mr. Unger. I answered that.
Mr. Cohn. I know you answered it, but how does that square
with the fact he told us that he has reported income received
from your law firm for the year of 1950?
Mr. Unger. I say he did not work for me. I have never--I
never recall employing him. If he worked for our office he
certainly wasn't working there with my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Well, would you have knowledge of someone working
in your office? Do you know which people are employed by your
office?
Mr. Unger. No. The fact might be--well, what might be the
case is that in some matter that he was working on, not under
my supervision, he may have been on the payroll in the office
for the purpose of a case, possibly, I wouldn't know.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know that?
Mr. Unger. No, I wouldn't know.
Mr. Cohn. Will you check that for us?
Mr. Unger. I probably can.
Mr. Cohn. All right.
Mr. Unger. Probably can.
Mr. Cohn. That is as to the year 1950, particularly. As far
as your testimony, as far as you know, he retained your office,
he consulted your office as a client, in a legal matter, the
nature of which you didn't recall at all?
Mr. Unger. That's right. It is of no significance. And
beyond that, he has been to the office, I am sure that goes
back a number of years, in the course of doing some research
work of a nature that didn't concern me.
Mr. Cohn. What do you mean by research work?
Mr. Unger. He might have looked at a file in the office--
that is to say, a case on appeal, a record.
Mr. Cohn. Did he----
Mr. Unger. I don't know. What specific one? I haven't the
faintest idea.
Mr. Cohn. That is pure conjecture on your part, as to
whether he did or not?
Mr. Unger. As to whether he did, it is not conjecture; it
isn't actually knowledge in the sense that I actually saw him
sit down and do it, but I know that he was a person who was
doing research work.
Mr. Cohn. You have no idea as to the nature of the work?
Mr. Unger. No, it was of no importance to me. It was
insignificant.
Mr. Cohn. Did it have anything to do with the preparation
of the defense of any persons indicted under the Smith Act?
Mr. Unger. It may have.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not it did, Mr. Unger?
Mr. Unger. I don't.
Mr. Cohn. You have no knowledge?
Mr. Unger. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you do any such work?
Mr Unger. Did I do any such----
Mr Cohn. Did you do any such work concerning the
preparation of the defense of persons indicted under the Smith
Act?
Mr. Unger. I think that is irrelevant to the subject of
inquiry. That has to do with the question of attorney-client
relationships, which obviously are not something which you
should inquire into.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, your testimony is whether or not
you did any work of that nature is a confidential communication
from a client to you; is that right?
Mr. Unger. That's right.
Mr. Cohn. Is that your testimony?
Mr. Unger. Yes, of course. It is self-evident, Mr. Cohn.
Mr. Cohn. Well, let us not argue. Just try to answer the
questions.
Mr. Unger. I have.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know him by the name of Remes or Reiss?
Mr. Unger. Actually, I don't think I ever heard the name
Remes, only Reiss.
Mr. Cohn. Then it was the name Reiss?
Mr. Unger. Reiss.
Mr. Cohn. All right. Now, is Mr. Reiss, to your knowledge,
a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Unger. On that subject, I would say to you I object to
the question on the grounds of principle. I think, for one, on
the basis of what you have already represented here, that is
not a relative question to the inquiry; and secondly, I object
on the ground it is not within the purview of a congressional
committee, this one, to inquire into the political beliefs and
opinions of persons. And thirdly, that it is proper on my part
to identify any person--to describe, rather, the political
opinions or beliefs of any person. That is a matter between
himself and yourself, if he decides to state it.
The Chairman. If the refusal is on that ground, you will be
ordered to answer.
Mr. Unger. I didn't hear you.
The Chairman. If, I say, if the refusal is on that ground,
you will be ordered to answer.
Mr. Unger. I see.
Mr. Cohn. You are free, of course, to consult any time you
want with counsel.
Mr. Unger. I understand. I want you to understand, I said
to you I believe as a matter of principle you have no right to
make such inquiry.
Mr. Cohn. I heard what you said, sir.
Mr. Unger. You have indicated very plainly that the purpose
of your inquiry to me--you have represented to me was to find
out whether or not this man was working for me. I have stated
to you what I do know about him.
The Chairman. And what you know about him?
Mr. Unger. What?
The Chairman. And what you know about him.
Mr. Unger. You haven't asked me what I know about him. You
asked me what I know about his political beliefs, and opinions.
That is an entirely different subject.
The Chairman. Counselor didn't ask you about his political
beliefs and opinions?
Mr. Unger. Yes, he did.
The Chairman. He asked you whether he was a Communist.
Mr. Unger. That is a political belief or opinion.
The Chairman. That is whether or not he belongs to a
conspiracy that is dedicated to overthrow this government. You
will be ordered to answer the question.
Mr. Unger. Senator, I want to say to you again that your
statement as to what the Communist party is is simply a
volunteered personal comment which you make, and while there is
no one to stop you from doing so, you can hardly consider that
it is acceptable as either evidence or as a basis for a
question within the purview of the examination. You have
indicated what you were concerned with here is this man's
connection with me or my office.
Mr. Cohn. And with the Communist party.
The Chairman. You are here to give up any information which
you have about this man. Counsel asked you a very simple
question, whether or not he is a Communist. You will be ordered
to answer the question.
Mr. Unger. I have stated to you----
The Chairman. I have heard what you stated.
Mr. Unger [continuing]. That I think you are not giving it
sufficient consideration, Senator. I understand what your
purpose is. I know that you are going after Communists, and
that is a fairly well-known activity on your part, and it is
not my purpose here to debate that question with you. You have
the power to do so at present, and you seem to be exercising it
for your own purposes. But the point that I make to you is that
as a legal question you have no right to inquire into the
political beliefs and opinions of people, as in this instance
as to ask anyone concerning the political beliefs and opinions
of another, just as you wouldn't have the right to ask me
concerning your own political beliefs and opinions or your own
religious beliefs and opinions, and I have tried to state that
to you as fully and as fairly as I can.
The Chairman. I understand your position, but you will be
ordered to answer the question.
Mr. Unger. All right, I shall confer.
The Chairman. What did you say?
Mr. Unger. I said I shall confer with counsel.
Mr. Jaffe. You have called Mr. Friedman as a witness----
Mr. Cohn. He is Mr. Unger's partner, is that right?
Mr. Jaffe. Yes, and I am here with him as well, under the
same difficult conditions.
Mr. Cohn. Talk to him as well.
All right, it is the same facts, and everything else.
The Chairman. Incidentally, your client will be ordered not
to leave the building. He is under subpoena.
[Whereupon, the witness was temporarily excused.]
TESTIMONY OF ALICE EHRENFELD
The Chairman. Will you please stand and raise your right
hand?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Miss Ehrenfeld, what is your occupation?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I am an attorney.
Mr. Cohn. You are an attorney. When were you admitted to
practice?
Miss Ehrenfeld. November '47.
Mr. Cohn. You graduated from Yale Law School?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What do you do now? Where were you employed?
Miss Ehrenfeld. The United Nations.
Mr. Cohn. In what capacity?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I am in the social affairs department,
social affairs office.
Mr. Cohn. Social affairs office up at the United Nations.
When did you go to work for the United Nations?
Miss Ehrenfeld. In July 1951.
Mr. Cohn. Miss Ehrenfeld, have you ever been a Communist?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. You have not?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Sol Newman?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. You don't. Have you ever been in New Haven,
Connecticut?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You went to Yale, didn't you?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Were you up there around '44?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes, it was my first year.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man by the name of Sol Newman
there?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man by the name of Sid Silverman?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man by the name of Sid Taylor?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever know any member of the Communist
party?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No, not to my knowledge, no one I knew as a
member of the Communist party.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been a member of the National
Lawyers Guild?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Are you a member now?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. What is the period of your membership?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I think the last time I paid dues was '48.
Mr. Cohn. 1948 was the last time you paid dues?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. When was the last time you had any connection
with the National Lawyers Guild?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I think it was some time in '48. I went to
a meeting in Washington.
Mr. Cohn. You haven't attended any meetings since then?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you regard the National Lawyers Guild as
under Communist domination?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever consider that question?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No, I didn't consider it to be under
Communist domination.
Mr. Cohn. Don't you know that the entire roster of officers
in the National Lawyers Guild resigned from it some time ago--
Justice Jackson, Justice Pecora, and a number of others--and
called it an organization completely under the domination of
the Communist party? You were familiar with that, weren't you?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I knew it had been under attack for that.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't that give you some pause as to whether or
not you ought to belong to it?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I thought it was a reasonable professional
association at the time I belonged to it.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know of any policy it ever adopted which
was contrary to that followed by the Communist party?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No. To be absolutely honest, I didn't keep
very close track on it. I just went to a couple of meetings.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know anybody by the name of Abraham
Ehrenfeld?
Miss Ehrenfeld. That is my father.
Mr. Cohn. Is he teaching in a high school in New York?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No, he is an assistant superintendent.
Mr. Cohn. Assistant superintendent of schools?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Has he ever been a Communist?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Is he a registered member of the American Labor
party, do you know?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I don't think so. He is a registered
Democrat.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether your father was ever a
sponsor or connected with the Carver School?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. You don't know that. Do you have a brother named
Robert Louis Ehrenfeld?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not he has been a
registered member of the American Labor party?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I think he once registered in ALP.
Mr. Cohn. When was the last time he registered in ALP, do
you know?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Has he ever been active in the American
Association of Scientific Workers, which is listed as a
Communist front?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Was one of your references for application at the
United Nations Thomas Emerson?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Is that Professor Emerson of Yale Law School?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Professor Emerson was a member of the
Communist party?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I don't think so.
Mr. Cohn. You don't think to this day he was?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Would you regard him as a Communist?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Professor Emerson rather well?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Yes, he was my reference.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Had you ever discussed communism and
related subjects with him?
Miss Ehrenfeld. We had political discussions.
Mr. Cohn. As a result of those political discussions, did
you not gain the impression that Mr. Emerson was a Communist?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. You did not?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you regard him as anti-Communist?
Miss Ehrenfeld. In some ways, yes.
Mr. Cohn. In what ways?
Miss Ehrenfeld. Well, I do remember his--I remember he took
issue on the Korean----
Mr. Cohn. That was quite a bit after you knew him as your
professor?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I really don't know too much about it, but
I do remember some things about left--Progressive party, or
something, on Korea. I really don't remember.
Mr. Cohn. Why did you drop out of the National Lawyers
Guild?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I just--I had never been very active, and I
went to a meeting in Washington and there didn't seem to be
anything very much, and I just didn't go any more, I just
didn't pay my dues any more.
Mr. Cohn. It had nothing to do with the question of
Communist control?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Would it bother you if the organization were
under Communist domination?
Miss Ehrenfeld. If I thought it was Communist dominated, I
probably wouldn't belong to it.
Mr. Cohn. Is there any doubt about that in your mind?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I didn't think it was Communist dominated.
Mr. Cohn. You said you wouldn't belong to it. Is there any
doubt that if it were under Communist domination you wouldn't
belong to it?
Miss Ehrenfeld. If there was no doubt in my mind that it
was under Communist domination, I would not belong to it.
Mr. Cohn. What evidence did you secure to indicate that it
was not under Communist domination, in view of the resignation
of the top officers?
Miss Ehrenfeld. I didn't go looking. I am not sure even
what time the top officers resigned.
Mr. Cohn. I see. And you are quite sure you don't know Mr.
Newman, or Mr. Silverman, who is also known as Mr. Taylor up in
New Haven; is that right?
Miss Ehrenfeld. The names don't mean anything to me now.
Mr. Cohn. One of those persons said that you had been a
member of a professional group of the Communist party up there,
they would not be telling the truth; is that so?
Miss Ehrenfeld. They would not be telling the truth.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend a Communist meeting?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. In New Haven?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend a meeting that you now think
might have been a Communist meeting?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. You have any doubt about that?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. None whatsoever?
Miss Ehrenfeld. No.
Mr. Cohn. All right, that will be all for this afternoon.
We will let you know when we want you back.
The Chairman. We may not want you back. Incidentally, your
name will not be given to the press by the committee, so that
the only way that anyone will learn that you were here is if
you decide to tell them yourself. We just want you to know that
there will be no publicity as to the fact that you were here,
unless you decide to give it out yourself.
Miss Ehrenfeld. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. I doubt very much we will want you back, I
wish you would consider yourself still under subpoena, and in
case there is any further information we want we will let you
know. Thank you very much.
[Witness excused.]
TESTIMONY OF ABRAHAM UNGER (ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, BERNARD
JAFFE) (RESUMED)
Mr. Unger. During the recess I conferred with my partner,
and he has reminded me that we were the attorneys of record in
the original Smith Act trial, and that in the course of that
time a number of people were employed for various tasks, among
which was the job of research, and among whom was Mr. Reiss,
who was on a payroll which was handled by him, by my partner,
whose name is David M. Friedman, and I think that is the
complete story. How long a period of time he worked there,
whether it was months or weeks, I have no recollection.
Mr. Cohn. So the specific matter on which Mr. Reiss was
working was research in connection with the defense of the
Communist leaders, your firm having been attorneys of record
for them?
Mr. Unger. That is the employment to which you refer.
Mr. Cohn. All right, sir, fine. That clears that up. Now,
can we get back to the question as to whether or not you knew--
--
Mr. Unger. I restate my objection, and also add the further
fact that I do not know.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Unger. I do not know.
Mr. Cohn. You don't know?
Mr. Unger. I don't.
Mr. Cohn. You have no knowledge as to whether he is or is
not a Communist?
Mr. Unger. Precisely.
Mr. Cohn. Or whether he was or was not in the year 1950?
Mr. Unger. That's right.
Mr. Cohn. You have no knowledge of that?
Mr. Unger. Precisely.
Mr. Cohn. Were you yourself at that time the head of the
professional group of the Communist party in this area?
Mr. Unger. I object to the question, and here we are back
again to the original issue raised by the senator's
representation and the representation made by the counsel for
the committee. It has been represented to us that this was an
inquiry into the employment or association of Mr. Remes or
Reiss, myself and my partner. There is no relevancy in the
question now propounded in so far as the nature of the
examination being conducted here, and it is not within the
province of this committee to make such inquiry as to the
political beliefs and opinions of myself. I object, for the
reason that this is an intrusion upon the personal political
rights and freedoms of an individual, and entirely outside the
scope and powers of a congressional committee, having no
relevancy to the subject of an investigation, not being
pertinent or material to the investigation, and intended solely
for ulterior purposes which are improper and unlawful, and I
therefore object to answering that question.
I further would indicate that that is a violation of the
representation already made by the chairman of the committee
and by counsel for the committee.
Mr. Cohn. That is just not accurate.
Mr. Unger. I insist that it is.
The Chairman. You have your position. Let us see. Number
one, Mr. Cohn, you certainly are strictly within the
jurisdiction of the committee when you inquire with regard to
this UN employee, Mr. Reiss, when you inquire as to his
Communist connections, whether he belongs to a conspiracy
against this country. I think that you are within your right
when you inquire as to whether or not he was the employer who
worked in defense of men accused of teaching and advocating the
overthrow of the government by force and violence. I believe to
go into the background of Reiss and to get the full picture of
him you must get the background of anyone associated with him.
Mr. Cohn. Of course, this witness says he doesn't know
whether or not Reiss is a Communist. As you know, Mr. Chairman,
we have some evidence to the contrary, and it appears that Mr.
Reiss was a member of the party.
The Chairman. In other words, you have got information that
shows this witness either knows or should know that Reiss was a
Communist; is that right?
Mr. Cohn. That's right.
The Chairman. And one way to evaluate his testimony is to
find out whether or not he is in a position to know whether or
not he was a member of the Communist party. In addition to
that, he works for government agencies--this witness himself
does.
Mr. Unger. Who does?
The Chairman. Practices before government agencies. I think
there is no question about that. Don't you think so?
Mr. Cohn. There is not.
The Chairman. The witness will be ordered to answer the
question.
Mr. Jaffe. May I say this, Senator----
The Chairman. No. I may say that you may advise with your
client fully, but the rules of the committee, that have been
adopted by the several members of the committee, are that a
lawyer can advise with his client as freely as he cares to at
any time, but the lawyer is not allowed to take part in the
proceedings. Therefore, you can advise with your client as much
as you care to. If there are any questions in mind that you
care to ask Mr. Cohn and myself, we will be glad to try and
answer them for you
Mr. Jaffe. That is what I mean. Can I ask you a question?
The Chairman. Oh, certainly.
Mr. Jaffe. See, when we first started, and I suggested that
an adjournment would be desirable, you indicated that the scope
of the inquiry would be about this man Riess.
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Jaffe. And, well, as far as I am concerned, as a
lawyer, if somebody wants to answer a few questions about a
particular individual, he can go ahead.
But are you now indicating that this man's whole
activities, just like Reiss' whole activities, were open for
your inquiry, now this man's whole life, and his opinions, and
his activities, become open for inquiry?
The Chairman. I am not concerned with his opinions at all.
One of the questions is whether or not Reiss was a high
functionary of the Communist party. This witness says he
doesn't know. It is very pertinent to find out whether he is in
a position to know or not. He has been asked a very simple
question, whether or not he himself is high in the party. If
so, he would know whether Reiss is a member. He will be ordered
to answer that, unless he wants to take advantage of the Fifth
Amendment, of course.
Mr. Jaffe. Well, I wonder whether I might act upon your
earlier suggestion, then, and request an adjournment of this so
that I can discuss this with him fully, because this opens up
an entirely new area of inquiry, if I am to participate in it.
The Chairman. I think that is a reasonable request.
Mr. Unger. I should like to state for the record that the
witness has been misled by representations made by the senator
and a member of the bar in this inquiry, that after carefully
thinking over the problem, no reasonably minded person can come
to the conclusion that the questions presently propounded, or
the line of inquiry that seems to be indicated has any
relevancy to, has any bearing upon what was represented to be
the subject of the inquiry.
I have thought very carefully in the few minutes concerning
that matter, and I say, therefore, that the inquiry is not now
within the purview set down by the--within the purview of the
subject matter of the investigation or represented by the
senator and the counsel.
The Chairman. Do you want an adjournment? I won't hear any
statement, if you want an adjournment. I am not going to spend
any more time with you. Are you asking for an adjournment?
Mr. Unger. I concur with the request of counsel for an
adjournment.
The Chairman. All right. You will be given a recess until
tomorrow morning at 10:30. I may say, for your benefit, under
the rules of the committee, this committee has absolute
jurisdiction if we wanted to go into any subversive activities
on your part, in view of the fact that you are admitted to
practice before a United States agency. That is not the
principal purpose of this hearing. What we are interested in
are the subversive activities of Mr. Reiss. We will give you
adjournment until 10:30 tomorrow morning.
Mr. Unger. I will be in court at 10:30 tomorrow morning. I
have a court engagement set before this.
Mr. Cohn. What is the engagement?
Mr. Unger. The case of People vs Vitale and two others.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that? What court?
Mr. Unger. In felony court, youth term.
Mr. Cohn. Here in Manhattan?
Mr. Unger. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How long do you imagine that is going to take?
Mr. Unger. Maybe twelve, one o'clock.
Mr. Jaffe. May I request your indulgence, Senator, for my
own purposes? As I say, I was called into this on very, very
short notice. My own schedule today is disrupted and it is very
crowded tomorrow. As a result, I wonder whether or not you
could indulge me in some additional time beyond that, so that I
can really have an opportunity to talk to him and know whether
or not I can go ahead or should represent him.
The Chairman. Well, here is our only problem. I certainly
would like to give you all the time that you think you need to
examine this legal question. We have the entire staff up here;
we have other work set for next week and the week after. Our
schedule calls for disposing of this this week. I don't think
we should disrupt your client's legal work that he is planning
on doing tomorrow morning. If he is going to be in court until
one o'clock, he shouldn't be asked to come here and testify. I
frankly don't think it is unreasonable if we gave him instead
of 'til 10:30 in the morning, in view of this court work, that
we give him until some time tomorrow afternoon.
We can do this: We can try and suit your convenience as to
the time we set for tomorrow afternoon. In other words, if it
will be easier for you to come in at 2:30, or 3:30, or 1:30, we
will try and accommodate you as to that.
Mr. Unger. You said at the outset that you will put it off
until next week.
Mr. Cohn. No, Mr. Unger, please.
Mr. Unger. Was I mistaken?
The Chairman. No, you asked for a week's adjournment and I
said if the matter came up and we needed additional time, we
would try and work it out.
Mr. Jaffe. This is an inquiry into Mr. Unger himself. Now,
I don't know what is involved personally, again. I am a lawyer.
I would like to inquire into it. I have heard Mr. Unger object
to this statement. I would like to discuss that with him, and
frankly, Senator, I realize that you are taking Mr. Unger's
convenience into consideration, but I want you to take into
consideration my own convenience.
Mr. Unger. I want to say, Senator--to aid you in forming a
judgment--I want to say to you, you have been told everything
there is to know concerning the relation of Mr. Unger or Mr.
Friedman with Mr. Remes, or Mr. Reiss.
Mr. Cohn. You say that now, Mr. Unger.
Mr. Unger. What?
Mr. Cohn. I say, you say that now. A few minutes ago you
were equally sure that Mr. Reiss had never been paid any money
by your firm, or he had not been employed by your firm.
Mr. Unger. That means nothing inconsistent. When I say
``equally sure,'' I meant just what I said, and as far as I was
concerned, he was not employed by us, and as a matter of fact
you might have asked about ten or fifteen other persons who
were employed in the same manner, and my answer would
undoubtedly have been the same, because in the course of my
practice as an attorney with my partner, I normally would know
the people that we employed. We employed a stenographer, we may
have employed a clerk, and that would be the end of it. This
happened to be a special and a very peculiar kind of
relationship that lasted for a short period of time, and as you
yourself are aware of, it was in connection with one case. That
is an obvious explanation for my having made the statement. I
didn't make the statement out of bravado, or out of a simple
desire to answer your question, but out of a conviction that
that was the fact. I find out that I am in error about it. I
correct that statement. You now have everything, practically
everything--I say practically, because I don't again want to be
held to whether or not I saw him one day on the street. You now
have everything that there is to know which might have any
relevancy to an inquiry by a Congressional committee concerning
the relation of Mr. Friedman or with Mr. Remes or Mr. Reiss,
period.
Mr. Cohn. You see, the senator has to pass judgment on the
question of relevancy. You don't know what we have and what we
want to do.
Mr. Unger. I said to you now, when I say, `` relevancy,''
all that I mean by that is that it excludes such a question as
whether or not I had a drink with him one day. But insofar as
it has anything to do with any business relations of any kind,
you have got the whole story, because that is all there is to
it. There is nothing more to it than that.
Mr. Cohn. The question we have now--I mean we have to ask
the questions we have to ask--the matter of adjournment.
The Chairman. Number one, it is important to know what, if
any, dealings he had with this man as a member of the Communist
party.
Mr. Unger. You have been told what they were.
The Chairman. Please don't interrupt. It is important to
know what dealings he had with this man Reiss, who has been
identified as a top functionary of the Communist party, in
order to pass upon the veracity of this witness, his
credibility, and to know what position he was in, to know
whether or not Reiss was a Communist. It is certainly relevant
to know whether this man was a top member of the party. I think
if counsel makes a point, however, that it is a very important
matter to him. He was subpoenaed yesterday.
Mr. Cohn. Of course, the witness is a member of the bar
himself.
The Chairman. He is a member of the bar and he has been
dealing with this particular type of work, so it is not new to
him at all, in defending these cases.
We will give you your choice, whether you want to come in
at 9:30 Thursday morning--that is a bit early--or if you want
to come in sometime Wednesday afternoon, and tell us what time
you prefer. I might say, we are trying to accommodate you as to
the time on Wednesday afternoon.
Mr. Jaffe. Couldn't you make it at least Thursday
afternoon, Senator, after your public sessions are over?
The Chairman. We cannot, because the public sessions will
last most likely Thursday and Friday.
Mr. Jaffe. At any time that they are over in the
afternoon--you see, it would be so much better for me, frankly.
One of my partners is away right now.
Mr. Unger. Why don't you put it over 'til next weekend?
Mr. Cohn. We can't do it.
Mr. Jaffe. If you put it over 'til Thursday or Friday, any
time.
Mr. Cohn. We can't do it, Mr. Unger. We have to get this
over with. We have a lot of other witnesses.
Mr. Unger. Why don't you take your other witnesses, if your
object is, as you state, or represented to me--or as you state
it in the newspapers--then I don't know why you persist in
saying that you have to have it tomorrow, when you are now told
that there is no more that you can get that has any bearing at
all on this matter in the remotest way?
The Chairman. The information that has a bearing is whether
or not you are a top member of the party.
Mr. Unger. I didn't hear you.
The Chairman. The information that has a very direct
bearing is whether or not you yourself were a top member of the
party.
Mr. Unger. I thought you were making an inquiry into Mr.
Remes, or Reiss.
The Chairman. We are not going to argue with you.
Mr. Unger. The whole point is in reference to the
adjournment.
Mr. Jaffe. If you can't put it over 'til next week,
couldn't you make it the afternoon of Thursday or Friday? Any
time you say; you can give me a call, or give Mr. Unger a call
when you are finished.
Mr. Unger. That's an idea. Give me a call, and give me a
couple of hours notice. Do you want to do it that way, on a
couple of hours notice?
The Chairman. We will make it Thursday afternoon at two
o'clock.
Mr. Jaffe. All right. Now, would the same thing apply to
Mr. Friedman?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Jaffe. Because the same information would be given by
Mr. Friedman.
Mr. Cohn. They are probably in the same boat.
Mr. Jaffe. And you propose to ask Mr. Friedman about his--
--
The Chairman. Yes. Just so there will be no question about
the scope of the examination, we will question both Mr.
Friedman and Mr. Unger on the activities of Mr. Reiss or Mr.
Remes, the capacity in which he worked in the office, the type
of work he was doing, whether he was known to them as a
Communist, anything else about him that would reflect upon that
question, and we will ask both Mr. Unger and Mr. Friedman about
their own activities, if any, within the party. That will be
necessary so that we can determine whether or not they are in a
position to know whether he was a Communist or not, and I may
say, just for the benefit of counsel, we have a rule of the
committee, passed unanimously by the committee, to the effect
that the chair can institute preliminary investigations, call
witnesses on any matter having to do with the business of the
federal government, so that even if Mr. Reiss' United Nations
matter were not up here, my interpretation of the authority of
the committee would be that we could call Mr. Unger anyway, in
view of his having been admitted to practice before a federal
agency. I bring that up because Mr. Unger was questioning the
jurisdiction of the committee.
I think we should subpoena, Roy, the records having to do
with the payments made to Mr. Reiss.
Mr. Cohn. Bring down just whatever you have reflecting
whatever payments were made to Reiss at any time by your firm
or by yourself.
Mr. Unger. I can see no reason offhand for not having them,
but I shall have to discuss that with my partner.
The Chairman. So the record will be clear, the witness is
ordered to produce the records showing payments made to Mr.
Reiss, or showing the type of work that Mr. Reiss did while in
the employ of the witness Unger, or his partner, Mr. Friedman,
or the firm. That will be two o'clock on Thursday. [Witness
excused.]
TESTIMONY OF DIMITRI VARLEY (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, HERMAN
A GRAY) (RESUMED)
The Chairman. The witness is reminded that he is still
under oath.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Varley, do you know a man named Johannes
Steel?
Mr. Varley. I don't believe so. I think I met him at one of
the UN cocktail parties.
Mr. Carr. Would you recall what year you met him?
Mr. Varley. Well, that would be anywhere from '46 on, I
guess.
Mr. Carr. You have no recollection as to the year?
Mr. Varley. No--I mean from '46 on.
Mr. Carr. After you were at the UN?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Do you know who Mr. Steel is?
Mr. Varley. Yes. He is a journalist.
Mr. Carr. And a commentator. Did you ever subscribe to a
newsletter that he put out?
Mr. Varley. I did.
Mr. Carr. Did you subscribe at the time you met him, or had
you subscribed previous to that?
Mr. Varley. I don't remember the date. I subscribed on the
basis of the ad I received.
Mr. Carr. An ad that you had received?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Do you think this was prior to the time you went
to the UN?
Mr. Varley. I don't remember clearly. I can check up, but
I----
Mr. Carr. You say you met him at a cocktail party, you
think, at the UN?
Mr. Varley. If I did meet him at all, I think I met him at
one of those receptions.
Mr. Carr. At the UN itself?
Mr. Varley. Not necessarily; at one of the receptions given
by a delegation.
The Chairman. Which delegation?
Mr. Varley. I wouldn't be able to recall. I have very vague
recollections, because I heard the name, I knew he was a
journalist, and I think it was some kind of a thing that so and
so, and you shake hands.
The Chairman. Is it a usual practice for the delegations to
invite well known Communists to their parties, their cocktail
parties?
Mr. Varley. I don't know what their practice is.
The Chairman. At the time you met him, did you have any
idea that he was a Communist?
Mr. Varley. I don't know whether he is a Communist or not.
The Chairman. Do you know now?
Mr. Varley. I don't know anything about him besides except
subscribing to his letters.
The Chairman. How did you pay for the subscription, do you
recall?
Mr. Varley. Mostly by my check.
The Chairman. By a check to him?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
The Chairman. Did you have correspondence with him?
Mr. Varley. No, sir, except sending subscription to whoever
it was.
The Chairman. Did you ever write to him?
Mr. Varley. No, sir, not to my recollection.
The Chairman. Did you think that the material which he sent
you followed the Communist line?
Mr. Varley. I wouldn't clearly remember. I remember much
material he would write on foreign news, and my general
impression--may I continue, or do I make it too long?
The Chairman. You may continue.
Mr. Varley. I felt that it was rather lengthy and uneven
material, but there were some bits of stories that were not in
the daily newspapers it was worth reading.
The Chairman. How much did you pay for the paper, the
newsletter?
Mr. Varley. I think it was four or five dollars.
The Chairman. A year?
Mr. Varley. Yes. The reason why I think that, because I
thought it was expensive, because it was, I think, a monthly
mimeographed letter.
The Chairman. How many years did you subscribe to it?
Mr. Varley. I would think about two years.
Mr. Carr. You renewed the subscription to it?
Mr. Varley. I think so, but I think it folded up, because I
have recollection that it stopped.
The Chairman. It was a strictly Communist sheet, wasn't it,
put out by top Communists?
Mr. Varley. I don't know that he is a Communist, and I
didn't think it was.
The Chairman. Did you have any reason to think he was a
Communist?
Mr. Varley. No.
The Chairman. Did his material follow the Communist line?
You could tell by reading that he was a Communist, couldn't
you?
Mr. Varley. Really, Senator, I am trying to think hard, and
the last thing I remember about Steel was his radio comments
during the war. I don't recall them being Communist material.
The Chairman. You say you don't recall that the newsletter
you got from him appeared to be Communist?
Mr. Varley. I didn't have that impression, Senator.
Mr. Carr. Now tell me, Mr. Varley, did you ever subscribe
to any other newsletter?
Mr. Varley. I can't think offhand. May I ask my lawyer?
Mr. Carr. Certainly.
[Whereupon, the witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Varley. I have no clear recollection.
Mr. Carr. The only newsletter you recall ever subscribing
to was the one put out by Johannes Steel?
Mr. Varley. Yes. Since you asked me that question, I recall
that.
Mr. Carr. It is possible there may have been some others,
but that is the only one you recall at this point?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
The Chairman. How about the Daily Worker?
Mr. Varley. I didn't subscribe to Daily Worker.
The Chairman. Did you buy it, or get it?
Mr. Varley. Many years ago I read it, but whether I read it
in the library or bought it on the stand, I don't remember.
The Chairman. How many years ago?
Mr. Varley. I would say it would be at least fifteen years
or so--up to the point when it was easier to get Russian papers
and I was looking for the material on Russian economic news.
The Chairman. Did you ever go to any Communist party
meetings?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Sir?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know anyone who was a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Varley. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Carr. Did you ever know a man named Harley Freeman?
Mr. Varley. Harley Freeman? Yes, I know him.
Mr. Carr. Did you know that he was a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Varley. I don't know.
Mr. Carr. Do you know his wife, Vera?
Mr. Varley. I know her, yes.
Mr. Carr. Do you know that she is a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did you know at that time that you knew them?
Mr. Varley. I didn't know, and I don't know.
The Chairman. How well do you know them?
Mr. Varley. I know them socially for several years.
The Chairman. You visited their home, did you?
Mr. Varley. I did.
The Chairman. And they visited yours?
Mr. Varley. They did.
The Chairman. You still have that association?
Mr. Varley. I see them infrequently socially, yes.
The Chairman. How many times have you been at their home in
the last six months?
Mr. Varley. I think I was once--that is, to my best
recollection--last six months.
The Chairman. How many times would you say they have been
to your home in the last six months?
Mr. Varley. They haven't been at my home during the last
six months.
The Chairman. Have you met them any place outside of their
home in the last six months?
Mr. Varley. No, sir, not that I can recall.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss communism with them?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You say you never had any reason to know they
were Communists?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never suspected it?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did you know that Freeman had been associated
with the TASS?
Mr. Varley. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did you know that he had been employed by the
Daily Worker?
Mr. Varley. I might have heard it, that he was employed but
I am not sure that I----
Mr. Carr. You never discussed that with him?
Mr. Varley. No, sir. He is employed by TASS, that I know.
The Chairman. You knew he was employed by TASS?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
The Chairman. And you heard that he worked at the Daily
Worker?
Mr. Varley. I am not sure.
The Chairman. You say you had no reason to think that he
might have been a Communist?
Mr. Varley. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You still say that?
Mr. Varley. I still say that.
The Chairman. That is, a man works for TASS and the Daily
Worker, and you have no reason to think that he might have been
a Communist?
Mr. Varley. I am not sure that I know he worked for Daily
Worker. You mentioned it, and I am----
The Chairman. I might say that you are not even trying to
be truthful with us, when you tell us that this friend of
yours, that you know, whom you visit, who visits your home, you
know he works for the Communist paper from Moscow, and you
heard he worked for the Daily Worker, and then you sit there
and perjure yourself and say, ``I had no reason to know he was
a Communist.'' You know better than that. If you don't then you
shouldn't be holding a $12,000 a year job at the UN. You can go
right ahead and do all of the lying you care to. We will give
you all the chance in the world. I have warned you three or
four times either to tell us the truth or refuse to answer.
Mr. Varley. Senator, I didn't refuse to answer. I am trying
to be as cooperative as I can, and when you ask me whether he
worked, what I know, I did say and I did tell you that I didn't
discuss communism with him, and I have no reason to know that
if he worked for TASS, he must be Communist.
Mr. Carr. Do you know Amy Oppenheimer?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. From Tuckahoe, New York?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. You don't know her?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Are you sure of that, now?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. You have no recollection of having been in
contact with Amy Oppenheimer?
Mr. Varley. Could you tell me who she is? Maybe I can----
Mr. Carr. Amy Oppenheimer was a prominent member of the
tri-county section of the Communist party--tri-county meaning
covering the Tuckahoe area.
Mr. Varley. No, sir, I don't know her.
Mr. Carr. You never had any contact with her that you
recall?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Have you ever contributed to the Veterans of the
Abraham Lincoln Brigade financially?
Mr. Varley. That is the question the counsel asked me this
morning, and I might have, but I have no clear recollection.
Mr. Carr. Did you ever contribute to the American Committee
for the Protection of the Foreign Born?
Mr. Varley. I did.
Mr. Carr. You did. When was that, do you recall?
Mr. Varley. This morning, I said '49, '50. I don't recall
the date, but maybe we could----
Mr. Carr. That is all right.
The Chairman. Incidentally, I am not sure if counsel has
identified himself.
Mr. Gray. Yes, I did this morning: Herman A. Gray, G-r-a-y,
551 Fifth Avenue, New York.
The Chairman. All right.
Do you recognize the American Labor party as Communist
controlled?
Mr. Varley. I have no knowledge to believe so, sir.
The Chairman. Did you think it is not Communist controlled?
Mr. Varley. I don't know enough whether it is or not.
The Chairman. When you join a party and register as a
member, don't you first find out whether it is run by the
Communists or not, or are you interested in that?
Mr. Varley. I registered with the party many years ago and
I kept up that registration. At the time when I registered I
remember seeing some material on the aims of the American Labor
party, and it didn't appear to me to be in any way contrary to
it.
The Chairman. You registered again in 1950, didn't you?
Mr. Varley. Yes, I repeated registration, but I didn't
examine their aims--reexamine their aims, and I assumed they
were more or less what they were to start with.
The Chairman. You didn't read the publicity in the paper
about their being Communist controlled?
Mr. Varley. I think I mentioned this morning that I have
seen something, I believe, during election campaign, but I
didn't see any--I mean, nothing to convince me that it was the
case.
The Chairman. Did you ever hear of a publication called In
Fact?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
The Chairman. Did you sell that?
Mr. Varley. No, I did not.
The Chairman. Didn't you ever sell that?
Mr. Varley. Sell In Fact?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Varley. I subscribed to it once.
The Chairman. Did you ever sell it?
Mr. Varley. Not to my knowledge, not to my recollection.
The Chairman. You don't recall ever having sold it?
Mr. Varley. Excuse me, would you repeat that?
The Chairman. You don't recall ever having sold it?
Mr. Varley. I don't recall that. May I just come back to
one question that counsel asked before? In Fact was also a sort
of a kind of a newsletter, if I recall; it was way back, but I
think it was kind of a page or two pages.
The Chairman. A Communist publication, was it not?
Mr. Varley. Not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Outside of the newsletter by Steel, who has
been named as a Communist, In Fact, which has been described as
a Communist publication, you don't recall having subscribed to
any other newsletters or papers?
Mr. Varley. Well, I subscribed, I recall, to the
information bulletin published by the Soviet embassy, when it
existed, but I didn't consider it--I considered it governmental
publication.
The Chairman. You subscribed to the Soviet embassy
bulletin? How many years did you get that? How many years did
you subscribe to that?
Mr. Varley. I think I started receiving it about 1945,
roughly.
The Chairman. How many years did you, subscribe to it?
Mr. Varley. And I got it until it was--they discontinued
it, or it was stopped.
The Chairman. Did you get bulletins from any of the other
embassies?
Mr. Varley. I do not recall, except that occasionally I
would get newsletters in my office from some countries--maybe
Australian or Brazilian. I wouldn't recall.
Mr. Carr. Do you know a man named Vladimir Kazakvich?
Mr. Varley. I did know him years ago.
Mr. Carr. When?
Mr. Varley. I went to college with him.
Mr. Carr. What college was that?
Mr. Varley. Columbia.
Mr. Carr. Columbia University?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
Mr. Carr, Were you a fellow student or----
Mr. Varley. We were fellow students.
Mr. Carr. You were fellow students?
Mr. Varley. Yes, at Columbia University.
Mr. Carr. He has been accused of being a Soviet agent?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. When did your acquaintanceship with him end or
does it continue today?
Mr. Varley. I knew him for some time after the college and
saw him occasionally, and stopped seeing him, I would say,
roughly around or before the war.
Mr. Carr. You haven't seen him since before the war, before
1941?
Mr. Varley. I have no recollection. Then I heard that he
left for Russia. That is about all I knew about him.
The Chairman. In other words, you saw him up until he left
for Russia?
Mr. Varley. I didn't see him--I might say that I have seen
him in the college days frequently and quite often after that,
because we both were members of a student organization.
The Chairman. What student organization?
Mr. Varley. It was National Russian Students Christian
Association.
The Chairman. National Russian----
Mr. Varley. Students Christian Association.
The Chairman. Are you of Russian descent, incidentally?
Mr. Varley. Yes, sir--excuse me, am I of Russian descent?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Varley. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Were you born in this country?
Mr. Varley. No, I was born in Russia.
The Chairman. When did you come from Russia?
Mr. Varley. I came here in 1923.
Mr. Carr. Were you a member of a Soviet espionage ring in
conjunction with Mr. Kazahevich?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did he ever speak to you concerning what he was
doing?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did he ever approach you----
Mr. Varley. May I just----
Mr. Carr. Go ahead.
Mr. Varley. When you say was I a member of a ring, that I
don't even know of such a ring, so he never spoke to me about
it.
Mr. Carr. Did he ever speak to you about what he was doing?
When I say ``what he was doing,'' I mean what he was doing in
connection with this Soviet espionage ring.
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did he ever approach you to join with him in this
ring?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did he ever ask any favors of any kind of you?
Mr. Varley. That is more difficult question, because during
the student days he might have borrowed something from me and I
borrowed from him.
Mr. Carr. Following that period, in the period up to when
you last saw him sometime before the war, roughly 1941, did he
ever ask you to furnish him with any information?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did he ever ask your opinion concerning any
information--when I say ``any information,'' I mean on any
subject other than the weather, a ball game, or something like
that.
Mr. Varley. You mean in terms of the espionage?
Mr. Carr. Right.
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Do you know where he is today?
Mr. Varley. No, sir. I heard that he left for Russia.
Mr. Carr. You haven't heard from him since he left?
Mr. Varley. I haven't heard from him. Actually I haven't
seen him for years before he left for Russia.
Mr. Carr. When you were a member of the State, County and
Municipal Workers Union, did you not sell copies of In Fact to
other members of your local?
Mr. Varley. I cannot recall anything of that sort, sir. I
remember, as I told you, that I subscribed myself.
Mr. Carr. You don't remember seeing the man at your local,
Local 28, I believe it was, who distributed the In Fact
magazine letter?
Mr. Varley. I have no recollection.
Mr. Carr. You have no recollection of that whatsoever?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Do you know a man named Kenneth Durant? \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Kenneth Durant served as the chief American representative of
TASS--Telegrafnoye Agentstvo Sovietskovo Soyuza or Telegraph Agency of
the Soviet Union--from 1919 until 1944.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Varley. I do.
Mr. Carr. Who is he?
Mr. Varley. He is the husband of a woman who is dead now,
who was a teacher of my wife, who was a famous American poet.
Her name was Genevieve Taggard. That is how I met him.
Mr. Carr. When is the last time you saw Kenneth Durant?
Mr. Varley. I stopped at his place this summer about--when
was it--July or August.
Mr. Carr. This year?
Mr. Varley. This year--and that was, I believe, first time
I saw him in about last three years or approximately that.
Mr. Carr. You mean since 1949?
Mr. Varley. Roughly, yes.
Mr. Carr. Did you ever know Durant as a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did he ever approach you to join the Communist
party?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did you know that during the period that you were
in contact with him, which now includes up through 1953, that
he has been a liaison between the Soviet Union and the
Communist party of this country?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. You had never heard of that?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Had you ever heard of him being accused of being
such a liaison?
Mr. Varley. I have seen something in the newspapers or a
magazine article, but I don't remember where it was--very
recently, but very vaguely.
Mr. Carr. Well----
Mr. Varley. May I just [consulting with counsel]. I really
don't remember.
Mr. Carr. But it was prior to July or August of this year
when you visited him again?
Mr. Varley. I can't really remember clearly.
Mr. Carr. You don't remember clearly concerning that?
Mr. Varley. No.
Mr. Carr. Where does Durant live? Where did Durant live at
the time you visited him in 1953?
Mr. Varley. In Vermont.
Mr. Carr. In Vermont? What place is that?
Mr. Varley. He lives on a farm. It is either East Jamaica
or Jamaica.
Mr. Carr. Now, just so this will be straight, at the time
you visited him in 1953, was that a social visit?
Mr. Varley. Purely social visit.
Mr. Carr. Did you stay there any length of time?
Mr. Varley. We came very late, I would say about seven
o'clock. They were going to some concert. They didn't expect
us--we were driving by--so they invited us to go to a concert.
We went with them to a concert, and we left early following
morning.
Mr. Carr. Did you stay overnight?
Mr. Varley. We stayed overnight.
Mr. Carr. At his residence?
Mr. Varley. At his residence.
Mr. Carr. Well, prior to this visit, had you heard that he
was a member of the Communist party?
[Whereupon, Mr. Varley consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Varley. No, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. On this fellow Durant, we questioned you about
him before the grand jury a year ago, didn't we, and told you
he was a Communist?
Mr. Varley. You asked me whether I know he was a Communist.
That is my recollection.
Mr. Cohn. I see.
Mr. Varley. To my recollection, I said I didn't know.
Mr. Cohn. Don't you know Whittaker Chambers testified that
Durant was a liaison between Soviet underground and the
Communist party?
Mr. Varley. No.
Mr. Cohn. We told you that before the grand jury.
Mr. Varley. That Whittaker Chambers testified?
Mr. Cohn. Oh, yes.
Mr. Varley. May I look at the grand jury minutes?
Mr. Cohn. No, you can't look at them, and I can't look at
them. Do you remember being questioned about Kenneth Durant
before the grand jury?
Mr. Varley. That I remember. Yes, I do.
Mr. Cohn. What did we tell you about Durant?
Mr. Varley. You asked me whether I knew that he was a
foreign agent, I believe, and I said not to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever asked him whether or not he was?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You haven't. Didn't it interest you?
Mr. Varley. It is difficult to answer yes or no on that
question. I had no reason to believe that he was, and therefore
I didn't believe I should ask him that kind of a question.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't think you should ask him that kind of
a question?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And after you were questioned about him before
the grand jury and all that, you continued to see him?
Mr. Varley. I saw him, yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Just one or two questions, Mr. Varley. Do you
know Caroline Flechener?
Mr. Varley. Yes, I do.
Mr. Carr. Was she instrumental in getting you your position
with UNNRA?
Mr. Varley. No, Mr. Weintraub recommended me in UNNRA.
Mr. Carr. In what connection do you know Caroline
Flechener?
Mr. Varley. She was working in UNNRA, and that is how----
Mr. Carr. A fellow worker with you?
Mr. Varley. Yes, and that is how I met her, I believe.
Mr. Carr. Did you know whether or not she was a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Varley. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Carr. Did you ever attend any social gatherings with
her?
Mr. Varley. I doubt it very much. I mean, I have no
recollection about seeing her at any social events--again,
unless it was those big parties----
Mr. Carr. In connection with your work?
Mr. Varley. Yes, where I am sure she was there, because it
would be, say, a party given by a government.
Mr. Carr. When is the last time you saw her?
Mr. Varley. To the best of my recollection, during UNNRA,
when Governor Lehman was there.
Mr. Carr. She is not in the UN now, is she?
Mr. Varley. Not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. You went up and stayed overnight at Durant's?
Mr. Varley. I did.
The Chairman. After you had been notified that he had been
identified under oath as a liaison in the Communist underground
of the Communist party of this country; is that correct?
Mr. Varley. I stayed at his house overnight, sir, but--
could you repeat the question?
The Chairman. I will repeat it for you. The question is:
Did you go up and stay overnight at the house of Kenneth Durant
after you had been notified that Durant had been named under
oath as a liaison between the Soviet underground and the
Communist party in this country?
Mr. Varley. My recollection was that in the grand jury
proceedings I was asked whether he was a foreign agent, and I
said not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Did they tell you at that time that he had
been identified under oath as a foreign agent?
Mr. Varley. I have no recollection of that, sir.
The Chairman. You don't remember that?
Mr. Varley. The counsel just said that even name of Mr.
Chambers was brought up in that connection. I just don't
recollect that.
The Chairman. After you had been asked about his being an
underground agent, you went up and spent the night with him; is
that right?
Mr. Varley. I spent a night at his place.
The Chairman. Answer my question.
Mr. Varley. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. The answer is yes?
Mr. Varley. Yes.
The Chairman. How well do you know this man?
Mr. Varley. I knew him socially, because he was the husband
of a woman who was my wife's teacher, an American poet who is
dead now.
The Chairman. How many years have you known him?
Mr. Varley. I can't remember clearly when I met him for the
first time.
The Chairman. About how many years ago?
Mr. Varley. It must have been before the First World War.
The Chairman. Now----
Mr. Varley. I am sorry, not before the First World War
before the Second World War.
The Chairman. When you went up to see him, was that shortly
after your appearance before the grand jury?
Mr. Varley. I appeared before grand jury--you mean when I
visited him in the summer?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Varley. Well, I appeared last before grand jury in
1952.
The Chairman. Did you contact him after you appeared before
the grand jury?
Mr. Varley. Before or after I appeared before the grand
jury?
The Chairman. After you appeared before the grand jury?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Didn't you get in touch with him immediately
after that?
Mr. Varley. No, sir.
The Chairman. Are you sure?
Mr. Varley. I am positive.
The Chairman. When is the first time you saw him after you
appeared before the grand jury?
Mr. Varley. After I appeared before the grand jury?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Varley. This summer.
The Chairman. That is the only time you have seen him?
Mr. Varley. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you tell him that you were asked about
him before the grand jury?
Mr. Varley. I don't believe so. I think I mentioned that I
was before the grand jury, but I did not think I mentioned
that.
The Chairman. You didn't tell him he was named as a
Communist agent, or a foreign agent?
Mr. Varley. I don't recall it, sir.
The Chairman. You will be excused for the time being, and
your counsel will be notified when we want you back. You are
informed that you are still under subpoena.
Mr. Varley. Do I do anything with the subpoena? Just hold
it?
The Chairman. Just keep it.
[Whereupon, the hearings were adjourned until Wednesday,
September 16, 1953, at 11:00 a.m. at the same place.]
SECURITY--UNITED NATIONS
[Editor's note.--Neither Frank Cerny (1888-1970) nor Helen
Matousek (1909-1989), a social affairs officer at the United
Nations, testified in public session.]
----------
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met (pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953) at 11:00 a.m., in room 128, of the
United States Court House, Foley Square, New York, Senator
Joseph R. McCarthy, presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Francis P. Carr, executive director; Roy M.
Cohn, chief counsel; G. David Schine, chief consultant; Donald
O'Donnell, assistant counsel; Harold Rainville, administrative
assistant to Senator Everett M. Dirksen.
TESTIMONY OF DR. FRANK CERNY
The Chairman. Will you stand up and raise your right hand,
please?
In the matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Dr. Cerny. I do.
Mr. O'Donnell. Will you tell us your full name, Doctor?
Dr. Cerny. Frank Cerny.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you know a girl by the name of Helen
Matousek?
Dr. Cerny. Personally, no. I only know that she was in
Paris before the war and at the beginning, during the war.
Mr. O'Donnell. Were you in Paris, Doctor, and what was your
particular job at that time?
Dr. Cerny. I was counsel of delegation of Czechoslovakia
Mr. O'Donnell. In what years, Doctor?
Dr. Cerny. From '36 till '40--June, '40.
Mr. O'Donnell. And you left in '41?
Dr. Cerny. I left because the Germans advanced to Paris.
Mr. O'Donnell. Tell us what you know about Helen Matousek.
Dr. Cerny. Being official of the embassy, I was in
communication with the Czechoslovak National Committee, which
was created in Paris. This national committee had several
divisions, and one of these divisions was information division.
This information division was formed before the national
committee was created. It was established, I think, already in
the summer of '39, but the national committee was recognized by
the French government in November '39, and so this information
bureau afterwards became part of Czechoslovak National
Committee.
In this information division, about forty or forty-five
employees, and, among them was Matouskova--that is, the Czech--
in English is Matousek; in Czech Matouskova.
Mr. O'Donnell. Is that Helen or Helena?
Dr. Cerny. Helena.
Mr. O'Donnell. All right. Tell us what you know about her
Communist activity.
Dr. Cerny. I didn't know her personally, but through my
official business I was in contact with special commissioner of
Surete Nationale, Vidal, and he told me--now, I don't know
when--but he told me that Matouskova and another employee of
the Information Division, Czinnereva, were arrested for
Communist activities.
Mr. O'Donnell. When were they arrested for Communist
activities by the French police?
Dr. Cerny. It might have been in spring, '40. I don't
remember. It might have been in spring, '40.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know the disposition?
Do you know what happened to them after they were arrested?
Dr. Cerny. No, I don't know. I thought they were arrested
also in this Kulture House, but they were not. But as I know,
they have been at other times arrested Communists in France,
who have been sent before the advancing Germans to North
Africa, and Matouskova was probably also there.
Mr. O'Donnell. What was this House of Kulture, Doctor?
Dr. Cerny. I couldn't tell, because I was never there and I
was very busy in Paris. I know only that the Communists
gathered there, that they had meetings there.
Mr. O'Donnell. Were any Czech Communists involved in the
House of Kulture Communist activities? Were there any Czech
nationals involved in the House of Kulture?
Dr. Cerny. Sure. Vladimir Clementis was also there.
Mr. O'Donnell. He was a Czech national?
Dr. Cerny. He was also a refugee and an emigrant in Paris,
and he met with other Communists in this Kulture House.
Mr. O'Donnell. Was there any other Czech nationals? How
about Mr. Hofmeister?
Dr. Cerny. Hofmeister was arrested there, and one who
accidentally was there and was Communist was Mr. Sturm, who is
now in New York.
Mr. O'Donnell. Now, you do not know that she was arrested
in the House of Kulture with these Communists?
Dr. Cerny. I don't think so, because I have not it in my
notes.
Mr. O'Donnell. All right. Do you have any notes with you,
Doctor?
Dr. Cerny. Yes, I have.
Mr. O'Donnell. What do those notes say about her arrest as
a Communist by the Paris police in 1940, with this other girl?
What do your notes say?
Dr. Cerny. The Misses Matouskova and Czinnerova, sir,
arrested for Communists, and I am sure I got it--I knew it from
Mr. Vidal.
Mr. O'Donnell. And Vidal was what?
Dr. Cerny. Was special commissioner of the Surete
Nationale--that means of the minister of the interior in Paris.
Mr. O'Donnell. When did you make those notes?
Dr. Cerny. It is an excerpt of my notes in four or five
books. I ought to look in my notes when I did it.
Mr. O'Donnell. These are excerpts of notes from your diary?
Dr. Cerny. From my diary, yes.
Mr. O'Donnell. Well, which you kept from day to day?
Dr. Cerny. Yes.
Mr. O'Donnell. So these notes, based on your diary, would
have been made right after the arrest in May of 1940?
Dr. Cerny. Or three days, yes.
Mr. O'Donnell. So that you are basing your statement now on
a record that you kept in May of 1940; is that correct?
Dr. Cerny. In spring.
Mr. O'Donnell. In the spring of 1940?
Dr. Cerny. That's right.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know of any other names that she has
ever used?
Dr. Cerny. No.
Mr. O'Donnell. What was her married name?
Dr. Cerny. Matousek.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know of any Communist activity on the
part of her husband?
Dr. Cerny. No, he wasn't a Communist.
Mr. O'Donnell. As far as you know?
Dr. Cerny. He was not Communist. He was a painter and he
left France also for London, for England.
Mr. O'Donnell. On the basis of what you know concerning
her, Doctor, do you think that she is working against the
interests of the United States and the allied countries?
Dr. Cerny. Having these Communistic ideas, yes, sure.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you think she is a proper employee for
the United Nations, as far as the free world is concerned? Do
you think she is a proper employee, as far as the free world is
concerned?
Dr. Cerny. My personal opinion, no.
Mr. O'Donnell. Your own opinion?
Dr. Cerny. In my own opinion, no.
Mr. O'Donnell. You don't think she should be employed by
the United Nation?
Dr. Cerny. No.
The Chairman. I want to thank you very much, Doctor.
[Witness excused.]
TESTIMONY OF HELEN MATOUSEK
The Chairman. Will you stand and raise your right hand,
please?
In the matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mrs. Matousek. So help me God.
The Chairman. Will you state your full name, please?
Mrs. Matousek. Helen Matousek, also known as Helen
Matouskova, which is the Slav form of my name, born Helen
Sommerova.
The Chairman. Is that Miss or Mrs.?
Mrs. Matousek. I am divorced, sir.
The Chairman. Mrs. Matousek, counsel here have a couple of
questions they want to ask you. We have several witnesses in
who have testified in regard to your activities. Under our law
you are entitled to refuse to answer any question if you think
the answer in any way might incriminate you. It is very
important to you that you either tell the truth or refuse to
answer. Otherwise, if you give us a false answer, you are
guilty of perjury each time you give an untruthful answer. I
would like to impress that on you all I possibly can, in view
of the fact you haven't got a lawyer.
Again I say it for your own good, either tell the truth, or
refuse to answer, and we have a great deal of testimony in
regard to alleged Communist activities on your part and counsel
will ask you about that.
Have you anything to add to the advice I have given the
witness?
Mr. Cohn. No, sir.
Where are you employed, Mrs. Matousek, at the present time?
Mrs. Matousek. I am working at the United Nations.
Mr. Cohn. In what capacity?
Mrs. Matousek. The Department of Social Affairs. I am the
social affairs officer.
Mr. Cohn. How long have you been with the United Nations?
Mrs. Matousek. Since February 1949.
Mr. Cohn. Now, when did you come to the United States?
Mrs. Matousek. September 27, 1941.
Mr. Cohn. Have you petitioned for naturalization?
Mrs. Matousek. Yes, I have.
Mr. Cohn. What is the status of your application?
Mrs. Matousek. I have my first papers. I have applied for
citizenship. I had my hearing in, I believe, December '48, and
have not heard any direct result since. I have a number of
times written the Immigration and Naturalization Department to
inquire what the status was. I did not receive a reply. I have
inquired and knew at the occasion of my signing the waiver of
privileges and immunities and I was told that there are
thousands of cases on hand, I have to be patient.
Mr. Cohn. Were you in 1940 arrested in Paris, France, for
Communist activities?
Mrs. Matousek. I was arrested in May 1940, in Paris, for
reasons unknown to me.
Mr. Cohn. What do you mean by ``for reasons unknown to
you''?
Mrs. Matousek. Because there was no trial, there was no
hearing, there was no questioning.
Mr. Cohn. What was the charge?
Mrs. Matousek. There was no charge preferred, that I know
of.
Mr. Cohn. You mean it is your testimony you have no idea
they arrested you, they just came along----
Mrs. Matousek. Yes, I do have an idea.
Mr. Cohn. Well, tell us.
Mrs. Matousek. While I was in Prague, I was secretary of a
committee for political refugees from Germany. That was from
1936 till spring, 1939. Some of these political refugees
obviously were Communists, just as obviously some of them were
not Communists. They were political refugees from Germany. They
were cleared by Czechoslovak police and they were passed on to
the committee for care. I have, therefore, known a great many
refugees, and inasmuch that I was detained in Paris, I was put
in a detention camp for German nationals, the only explanation
I have--and I admit that is my analysis--is that I might have
been mistaken for a German national. That must also have been
the understanding of my then government, which has issued,
therefore, to me an affidavit confirming my Czech nationality.
When I have shown this paper to the camp commander, he released
me immediately.
Mr. Cohn. Isn't it a fact that when you were arrested it
was made very clear to you that you were being arrested with
Communists on a charge of Communist activity?
Mrs. Matousek. No, sir, no such a thing was said to me
ever.
Mr. Cohn. Were you arrested with some Communists?
Mrs. Matousek. I was arrested with a number of people whom
I didn't know. There was one person I did know; there was a
Miss Margaret Zinner, whom I till then didn't know. I have not
known her very well. She was working as a secretary at
Czechoslovak National Council in Paris, where I have been
working. She wasn't any particular friend of mine till then. I
became friendly with her while we were detained together the
two months.
Mr. Cohn. I don't think you understood my question. The
question is: Were any other persons arrested with you
Communists?
Mrs. Matousek. I didn't know the other persons. The only
person I knew was Miss Zinner.
Mr. Cohn. Was she a Communist?
Mrs. Matousek. I don't believe so, but I do not know. I do
not believe so.
Mr. Cohn. You say you don't know; you didn't know any of
the other persons?
Mrs. Matousek. No.
Mr. Cohn. Where did they come from?
Mrs. Matousek. They were mostly German refugees, as far as
I have heard from them, but I didn't know them.
Mr. Cohn. You don't know if any of the other people
arrested with you were Communists?
Mrs. Matousek. No, I don't.
Mr. Cohn. Did you find out whether or not any of them were
charged with being Communists?
Mrs. Matousek. I have no idea.
Mr. Cohn. Therefore, during the period of your arrest, you
never heard it said that any of the people arrested with you
were arrested for Communist activity; is that what you want to
tell us?
Mrs. Matousek. That's right. I know that there were a great
many people who were simply German refugees, who at that time
lived in France or in Belgium. If you want me to tell it to you
chronologically, when I was in Paris, when I was arrested, the
night of the 19th of May, and taken to the Paris Prefecture of
Police, the only person I knew was Miss Margaret Zinner. Both
of us were perfectly convinced that this was some kind of a
mistake, and the other persons who were around I didn't know. I
do not know who they were, and there wasn't too much discussion
going on. When I was taken from the Police Prefecture----
Mr. Cohn. Go right ahead.
Mrs. Matousek [continuing]. To the Velodrome Devere, again
that was the detention center for German nationals. I didn't
know any of them until then except Miss Zinner. It didn't
appear to me that these people were political refugees. Some
may have been. I know there were some discussions going on.
There were some people who were violently anti-Nazi and some of
them who were violently anti-Russian. Remember, that was at the
time of the Soviet-Russian Pact. So they were thrown together
on the basis of their German nationality, and they were of all
colors, I believe.
The Chairman. When did you first go to France?
Mrs. Matousek. You mean to say in France or on visits?
The Chairman. On visits, or anything.
Mrs. Matousek. Oh, I believe I went to France first on a
tourist trip; I think it must have been in '35 or '36.
The Chairman. Then when did you go to France to live there?
Mrs. Matousek. That was in April or May 1939, after I have
escaped from Czechoslovakia.
The Chairman. Did you know a Dr. Prochek?
Mrs. Matousek. Yes, I did. I didn't know him in Paris. I
knew Dr. Charles Prochek; I met him in UNRRA in Washington in
the spring of 1945. I believe he comes from Minneapolis.
The Chairman. Were you with UNRRA then?
Mrs. Matousek. I was with UNRRA then.
The Chairman. Is that when you first met him, in 1945?
Mrs. Matousek. That was the first time when I met him in
person. However, I was in correspondence with his wife, who was
one of the persons who provided an affidavit for me when I
needed one for the visa. I didn't know about it; I was told
about it by the Czech Consulate when I arrived here, so I wrote
to her thanking her for this kindness, and then we had some,
oh, spotty correspondence here and there. But I didn't know Dr.
Prochek in person until I met him at this College Park in
Maryland with UNRRA in the spring of 1945.
The Chairman. Where did you meet Mrs. Prochek?
Mrs. Matousek. I never met her in person.
The Chairman. How could she give a letter, then,
recommending you, if she had never met you personally, do you
know?
Mrs. Matousek. Well, I assume that she was willing to give
it because I had very good recommendations from the Benes
government, and she was a very ardent Czech.
The Chairman. Were you living in France in 1937?
Mrs. Matousek. No, I was not living in France in 1937. I
may have been there on a short vacation trip. Let me think.
Yes, I believe I spent three weeks in summer of '37 on the west
coast of France in Pontiac.
The Chairman. Now, we have testimony here--and of course
the mere fact that we have testimony does not mean that the
committee considers it true or untrue, we just take all the
testimony in regard to any witness--we have testimony that in
1937 you were an organizer for the Communist party, that you
worked in France. What do you have to say about that? Is that
true or not?
Mrs. Matousek. It is not true. I am very glad that you said
that the mere testimony is not the truth. It isn't true,
unequivocally.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this: Have you ever done any
organizing for the Communist party?
Mrs. Matousek. I have not.
The Chairman. And have you ever joined yourself?
Mrs. Matousek. I have not.
The Chairman. And you are not a member now?
Mrs. Matousek. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever get paid any money by any
representative of Soviet Russia or the Communist party?
Mrs. Matousek. No.
The Chairman. Was your former husband a Communist, if you
know?
Mrs. Matousek. He was not a member of the Communist party
while we were married. I would say he was a sympathizer. He
wasn't a member of the party. I don't believe that he was
anything else but one of these neurotic persons who talk a
great deal and don't do anything.
The Chairman. How about yourself, were you a sympathizer
with the Communist party?
Mrs. Matousek. No.
Mr. O'Donnell. When you left Prague as an escapee, who
advised you to leave Prague, do you recall?
Mrs. Matousek. Well, in the first place, my own reason--you
see, the fact that I was helping anti-Hitler refugees obviously
could not make me popular with the German authorities, who by
that time occupied Czechoslovakia.
Moreover, I am Jewish, so there was no reason for me to
want to stay on.
Inasmuch as I have been helping other people to get out of
the country, I have done exactly the same thing. I have--since
Munich, my main part of the work for the German refugees, I
would say, was obtaining for them from the Czech government, in
an official capacity, interim passports and by dealing with
various consulates--I would say primarily the British
Consulate, French Consulate, the Norwegian Consulate--visas for
these people to leave the country.
Mr. O'Donnell. May I interrupt for a moment?
Mrs. Matousek. Sure.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you know a chap over there by the name
of Mr. Nejedly?
Mrs. Matousek. No, I don't remember to have known him.
Mr, O'Donnell. Did he at any time advise you to leave
Prague?
Mrs. Matousek. Most definitely not. I didn't know him.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know who the present foreign minister
of education is in Prague?
Mrs. Matousek. Oh, you mean Mr. Nejedly?
Mr. O'Donnell. That is correct.
Mrs. Matousek. Oh, sorry, yes, that Mr. Nejedly. I have met
Mr. Nejedly, I would say, oh, two or three times perhaps in my
life, but he certainly did not advise me to leave Prague.
Mr. O'Donnell. He did not advise you to leave Prague?
Mrs. Matousek. That's right.
Mr. O'Donnell. We have evidence from a witness who says
that you told the witness that he advised you to leave Prague.
Mrs. Matousek. That may be the other way around, sir. Mr.
Nejedly, at that time I believe was professor at the University
of Prague, knew that I was helping people to leave the country,
it was he who called me up and asked me if I could help him get
out of the country.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you help him get out?
Mrs. Matousek. No, I did not. I said, ``I am very sorry,
but my mandate is to help the people who are taken care of by
the committee, and I cannot do anything for any other people.''
Mr. O'Donnell. What is his first name?
Mrs. Matousek. Sdenek.
Mr. Cohn. What does he do now?
Mrs. Matousek. I believe that he is part of the Communist
government in--he is the present foreign minister of education
in Prague--minister of education, probably, rather than foreign
minister.
Mr. O'Donnell. He is the minister of education?
Mrs. Matousek. Yes, I believe so. So that it was the other
way around, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you ever tell anyone that he suggested
that you should leave Prague at that time?
Mrs. Matousek. I very much doubt it, because it isn't so.
It was the other way around. I may have said to someone that he
asked me to help him get out of the country.
Mr. O'Donnell. Were you very friendly with him?
Mrs. Matousek. No, I met him about two or three times in my
life.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you know he was a Communist?
Mrs. Matousek. Oh, yes, I did.
Mr. O'Donnell. Have you had any contact with him?
Mrs. Matousek. No.
Mr. O'Donnell. While you were with UNRRA, wasn't there a
group in UNRRA who were locating deserters from the Russian
army and having them returned to Russia?
Mrs. Matousek. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you ever contact a Russian deserter and
through indirection have him turned over to the OGPU?
Mrs. Matousek. Me?
Mr. O'Donnell. You?
Mrs. Matousek. No.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know of anyone who did?
Mrs. Matousek. No, I don't.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know if that was a common practice at
UNRRA in Germany, to invite these deserters from the Russian
army in under pretexts and then have them turned over to the
OGPU, or to an OGPU agent?
Mrs. Matousek. I have never heard of that practice.
Mr. O'Donnell. You never heard of it?
Mrs. Matousek. No.
Mr. O'Donnell. You never participated in any activity such
as that?
Mrs. Matousek. Certainly not.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you ever visit Moscow?
Mrs. Matousek. I have never been to Moscow or to Soviet
Russia.
Mr. O'Donnell. Had your former husband ever visited Moscow,
to your knowledge?
Mrs. Matousek. Not to my knowledge, not as long as I was
married to him. I don't know whether he went there afterwards.
Mr. O'Donnell. How long were you interned after your arrest
for Communist activity in Paris?
Mrs. Matousek. I would like to state first that to my
knowledge I was not arrested by Communist activities, but for
reasons unknown to me, and I was detained for approximately two
months.
Mr. O'Donnell. Two months. Were you interned by the----
Mrs. Matousek. By the Vichy police of France, yes.
The Chairman. Was this before or after France was overrun?
Mr. O'Donnell. This was before.
Mrs. Matousek. I was arrested before, about two weeks
before the fall of France, and detained for about six weeks
after.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you know Adolph Hofmeister?
Mrs. Matousek. I knew Adolph Hofmeister, who was a lawyer,
painter and writer. I knew him slightly socially in Prague. I
met him, oh, just occasionally in Paris, where he was with the
House of Kulture, and then I met him very slightly again,
without any premeditation or making any appointment with him,
just occasionally and by accident a very few times here in New
York in, oh, I would say in '41, '42. The last time I met him
was when he arrived here in New York. By that time he became
Czechoslovak ambassador to Paris.
Mr. O'Donnell. What year was that?
Mrs. Matousek. That was in 1949, I believe. It might have
been 1950. I am not quite sure. And I met him in the hall of
the United Nations, and he recognized me and invited me for
lunch, which I did have with him. It was an absolutely non-
political lunch, but 1 was eager to hear what he had to say,
and afterward I told him--when he met me the next day he looked
straight through me, and never recognized me.
Mr. O'Donnell. Was he a member of the House of Kulture
group in Paris?
Mrs. Matousek. Yes, he was.
Mr. O'Donnell. What was the House of Kulture in Paris?
Mrs. Matousek. I cannot tell you too much about it, sir,
because I was not a member myself and didn't have any real
contact with them. It was a group of painters and artists, but
there were some people who didn't have anything to do with
arts, I believe, who rented together a house and lived there,
probably for reasons of economy. But what other activities they
have adopted, I do not quite know, because, as I said, I didn't
have any contact with them.
Mr. O'Donnell. Wasn't it generally known among your group
that the House of Kulture was a Communist group?
Mrs. Matousek. It was.
Mr. O'Donnell. And Adolph Hofmeister did belong to that
group?
Mrs. Matousek. Yes, he did.
Mr. O'Donnell. As a matter of fact, he was arrested as a
member of that group, wasn't he?
Mrs. Matousek. I believe so. There was a whole group of
people who were arrested at the very beginning of the war. I
believe all of the members of the House of Kulture were
arrested.
Mr. O'Donnell. Was Vladimir Clementis a member of the House
of Kulture?
Mrs. Matousek. I know whom you are speaking of. I would not
know, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. You would not know?
Mrs. Matousek. No.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you know Vladimir Clementis. Did you
know him?
Mrs. Matousek. I met him. He came several times to see my
then chief, Mr. Hubert Ripka, who was then President Benes'
representative of the National Council in Paris, and Mr.
Clementis came a couple of times with him. That is how I met
him. But then shortly afterwards I believe Mr. Clementis was
arrested, too, and that was in the fall of '39, and I didn't
have any contact with him since.
Mr. O'Donnell. Was he arrested as a member of the House of
Kulture group, too?
Mrs. Matousek. I wouldn't know, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. But you know he was arrested?
Mrs. Matousek. Yes.
Mr. O'Donnell. By the French police?
Mrs. Matousek. Yes.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know if he was arrested for
Communistic activity?
Mrs. Matousek. Oh, I would assume so, but I do not know.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you know a Joseph Pelz?
Mrs. Matousek. I have known an Antonin Pelz.
Mr. O'Donnell. Who was Antonin Pelz?
Mrs. Matousek. Antonin Pelz was a cartoonist.
Mr. O'Donnell. That is the same chap.
Mrs. Matousek. Yes. His first name is Antonin. Was a
cartoonist whom I have met. I haven't known him too well, but I
believe he was a member of the House of Kulture, too.
Mr. O'Donnell. Then was he arrested in that group, the
House of Kulture?
Mrs. Matousek. I don't quite remember, but I believe so.
Mr. O'Donnell. Was the House of Kulture in existence when
you first arrived in Paris?
Mrs. Matousek. This I do not know, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. How many times did you visit the House of
Kulture yourself?
Mrs. Matousek. About twice, perhaps.
Mr. O'Donnell. What was the reason for your visits to the
House of Kulture?
Mrs. Matousek. Having dinner there.
Mr. O'Donnell. Having dinner there?
Mrs. Matousek. Yes.
Mr. O'Donnell. With whom?
Mrs. Matousek. Well, with my husband.
Mr. O'Donnell. Your husband. And would anybody else be
present?
Mrs. Matousek. Oh, well, they must have invited us, or we
must have invited ourselves, but I do not recall who would have
been present, because it was no other but social occasion.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did your husband ever belong to the House of
Kulture?
Mrs. Matousek. No, he did not, as far as I know.
Mr. O'Donnell. To what extent did your husband attempt to
become affiliated with the House of Kulture?
Mrs. Matousek. I believe he felt that they were in a way a
competition. My husband founded in Paris a group--they called
themselves, oh, Czechoslovak Artists in Paris, or some such a
thing, and he was president of this group and arranged for an
exhibition in Paris. He, I had an idea, rather felt that the
House of Kulture was a kind of competition.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did he make any positive effort to join the
House of Kulture, as far as you know?
Mrs. Matousek. He may have, but I am not aware of it. I
really don't recall.
Mr. O'Donnell. Were you ever approached to join the
Communist party by anybody?
Mrs. Matousek. No, I have not; not that I recall. Not in so
many words, I am sure.
The Chairman. That will be all. Incidentally, the committee
does not give the press the names of any witnesses who appear,
so that unless you tell the newspapers that you have been here,
no one will know you were here. I don't think we will want you
back for anything at all, but I wish that you would consider
yourself still under subpoena in case there is any additional
information the staff might want.
Mrs. Matousek. Certainly. I am at your disposition,
Senator.
[Witness excused.]
[Whereupon, the hearing was adjourned to Thursday,
September 17, 1953, at 10:00 a.m.]
SECURITY--UNITED NATIONS
[Editor's note.--Abraham Unger's executive session
testimony was published in 1953. Vachlav Lofek did not testify
in public session. David M. Freedman testified publicly on
September 18, 1953.]
----------
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, N.Y.
The subcommittee met (pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953) at 2:25 p.m., in room 128, of the
United States Court House, Foley Square, New York, Senator
Joseph R. McCarthy, presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Francis P. Carr, executive director; Roy M.
Cohn, chief counsel; Robert Jones, administrative assistant to
Senator Potter; Harold Rainville, administrative assistant to
Senator Dirksen; and Blaine Sloan, legal department, United
Nations.
TESTIMONY OF ABRAHAM UNGER (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, BERNARD
JAFFE)
[Although taken in executive session, this testimony was
published in 1953 in U.S. Senate, Committee on Government
Operations, Hearings before the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations, Security--United Nations (Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office, 1953), pages 40-55.]
TESTIMONY OF VACHLAV LOFEK
Mr. Cohn. Are you a citizen of the United States?
Mr. Lofek. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Naturalized?
Mr. Lofek. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. In what year?
Mr. Lofek. 1937, in January.
Mr. Cohn. What is your employment at the present time?
Mr. Lofek. Employment, I work for?
Mr. Cohn. Where do you work?
Mr. Lofek. In the Czech Delegation.
Mr. Cohn. You work for the Czech Delegation?
Mr. Lofek. Yes, for the Czech Delegation.
Mr. Cohn. To the United Nations?
Mr. Lofek. To the United Nations.
Mr. Cohn. Is that right?
Mr. Lofek. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Are you a Communist?
Mr. Lofek. No, sir, I never been.
Mr. Cohn. Are you a Communist at the present time?
Mr. Lofek. No.
Mr. Cohn. You work for the Communist government?
Mr. Lofek. Yes, I do.
Mr. Cohn. Do they make a practice of employing people who
are not Communists?
Mr. Lofek. I don't know, but they never asked me to join,
or anything.
Mr. Cohn. Are you sympathetic to the Communist regime in
Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Are you opposed to it?
Mr. Lofek. Well, just nothing. I don't say nothing.
Mr. Cohn. I don't want to know if you say nothing. Are you
in favor of or opposed to the Communist regime in
Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. I don't like it the way they do. It now is there
anymore.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Lofek. I don't like the way they do.
Mr. Cohn. You mean in Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. You are opposed then?
Mr. Lofek. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. To the Communist government in Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Do they know you are opposed to them up there?
Mr. Lofek. I don't know. They never ask. No, I never tell
it.
Mr. Cohn. What kind of work do you do?
Mr. Lofek. I am mostly like a messenger. I have to go all
around. They need something, I have to go get it.
Mr. Cohn. Do you ever carry papers back and forth?
Mr. Lofek. Papers, like the United Nations papers. I go to
the headquarters and pick them up and bring them to the office
and when they assort them they tell me to mail them, you know,
I send them back, you know, what they want to Czechoslovakia.
Mr. Cohn. What is your salary?
Mr. Lofek. $200 a month.
Mr. Cohn. $200 a month. Do you have any other income?
Mr. Lofek. No, sir. Well, I keep just a little bit from
what I saved before I work for them from the bank with
interest.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever carried any papers to the Communist
party headquarters?
Mr. Lofek. To the Communist party--no, I don't. You mean to
the Soviet or----
Mr. Cohn. No. I mean Communist party headquarters of the
United States.
Mr. Lofek. I don't know even where it is.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever carried any papers to the Communist
party headquarters?
Mr. Lofek. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Any office of the Communist party?
Mr. Lofek. No, sir. I never know where these office----
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever deliver any to any American
Communist?
Mr. Lofek. No, no.
Mr. Cohn. Who obtained your job for you at the Czech
Delegation?
Mr. Lofek. Who--people?
Mr. Cohn. Yes, who got you the job there?
Mr. Lofek. I got it myself.
Mr. Cohn. How did you go about it?
Mr. Lofek. I got it 1943, you know, they advertised, but
they used to be Czech information office.
Mr. Cohn. After the Communists took over----
Mr. Lofek. Well, they kept me. You know they discharged
lots of people after they closed the consulate, the Czech
consulate two years ago, they discharged most of people, and
they only kept me.
Mr. Cohn. Were you the only one they kept?
Mr. Lofek. That is all.
Mr. Cohn. You are the only one they kept?
Mr. Lofek. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You say they never asked you whether or not you
are a Communist?
Mr. Lofek. No. Never did, never noticed.
Mr. Cohn. When I first asked you if you were in favor of
the Communist regime in Czechoslovakia you were not sure
whether you were in favor or opposed?
Mr. Lofek. No, but I have never been, still never. Never
did anything for them, only this what I am working for now.
Mr. Cohn. Your testimony is that you have never talked with
anybody up there about----
Mr. Lofek. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn [continuing]. Whether or not you favor the regime
in Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Never discussed it?
Mr. Lofek. No.
Mr. Cohn. What do you object to in the regime in
Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. Well, the way they treat the people, like----
Mr. Cohn. What way do they treat the people?
Mr. Lofek. They took the property away from them, you know,
that is what I think because they did it for my sister, my
brother-in-law, you know.
Mr. Cohn. The Communists?
Mr. Lofek. Yes. Now, after two years ago.
The Chairman. Are your sister and brother-in-law living in
Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. Yes, but they died now. My sister died two years
ago and my brother-in-law died last fall.
The Chairman. Natural deaths?
Mr. Lofek. What is that?
The Chairman. They were not killed by the Communists? They
died natural deaths?
Mr. Lofek. Yes. My sister had a stroke.
The Chairman. Do you know whether they were members of the
Communist party in Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. No, never as far as I know. My brother was
against them. Always against them. And my sister, she never
know anything about politics because she was old.
The Chairman. Who recommended you for the job at the United
Nations?
Mr. Lofek. No, sir, no one, they kept me since I start to
work for the information bureau, you know, the Czech
information in 1943.
The Chairman. You started working for the Czech information
in 1943?
Mr. Lofek. That is right, in January.
The Chairman. That was under the free government in
Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. Yes, yes.
The Chairman. And then when the Communists took over they
kept you on as an employee.
Mr. Lofek. They kept me. First they said have to discharge
me, they have no work for me, but after the--I don't know--
couple of weeks later they said if I want to stay they keep me
because they need somebody to go around and understand a little
English because none of the others, none of them can speak
English, you know.
The Chairman. You are a messenger, you take papers from one
place to another, don't you?
Mr. Lofek. Not from one place to another. I mean I have to
go down to the headquarters, bring them to the office. They,
couple of the guys assort them, and they tell me which the
untied papers I have to wrap up and send to Czechoslovakia, you
know.
The Chairman. I see.
Mr. Lofek. But I don't carry any other papers any other
place.
The Chairman. In other words, when they tell you to do it,
you wrap up certain mail or papers?
Mr. Lofek. Yes, they give me----
The Chairman. And send them to Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. That is right, they give me, you know, what they
want to send and if they have letters like that they send over
to the states here for this, like United Nation delegations, so
I do that, too, you know. I stamp them, and I sent them out.
The Chairman. How is the stuff sent to Czechoslovakia? By
diplomatic pouch?
Mr. Lofek. No. This papers I send them not through the
diplomatic pouch. I send them through the parcel post. Printed
matter, through the post office; and sometimes if they want
something in a hurry, then I send it through Sabena Air Line,
you know. But that is only maybe once, sometimes only once in
two weeks, sometimes once a week.
The Chairman. Are you the only American citizen working for
the Czech delegation?
Mr. Lofek. There is one lady there, but she minding the
switchboard.
The Chairman. What is her name?
Mr. Lofek. Mrs. Joseph.
The Chairman. Mrs. Joseph?
Mr. Lofek. Yes, Mrs. Joseph.
Mr. Cohn. What is her first name?
Mr. Lofek. Eva. I forgot already, because I don't pay much
attention.
Mr. Cohn. Where does she live?
Mr. Lofek. I don't know where she lives.
Mr. Cohn. Does she live in Manhattan, do you know?
Mr. Lofek. Oh, yes, I guess she lives in Manhattan, but I
don't know.
Mr. Cohn. She is married, isn't she?
Mr. Lofek. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. What is her husband's first name?
Mr. Lofek. Her husband is Mr. Joseph but he used to, as far
as I understand, he used to work for the UNRRA in Prague.
Mr. Cohn. What is his first name, do you remember?
Mr. Lofek. I don't know. I couldn't tell you.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you ever meet him over at the office?
Mr. Lofek. I met him, but I never speak to him, but because
he came to see his wife.
The Chairman. Haven't you ever gone to their house for
dinner?
Mr. Lofek. No.
The Chairman. You don't know them well at all?
Mr. Lofek. No, sir.
The Chairman. Are you married?
Mr. Lofek. I was, but I am divorced already twenty years,
so far about twenty years.
The Chairman. Where is your former wife? In Czechoslovakia?
Mr. Lofek. In New York, but I don't know where she lives.
The Chairman. When did you come to this country?
Mr. Lofek. Where?
The Chairman. Yes, when did you come to this country.
Mr. Lofek. In the 13th of March.
The Chairman. When were you naturalized?
Mr. Lofek. In 1937.
The Chairman. Then you worked for UNRRA for a while?
Mr. Lofek. No, not me.
The Chairman. You didn't?
Mr. Lofek. No, not me.
The Chairman. Did you ever work for any other United States
government agency?
Mr. Lofek. No. Only once I worked for the post office, but
in the, you know, for the Christmastime two months, like that,
you know, when they were busy. I got a job in the Morgan Annex
two months only.
The Chairman. Have you ever attended Communist meetings?
Mr. Lofek. No, sir. No, sir, never. I never cared for those
things. I never did.
The Chairman. Never joined the Communist party?
Mr. Lofek. No, no, sir.
The Chairman. Anyone ever ask you to join the party?
Mr. Lofek. No.
The Chairman. It seems rather unusual that the Communist
delegation would hire an American who was against communism.
Mr. Lofek. They don't know about that. They don't know. You
see, if I tell them then I am finished with the job, you know.
And the job sufficient for me, like I am an old guy you know,
and it is not hard, you know, so that is why I am trying to
keep it as long as I could.
The Chairman. How old are you?
Mr. Lofek. Sixty-one, I am going to be next month.
The Chairman. I have no further questions, Mr. Counsel.
Mr. Cohn. I have no more.
The Chairman. I may say that the Czech delegation will not
be notified you were called. The newspapers will not be
notified unless you tell them. If you want to tell anyone you
were here, that is up to you.
Mr. Lofek. Only the boss knows about it because I told him
I have to come down here.
The Chairman. I merely want you to know if anyone knows you
were here is because you tell them.
Mr. Lofek Yes.
The Chairman. Okay.
Mr. Lofek. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Who knows about it, you say?
Mr. Lofek. Only my boss, you know, because--I tell him I
come. Mr. Nosek.
Mr. Cohn. What is his name?
Mr. Lofek. Nosek
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell it?
Mr. Lofek. I had to tell him.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell his name?
Mr. Lofek. N-o-s-e-k.
Mr. Cohn. Is he a Communist?
Mr. Lofek. Yes, I guess he is because he is the boss from
the delegation, you know, so----
The Chairman. Your testimony is that as far as you are
concerned you are not interested in communism?
Mr. Lofek. I never been and I am not.
The Chairman. Your job is merely a messenger?
Mr. Lofek. And like a little shipping clerk, I got to pack
those things and they need something, I have to do everything
for them, especially they come to the delegation.
The Chairman. You never have occasion to read the mail that
comes in or goes out?
Mr. Lofek. Oh, no, because I don't get that. I get the
mail, you know, the mailman gives it to me but I have to take
it right up there, you know.
The Chairman. Did they ever send you as a messenger to
deliver any material to Communist headquarters in New York.
Mr. Lofek. No, sir, no, sir, they never did.
The Chairman. So that you will know, the address is 35 East
12th Street.
Mr. Lofek. No, I never been there.
The Chairman. You never delivered any there?
Mr. Lofek. I don't know where it is, never heard about
that.
The Chairman. That is all. I don't think we will want you
back but consider yourself under subpoena in case we want to
call you.
Mr. Lofek. Yes, if you want to, then I am willing, see, but
the only thing is I got to tell the boss because, you know he
wants to know.
The Chairman. I don't think we will want you.
Mr. Lofek. He wants to know that I go.
The Chairman. This is off the record.
[Discussion off the record.]
The Chairman. That is all. If you are discharged, let us
know. Understand, there is nothing we can do about it if you
are, but let the committee know if you are fired, will you?
Mr. Lofek. Thank you.
The Chairman. Your testimony will not be given to the Czech
delegation.
Mr. Lofek. Thank you. Good day.
[Witness excused.]
TESTIMONY OF DAVID M. FREEDMAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
BERNARD JAFFE)
The Chairman. In this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Freedman. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Freedman, you are a member of the New York
Bar?
Mr. Freedman. I am.
Mr. Cohn. Are you admitted to practice before any agency of
the federal government?
Mr. Freedman. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Which one?
Mr. Freedman. Immigration service.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man named Julius Reiss?
Mr. Freedman. I would like to say about that, when we were
here on Tuesday I was informed by my counsel that he had been
told that the purpose for which we were asked to come here----
Mr. Cohn. No, no. I don't think you got the question. Do
you know a man named Julius Reiss?
Mr. Freedman. I heard you.
Mr. Cohn. We were held up so much by Mr. Unger, we would
like to move along.
Mr. Freedman. I heard your question, but I would like to
make a preface to what I want to answer.
The Chairman. There will be no prefaces. Do you know Julius
Reiss?
Mr. Cohn. It is a simple question.
Mr. Freedman. It is not as simple as that.
The Chairman. We will make it simple. Answer the question.
Mr. Freedman. I am answering it, Senator. I am saying when
I was here Tuesday I was told----
The Chairman. Do you know Julius Reiss? I don't care what
happened Tuesday. Do you know him or don't you know him?
Mr. Freedman. I will decline to answer the question.
Mr. Cohn. On what ground?
Mr. Freedman. On the ground in view of the statements made
by the senator to the press which I have seen reported, it
would appear that the attempt to ask me that question is an
attempt to try to besmirch me. I will not allow myself to be
used in that way, and I will therefore decline to answer on the
ground the answer may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. You are refusing on the ground it will
incriminate you?
Mr. Cohn. He is entitled to that.
The Chairman. Is that the ground?
Mr. Freedman. I am urging that as a ground because of the
fact when you were--made a representation to my attorney on
Tuesday the only purpose for which we were coming here was to
ask questions with relation to this man, you used that as a
means for utilizing this forum with my partner, Mr. Unger, who
was here before, to try and investigate and interrogate him
with matters that had no concern with Reiss or anybody else,
and I refuse to be entrapped in the same way.
The Chairman. I have never met you before, know nothing
about you, never seen you before.
Mr. Freedman. That is mutual, Senator.
The Chairman. When I say I know nothing about you, I know
something about your background. You are now being asked the
question whether or not you knew Mr. Reiss.
Mr. Freedman. I have answered.
The Chairman. Are you refusing on the ground a truthful
answer might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Freedman. I am answering on the ground that an answer
to that question may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. You are entitled to the privilege.
Mr. Cohn. Now, did Mr. Reiss work for you in connection
with the defense of the twelve Communist members of the
Communist party who were indicted under the Smith Act here in
1948?
Mr. Freedman. For the same reason I refused to answer the
previous question I will refuse to answer this one.
Mr. Cohn. Now, were you in the year 1950 a member of the
Professional Group of the Communist party?
Mr. Freedman. I believe that question is impertinent, and
it has no place in this proceeding. It is no function of this
committee to inquire about such things, if such a thing
existed, and I certainly resent being asked the question. I
think it violates my rights under the Constitution, under the
First Amendment and under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments and it
certainly is----
The Chairman. What is the Ninth Amendment that is violated
by--and the Tenth?
This is off the record.
[Discussion off the record.]
Mr. Freedman. I will therefore not answer the question.
Mr. Cohn. Would you examine this for a moment, please, Mr.
Freedman?
The Chairman. What is the right under the Ninth and Tenth
Amendments you think are violated by that question?
Mr. Freedman. The right is all powers not given to the
federal government are reserved in the people in this country,
and one of the powers not delegated to the federal government
was the power to inquire into the political affiliations and
beliefs and aspirations of the people.
The Chairman. You are refusing to answer under your rights
in the First, Ninth and Tenth Amendments; is that right?
Mr. Freedman. I am right now.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to answer, then.
Mr. Freedman. I will refuse to answer under the ground any
answer may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. You are refusing--I don't guess there is any
further use questioning him. He has used the Fifth Amendment.
He is entitled to do it.
Mr. Cohn. I want to ask you one or two very short
questions.
The Chairman. Okay.
Mr. Cohn. Can you identify that record here which we
directed to be produced? Sir?
Mr. Freedman. I decline to identify it under the ground
this is simply a repetition of the question you previously
asked me in another form which I have declined to answer on the
ground it may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. On the ground it may tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Freedman. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. For the record we will indicate that is the
exhibit produced by Mr. Unger in response to the request to the
committee.
I don't know if I asked you this or not. Are you a member
of the Communist party today?
Mr. Freedman. You did not ask me that.
Mr. Cohn. Consider it asked now.
Mr. Freedman. My answer to that is the same as my answer to
the previous question. I decline to answer the question because
you have no right to ask me. I think it is impertinent to do
so, and on the further ground I will not answer on the ground
it will tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Do you think it is a crime to be a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Freedman. I will not answer that question either,
Senator, for the same reasons.
The Chairman. On the ground that the answer might tend to
incriminate you. Is that the ground?
Mr. Freedman. That is the ground.
The Chairman. You are entitled to refuse.
You will be ordered to be here at 10:30 in the morning.
10:30 in room 110. I think I will make it ten o'clock in the
morning in room 110.
Ten o'clock. Incidentally, ten o'clock does not mean
someone will phone you and bring you over.
Mr. Freedman. I am sorry if you were inconvenienced any
this afternoon.
The Chairman. I am telling you about tomorrow, not today.
Mr. Freedman. All right.
The Chairman. Be here about ten. I think I will make it
10:15 in the morning.
Mr. Jaffe. Aren't the hearings going to be held next week,
or some other time? It will be impossible for me to make it. It
really is. I mean, I don't like to request anything like this,
but I had no notion that, you know, my coming here with these
attorneys would involve this much time.
The Chairman. Mr. Jaffe, it is your own clients that make
it difficult, not Mr. Freedman, he has taken very little time,
but your own client took up almost over two hours of the
committee's time, and when we have a witness who goes out of
the way to make trouble for the committee to accomplish its
purpose to get the information it wants and needs to perform
our function, I just don't like to call the entire staff back
here if it costs a lot of money to come back here. We have the
staff of Senator Dirksen and Senator Potter. Have their
investigators.
Mr. Jaffe. I thought you were sitting here next week, in
any event, Senator.
The Chairman. Not that I know of now.
Mr. Jaffe. If you were, I would really appreciate putting
this over.
The Chairman. As far as I know, we are not going to. We
need your man in the morning for the hearing.
Mr. Jaffe. Okay.
[Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
COMMUNIST INFILTRATION IN THE ARMY
[Editor's note.--Igor Bogolepov and Vladimir Petrov (1916-
1999) both testified at a public hearing on September 28, 1953.
Additional testimony given in executive session on September 21
by Gen. Richard C. Partridge and Samuel McKee was published by
the subcommittee in Committee on Government Operations,
Hearings before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations,
Communist Infiltration of the Army (Washington, DC: Government
Printing Office, 1954), pages 85-105.]
----------
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met (pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953) at 10:30 a.m., in room 155, Senate
Office Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; and David Surine,
assistant counsel.
Present also from the Department of Army: Hon. Robert T.
Stevens, secretary of the army; Gen. Richard C. Partridge, G-2;
Brig. Gen. C. C. Fenn; and Joseph W. Bishop, acting department
counselor.
TESTIMONY OF IGOR BOGOLEPOV
The Chairman. Would you raise your right hand, please?
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to
give in the matter now in hearing will be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Bogolepov. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Could we get your full name for the record?
Mr. Bogolepov. My first name is Igor. My last name is
Bogolepov.
The Chairman. May I admonish everyone in the room that no
information is to be given out of Mr. Bogolepov's testimony
today. I may say, Secretary Stevens, that he objected very
strenuously to giving this testimony. Mr. Bogolepov is working
for the government himself. He didn't want to testify. He came
here because the committee wanted him to come.
Is that right?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Bogolepov, could you give us a little
background? Where were you born?
Mr. Bogolepov. Born in Siberia in 1904.
Mr. Cohn. Did there ever come a time when you went into the
Soviet Foreign Service?
Mr. Bogolepov. Yes, I was employed there from 1923 to 1942.
I was first an officer awhile in the legal department; then I
went to the Red Army; then came back to the foreign office in
the League of Nations desk; then I participated in the Civil
War in Spain as interpreter between the Soviet generals and the
Republican general staff. I was arrested in Spain by the secret
police and shipped back to the Soviet Union for trial. Then I
was released in 1938 and restored in the Foreign Service Office
in the Soviet Union.
I have participated in many international talks which took
place between the Soviet Union and Western nations, including
the Soviet-Nazi Pact and President Roosevelt's emissary, Harry
Hopkins, in the summer of 1941.
During the war I was in the Baltic countries and on the
Leningrad Front and come over to the German lines. I deserted
from the Soviet army being in rank of colonel of general staff.
I tried for sometime to convince the Germans to take less
stupid political line towards the Russian people and Russian
soldiers. Because of my stubbornness and perhaps too hot a
defense of the Russian national interests as opposed to
Communists and Nazis they put me in Gestapo jail for a while to
cool me down.
After release I went to a German farm in Bavaria and was
there until the American army came in 1945.
Under American occupation I was obliged first to hide
myself, for a couple of years, due to the western policies of
extradition to the Soviet police of all Russian people,
especially like me who were on the Soviet wanted persons list.
In 1947 I came out and explained to the U.S. Army
intelligence officers in Germany who I was actually and my
political standpoint and I started my work in the United States
Army.
First I worked as instructor in the European Command
Intelligence School in Oberammergau and next year I was
transferred to the General Staff School in Regensburg, Germany,
as an instructor on the matters of the Soviet policies, party
organization and similar matters. In 1952 I was brought by the
army to this country to testify before the Senate Internal
Security Committee against Owen Lattimore.
After my testimony I was dismissed from the army,
unfortunately, and I am living now in this country waiting for
my bill to be decided.
The Chairman. A bill introduced by Senator Karl Mundt
granting Mr. Bogolepov full citizenship.
Mr. Bogolepov. I had forgotten to mention that at the end
of the thirties I was able to join the Communist party of the
Soviet Union. I did it, as many other Russian anti-Communists
do, in order to get in a higher position and to influence in
that way the overthrow of the Communist regime in my country.
That is all.
Mr. Cohn. Were you dismissed from service with the army
after you testified before the McCarran committee?
Mr. Bogolepov. I think in connection with this. If you need
more information about it, when I came here the assistant chief
of G-2, General Bolling was much eager to get me for his
service. He introduced me in the Pentagon to another general
and they discussed my further employment as a lecturer in
various U.S. military colleges. Two days after the talks were
stopped and I got my discharge papers from the army.
The Chairman. What are you working at now?
Mr. Bogolepov. I am not very much happy with work, for
evidently my reputation of a radical Russian anti-Communist is
speaking against me. Neither State Department or Pentagon
wanted to have anything with me. I am working merely on an
informal basis. I have here some former students of mine. I
examine for them various aspects of psychological warfare; also
I am writing for newspapers from time to time, etc., etc.
The Chairman. In the statement I made in the record
originally, I understood you objected to testifying because you
are now working for the army. I gather you don't; that you lost
your job.
Mr. Bogolepov. That is right.
The Chairman. Mr. Secretary, may I ask if you could check
that.
Secretary Stevens. You bet your life.
The Chairman. We would not like Mr. Bogolepov's name used
publicly.
Mr. Bogolepov, the secretary of the army will check into
your discharge after you testified before the McCarran
committee. It seems on the face to be completely unreasonable
that you worked for the army until you were subpoenaed before a
United States Senate committee and then were promptly fired.
The secretary will check into that.
Mr. Bogolepov, you were working in the Foreign Office,
Moscow, and a book entitled A History of Russia, War Department
Educational Manual EM 248 was being written. Is that correct?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is correct.
The Chairman. This book was written by a man in London?
Mr. Bogolepov. Right.
The Chairman. From the information we have, Mr. Secretary,
this has been used as an indoctrination course in the army.
Also I may say one of the sources for the document which we
discussed the other day. They used this as source material.
Mr. Bogelepov, while you were in the Russian Foreign Office
did you see any correspondence either with the man who was
writing this book in London or with the Russian embassy in
London giving instructions as to how propaganda was handled?
Mr. Bogolepov. I have to explain first that starting with
the middle of the thirties, big operation was set for by the
Soviet government in order to infiltrate into the Western
administrations the idea favorable to the Soviet government.
In that connection they used Soviet embassies, the
Komintera channels and emissaries sent from Moscow to various
foreign countries. Contacts were established with prominent
Western lawyers, scholars and especially with the people known
here under the name of Russian experts.
The idea was that in order to get Western politicians to be
confused and influenced--presidents, ministers of foreign
affairs, etc., one has to confuse and to influence their
advisors. The Russian experts in the west--I saw myself in the
secret files of the Soviet foreign office this directive of the
Foreign Commissar Molotov--must be ``won on our side.'' Molotov
said to the Soviet ambassador in London, Maisky, in 1939, that
he has to redouble his efforts in the matter of mobilization of
the people who work on Russian matters in England to get them
``work for us.'' They were supposed merely to supply false
suggestions on Soviet policies to the Western governments and
public opinion rather than to serve as a source of information.
Especially insistent was Moletov to influence members of the
British government in 1939 in the sense which will help the
aims of the Soviet foreign policies.
In one of the letters Ambassador Maisky sent back to Moscow
to the foreign office, it was mentioned that a noted British
scholar, Sir Bernard Pares, make appearances in the Soviet
embassy and ask the Soviet embassy's help in writing chapter of
his history on Russia dealing with Soviet matters. I remember
that report of Maisky was mentioned that the man asked embassy
to give information about Soviet history because he felt
himself incompetent and needed some assistance.
The Chairman. Mr. Bogolepov, just to have the record
straight, this book was originally written in 1926, apparently
revised in 1928 and a final revision in 1937. Now, was it
during the 1937 revision that this London Communist got
instructions from the Soviet embassy?
Mr. Bogolepov. Yes, that was in the end of the thirties. I
do not remember the exact date--1936 or 1937.
The Chairman. He did not do the original writing but the
final revision?
Mr. Bogolepov. Right, if one will judge by correspondence I
saw.
The Chairman. I may say, Mr. Secretary, that we have
checked and find that this was in use by the army up through
1952.
Secretary Stevens. What is that?
The Chairman. History of Russia.
It was released by the armed forces as a War Department
educational book. I might say also that it was source material
for the document entitled ``Psychological and Cultural Traits
of Soviet Siberia.'' I think I should emphasize for the record
that none of it had its origin under the present regime. It was
all brought in, long before Secretary Stevens took over and
long before President Eisenhower took over as president. I
assume it may still be in use because of the time lag in
getting rid of it. That is why I think our committee might be
of some benefit by giving you a picture of the unusual material
that has been used.
Mr. Bogolepov. Inasmuch as Mr. Secretary is present here, I
think it would be of interest to know that some of my students,
high officers of the intelligence division, were protesting
against use of this book in the Regensburg school and other
U.S. Army installations in Germany. I don't know whether they
succeeded or not but I do know that when I protested myself
against this and other literature and I got in serious trouble
and here I have with me copy of the order from the intelligence
school, Oberammergau, to tell you what kind of mess I got in
because of my protestation.
The Chairman. In other words, when you objected to the use
of Communist propaganda to indoctrinate our troops you were
removed from your job?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is right. One of the reasons, they said
I was a chronic complainer, signed by J. E. Raymond, Colonel,
U. S. Infantry. In a way I certainly was. I was complaining
about communism for thirty years.
The Chairman. They didn't like you being a chronic
complainer about Communist literature.
Mr. Bogolepov. That is right.
The Chairman. I can understand why you objected so
strenuously to coming here to testify.
When you came to the United States you then worked for army
intelligence for a while?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is correct. I still was employed by the
army one month after arrival to this country.
The Chairman. And you were furnishing the army all the
material you could about Soviet Russia and their potential war
plans, strength, etc.
Mr. Bogolepov. That is right.
The Chairman. When you were discharged after you testified
before the McCarran committee were you given any reason for the
discharge?
Mr. Bogolepov. No. I just got my papers. That is all. When
I asked Colonel Brown, the adjutant to General Bolling, what is
the result of General Bolling's intention to employ me with
army in the United States, I got answer by telephone this issue
wasn't raised anymore.
The Chairman. How long after you testified before the
McCarran committee were you discharged?
Mr. Bogolepov. Immediately after I was released from the
subpoena of the United States Senate.
The Chairman. Getting back to this book, do I understand
your testimony to be that parts of the book, I think you
referred to the last chapter specifically, were written under
the direction of the Russian Foreign Office and instructions
having been submitted through the Russian embassy in London? Is
that correct?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is correct. Through the Soviet embassy
in London.
The Chairman. Have you had an opportunity to read this book
yourself?
Mr. Bogolepov. Yes, certainly I had.
The Chairman. Would you consider this Communist propaganda?
Mr. Bogolepov. I consider it worse than Communist
propaganda. I was in the army myself, and no worse thing
happens to an officer when intelligence gives him
misinformation and gives false description and evaluation about
enemy. Then the battle would be certainly lost. This book you
have in your hand, together with a lot of other information on
the USSR used by the army in Europe, is evidently calculated
misinformation. That is my sincere belief and impression.
The Chairman. So you consider this much more serious than
propaganda. You consider it important from the standpoint of
giving our officers information about the enemy which is
completely false, which would mislead them and which would
result in losing battles and wars if they relied on this type
of information.
Mr. Bogolepov. That is right, sir.
The Chairman. I may say, from a different source we will
have sworn testimony that the author of this book was a member
of the Communist party under Communist discipline.
Obviously, you know for a fact that he was taking
instructions but you are not in a position to know whether he
is a Communist or not. That information will be supplied by
another witness.
Mr. Surine. Could you furnish the details about the Bernard
Pares situation? You were in the process of testifying about
observing correspondence in the Soviet Foreign Office in Moscow
concerning Bernard Pares' contact with the embassy in London.
Could you finish that?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is more or less all. I don't remember
the details.
Mr. Surine. One of the other books which is used in the
bibliography of this report, ``Psychological and Cultural
Traits of Soviet Siberia'' is a book called U.S.S.R., a Concise
Handbook edited by Ernest J. Simmons. I hand you this book and
you will see----
Mr. Bogolepov. I know this book pretty well in six years
with the United States Army.
Mr. Surine. In the time you were in the army you worked on
the book itself, observed the book being used by the army.
Could you furnish the information you know about the various
source material you know in this book?
Mr. Bogolepov. I remember this book by heart. I testified
before the Senate McCarran committee that one of the authors of
the book, a professor at Columbia, John Hazard, spent time in
Moscow in so-called Moscow Institute of Soviet Law, which head
was in those days no other person than Vishinsky himself, and
Professor Hazard got a very good education in the Soviet law
and in time of his being there was graduated from this Soviet
Institute of Law with high praise and it is my opinion after
reading his article and this book that this praise was not
given in vain, he really deserved it. Professor Hazard in his
many writings, in this book as well as in other publications,
is carrying out the idea that the Soviet legal institutions are
more or less like American institutions. It does not help much
when he writes that Americans have a different way, still his
method of comparing Soviet institutions with the American
government administration and judiciary implies the false idea
that the things under communism aren't that bad.
The Chairman. I think the record should show that this is
work edited by Ernest Joseph Simmons, paragraphs were written
by different individuals, one by Corliss Lamont, who has been
identified as a long-time apologist for communism; one by
Harriet Moore, a rather notorious Communist who invoked the
Fifth Amendment in regard to espionage and communism; another
chapter written by Fredrick Schuman, who has been identified
not as a Communist but as a sympathizer.
Mr. Bogolepov, just to have the record clear, this book
which we are now talking about, U.S.S.R., a Concise Handbook by
Ernest J. Simmons, was used to indoctrinate our military while
you were working for the military?
Mr. Bogolepov. Right.
The Chairman. And I understand you objected to the use of
this book at that time?
Mr. Bogolepov. I did.
By the way, Senator, I met Simmons in Moscow. He visited
Soviet Union many times. If my recollections are correct, I
talked to him in Moscow in the Office of the Press Division of
Foreign Office and I was one of those who were obliged to give
him some indoctrination on how to carry out pro-Soviet
propaganda in this country. He was a very friendly, very polite
person. When I came to the West and disclosed that actually I
was an anti-Communist, he didn't want to have contact with me
anymore.
The Chairman. Were you convinced that Simmons was loyal to
the Communist cause?
Mr. Bogolepov. Well, Senator, my English is not very broad.
I don't know perhaps the actual significance of the word loyal.
If a man comes to the Communist Foreign Office and gets advice
on how to carry out pro-Soviet propaganda in this country, to
me that means he is loyal, but I may be wrong. It was my
impression at least.
Mr. Surine. You have finished your comments on the U.S.S.R.
handbook?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is right.
Mr. Surine. You have had an opportunity to analyze the
report which is at issue in this hearing, haven't you?
I might point out for the record that Mr. Bogolepov did not
have an opportunity to look at this report until just a couple
of days ago.
Would you care to analyze that report on the basis of your
study?
Mr. Bogolepov. Right, but may I just make an observation
concerning this business with pro-Communist books in the army.
I wish to emphasize once more that I met a great deal of army
officers, intelligence officers, who were also as much upset as
I was. Some protested. For example, the former chief of
Regensburg Military School, Colonel Martin, was one who was
protesting against, to my knowledge, against the use of all
these books I mentioned here, especially with the special
service of the U.S. Army of occupation in Germany.
I wish to make it completely clear when I am talking about
such sad matters in American army, that it does not mean I
accuse army as a whole. I have only to praise the intellectual
and moral level of the American officers and soldiers as very
high. They resented much all this Communist propaganda stuff in
the army installations.
The Chairman. Your testimony is that a sizeable number of
the officers felt as strongly about this Communist type of
literature as you do?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is right. They protested.
The Chairman. But you feel the army as a whole has a high
moral standard, anti-Communist, and that their protestations
were of no avail under the past administration?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is exactly what I mean, sir.
Mr. Surine. Proceed on this report.
Mr. Bogolepov. Well, how much time do I have? To talk about
this report and say everything which is really must be said,
requires too much of time.
The Chairman. As much time as you need.
Mr. Bogolepov. I will try to do it in twenty or twenty-five
minutes if such would be your wish.
There are two different methods of pro-Communist propaganda
in the Western world. One is direct and overt when people
simply praise all elements of the Communist regime in the
Soviet Union. That was possible before the war and up to 1948.
Now the Communist sympathizers were obliged to change tactics.
They can't praise the Soviet regime openly. They have to use a
subversive tactic since in general they come over to subversive
activities. The document on Siberia reflects both of these
methods of pro-Communist influence. First of all, I will give
you some examples of open praise of the Communist regime and
ideology.
In many instances the works of Stalin and Lenin and other
pro-Communist propagandists are used with just slightly
changing of the exact wording. For example, on page one of the
Siberian document at the very beginning it is stated: ``Harsh
Soviet government has liquidated or expelled potentially
rebellious elements.''
In this book in Russia, Stalin's Problems of Leninism, page
510, we may read:
Class of land-lords was liquidated during civil war. Other
exploiters shared the fate of the land-lords. All exploiters
became liquidated.
In other words, there is no more Communist opposition in
Russia, which is purely Communist propaganda, which is not
correct. The aim of this document is to make the army believe
that there is no cracks in the Kremlin walls; that there is
only one way to fight against communism; to carry out a total
war against all peoples behind the Iron Curtain.
On pages four and five, there is a long story about how
life is wonderful under the Communist regime.
The toiler was elevated to the highest level of
respectability The laborer is hero now in the Soviet Union. . .
. The farmers status has also risen sharply. . . . Women are
virtually on a par with men in all walks of life. Women have
the right to be employed . . . '' etc.
Exactly the same statement might be found again in the book
of Stalin's on page 518, when Stalin speaks that:
The working class of the Soviet Union who has liquidated
private property and capitalistic exploitations is now the
leading class of Soviet Society. . . . Our Soviet peasantry
also changed completely, became a new peasantry. It is a
peasantry liberated from the bondage. . . . And our working
intelligentsia is also a new intelligentsia, second to none in
the world.
In other words, the analyst of Siberia repeats word for
word the statements of Stalin.
Mr. Surine. In connection with the theme of people being
solidly behind the Communist regime, did you have or hear any
personal conversation by Molotov himself along that line?
Mr. Bogolepov. Along which line?
Mr. Surine. That is must be prevented at all costs--that
the Western world know of the real conditions behind the Iron
Curtain?
Mr. Bogolepov. Yes, that was the prime objective the
activities of the foreign office.
Mr. Surine. Would you repeat the conversation?
Mr. Bogolepov. Well, there wasn't one conversation. That
was the main line of instructions which Molotov always gave to
us, employees of the Soviet Foreign Office and to the members
of the Soviet embassies abroad, that we would have to do our
best in order to implant in the Western world the idea the
Soviet people would back the Soviet system; that there were no
enemies inside the Soviet Union; that in case of war against
the capitalist world, the whole country would have to fight,
the whole people will raise as one man against the capitalist
enemy. I couldn't refer to any particular talking. That was the
main theme all talks they have in Moscow and in the Soviet
Embassies and agencies abroad.
On page ten, for example, you might find extremely
revolving statement to the effect that in Communist countries
where there is no freedoms, still one freedom is maintained,
that is freedom of self-improvement within occupation.
This statement, again, is taken from this book of Stalin's
when it is said:
Under Soviet regime people works for themselves, not for
the enrichment of exploiters. . . . Our working man feels
himself as a free man. And if he works well, he is a hero of
labor, he is covered with glory.
That is from page five hundred, Problems of Leninism of
Stalin's, which evidently served as a basis for statements in
this document.
On page thirty-seven, it is stated:
Soviet elections generate great interest and enthusiasm.
The average Soviet citizen, whatever his nationality, is apt to
feel that he has full and equal citizenship in the U.S.S.R. and
shares much of the patriotic pride which is so marked in the
Great Russian segment.
Here I have another book which is considered as a Communist
``Bible,'' the Short Course of the Communist Party, which you
might find on the desk of every member of the Communist party
in the Soviet Union as well as abroad. On page 336 you may find
the statement:
The elections were carried out in the atmosphere of great
enthusiasm. Those were more than elections. Those were feated
as a great holiday, as a triumph of the Soviet people. Ninety
millions confirmed the triumph of socialism in the U.S.S.R.
with their votes.
Almost exact wording of Siberian document!
The Chairman. Who is the author of that book?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is the official history made by the
Central Committee of the Communist party in the Soviet Union.
That is the highest authority in the Soviet Union.
The Chairman. And Stalin personally is the author of some
of the chapters?
Mr. Bogolepov. That is right. That is, as I said, the
Communist Bible in a way.
On page forty-nine of the U.S. Army intelligence report we
read:
National leaders are vitally respected and admired. Stalin
and Molotov are regarded as great men.
I didn't give you any reference to Soviet propaganda
because this statement you might find on every page of this and
other Communist books.
On pages forty-seven and forty-eight, just a very last
observation, we may find one of the new clever, indirect
methods of the fellow travelers and Russian experts in this
country in their work of distorting the truth about Soviet
realities and confusing the American mind. It is an effort to
identify Russian people with present regime, the same method
you might find in all Communist publications. American self-
styled experts say there was never any freedom in Russia and
there is no freedom today, so you haven't to worry about
Russia, and the one way to deal with the mess is the Atomic
bomb. While using this method of putting all Russian
Communists, as well as non-Communists, on the same level, the
author or authors of the Siberian document go as far as to
repeat word for word basic untruths of the Red propaganda.
For example, on page nine we may read: ``Russia, long known
as prison of peoples.'' I open the story of the Communist party
on page six and I read: ``Czarist Russia, known as prison of
peoples.''
So it is a complete quotation from the Soviet book of
historical lies and this is just one example of how authors of
this document simply rewrote most appealing statements of
Communist leaders for influencing American officers, without
criticism or reservation made whatever.
On page forty-seven it is said:
Extreme caution is required in accepting hearsay data. The
opinion of 2,000,000 White Russian refugees and small numbers
of deserters and escapees cannot be taken as representative of
the 200,000,000 who remain in the USSR. Foreign travelers also
tend to distort what they see in terms of their own background,
and are readily misled by the typically human tendency of the
Russian to display deference to his correspondent's viewpoint,
particularly if the acquaintance is casual. The ardent foreign
Communist visiting the U.S.S.R. will attract his own kind, and
receives few negative impressions from those he talks to.
Similarly, Russians wishing to vent grievances will seek out
the American or British official, and casual acquaintances will
seem to agree with his opinions. Moreover, the outsider is
likely to impute his own reactions to the Soviet people,
forgetting that a situation intolerable to an American may be
acceptable as familiar routine to a Soviet citizen.
The idea is very familiar to me. When people of my type
came to Western world with the idea of explaining how dangerous
communism is exactly in the Western world, to make it obvious
that as long as communism exists in Western world, the dangers
of the Soviet Union will grow on, we immediately ran into
opposition of so-called Russian experts who have position
inside administration, publishing houses, newspapers, etc. Take
the books you have before you; take almost any other western
left-wingers writing on Russia and Soviet affairs. You'll have
almost always a hint as to non-reliability of Russian anti-
Communist refugees. Top British expert, Isaac Deutscher,
American fellow travelers, Fredrick Schuman, Harvard people,
they all are much insistent: Don't believe Russian
eyewitnesses. They are emotional and embittered. They don't
tell the truth. They are warmongers, Fascists, Communist,
everything. Believe only us Western experts on Russian affairs.
Mr. Surine. Mr. Bogelepov, isn't the effect of it that
officers reading the Siberian document should disregard
everything Russian defectors may say, and believe this document
allegedly putting out the real facts?
Mr. Bogolepov. In a way, yes. Intelligence officers who
more than often meet refugees from behind the Iron Curtain are
evidently the main target of the effort to deprive them of the
use of information provided by anti-Communist sources.
Mr. Surine. You have reviewed the entire document,
especially the last four or five pages?
Mr. Bogolepov. Yes.
Mr. Surine. Have you found in the document any statements
retracting the previous seventy pages or any facts in it?
[Off-record discussion.]
Mr. Bogolepov. Yes, I paid special attention to this moment
and as I told you in the beginning of my testimony, we have
before us a new method of fellow-travellers and false experts
on Russian affairs. They can't praise openly our common enemy.
They have to put it, as we Russian say, a spoon of tar into
the barrel of honey, I would say, to use a protective cover. If
somebody will say it is a pro-Communist report, they will quote
some sentences that sound objective: Say Soviet worker is
unhappy; there is no freedom in the Soviet Union; that there
certainly should be discontent, etc., etc. But isn't all that
in itself very confusing? It is to contradict all of what was
said before. It looks as a way of getting alibi for the authors
of this document. They say bad things do exist in the Soviet
Union but what matters is the whole impression American
intelligence officers may have after reading the document.
Coming to the end of my testimony about this document, for
I promised to be short, I would say that the picture of the
Soviet Union, of the Communist administration, of relations
between the Russian people and their Red oppressors, and
psychology of the Soviet soldier is strongly biased. For
example, there is a true statement that the average Russian is
not an American hater, has a very high respect towards
Americans, and as a Russian who lived most of his life in the
Soviet Union, I am happy to testify here that we really don't
hate any foreign nation, whereas we have especially high esteem
of the American people, and after my living in this country I
can understand why. I found that--I hope you won't get angry--
there are much similarity between Russians and Americans, in
human character. I found Americans very frank, very friendly to
other men and nations, exactly as an average Russian is.
All is not bad in the paper under our examination, indeed.
There is a very important statement in this document to the
effect that it would be a mistake to over-emphasize the problem
of national minority in the Soviet Union, and it is rightly
suggested that in case of war American army should not place
much emphasis on national minorities to try to use them against
the Russian majority. Nothing good would come out of this. I
agree on that point with the authors of the Siberian paper.
Besides these very few positive moments, I would say, after
reading this document, the impression of an American would be
full of confusion. He would know about the Soviet Union even
less than he did before because his brains would be completely
put out of balance, due to contradictions in documents.
The second impression a reader of the document should get,
in my opinion, that the life in the Soviet Union is not so bad;
that the Russians are accustomed to this life, take life as it
is and, therefore, in case of war, as I guess I mentioned
already, there is no opportunity for American intelligence or
psychological warfare to live a wedge between regime and
Russian people and profit by dividing of enemy camp. This is a
most dangerous thought. It may cost much to all of us.
The Chairman. I have an appointment at a quarter of 12:00.
I would like to have you back here this afternoon.
[Off-record discussion.]
Mr. Bogolepov. May I make one observation. In my opinion,
it seems to me that even if this document has been declassified
it would not be wise to disclose in public hearings the full
text of this document. If the Soviet intelligence would be
informed about the contents of this type of intelligence
documents in American army, it would be very valuable
information for our enemy.
The Chairman. In other words, you feel that if the Soviet
Union knew how badly misinformed our officers are, it would be
a benefit to them?
Mr. Bogolepov. Yes.
The Chairman. I have weighed that carefully. I think some
damage can be done by that, however, I think the benefit gained
by exposing the complete clear-cut propaganda of the old
administration would put the new administration on its toes.
We will adjourn until two o'clock this afternoon.
afternoon session
The subcommittee reconvened at 2:00 p.m., room 155, Senate
Office Building, with the following additional people present:
Senator Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan; Karl Baarslag,
Research Director.
Present from the Department of Army: Col. Odis McCormick,
chief, Troop Information and Educational Division; Col. John L.
Chamberlain, asst. chief.
TESTIMONY OF VLADIMIR PETROV
The Chairman. Will you stand and raise your right hand?
In the matter now in hearing before this committee, do you
solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give shall
be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so
help you God?
Mr. Petrov. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Give us your full name, please?
Mr. Petrov. Vladimir Petrov. P-e-t-r-o-v.
Mr. Cohn. And what is your occupation at the present time?
Mr. Petrov. Teaching at Yale University.
Mr. Cohn. Can you tell us a little bit about your
background?
Mr. Petrov. I am not a professor in the first place,
instructor. I was born in Russia in 1915. I lived there until
1944. I got my college education in Moscow and Leningrad. From
1935 until 1941 I served a prison sentence in Northern Siberia.
I was released shortly before the war began to turn back to
Europe and Russia, a few months before the area was occupied by
Germany. When the Germans began to retreat from Stalingrad, I
moved westward, first to Austria, Vienna and in 1945 I was in
Italy already. I stayed there for two years before I got a
chance to come over to this country. I have been on the faculty
of Yale University since 1947.
Mr. Cohn. I believe it is correct that since that you are
the author of at least one book?
Mr. Petrov. Two books.
Mr. Cohn. And magazine articles that appeared in national
magazines in this country, based on your experience and
knowledge of the Soviet Union. Is that correct?
Mr. Petrov. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Have you examined, Mr. Petrov, this army
indoctrination report?
Mr. Petrov. I certainly did.
Mr. Cohn. Could you give the committee and Secretary
Stevens the benefit of your observation and analysis of this
report based on your great experience concerning the Soviet
Union and the very matters dealt within this report.
Mr. Petrov. I'd be glad to. First, I will give you a
summary of what I think of it.
This is a paper of a scientific character that has little
to do with Siberia in the first place and that, in my opinion,
is a pro-Communist apology. It contains distorted information
about the Soviet Union that tends to mislead and misinform the
reader. If you read it, your inescapable conclusion would be
that the Russians are very content with the Communist
dictatorship; that Communists are admired by the population of
the Soviet Union; that even millions of slave laborers in
Siberian concentration camps are relatively happy. The paper is
trying to prove that there is no bounds to Soviet patriotism
and the Soviet soldier is so devoted to the Communist regime
that the United States will find it next to impossible to win.
So far as the paper is used for information of American
officers, it undoubtedly would spread a defeatist attitude and
a tendency to appease communism and encourage him to surrender
on the battlefield in case of diversities. I can prove every
statement from the text of that manuscript. If American
officers believed what the papers tells them, they can't help
but feel a sense of guilt fighting the happy Russian who
maintains cordial relations with their Communist government and
no matter what leads to war, the American officer is so
indoctrinated he feels they are the target of the United
States.
Needless to say that in order to prove his point, the
author or authors knowingly or unknowingly, impose half-truths
and outright lies. Since he used as bibliography largely so-
called fellow-travelers, there is no wonder it promotes
Communist propaganda lines on most points concerning the Soviet
Russia. It may be that only the army need clean up army
information and education from bias and misleading material,
the use of which, in my opinion, is harmful to the best
interests of this country.
I want to add that least of all I think that the author of
this book is a Soviet agent or an undercover Communist because
I had some experience in the past in this country with this
kind of people and the attitude that I discovered in this paper
is not a rare thing in this country I discovered. As a matter
of fact, the author, quoting himself on page fifty says:
Most Americans are fortunate enough never to have knowingly
had personal contact with a professed communist. In the USSR
the Communist is a patriot, a civic booster, and frequently a
war hero, doing his best to build up his country. In the United
States the communist is at best a fool, and at worst a traitor,
whose primary aim is to destroy his country. Communists in the
USSR enjoy public admiration, while those in the United States
are justly condemned as actual or potential felons.
This sentence, in my opinion, characterizes the whole
approach of the author to the problem. He believes that
communism is probably not good for the United States, but it is
perfectly all right for the peoples of the Soviet Union or
whatever other country it has under its control.
I can also point out that the author in another
unscientific way tries to disqualify the sources that may
disagree with him. On page forty-seven he says:
Extreme caution is required in accepting hearsay data. The
opinion of 2,000,000 White Russian refugees and small numbers
of deserters and escapees cannot be taken as representative of
the 200,000,000 who remain in the USSR.
While I, myself, admit that I am one of these refugees, I
think that this doesn't make me less trustful source of
information.
Everyone, of course, has his opinion and is entitled to his
opinion. One may think that communism is a good thing. Another
may think that communism is a wrong thing. I believe that is a
wrong thing but it doesn't diminish any knowledge of the Soviet
Union so far as facts go. When we discuss that or this event is
good or bad, it is matter of opinion but when we come to the
facts, I believe that after spending thirty years in Russia,
reading more books about Russian than any of the so-called
experts, that were listed in the bibliography in this
manuscript, I can at least claim to be a reliable source of
information.
Do you want me to go into any details of my findings
because I have marked out a number of quotations here.
The Chairman. I think perhaps not at this time. I just read
over your analysis of some of the comments you made on this. I
may say that I disagree with the author when he says disregard
anyone who was there, we should only listen to the Corliss
Lamonts and those others. I'd much rather listen to a man like
yourself who knows the people in Siberia, knows the people of
Siberia. I may say I want to thank you very much for coming
down here today and making this study. What I'd like very much
to do if it does not impose on your time, I would like to have
you continue your analysis of not only this particular document
under consideration but several of the other books used to
indoctrinate our military.
Mr. Petrov. It is a rather ungrateful task, very dull
reading and it makes me mad.
The Chairman. I would like to have you come back Monday, if
you could, for open session.
[Off-record discussion.]
COMMUNIST INFILTRATION IN THE ARMY
[Editor's note.--Louis Budenz (1891-1972) and Harriet Moore
Gelfan testified at the public hearing on September 28, 1953.
The executive session testimony of Corliss Lamont (1902-1995)
was published in 1953.]
----------
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, N.Y.
The subcommittee met (pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953) at 2:30 p.m., in room 128, United
States Court House, Foley Square, New York, N.Y., Senator
Joseph R. McCarthy, presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Francis P. Carr, executive director.
The Chairman. Show the witness is reminded he has been
sworn previously.
TESTIMONY OF LOUIS FRANCIS BUDENZ
Mr. Carr. Professor, you have been sworn.
First we would like to have you, extremely briefly, give
your present occupation.
Mr. Budenz. I am assistant professor of economics at
Fordham University and also on the faculty at Seton Hall
University.
Mr. Carr. You were formerly editor of the Daily Worker?
Mr. Budenz. That is correct.
Mr. Carr. Would you briefly recite your positions in the
Communist party very briefly?
The Chairman. May I suggest, Mr. Carr, that this is already
in the record?
Mr. Carr. We can skip that.
The Chairman. The fact Mr. Budenz was a very important
functionary and all his activities have been put in the record
so I don't think it is necessary to go through it again.
Mr. Carr. Fine.
Mr. Budenz, I am going to show you a book entitled A
History of Russia written by Bernard Pares.
Mr. Budenz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Are you familiar with Bernard Pares?
Mr. Budenz. I am. I don't know him personally, but I know
of him by official communications in the Communist leadership.
Mr. Carr. Do you know him as a member of the international
Communist movement?
Mr. Budenz. Yes, sir, and as a member of the British
Communist party.
Mr. Carr. In what year was this, sir?
Mr. Budenz. This was during the 1940's, over a period of
time, as a matter of fact. I should say roughly, so far as my
memory can serve now, from 1942 to 1945.
The Chairman. I am going to ask you, Mr. Carr, for the
record, has it been established this book is being used for
indoctrination purposes in the army?
Mr. Carr. Yes, sir. We had the man the other day that
testified that as late as 1952 this book was being used.
Professor Budenz, did you have an opportunity to look at
these pages of the book [indicating]?
Mr. Budenz. Rather hastily.
Mr. Carr. Would you care to express your opinion as to
these pages in the last chapter of the book or would you rather
have some time to study them?
Mr. Budenz. No. I think I can express an opinion.
This discussion here on the Soviet Constitution or the
Stalinist Constitution is a Communist interpretation of that
constitution. It is taking at its face value everything the
Constitution says whereas there is plenty of evidence now and
there was plenty of evidence then that this constitution is a
very decided hoax.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this, Professor. This book,
according to the evidence, has been used to indoctrinate the
American military, to teach them what communism is, what it
stands for. Do you think this is an honest description of the
workings of communism, what it stands for, what it is?
Mr. Budenz. It is not. The Constitution of 1936 was written
specifically to deceive the Western world and specifically the
United States. It incorporates provisions such as freedom of
assembly, the right to hold demonstrations, and many other
provisions which do not exist in Soviet Russia. We have ample
evidence of that. I know of that from information through the
Communist international apparatus, but I think that is public
information today. It is impossible to hold a demonstration in
Soviet Russia even for higher wages. And the Constitution
provides many such guarantees on paper which do not exist in
reality and was written in 1936, significantly when Soviet
Russia was seeking to bring about the people's front
arrangement or the means of deceiving the United States.
The Chairman. Here is one of the things that puzzles me and
disturbs me greatly, Professor. We have had many of these books
that we find are being used to indoctrinate our troops, one
being the book by Ernest J. Simmons. He has been identified by
Bogolepov, who was in the Soviet Foreign Office in Moscow. He
identified Simmons as the man he knew in the Soviet Foreign
Office and had instructions to write this book.
As I read it, and I am not nearly as such an authority on
this subject as a man like you, but just as I read it, I am of
the impression it is complete Communist propaganda. You have
this one by Pares. I believe the testimony is that the last
chapter was written under instructions from the Soviet Foreign
Office, those instructions being transmitted through the
Russian embassy in London.
Is that right?
Mr. Carr. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Would you have any idea at this point you may
want to give this more study, I don't know--as to whether this
material is being or rather has been put out to our military as
a result of merely stupidity or do you think that that is being
put out for more sinister reasons?
Mr. Budenz. May I see the book a moment, Senator?
The Chairman. Yes. The book which I hand you now,
Professor, is not only used as an indoctrination source for
other material, it also is being used in its entirety.
I would suggest you turn over and look at the authors that
were used. You will find an unusual group.
Mr. Budenz. The authors in this book indicate it is
Communist propaganda.
Corliss Lamont, to my knowledge, is a Communist.
Harriet L. Moore, to my personal knowledge and I have met
her in national committee meetings of the Communist party, is a
Communist.
Vladimir Kazekavich, though I have not met him, he was a
lecturer also and according to official communications, he was
a Communist.
Frederick L. Schuman has repeatedly and emphatically been
called to my attention by the Communist leaders as a Communist.
He is a member of so many Communist fronts that that should
suffice but I have this official information.
John N. Hazard, though I have never heard him mentioned
specifically as a Communist, has been noted as a close friend
of the Communist party. He helped, I think, Henry Wallace write
Soviet-Asia Mission, and you will observe that he also is an
editor of Vishinsky's Law of the Soviet Union.
The Chairman. I believe Hazard has been identified by Mr.
Bogolopov, who was in the Russian Foreign Office, as a
Communist for some years, was he not?
Mr. Carr. Yes.
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Budenz. So it wouldn't surprise me, though I had never
heard it specifically mentioned that way.
Sergei Kournakoff is known to me personally--he is dead now
but was known to me personally not only as a Communist but as a
Communist espionage agent. He was a courier from the secret
underground apparatus of the Communist party of the United
States to the Soviet Consulate. He also wrote in the Daily
Worker under the name of The Veteran Commander and was
connected with the Communist Russian paper here--Russian
Communist paper here in New York.
Andrew J. Steiger, he is a Communist, wrote in the Daily
Worker and is also the ghostwriter for Henry A. Wallace's
Soviet-Asia Mission.
Dr. Henry N. Sigerist though I have never met him, was
officially called to my attention on a great number of
occasions and most emphatically because of his outstanding
position as a Communist.
John Somerville may be known to me personally, but at any
rate I know from official communications that he is a
Communist. About 1943 or 1944, he wrote an article on
dialectical materialism either for an encyclopedia or an
anthology on philosophy, and we had a discussion of that in the
cultural commission of the Daily Worker; and while that
discussion is of course no longer too clear in my mind, I do
know that on that occasion V. J. Jerome, who was in charge of
cultural work for the Communist party, declared Mr. Somerville
to be a Communist, and that was the information on which I
proceeded to act while I was managing editor of the Daily
Worker.
I noted here, Senator, also in the bibliography which I
have glanced at very hastily that most of the sources are pro-
Communist sources, some of them open Communist or at least
identified Communist.
For instance, we have here Dr. B. J. Stern who is notorious
as having written under the name of Bennett Stevens for the
Communists; and we have others of that character.
There are one or two references in here that are not
Communists and maybe you would say are even critical of the
Communists, but the overwhelming majority of those cited here
in the bibliography, and I would say without wanting to be too
accurate, almost 90 percent are pro-Communist sources,
including Communists.
The Chairman. Professor, we have another--first, let me ask
you a question, referring to the book that you had before you
written by this man, Simmons, which apparently is a compilation
of the works of a sizeable number of Communist authors, can you
conceive of that being of any benefit whatsoever, being used to
indoctrinate our troops?
Mr. Budenz. Most decidedly, not, and I am astounded to find
that the intelligence service, which is particularly sharp on
this matter, has accepted this book or any part of it.
The Chairman. I may say, in connection with the
intelligence service, we had General Partridge before us the
other day--he is head of G-2 now--and he said he has never read
any of the works of Marx, Lenin, Engels; he couldn't--didn't
know the difference between Marxism and Marxism-Leninism; he
didn't know what happened in the Communist movement from 1945--
that is when, as you know, they had the tremendous turnabout;
he didn't recognize who Harriet Moore was or any of the
Communist authors. And that is the man who is head of our G-2
at this time, so I am not too much impressed with G-2 as an
authority on communism.
We have here also, Professor Budenz, a document entitled
``Psychological and Cultural Traits of Soviet Siberia.'' This
was sent out to various commands--not a great number of the
original documents were sent out, but the command of course had
the right to reproduce it, if they cared to, and the obvious
purpose was to give the various commanders an accurate picture
of communism in action in Siberia.
I wonder if you have had a chance to look this over or not.
Mr. Budenz. I haven't seen this full document, Senator. I
have seen portions of it, and those portions were certainly not
realistic to start with and were not descriptions that should
be conveyed of Soviet Siberia.
The Chairman. I wonder if you would care to take the list
of people who were used as authors or sources for this document
and give us a rundown on it. I am particularly interested today
in Corliss Lamont, who will be here to testify.
Mr. Budenz. Corliss Lamont is known to me as a member of
the Communist party. I say that aware that he has denied this.
But on several occasions I met him as a member of the Communist
party. In official communications among the Communist leaders,
he was held up as being among the first rank of the Communist
concealed leadership. And, of course, the positions of
responsibility to which he was assigned as head of the Friends
of Soviet Russia, which later became the National Council of
Soviet-American Friendship indicates his position. I happen to
know, however, definitely face to face that he is a Communist.
The Chairman. Have you ever personally met him at a
Communist gathering?
Mr. Budenz. No, I have not met him personally, because the
understanding was that he was not to be at Communist gatherings
nor at the headquarters of the Communist party.
But I have met him in connection with the formation of the
People's World, where he represented the party. That is, he
didn't say so, but it was said to me by Frank Palmer and by a
Miss or Mrs. Field, I think it was Alice Field, in his
presence.
Secondly, in 1937 Herb Goldfrank, he is the husband of
Helen K. Colodny, the writer of children's stories and the
Soviet espionage agent, called to my attention the fact that
Corliss Lamont was on the telephone.
He stated that Lamont wanted to know about James Burnham,
then a professor in New York University, and I went to the
phone and talked to Lamont and told Lamont that Burnham was a
Trotskyite in his sympathies, and Lamont said as a Communist he
was pleased to hear that, or at least to get the information
because he had been taken in by Burnham temporarily.
At that same time, in that conversation, he sent word to
Clarence Hathaway, who was in charge of the penetration of a
number of organizations for the Communist party and also in
charge of the control of certain Communist fronts, that he,
Corliss Lamont was sending to Comrade Hathaway, and that was
the phrase he used, a report for the party on his activity
within the organization known as the Friends of the Soviet
Union.
The Chairman. Did he tell you this over the phone,
Professor, or where did you get the information that he was
sending his report?
Mr. Budenz. He told me that over the phone in this same
conversation about James Burnham.
The Chairman. May I ask you this: There is always the
possibility that I could call you and say, ``Professor Budenz,
this is John Jones speaking.'' Unless you recognized my voice,
you wouldn't know whether it was John Jones or Pete Smith or
Joe McCarthy. Do you think if you listened to Lamont testify,
you would be able to state definitely whether or not you would
recognize his voice as the man who admitted he was a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Budenz. Yes, I think I would.
The Chairman. With that in mind, I would like very much if
you could--I know we have imposed on you and taken a tremendous
amount of your time, but we would like it very much if you
would stay in the room and listen to Lamont testify.
Mr. Budenz. Very well.
The Chairman. If you could do that.
[Mr. Budenz shakes head in affirmation.]
The Chairman. Pardon me, Frank, you have more questions.
Mr. Carr. Concerning this book you had before you, there
are other people listed in the bibliography. Would you
recognize any of the others there?
Mr. Budenz. Simmons.
Mr. Carr. Simmons you have spoken of?
Mr. Budenz. Pares, I have spoken of.
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Mr. Budenz. Professor Harper, though I don't know him as a
Communist, he was always considered by the Communists to be
very close to them in his attitude.
There is only one name that I see whom I could say to be a
critic of Soviet Russia and that is David J. Dolan, Forced
Labor in the Soviet Union. There is no doubt his work is
valuable.
The Chairman. Let me ask you----
Mr. Budenz. In criticizing slave labor in Soviet Union.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this. As I go through this
document, and I understand you haven't read it over, you may
not be in a position to testify in detail, but as I read it, I
find about 95 percent of it praises either directly or
indirectly the Communist system to the skies, and I find about
5 percent which is highly critical of communism. We have had
witnesses who have identified entire passages as coming
directly from Stalin's book, others that come from--I forgot
the name of the document--one that Bogolepov referred to as the
Communist Bible.
Mr. Carr. History of the CPSU.
The Chairman. History of the CPSU.
Mr. Budenz. That is Stalin's own work. That is what you
might call, if you dared use that language, the Bible of the
Communists.
The Chairman. I think that is the way it was referred to.
I think I understand the modus operandi here myself but for
the record, would you care to discuss the purpose of putting
in, into that document, material highly critical of communism,
3 or 4 or 5 percent of the entire work.
Mr. Budenz. Well, if there weren't something critical in
here, it would be seen to be too clearly a Communist document.
For example, we have some very startling statements: The
toiler was elevated to the highest respectability. That is
utterly false, false in view of the fifteen million slave
laborers in the labor passport system wherein the laborer could
not leave the job without the consent of the bureaucrat; false
measure of respectability is wrong; and it is false in addition
in Stalin's own words, if we had time to quote them from the
Problems of Leninism, where he shows the dictatorship of the
proletariat is actually the dictatorship by the Communist
party, by the vanguard. Just one statement like that
immediately throws the whole picture out of focus.
The Chairman. I wonder if I could ask you to do this,
Professor. I would like to send you the testimony of Bogolepov
and the Yale Professor who was in--what is his name?
Mr. Carr. Petrov.
The Chairman. Petrov, who had been imprisoned in Siberia
for some time and was an important member of the Communist
party in Russia, who has testified this is pure Communist
propaganda. I would like you to go over their testimony and the
passages which they pick up and get at some future time--oh, we
are having a hearing Monday, but I don't think perhaps we could
get around to your testimony then. I am taking Tuesday off. And
be in a position to give us a--oh, your idea of just the extent
to which this is Communist propaganda.
This is off the record.
[Discussion off the record.]
[Witness excused.]
Mr. Carr. Mr. Chairman, to further identify one of the
authors mentioned, I would like to just note for the record
that the New York Times, of Wednesday, January 18, 1950, page
seventeen, carries an article in which Vladimir Kazekavich is
identified by Elizabeth Bentley as a Russian agent.
The Chairman. Kazekavich is one of the men being used to
indoctrinate or was used----
Mr. Carr. That is right.
The Chairman [continuing]. To indoctrinate the troops.
Mr. Carr. He is one of the contributors to the book called
USSR, a Concise History.
The Chairman. Which is----
Mr. Carr. Which is being used by the army.
The Chairman. Have we found out whether that is being used
as of this moment? We know it was up to 1952.
Mr. Carr. No. We were to get that.
The Chairman. From Stevens.
Mr. Carr. From Stevens.
The Chairman. We are to get that from Stevens. Good.
TESTIMONY OF HARRIET L. MOORE (HARRIET MOORE GELFAN)
The Chairman. Miss Moore, raise your right hand. In the
matter in hearing before the committee, do you solemnly swear
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
so help you God?
Miss Moore. Yes.
The Chairman. The answer is I do?
Miss Moore. I do.
The Chairman. Your name is Harriet Lucy Moore, is that
correct?
Miss Moore. That is my maiden name, yes.
The Chairman. What is your name today?
Miss Moore. Harriet Moore Gelfan.
Mr. Carr. What is your present address for the record,
please.
The Chairman. May I first inform the witness the principal
reason why you are here is because we found your works are
being used to indoctrinate our military on communism and upon
the Soviet Union. We have been investigating the use of the
works of Communist authors, the works of espionage agents to
indoctrinate our military, and that is the principal reason why
you are here today, to ask you some questions in that respect.
And Mr. Carr will proceed with the questions.
Mr. Carr. What is your present occupation, please?
Miss Moore. I have--housewife.
Mr. Carr. Housewife. Are you the Harriet Moore who assisted
in the preparation of the book entitled USSR, a Concise
Handbook, which was edited by Joseph J. Simmons, excuse me,
Ernest J. Simmons? \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Ernest Joseph Simmons, ed., USSR, A Concise Handbook (Ithaca,
N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1947).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Miss Moore. Yes. Well, I wrote one section of it.
Mr. Carr. Did you write the section entitled ``Number II,
Physical Features''?
Miss Moore. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Did you contribute in any other way towards the
production of this book?
Miss Moore. Not that I recall.
The Chairman. Do you know Ernest J. Simmons?
Miss Moore. I am in a peculiar position. I was called to
this committee at five o'clock yesterday. I have had no
knowledge of what it was about. I have not had an opportunity
to consult with counsel, and I don't quite understand the
implications of my being called here.
The Chairman. May I say this, that the subpoena has been
issued for some time, we issued it some time ago, and it wasn't
your fault that it wasn't served until last night.
If you feel for your protection you need to confer with
counsel, I think, Mr. Carr, that the witness is entitled to
have time to confer with counsel.
Mr. Carr. All right, sir.
The Chairman. Do you want to have an adjournment so you can
confer with counsel?
Miss Moore. How long an adjournment would I get?
The Chairman. How long do you want?
Miss Moore. As a matter of fact, I would need several days.
The Chairman. I think that is reasonable.
Miss Moore. I called and asked for such a delay, but
couldn't get one.
The Chairman. I think that is a reasonable request. You
have been identified, you see, under oath as an espionage agent
of Communist Russia. You have been identified as a Communist.
You have been identified as an important functionary in the
Amerasia publication, which has been named, I believe, by
intelligence agents as a tool for Soviet espionage.
In view of the seriousness of those charges, I think you
should have whatever time you think you need to consult with
counsel and decide whether or not you want to give us the
information which we want or decide whether you feel giving
such information to us would incriminate you.
Today is Tuesday. How would it be if we give you until next
Monday?
Miss Moore. Well, that's better than nothing.
The Chairman. If you think that isn't enough, we will try
to give you more time. I think that gives enough. That gives a
full week.
Miss Moore. Okay.
The Chairman. One thing that occurs to me is this. We had
some questions to ask you today principally about your alleged
Communist connections, about whether or not you were under the
discipline of the Communist party when you wrote these things,
and we were going into that.
We had hoped it would be unnecessary to call you to
Washington. If we don't hear you today, we will have to ask you
to come to Washington. That is both a hardship upon you and a
hardship on the committee, because we have to pay your way back
down there and back.
Miss Moore. If that is the only question you want to ask
me, I can answer that by declining to answer it, as you know I
do.
The Chairman. Why don't we do this. If it meets with your
approval, we will let Mr. Carr go ahead and ask you questions
and if the situation arises in which you think you want
additional time, then we will give you until Monday.
Miss Moore. It has already arisen.
The Chairman. I see. In other words, you do want additional
time?
Miss Moore. Yes.
The Chairman. We are giving you until Monday.
Miss Moore. All right. I will have to go to Washington?
The Chairman. Yes. Uh-huh! This may seem a hardship to you,
but, you see, and I have never met you before, know nothing
about you personally; all of the evidence about you is that you
were a very, very important functionary of the Communist party,
a party which is dedicated to the destruction of this nation by
force and violence; evidence that you were an espionage
agent.Therefore we are duty bound to try and get that
information from you. And we find your works are being used to
teach our military.
And I may say we do not enjoy this, either, but we will
have to ask you to come down Monday.
Miss Moore. There will no more hearings in New York?
The Chairman. No. I will be leaving--I will be here two
days, but I am tied up completely with the interviewing of
witnesses.
Miss Moore. It is very difficult for me. I have five small
children, and it is not easy for me to go to Washington.
Mr. Carr. It would be a one-day hearing.
The Chairman. It will be; might not get to her Monday. I
wouldn't like to call her down, if we have Budenz. Bogolopov,
and the Yale professor. I have got to take off Monday afternoon
before 3:30. Doubt if we can get to her Monday.
Mr. Carr. Then we would have to have a hearing here?
The Chairman. We will try and arrange so you can be heard
up here.
How old are you children?
Miss Moore. The oldest is 8\1/2\.
The Chairman. We will hold it up. We won't require you to
come to Washington Monday. I wish you would consider yourself
under subpoena, in other words not released from the subpoena.
We will try and hear you in New York. I perhaps won't be here
myself, but have one of the other senators hear your testimony.
Let me ask you this question, and you can either answer or
refuse to answer, using the Fifth Amendment, or ask for an
adjournment on this also.
Would you care to tell us whether or not as of today you
are a member of the Communist party?
I say, if you want to hold that answer up until you have a
chance to consult with counsel, you may do so.
Miss Moore. I would like to hold that up, too, please.
The Chairman. You may. You may. You will be excused, but
you are still under subpoena.
Miss Moore. Yes, sir.
[Witness excused.]
The Chairman. Mr. Lamont.
Mr. Wittenberg. How do you do, Senator? Mr. Lamont is
coming in. I am his attorney.
The Chairman. I see.
Mr. Wittenberg. Where do you want him?
The Chairman. Raise you right hand, Mr. Lamont.
TESTIMONY OF CORLISS LAMONT (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, PHILIP
WITTENBERG AND IRVING LIKE)
[Although taken in executive session, this testimony was
published in 1953 in U.S. Senate Committee on Government
Operations, Hearings before the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations, Communist Infiltration in the Army (Washington,
DC: Government Printing Office, 1953), page 1-19.]
[Whereupon, at 4:25 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
KOREAN WAR ATROCITIES
[Editor's note.--A task force of the Permanent Subcommittee
on Investigations, chaired by Senator Charles E. Potter,
investigated war atrocities committed by Communist forces
against American troops in Korea. Public hearings on the issue
were held on December 2, 3 and 4, 1953. None of the witnesses
who appeared at the executive session on October 6, Edward J.
Lyons, Jr., Lt. Col. Lee H. Kostora, Maj. James Kelleher, and
Lt. Col. J. W. Whithorne, III, testified again during these
public hearings.]
----------
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met (pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953) at 10:00 a.m., room 357, Senate
Office Building, Senator Charles E. Potter, acting chairman,
presiding.
Present: Senator Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan.
Present also: Francis P. Carr, executive director; Roy M.
Cohn, chief counsel; Robert Jones, assistant to Senator Potter;
Harold Rainville, administrative assistant to Senator Dirksen;
Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk.
Also in attendance: Mr. John Adams, representing the
secretary of the army, Mr. Stevens; Brig. Gen. C. C. Fenn,
director, legislative and liaison division, Department of the
Army; Lt. Col. J. W. Whitehorne, III, G-2; Lt. Col. Lee H.
Kostora, G-1; Mr. Edward J. Lyons, Jr., Judge Advocate
General's Office; Maj. James Kelleher, Department of Defense,
Psychological Warfare; Mr. Charles A. Haskins, staff department
counselor.
Senator Potter. Gentlemen, first I want to thank you for
coming up here on such short notice to give us the benefit of
what information you can give us. As you probably know, the
chairman has designated me as a task force of one to try to
find out what has happened to the several thousand American
soldiers that the Communists haven't returned and we have
apparently no knowledge what has happened. We have seen in the
papers that many of them have been massacred behind the North
Korean lines. We would like to have that information.
Now, also, I think it would be well for me to say we have
no intention of competing with the military or competing with
United Nations forces in this field, but I do know that a
mother that has a son or a wife who has a husband that is
unaccounted for here desires to get full and accurate
information as to his whereabouts or what has happened to the
person that they are interested in. We solicit your cooperation
and we assure you that we will endeavor to carry out our duties
without any embarrassment to the military or anyone else. We
are not after anyone. We are on the same mission that I am sure
you gentlemen are.
Now, Frank, I assume you have discussed this with the
gentlemen here, so would you go right ahead.
Mr. Carr. I think first, sir, I will have Mr. Lyons give us
a little bit of background of the situation.
In the sense that this is going to be a roundtable
discussion, if at any point some of you other gentlemen find
something you want to put in that might help the senator----
Senator Potter. If you do that, take cognizance of the fact
that our fair young lady is keeping minutes of the meeting.
Mr. Cohn. I think if each person who speaks will identify
himself first.
TESTIMONY OF EDWARD J. LYONS, JR., WAR CRIMES
DIVISION, JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL'S OFFICE,
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Mr. Lyons. In the summer of 1950, to be exact, July of
1950, General MacArthur, at that time Far East commander,
ordered his judge advocate to take steps to investigate
atrocities, war crimes, being committed against our soldiers,
South Koreans and civilians. Within a week or ten days, General
MacArthur was appointed United Nations commander in charge of
all forces in Korea and thereafter he appointed his commanding
judge advocate responsible for the collection of war crimes
material, the investigation, interrogation of witnesses, the
collection of evidence in the preparation for trial. In his
capacity as United Nations commanding judge advocate, Colonel
George Hickman prepared what we shall call a ``direction'' to
all judge advocates in the field as to the manner in which they
would conduct interrogations and submit the evidence to him.
A step further, in October of 1950, the United Nations
commander, General MacArthur, ordered the judge advocate of the
United States Eighth Army to establish a war-crimes division in
his command which would gather all of this evidence and which
would interrogate the witnesses for all needs and coordinate
the work of various staff judge advocates in the army and
different commands. That division functioned as such until
August of 1952 when the then United Nations commander, General
Clark, ordered the duties of that division transferred to the
Korean Communications Zone, so as of 1 September 1952, the War
Crimes Division has been operating under the commanding general
of the Korean Communications Zone.
Senator Potter. In order to fully identify that command,
who is the commander?
Mr. Lyons. I am afraid----
Senator Potter. Is that a theater command?
Mr. Lyons. That would be a theater command. I don't know
the name of----
Mr. Adams. The Korean Communications Zone is not a theater
command as it is now known under General Clark. The Korean
Communications Zone was a line of communications to the Eighth
Army in Korea as distinguished from the theater command.
Mr. Lyons. It is headed by a Lt. Col. R. Todd, a judge
advocate lt. colonel.
During the time that the War Crimes Division has been in
operation it has investigated roughly eighteen hundred cases,
with the exception of roughly seventy duplicate files. All of
these case files are in Korea.
Senator Potter. Now, the case files for the entire eighteen
hundred cases are in Korea?
Mr. Lyons. The entire eighteen hundred cases are in Korea.
The case files range from cases that the judge advocate
believes are provable cases, and there are only a small
percentage of those cases which we have nothing more than an
unsupported confession or individual eyewitness testimony. Many
of the roughly eighteen hundred case files are based solely on
confessions of North Korean or Chinese Communists who were
prisoners of war at Koji Island. That was the United States
prisoner-of-war center.
Now, in our office we have at the present time what we call
case status reports of roughly sixteen hundred of these files.
Senator Potter. What do you mean by case status reports?
Mr. Lyons. A case status report is what we call a thumb
nail sketch of the file. It would contain, where possible, the
names of victims; where known, their nationality; whether
military or civilian. It will contain the names of suspects and
their nationality if they are known. It will state where the
incident occurred and then will give a brief description of
what the incident was or is.
It will give where we have the names of survivors and that
is pretty much all.
Senator Potter. Have the survivors been notified at all
that you have this information?
Mr. Lyons. The survivors have been interrogated in Korea.
Senator Potter. You are talking about survivors on the
spot?
Mr. Lyons. Yes, sir.
Now the statements, interrogations or affidavits of the
survivors will be found in the case files that are in Korea,
and in those case files in Korea you will find photographs; you
will find a report of the investigating officer; you will find
medical case histories, identification of bodies and any other
information that in the opinion of the investigating officer
would go to make up a case.
Senator Potter. What are your plans now? What are you
planning to do with this information?
Mr. Lyons. I would say that--let me answer your question by
going back a few months if I may, Senator. The Little Switch
Operation, that was a term of wounded POWs, which took place in
April of this year and was completed in the middle of the
summer. The returnees, both United Nations and our boys, were
interrogated in Korea. The results of those interrogations have
been incorporated, here applicable, in these eighteen hundred
case files. There is continual interrogation of all of the
returnees. As a result of this ``Little Switch'' operation
roughly 140 new cases have been opened. We have not as yet
received any of those case status reports.
Now we come to ``Operation Big Switch.'' There will roughly
be thirty-five hundred interrogations there. I don't know at
the moment what percentage of the thirty-five hundred
interrogations will obtain war crimes information but whatever
there is, whatever number we do extract will have to be
returned to the War Crimes Division in Korea for study and
incorporation in the pending cases or the possibility of an
opening of a great many new cases.
Senator Potter. In other words, your eighteen hundred cases
were discovered prior to the exchange of prisoners?
Mr. Lyons. No, I must say roughly fifteen hundred or
sixteen hundred, in round figures, prior to the exchange of
prisoners. There were roughly 141 new cases as of the 31st of
August as a result of ``Little Switch.''
Senator Potter. What type of a process did you find? Were
they on a mass basis or----
Mr. Lyons. They vary, Senator. You had the mass basis
particularly as regards the South Korean civilians. You did not
have, so far, too many of the mass cases involved in United
Nations. You do, of course, have the three or four cases that
have grown out of the march from Seoul to the border.
Now, we do expect and we have reason to believe that there
will be many more cases opened as a result of ``Little Switch''
and ``Big Switch'' having to do with the march from Seoul. We
have other cases--we have found other cases--we have the murder
of roughly twelve hundred United States soldiers by North
Koreans and there we have only the testimony of one North
Korean who was a participant and eyewitness but the War Crimes
Division in Korea thought that his statement would be accepted.
Senator Potter. I understand that this North Korean
testified or they have a statement from him that twelve hundred
were killed at one time?
Mr. Lyons. In one operation.
We have a large number of cases where the atrocity is two,
three, four, five, six, ten, twelve United Nations prisoners
who were wounded and their bodies were discovered with their
hands tied behind their backs with evidence that they were
beaten, their eyes gouged out, used for bayonet practice and
the like. We have one case where a wounded American, the enemy
Communist threw gasoline on his clothing and ignited him and he
managed to crawl back to the American lines and later died in
the hospital.
Senator Potter. You have his statement, I assume, before he
died?
Mr. Lyons. Yes.
Senator Potter. I wonder if from the G-1 section we could
find out what a man's family would be notified when a soldier
is missing in action and then his statement given to the War
Crimes Commission that he has been a victim of Communist
atrocity. I assume that G-1 notified the parents.
TESTIMONY OF LT. COL. LEE H. KOSTORA, G-1, OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT CHIEF OF STAFF
Col. Kostora. We notify, that is, the adjutant general
notifies the family or the next of kin of any change of status
of anyone missing in action or any casualty. If we have the
information on any casualty we report it to the parents. I
don't know of any cases where we reported atrocity cases, that
is, we have told the parents that an atrocity was committed.
Senator Potter. Now, in the cases that Mr. Lyons mentioned
where a majority of them haven't been definitely proven, do you
notify the family that the missing in action son has been
killed?
Col. Kostora. That is right. We have in our records where
we have definitely known that a person was missing in action
and died in a missing status, we have notified the family.
Mr. Adams. I think the Senator's question was: Do you
advise the family that he was murdered?
Col. Kostora. No, sir.
Senator Potter. It is changed from missing in action to
killed in action?
Col. Kostora. It depends on the circumstances. It would
depend on the report we would get from the Far East command.
All of the information that we get concerning a man we do
report to the family of the man.
Senator Potter. I don't know whether you have the
information Mr. Lyons is referring to or not. I assume you
don't.
Col. Kostora. I assume not. We probably have cases where
they died in American hospitals. I am sure the adjutant general
received information through casualty channels. What type of
information he received I couldn't say.
Senator Potter. If they have information from a North
Korean prisoner that he witnessed the massacre of a soldier or
several soldiers, then you wouldn't necessarily have that
information?
Col. Kostora. No, sir. Not necessarily.
Mr. Adams. I would like to say the army never revealed the
names of soldiers who were murdered at Malmedy Massacre
although they have them. They have not made the family aware of
the fact that they were murdered instead of killed in action.
That has been eight or nine years. I expect they will adhere to
that situation. They have photographs, in General Clark's
possession, of numerous soldiers with their hands tied behind
their backs readily identifiable, throats cut and things of
that sort. Obviously, if they are published the face will be
blacked out. That would be a terrible thing for a mother to
see. I don't think the fact that an individual was murdered
instead of killed in action would be revealed. Is that right?
Col. Kostora. That is right.
Senator Potter. I am not an expert on psychological
warfare, but I am just wondering if that might be a pretty good
psychology although it may be hard on the mother, but I am just
thinking out loud.
Mr. Adams. We have Major Kelleher here from the
Psychological Warfare Branch of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense who could describe the program if you'd like to hear
about it.
TESTIMONY OF MAJ. JAMES KELLEHER, PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE BRANCH,
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Maj. Kelleher. That is presently under active
consideration, sir, and on the verge of approval a program
which will really include three different phases. First is the
exposure for the benefit of not only the American public but
the world in general the nature of these atrocities and that
really covers two phases there-domestic and foreign, do the
same thing on a global basis. It has a third phase which I
might say concerns Ambassador Lodge at the United Nations,
which will include the charge of biological warfare. This plan
will probably be kicked off within the next day or so. In fact,
Ambassador Lodge is going to show some film, motion picture
sound interviews with the same air force fliers who were
characterized in the so-called germ warfare charges. Over a
period of the last two years the Communists have produced at
least four or five propaganda films which have been distributed
through different areas of the world and various languages
which are built around their confessions--six people, four air
force fliers and two marine fliers. Also involved is a so-
called International Scientific Commission made up mostly of
Europeans and Asiatics. The British representative is a man
named Neeaam. They went to Korea under the auspices of the
Communists and made a so-called impartial investigation of germ
warfare. The biggest and most powerful propaganda on the
Communist side in the hearing of this commission were the
confessions of the two air force fliers, Lt. Enich and Lt.
Quinn. Oddly enough, we weren't so sure we would get these
individuals back from the Communists on the ``Big Switch.'' We
feel that we got them back because the Communists had put them
on film and gave it global distribution and quite evidently
couldn't hold them, they repatriated them. However, these
people on repatriation have all recounted, stated that
confessions were obtained under various degrees of mental
duress. We got for Ambassador Lodge sound motion picture
interviews with the same individuals and these are now in his
hands. If you will recall, he entered a resolution at the
United Nations last spring asking for an impartial
investigation of this PW thing, and he defied Communists at the
United Nations stating if you will bring the so-called
confessors out of North Korea and give them thirty days rest,
without exception they will recount on their confessions. They
have now recounted and he wants to put it on record. He has
invited members of various delegations and a pretty good press
quorum in New York to view these films. The latest word is that
it will be this afternoon or this evening, in what has to be a
kick-off on this program.
We also feel, if I may bring up this point, that your
committee in making these investigations can be of tremendous
help in the global program that we are trying to get underway
to bring this whole mess to the attention of the world.
To get back to your mention about notifying the mother that
her son was a victim of atrocity, from a psychological
standpoint it will undoubtedly have a powerful effect. It has
to be measured simply against the pain and emotional impact on
the mother and American people. Does that about suffice, sir?
Senator Potter. Yes. I would like to solicit your advice as
to how best we can utilize the information we have.
Maj. Kelleher. All right, sir.
Senator Potter. Since the truce and the switches of
prisoners has there been any interrogation of American PWs
after they returned to the states. Do we have information on
that?
TESTIMONY OF LT. COL. J. W. WHITEHORNE, III, COLLECTION AND
DISSEMINATION DIVISION, OACS, G-2
Col. Whitehorne. War crimes and atrocities information is
not in itself intelligence. However, during the interrogation
process applied to all returned personnel we do conduct, in
accordance with established EEI, Essential Elements of
Information, questioning for war crimes and atrocities
information as a collateral activity. That information in turn
is received after processing in the Department of the Army
where it is made available to the interested parties, in
particular the adjutant general casualty branch and the JAG
office.
G-2 does not evaluate or process this information. We
merely pass it on to the interested and competent agencies.
Does that answer you question, sir?
Senator Potter. Yes. The reason I asked the question, I
have had several inquiries from people, mothers, whose sons
haven't returned and they claim they have heard from certain
PWs, American PWs, that they saw them in prison camps. They
have no information from the military or they had no
information from the son while in prison camp. I saw some
correspondence where the mother contacted the army and gave the
army the names of some returned PWs who were supposed to have
information concerning her son. I am just wondering if the army
has had the time or facilities to track those individual cases
down by contacting PWs after their return to the states.
Col. Whitehorne. Each returnee is interrogated. They have a
list of questions--who they saw, where they saw them, physical
condition, where he thinks they are now.
Off the record, I can explain the process to you.
Where we receive an indication through the interrogations
that a particular man is alive, that information is passed to
the adjutant general along with the identity of the man who
gave it. In fact, we pass the raw information to them so they
have as much of the story as we do. They cross-check the other
persons who might have seen him. If John Jones is carried as
missing in action on the adjutant general's roster, then three
prisoners come back all of whom said they saw John Jones, that
gives the adjutant general a basis for three checks to see
whether he should be changed from missing in action status to
captured. Comparison of dates involved tell whether or not he
should have been returned on possibly this last exchange.
Senator Potter. How many should have been returned that
haven't been?
Col. Whitehorne. I believe Colonel Kostora----
Col. Kostora. So far we have turned over--the UN Command
has turned over to the Communists a list of 944 American names.
Senator Potter. 944?
Col. Kostora. Yes, sir.
Mr. Adams. That includes army, navy, air force and marines.
Col. Kostora. That includes all of the services.
Senator Potter. How many UN troops have been returned?
Col. Kostora. I think there were about three thousand,
roughly.
Senator Potter. About three thousand have been returned?
Col. Kostora. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Do we have any information at all that some
of our PWs have been sent to labor camps?
Col. Whitehorne. Yes, sir, installations which could be
called labor PW camps where they saw lumber, some mining, but
mostly lumbering.
Senator Potter. Do we have any information that we still
have American troops in labor camps?
Col. Whitehorne. None at present.
Senator Potter. I am thinking now in comparison to World
War II. I think they are still returning German PWs who served
seven or eight years in Russian Labor Camps. I wonder if they
have any Americans as a result of the Korean War. Do we have
any knowledge or information to that effect?
Col. Whitehorne. We have no information that any particular
individuals are held in camps of that nature at this time. We
have a dragnet out now for information and action trying to
ascertain that fact, as to who they are, where they are, why
they are there.
Mr. Cohn. You think there are people there and are looking
for further identification?
Col. Whitehorne. Typical. G-2 pessimism, there probably
are.
Senator Potter. For my own information, I am curious about
the twenty-three Americans who are still over there and
apparently Communist propaganda got the best of them--or maybe
they went into the service as pro-Communists. Is there any
check being made as to the background of the men still there?
Col. Whitehorne. That information is available.
Mr. Cohn. What was the answer on that? Did any of those
people have Communist backgrounds?
Col. Whitehorne. Some of them had leftist leanings.
Mr. Cohn. Would we be able to get some documentation?
Col. Whitehorne. There are some present FBI files of
activity prior to entry in service.
Mr. Cohn. From whom in your shop could we get that? You are
probably going into that pretty thoroughly?
Col. Whitehorne. No, we have not. Our information is fairly
scattered. The adjutant general may have some information in
their 201 files; then on check of the name for security
purposes, you may find that the F.B.I. had some report of
activity on the individual. Now, our security division would be
the people to contact regarding each person.
Senator Potter. Now, that is security division of G-2?
Col. Whitehorne. Yes.
Senator Potter. Could they supply us with a little summary
on each one of those on whom there is any derogatory
information?
Col. Whitehorne. They probably could. I am sure they could.
Mr. Cohn. I think it would be helpful--a summary on the
twenty-three on whom there is any information of leftist
activity before they went in.
Col. Kostora. Actually we have twenty-three names of people
as reported by the Communists at this moment. We don't know
whether the twenty-three men are the twenty-three named, and I
don't suppose there has been any attempt to find out whether or
not they are because I don't believe our people will ask the
identity of any men because of the feeling that we don't want
to reveal the identity of anti-Communist people that we have in
our possession.
Mr. Cohn. They have given us twenty-three names. If we
could have the information on the twenty-three imparted, what
information you have concerning them would be very helpful.
Maj. Kelleher. The twenty-three names were released by
Wilford Burchett, a Communist Korean correspondent for a
Parisian Communist newspaper. The Communists didn't do it--a
pretty neat trick to use a kind of third person.
They don't have to stand behind their lies regardless.
Certainly the UN commander or military never would have given a
list of the twenty-three names to the American press, knowing
the impact on American mothers and not knowing for sure that
they were the same ones. The Communists are only too glad to
help you out.
Mr. Cohn. Of course, you can't tell but I would think they
would try to be accurate. If someone named turned up on our
side they would look pretty sick.
Senator Potter. How many soldiers would you classify in the
so-called progressive group? The ones who played ball with the
commies previous to the war?
Col. Whitehorne. Before answering that I'd like to issue a
caution. The files are not complete as yet. When a man is
interrogated his file is received in the U.S., received in G-2,
Sixth Army, who turns over the file to the service of the
individual, in case of airman, marine, sailor. In case of army
personnel the files move from the Sixth Army to his home army,
what we call gaining command. The gaining command is charged
with the responsibility of reading the file for their own
information. They have the case in their hands summarizing it,
distributing summaries to other armies and back overseas to the
armed forces Far East and then forwarding the summaries, ten
copies of the summaries and original to G-2.
G-2 in turn makes the original and a copy of the summary
available to all interested parties. Unless those files are all
received in G-2, cross indexed and filed centrally, it will be
impossible to say ``yes'' or ``no.''
Senator Potter. How long before that process will be
completed?
Col. Whitehorne. We hope to have it done in about nine
months. Each individual returning has information on upwards of
two hundred others which means a cross indexing to two hundred
other files.
Senator Potter. Would you be in any position to make a
rough estimate to the number indoctrinated with Communist
philosophy here?
Col. Whitehorne. The Communists attempted to indoctrinate
them all. We feel that it has possibly taken on the basis of
``Little Switch'' about 2\1/2\ percent, ``Big Switch'' about 5
percent. However, as a complete group, the figure now--possibly
the overall impression is somewhere around 2\1/2\ percent.
Senator Potter. The major mentioned the air force personnel
who signed confessions concerning germ warfare. Now, I would
assume that the army and the Psychological Warfare Branch has
spent considerable time interviewing the returned PWs who
signed confessions, not only in germ warfare but went on the
radio--We did have some personnel that did that? Has that been
done?
Col. Whitehorne. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Another question that I would like to ask,
who do you think we should talk to? Who do you think we should
contact to get as much information as possible to conduct this
hearing?
Col. Whitehorne. On the, war crimes and atrocities or
overall?
Senator Potter. First, on war crimes, atrocities, then on
the overall--the prisoners of war and we'd like to get
information concerning the Communist methods. I think we should
blow that up. How the Communist used the prisoners of war in
violation of all international agreements as to indoctrination
and the methods used. I think that should be blown up as much
as possible.
Col. Whitehorne. On war, crimes and atrocities, War Crimes
and Atrocities Division, Office of the Judge Advocate; on
indoctrination, Office of the Chief of Psychological Warfare.
Senator Potter. Mr. Adams, I don't know whether anyone here
would be in a position to say whether the proper defense places
would loan us personnel to work on this case----
Mr. Adams. I am quite sure we can. I am quite sure the
department will lend the committee any assistance which you
required to make preparations for a hearing. I am sure the
secretary of the army would want to and I am sure the secretary
of defense would. The Psychological Warfare Office, under
General Erskine, Office of Secretary of Defense would be
available to assist you. I am sure then both the judge advocate
general, G-1 and G-2 of the army would give you all the
assistance possible.
I would like to make a slight reservation on the request of
Mr. Cohn that the cases on the twenty-three names be made
available to the committee, together with any background of
possible Communist affiliation before they entered the service,
in addition to the problems faced, these individuals would fall
within the terms of the president's directive on--I'd like to
reserve that long enough for us to examine whether or not this
situation would.
Mr. Cohn. That would still come under the Truman black-out
order?
Mr. Adams. I am quite sure it would.
Maj. Kelleher. May I say we were faced with the same thing
in supplying material to Ambassador Lodge at the UN. We have
run across it in one case. Finally--I'd like to mention this to
Mr. Adams--it was down to whether we were dealing with a
personnel loyalty file. We managed to skirt it in this case by
simply dealing with the open testimony given after coming back
from Korea.
Senator Potter. Of course, the names have been made public.
I know of the name of a men mentioned. I assume he is from
Detroit, and I mean Detroit newspapers played it up.
That is something that could be worked out with the staff?
Mr. Adams. That is correct.
Senator Potter. I wonder, Major, if you know whether the UN
have--do they have a committee or commission working on this
problem too?
Maj. Kelleher. With regard, sir, to the exposure of the PW
mess or refuting charges, yes, sir they do. It is, I might say,
a pet project of Ambassador Lodge and a follow through from his
resolution of last spring demanding an impartial investigation
of this thing.
Senator Potter. Would it be your advice to contact
Ambassador Lodge so that our efforts are coordinated?
Major Kelleher. Yes, sir. I believe so. It could be done
very handily right here in Washington. In this particular case
he has a back-stopping group which works out of the formerly
Psychological Strategy Board, now the Operations Coordinating
Board of the National Security Council. This is Mr. C. D.
Jackson's group, sir.
Mr. Adams. I might suggest, Mr. Chairman, you might wish
personally to get on the phone and talk to Ambassador Lodge
about it. It might also be well worth your while to speak to
General Robert Cutler, administrative assistant to the
president on this psychological strategy matter. Both of them
might be able to give you assistance, help the committee.
Senator Potter. That is good advice.
Do you think it desirable at this point to follow through
and talk with some of the returning PWs who you have
information concerning, eyewitnesses of atrocities committed?
Mr. Lyons. Yes, but the report on recent returnees--our men
go back to 1950 and 1951. The recent ones the files are in
Korea. No, some of them would be in the files in Korea, but I
think that a batch of affidavits would be found in the
Pentagon. A great number are still in ``Big Switch,'' which
have not as yet been processed. In the pipeline, sir.
Mr. Adams. There were two points in this Lyons made
yesterday in the meeting I attended you ought to know. One is
that the interrogations of these people developed the fact that
most of the men who had been incarcerated for a long period of
time, during the course of lengthy interrogation dropped two
hundred names of individuals they have known in prison camps.
Those people must be dropped into slots. We have no IBM
machines to do it. It is a hand job. That brings the second
problem. The army doesn't feel these people can be
interrogated, cross-checked and put in the proper place within
eight or nine months. The second point was made by the people
here, I have forgotten which one, but that can be elaborated
on. Some of these returning prisoners on interrogation proved
to be surprisingly inaccurate in the things they may say. I
have forgotten which one.
Col. Whitehorne. Yes. We have found instances where four or
five men had been together for a long period of time. They were
restricted in movement and one saw what everybody else saw.
Yet, we got reports from the four gentlemen and the fifth would
go off on a tangent, and well, we checked it in a couple of
instances--went to the adjutant general's file and found that
he left school in the fourth grade. He put misinterpretations
on things probably as a result of a fairly poor background, not
a trained observer, in fact, a poor observer. We also found
that the stories did not adequately describe the behavior of
individuals. It would take stories of four or five to describe
one--before we got the correct idea. At the present moment all
stories are considered unreliable and will be considered
unreliable until the facility is achieved whereby they can be
cross-checked.
We had one instance, and I would like to put this up as a
warning in dealing with these people, where one gentleman came
back and spoke to another here in Washington and made a
statement to the effect that four men should be decorated for
acts behind the enemy lines while prisoners. We proceeded to
try to build up stories so they could be decorated and found
just the opposite was true.
One of the men whom we know, in the hands of the enemy--in
an army group at the moment--is repeatedly reported as most
helpful to his fellow prisoners. Yet at the same time he has
indulged in all sorts of treasonable acts which amount to trial
of the individual.
Senator Potter. Just a good natured fellow helping both
sides.
Maj. Kelleher. There is a point on that. It goes back to
the basic philosophy of good treatment. In the Communist
indoctrination process good treatment is inducive to
indoctrination. It is not at all unreasonable when you have
studied it. There is a lot of ostensibly good treatment for a
very specific purpose. Good treatment of patients who adhere to
their teachings.
For instance, a fairly smart boy working on an ignorant
farm hand says come over to the indoctrination lecture and just
play along with your captives. They gave those boys a library
loaded with Communist trash and terrific anti-American
propaganda and it is not unreasonable to find the situation
Colonel Whitehorne is talking about.
Senator Potter. Do you have any suspicion that they have
sent some of the men who have been indoctrinated back and they
kept them from being identified too much as progressives so
they come back here and do their work?
Maj. Kelleher. Yes, sir, and I am thinking of your
committee too because I wouldn't say probably but possibly you
put out word that you welcome people to come and testify before
your committee, you might get to it, and they may get up and
give you a harangue with which I am sure Mr. Cohn is familiar.
Mr. Cohn. I gather they don't stock their information
libraries with pro-American books.
Maj. Kelleher. They take care of pro-Communist stuff. Don't
worry about that.
Senator Potter. Major, I assume you also received
information from the air force and navy as well as the army?
Maj. Kelleher. Well, sir, there is nobody involved in this
PW stuff except the air force and marines--this biological
warfare proposition. Obviously, the navy in this case was not
involved.
Senator Potter. When I spoke of navy, I meant it to include
the marines. I would assume that it would be probably desirable
to contact the appropriate officer of the air force and the
marine corps as well.
Maj. Kelleher. Is this with reference to prospective
witnesses?
Senator Potter. Yes. Would you have information?
Maj. Kelleher. We would either have it or could get it,
yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Mr. Adams, I am wondering if somebody could
be designated soon to work as liaison between the committee and
the Department of Defense on this matter.
Mr. Adams. Yes. Secretary Stevens asked me to work as
liaison with the committee on matters such as this; initially
me.
Mr. Cohn. We are going to be keeping you pretty busy on
other things. We would like to get one fellow who could just
keep his fingers on the whole situation all the time.
Senator Potter. I think this afternoon I will call General
Erskine or secretary of defense to see if one person can be
designated to work close liaison with the committee.
General Fenn, do you have anything you'd like to add.
Gen. Fenn. No, sir. I'd like to have Colonel Whitehorne
tell something about the screening process they are going
through, the details.
Col. Whitehorne. When the reports that I mentioned reached
Washington we have a reading panel set up who go through the
reports. Twenty-two different officers are perusing these
reports at the reading panel. They read the summary and the
report and designate whether or not they want the report
circulated to their particular agency. We have set a priority
on these things purely arbitrarily giving the adjutant
general's casualty branch first go. The reason we do that, it
is a life and death matter concerned with the welfare of the
individual and his family.
By using the reading panel system we show everybody what we
have and where we get it. Also, it gives them a chance to come
back and ask for individuals to be re-interrogated here in the
Continental United States by the army commander.
Senator Potter. These reports that are sent to you are from
the theater?
Maj. Whitehorne. The report that came back from overseas
with the individual.
Senator Potter. You say you have a reading panel?
Col. Whitehorne. G-2. My office--what we call our documents
library.
Senator Potter. After reading the reports do they make
recommendations or what happens?
Col. Whitehorne. We are acting there in the capacity of
disseminator of information. We make the information available
to the judge advocate who then takes it and processes it,
brings it forth in trial.
Mr. Lyons. We plan to excerpt from these interrogations any
war crimes information and forward it to our War Crimes
Division in Korea for incorporation in the case files as soon
as possible.
Senator Potter. Then the complete files are still in Korea?
Mr. Lyons. I am leading up to that Senator, if I may.
In the early part of September at the start of this so-
called Department of Army Psychological Warfare plan, we
communicated with the Korean Communications Zone and asked them
to forward to us, on a loan basis, a certain type of case.
Number one, what we would call a referral case. A case we
felt would be recommended for trial. Number two, a case which
had reached the point of proof; that additional evidence would
simply be accumulated. In other words ``Big Switch'' or
``Little Switch'' would add nothing to the merits of the case,
and Number three, those cases which they had which were of
prima facie nature where they had no perpetrator. They didn't
know the perpetrator. To date we have received seventy-eight of
those case files. Some of them are pretty good. Roughly forty
of them involved Americans solely or Americans and South
Koreans as the victims.
Now, we personally would like to offer for your
consideration as a suggestion the idea that you might want to
use some of those better case files and we would offer to you
the JAG officer whose interrogation it was in the field in 1950
and 1951, who saw the victims, talked with survivors,
interrogated eyewitnesses, were present when pictures were
taken, wrote up reports of cases which he submitted to the War
Crimes Division.
Now, we have six or seven officers available at the moment.
Senator Potter. Gentlemen, I think one of the main purposes
of this committee will be to get the greatest psychological
value we can from the hearings and it would seem to me from the
questioning this morning that it would be desirable to work
with yourself, the JAG office and also the others, particularly
Psychological Warfare Division, to get three or four or more
cases where we have eyewitness accounts where the soldiers are
back here. Bring him in for the purpose of a hearing. I think
it will be much better to have a former G.I. himself tell his
eyewitness story than it would be for an officer to relate his
story.
We could get--select four or five of these stories and work
with your people, then contact the eyewitness observer to have
public hearings. Now, can you see anything wrong with that?
Maj. Kelleher. It sounds fine to me.
Mr. Jones. Major, may I ask if the Psychological Warfare
Division has consulted any way General MacArthur or any other
field leaders over there?
Maj. Kelleher. No, sir. We haven't.
Mr. Adam. I think it would be well, Mr. Chairman, to
explain how the Psychological Warfare program was developed.
It generated in the army. It was first conceived by General
Ridgeway and proposed to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The
secretary of defense agreed to their proposal and it was
submitted to the National Security Council, which is composed
of the president, the vice president, secretary of state,
director of mutual security, secretary of defense and director,
Office of Defense Mobilization. The National Security Council
made the decision so it is as close to being a national policy
as you can get if the decision is finally made to publication.
It is not something that was ill-considered in the Pentagon. It
started as the public information program and has global
ramifications. The truth--the pure bare facts are such potent
anti-Communist propaganda that it has global ramifications
rather than just domestic.
Mr. Jones. You say the Psychological Warfare Board has been
working as a back-stop to Ambassador Lodge, have you in the
course of your work consulted with General MacArthur?
Maj. Kelleher. Not at my level, sir. If such consultations
have taken place, it would certainly be at a higher level.
Mr. Jones. Have there been such consultations?
Mr. Adams. We don't know. We have no way of knowing.
Mr. Cohn. Could you find out?
Maj. Kelleher. I could raise the question. Ours is purely
an intelligence collection and evaluation job to get ammunition
for Ambassador Lodge.
Mr. Jones. Wouldn't his advice be beneficial, helpful?
Senator Potter. What about General Van Fleet? Has he been
consulted since his return? I assume many of the reports came
while he was in command.
Maj. Kelleher. I am at a little disadvantage, sir. I am at
a little lower level.
Senator Potter. Sometimes word of such consultations gets
around. The fact that you don't know doesn't mean they didn't
take place?
Maj. Kelleher. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. The consultations with General Van Fleet, if we
could check on that too.
Maj. Kelleher. I doubt very much if I could get the answer.
Mr. Adams. I think what you could do would be to ask
General MacArthur and General Van Fleet. You might write them a
letter and get the answer for the record.
Gen. Fenn. I think, Senator Potter, we should go into a
little more detail of the cases that we have reports on north
of the parallel and we are now not able to do anything about.
You put on the record a large number of cases. Tell us
about the investigation.
Mr. Lyons. There were roughly about four hundred, in round
figures, incidents which have occurred in North Korea and you
are never going to be able to get back in the area where the
atrocity took place to check as regarding eyewitness accounts
of people in the neighborhood, local people, and to find the
bodies. A certain number of those case we have the confession
of the North Korean Communist but practically all of those
confessions were at a later date repudiated by the Communists.
Senator Potter. Has this information been submitted to the
United Nations?
Maj. Kelleher. Various portions of it, sir, are in
preparation.
First, our intelligence got together documents and prepared
them on a classified basis. Then they are put back through
intelligence channels for evaluation study and agreement with
conclusion. Then they request declassification and it becomes
an open public document for Ambassador Lodge's use. We use the
psychological vulnerability, which simply means those holes we
can get at.
Senator Potter. Is there any thinking that war criminals
will be prosecuted if we ever have the opportunity?
Mr. Adams. I think that point should be in the record, Mr.
Chairman. The point you should remember is that when the Korean
Truce was signed we did include among the prisoners in United
Nations control a number of individuals accused by one person
or a group of persons. War criminals were all returned just as
the Communist returned to us some people they accused of war
crimes.
Senator Potter. In other words, we returned a prisoner who
we had a case against of war crimes?
Mr. Adams. On whom we may have had cases.
Senator Potter. And in return they sent back people they
were charging with such stuff as germ warfare.
Gen. Fenn. I think we returned two hundred, 199.
Mr. Cohn. How many did we get back?
Mr. Lyons. We received a total of thirty-five hundred.
Mr. Cohn. I was thinking of the 199----
Mr. Lyons. That was the total exchange, ``Big Switch''----
Gen. Fenn. Mr. Cohn was referring to how many we got back
from the Communists charged with war crimes.
Mr. Cohn. Did we give back more than we got?
Mr. Lyons. There was no attempt to tabulate. I just don't
know.
Maj. Kelleher. We were perfectly willing to give one
hundred Commies for one American.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lyons, you stated earlier that over in Korea
you have approximately eighteen hundred provable cases. Is that
correct?
Mr. Lyons. I can't tell you the exact number of provable
cases. There are roughly eighteen hundred case files. The
majority of them are based on the confession of a Korean or
Chinese Communist, which has since been repudiated--hearsay,
unsupported eyewitness testimony.
Mr. Jones. In other words, eighteen hundred files.
Mr. Lyons. Eighteen hundred files.
Mr. Jones. Have UN officials seen these files?
Mr. Lyons. No. The files are over in Korea.
Mr. Carr. You have sixteen hundred of these summaries of
files here?
Mr. Lyons. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Of this sixteen hundred, you must have been
making classification and study of that number. Do you have an
estimate or analysis of these? Narrow it down from sixteen
hundred to some number you think would be a good number of
cases. In other words, we would like to come over and look at
the sixteen hundred cases and not have to go through sixteen
hundred cases. Can you point out forty or fifty?
Mr. Lyons. Yes, from the case status report.
Senator Potter. Are some of these cases possible treason?
Mr. Lyons. I am quite sure not.
Mr. Cohn. I am thinking in terms of the Provoo case.
Col. Whitehorne. I am not a lawyer. I wouldn't know a
treason case if it fell on me except I do know actions inimical
to the best interests of the United States. It is up to the
judge advocate to decide whether a case exists.
Mr. Cohn. About how many cases would you say?
Col. Whitehorne. I wouldn't hazard a guess.
Senator Potter. Any referred to your office?
Mr. Lyons. No, sir, Senator, my understanding of that
procedure is that an army level determination will be made as
to whether a case can be prosecuted and recommendation will be
made at that field level.
Maj. Kelleher. Secretary Wilson made an announcement to the
press to the effect that cases will be considered on an
individual basis and each case will be given sympathetical
consideration.
At what point does a man's physical and mental ability to
withstand his treatment--at what point is he resolved of
responsibility from the standpoint of temporary derangement.
Colonel Enich, the air force confessor reached the point where
he realized later he was thinking like a ten year old child to
the point where he agreed to write and sign the confession.
Mr. Jones. Are both Allen Wington and Wilford Burchett,
wartime correspondents in Korea, are they British subjects?
Maj. Kelleher. They seem to figure in. We have one man who
said Burchett came to him shortly before he was repatriated and
said, ``You are the only American left in North Korea.'' He
signed the confession and was on his way down to Panmunjom.
That was a lieutenant. I don't remember this man's name. I
think he is covered in the U.S. News and World Report. That is
where you have got to decide the amount of psychological
pressure a man can stand.
Mr. Carr. Major, it seems apparent that your department,
psychological warfare, you seem receptive to the committee's
going into this matter. You say it will work out very well from
your standpoint. Now, what kind of concrete suggestion do you
have as to our approach to this thing.
Maj. Kelleher. I think I can answer that fairly clearly. We
would like to help. There are many sides to it. This mind
murder or complete inversion of mentality, if we could do
that--display the methods used in handling all propaganda, the
false conceptions, the distorted stories.
What we should do on a long-range goal is destroy the
credibility of Communist propaganda. Colonel Green would be a
good witness.
Senator Potter. Who was the air force colonel who signed
the confession?
Maj. Kelleher. Evans. I believe Colonel Evans would make a
good witness. Captain Sachden, who was repatriated, exchanged
in the ``Little Switch'' operation, I believe would make a good
witness.
Senator Potter. We have, you say, nine hundred and some
that are still missing?
Mr. Lyons. Nine hundred forty.
Senator Potter. They are not accounted for. Now, I assume
that possibly some of those could be victims of murder by the
Communists? Have the nine hundred and some been checked against
the atrocity file that Mr. Lyons mentioned?
Mr. Lyons. I don't know, sir. The adjutant general would
make that check. The adjutant general is making a check based
on the result of interrogation of returnees. The adjutant
general has put out a plan on gathering information on
casualties and the plan has gone to the field and has placed
the responsibility on local commanders to question all
returnees regardless of whether the returnee is a prisoner of
war. Every man who comes back from Korea who belonged to a unit
is subject to further interrogation for casualty information.
From time to time, as we get word from these returnees that
they saw a certain person in a prisoner of war camp, the
adjutant general sends material out to the field and advice to
contact members of that man's unit or other prisoners who might
have been in the camp for as much information as they possibly
can. The adjutant general is required to make determination
under the Missing Persons Act to finally close out these cases
and he is attempting to get everything he possibly can. Senator
Potter, you mentioned earlier something about mothers who write
in and they had never received any letters or had never
received any information, that is a continuing process and it
won't stop. It is very active.
Senator Potter. I have been swamped by letters from mothers
who have sons who haven't been accounted for as yet, and from
many of them I have a certain amount of evidence that they were
prisoners of war and I know the anxiety they have and we would
like to work with you so we can give them as much information
as possible.
Maj. Kelleher. Undoubtedly, it would hurry things up if we
could talk with them when they get off the ship at San
Francisco. However, under the law everyone coming back from the
Pacific, the first thing they get is a pat on the back and
thirty days leave. It is hard to interrupt that.
Senator Potter. Gentlemen, I have nothing further this
morning. I would appreciate it if somebody could be designated
as liaison with the committee. I think I had better take care
of that myself and call either the secretary of defense or
General Erskine so we would have somebody that would work with
our committee full time and not going off on cross purposes.
Mr. Adams. I am sure General Erskine for the psychological
strategy phase would designate Major Kelleher. As far as the
atrocity matter the secretary of defense would turn it over to
the army, Secretary Stevens and he would turn it over to me and
I would designate Mr. Haskins sitting next to me. I think that
would probably save you the call, unless you want to call
General Erskine.
Senator Potter. I am going to be away on other committee
assignments until the first part of December. That will allow
time for the staff to work liaison with Mr. Lyons' office and
also the Psychological Warfare Division and make other contacts
that might be necessary.
I would think it advisable to get some of your best files,
I think possibly I'd line up about ten cases, Frank. Try to
contact some of the returned PWs, returned soldiers, who were
eyewitnesses to these atrocities. Interview them in light of
the statements that they have given in prior interviews and set
that up for a hearing about the 10th of December. Is that
agreeable with you gentlemen? Can you see any cross purposes to
that? In the meantime I think the committee should go out and
contact Ambassador Lodge. We will also contact previous field
commanders, I think General MacArthur and General Van Fleet.
See if they have any suggestions. As a matter of fact, I think
General Van Fleet should be contacted. I would like to have him
work quite closely with this committee.
Maj. Kelleher. For your information, Ambassador Lodge has
the PW item coming up on his agenda today--anytime after about
the 21st of October--I am thinking only in terms of keeping the
campaign alive. This might just fit in.
Senator Potter. I expect to be on the West Coast the latter
part of the month and if you have any witnesses out there that
you could turn over I would be happy to see them while out
there.
In the meantime, Frank, if you have two or three you'd like
me to see while there it would save time.
Mr. Cohn. There definitely would be some on the West Coast.
Senator Potter. Well, gentlemen, if there is no other
suggestion, I want to thank you again for taking time to meet
with us and I will appreciate your continued cooperation as we
go along. Feel free at any time if you have suggestions as to
how to better operate this committee, we are working for the
same purpose and we will be very happy to receive them.
[Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 11:45 a.m.]
KOREAN WAR ATROCITIES
----------
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953, at 10:00 a.m. in room 357, Senate
Office Building, Francis P. Carr, executive director,
presiding.
Present: Francis P. Carr, executive director; Donald F.
O'Donnell, assistant counsel; Thomas W. La Venia, assistant
counsel; Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk; Raymond Anderson,
administrative assistant to Senator Potter; and Robert L.
Jones, executive assistant to Senator Potter.
Present also: Edward J. Lyons, Jr., Judge Advocate
General's Office; Col. Wade M. Fleischer, Office of Secretary
of Defense for Public Relations and Legislative Liaison; Maj.
James Kelleher, Department of Defense, Psychological Warfare.
Mr. Carr. Gentlemen, to get started this morning, I think
we will just have a roundtable discussion as we did the last
time. Let me review briefly the situation as I see it, and as
it stands as of this moment.
It is our purpose this morning to salvage what we can out
of what appears to be an unfortunate situation. It was our
understanding at our last meeting at which some of us were in
attendance here on October 6th, that the hearings projected by
Senator Potter for this fall on the Korean War atrocities were
to be held in full cooperation and conjunction with the army
and Defense Department's projected program in this matter. It
was our understanding and it was quite clear to me, and to all
in attendance, that Senator Potter was extremely anxious that
the committee's work coincide with that of the whole program.
It was my understanding also that the Department of
Psychological Warfare and the Department of Defense were, I
would say, anxious, or at least enthused about having the
committee come in and take part in the program since it was
felt that the committee would be another means of bringing this
situation forcefully to the public's attention.
It seems to have developed to the point where we have hit
sort of an impasse which we will have to overcome this morning.
Mr. Anderson. Do you think it would be well at this point
for the purposes of the record to incorporate excerpts from our
executive session?
Mr. Carr. I think that would be a good point. The reporter
will make a part of the record excerpts of the original
conference of October 6, 1953.
[The excerpts referred to are as follows:] Excerpts from
Stenographic Transcript of Hearings Re Korean Atrocities, October 6,
1953, before the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, U.S.
Senator Charles E. Potter, Republican of Michigan, presiding.
Maj. Kelleher (Psychological Warfare). There is presently under
active consideration, sir, and on the verge of approval, a program
which will really include three different phases. First is the exposure
for the benefit not only of the American public, but the world in
general, as to the nature of these atrocities, and that really covers
two phases there--domestic and foreign, do the same thing on a global
basis. It has a third phase which I might say Ambassador Lodge at the
United Nations, which will include the charge of biological warfare.
This plan will probably be kicked off within the next day or so. In
fact, Ambassador Lodge is going to show some films, motion picture
sound interviews with the same Air Force flyers who were characterized
in the so-called germ warfare charges. . . . also involved is the so-
called International Scientific Commission, made up mostly of Europeans
and Asiatics. The British representative is a man named Needham. They
went to Korea under the auspices of the Communists and made a so-called
impartial investigation of germ warfare. . . .
If you will recall he (Ambassador Lodge) entered a resolution at
the United Nations last spring asking for an impartial investigation of
the PW thing, and he defied the Communists at the United Nations
stating that if you will bring the so-called confessors out of North
Korea and give them thirty days rest, without exception they will
recant on their confessions.
We also feel, if I may bring up this point, that your committee in
making these investigations can be of tremendous help in the global
program that we are trying to get under way to bring this whole mess to
the attention of the world. [P. 887]
Senator Potter. Mr. Adams, I don't know whether anyone here would
be in a position to say whether the proper defense places would loan us
personnel to work on this case----
Mr. Adams (Counsellor for the army). I am quite sure we can. I am
quite sure the department will lend the committee any assistance which
you require to make preparations for the hearings. I am sure the
secretary of the army would want to and I am sure the secretary of
defense would.
The Psychological Warfare Office under General Erskine, Office of
Secretary of Defense, would be available to assist you. I am sure that
both the judge advocate general, G-1 and G-2 of the army would give you
all the assistance possible. [P. 898]
Senator Potter. Major Kelleher, I wonder if you know whether the UN
has a committee or commission working on this problem too? [P. 899]
Maj. Kelleher. With regard, sir, to the exposure of the PW mess or
refuting charges, yes, sir, they do. It is, I might say, a pet project
of Ambassador Lodge's and a follow-through from his resolution of last
spring demanding an impartial investigation of this thing.
Senator Potter. Would it be your advice to contact Ambassador Lodge
so that our efforts are coordinated?
Maj. Kelleher. Yes, sir, I believe so. It could be done very
handily right here in Washington. In this particular case, he has a
back stopping group which works out of the former Psychological
Strategy Board, now the Operations Coordination Board of the National
Security Council. This is Mr. C.S. Jackson's group, sir.
Mr. Adams. I might suggest, Mr. Chairman, that you talk personally
to Ambassador Lodge about it. It might also be well to speak to General
Robert Cutler, administrative assistant to the president on this
psychological strategy matter. Both of them might be able to give you
assistance, help the committee.
Senator Potter. That is good advice. [P. 899]
Senator Potter. Mr. Adams, I am wondering if somebody could be
designated soon to work as liaison between the committee and the
Department of Defense on this matter.
Mr. Adams. Yes. Secretary Stevens asked me to work as liaison with
the committee on matters such as this; initially me. [P. 903]
Mr. Lyons. (Judge Advocate General's Office). . . In the early part
of September at the start of this so-called Department of Army
Psychological Warfare Plan, we communicated with the Korean
Communications Zone and asked them to forward us, on a loan basis, a
certain type of case. . . To date we have received roughly seventy-
eight of these case files. . . Now we personally would like to offer
for your consideration as a suggestion the idea that you might want to
use some of those better case files and we would offer to you the
officer whose interrogation it was in the field in 1950 and 1951, who
saw the victim, talked with survivors, interrogated eye witnesses, were
present when the pictures were taken, wrote up reports of cases which
he submitted to the War Crimes Division. [P. 906]
Senator Potter. Gentlemen, I think one of the main purposes of this
committee will be to get the greatest psychological value we can from
the hearings and it would seem to me from the questioning this morning
that it would be desirable to work with yourself (Mr. Lyons), the JAG
office, and also others, particularly the Psychological Warfare
Division, to get three or four names where we have eye witness accounts
where the soldiers are back here. Bring him in for the purpose of a
hearing. I think it would be much better to have a former GI himself
tell his eye witness story than it would be for an officer to relate
his story . . . [P. 906]
Mr. Adams. I think it would be well, Mr. Chairman, to explain how
the psychological warfare program was developed.
It generated in the army. It was first conceived by General
Ridgeway and proposed to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The secretary of
defense agreed to their proposal and it was submitted to the National
Security Council, which is composed of the president, the vice
president, secretary of state, director of mutual security, secretary
of defense, and the director of the Office of Defense Mobilization. The
National Security Council made the decision so it was as close to
national policy as you can get if the decision is finally made to
publication. It was not something that was ill considered at the
Pentagon. It started as the public information program and has had
global ramifications. The truth, the pure facts are such potent anti-
communist propaganda that it has global ramifications rather than just
domestic. [P. 907]
Mr. Carr. (Executive director, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations) Major (Kelleher), it seems apparent that your
department, psychological warfare, you seem receptive to the
committee's going into this matter. You say it will work out very well
from your standpoint. Now, what kind of concrete suggestion do you have
as to our approach to this thing? [P. 913]
Maj. Kelleher. I think I can answer that fairly clearly. We would
like to help. There are many sides to it. This mind murder or complete
inversion of mentality, if we could do that, display the methods used
in all propaganda, the false conceptions, the distorted stories. . . .
The Acting Chairman. . . . I would appreciate it if somebody could
be designated as liaison with the committee. I think I had better take
care of that matter myself and call either the secretary of defense or
General Erskine so that we would have somebody working at full time and
not going off on cross purposes. [P. 916]
Mr. Adams. I am sure General Erskine for the psychological strategy
phase would designate Major Kelleher. As far as the atrocity matter is
concerned, I believe the secretary of defense would turn it over to the
army, Secretary Stevens, who in turn would give it to me, and I would
designate Mr. Haskins sitting next to me. I think that would probably
save you the call unless you want to talk with General Erskine. [P.
916]
Senator Potter. I am going to be away on other committee
assignments until the first part of December. That will allow time for
the staff to work liaison with Mr. Lyon's office and also the
Psychological Warfare Division and make other contacts that may be
necessary. [P. 916]
. . . Is that agreeable to you, gentlemen? Can you see any cross
purposes to that? In the meantime, I think the committee should go out
and contact Senator Lodge . . .
Maj. Kelleher. For your information, Ambassador has the PW item
coming up on his agenda today--any time after about the 21st of
October--I am thinking only in keeping the campaign alive. This might
just fit in.
[End of Excerpts]
Mr. Carr. It was pointed out at that time by Major Kelleher
that there was under consideration a program which would
include various phases. One phase was that Ambassador Lodge
might possibly kick off the program at the UN by showing of a
film and motion pictures of interviews of the American flyers
involved in the alleged germ warfare charges.
There was also, I believe, at that time a question as to
whether or not the Department of Defense could loan personnel
to the committee to work on this matter. Mr. Adams felt sure
that it could be worked out, and that proper liaison could be
established through Mr. Charles Haskins of his office.
Mr. Anderson. Do you recall the acting chairman pointed
out, and I might quote here, ``I would appreciate it if
somebody could be designated as liaison with the committee. I
think I had better take care of that matter myself and call
either the secretary of defense or General Erskine, so that we
would have somebody working at full time and not going off at
cross purposes.''
Mr. Adams followed and said, ``I am sure General Erskine
for the psychological strategy phase, would designate Major
Kelleher as far as the atrocity matter is concerned. I believe
the secretary of defense would turn it over to army Secretary
Stevens, who in turn would give it to me, and I would designate
Mr. Haskins, sitting next to me. I think that would probably
save you the call unless you want to talk to General Erskine.''
Mr. Carr. I think it should also be noted that I myself
stated that it was apparent that the psychological warfare was
receptive to the committee going into this matter, and asked
what kind of concrete suggestion could be offered so that we
could approach this thing in a proper manner. All of this is
being put in the record just to make it as clear as possible
that the position of everybody associated with the subcommittee
has been that we at least thought we were operating in full
cooperation with the Department of Defense on this matter. It
appears that somewhere along the line the business has become
pretty much snafued. We are in the position, as I understand
the picture, where we have a man who is over at the Department
of Defense trying to establish liaison in this matter, and yet
at the same time the information which he has been seeking is
made available to the press before it is known to him.
The point we are interested in getting straight here is
whether or not this was an oversight or some sort of design, or
what the purpose of this thing was, because it becomes apparent
that much of the information given to the press was the type of
information that we had been seeking.
It seems to me that our best position this morning should
be that we do everything we can to salvage something from the
situation. It also seems to me that a more proper way of
handling the situation would have at least been to notify
Senator Potter by at least forwarding this material to him at
the time the release was to be made.
I might say for Senator McCarthy that he feels that
something has been fouled up here, that he is anxious to get it
straightened out, and he is very anxious to see that Senator
Potter, as acting chairman, does have the full cooperation of
the Defense Department in this matter.
Mr. Anderson. May I interject something at this point? I
have discussed the situation with Ambassador Lodge of the UN,
and also Ambassador Wadsworth. It is quite clear that they
likewise were not notified of any release such as the
Department of Defense made available to the press on Wednesday.
Mr. Carr. Gentlemen, that seems to be the position we are
in. It is Senator McCarthy's intention, I know, because I have
been in contact with him, and I understand it is the intention
of Senator Potter's office, to continue to try to cooperate in
this matter to the point where we can conduct these projected
hearings as had been intended. The problem that presents itself
is what material do we use now. Most of it has been made
public. These are the points we would like to get under
discussion at this time.
Mr. Anderson. In the hearing of October 6, Mr. Lyons stated
as follows:
To date we have received roughly seventy-eight of these
case files. We personally would like to offer for your
consideration as a suggestion the idea that you might want to
use some of those better cases files, and we would offer to you
the officer whose interrogation it was in the field in 1950 and
1951, who saw the victims, talked to the survivors and
interrogated eye witnesses, and were present when the pictures
were taken and wrote up reports of cases which he submitted to
the War Crimes Commission.
It is my understanding that those cases were included in
the release given fully to the press.
Mr. Carr. On that matter, it is my understanding that Mr.
Lyons has fulfilled his statement made on October 6 in that he
has scanned the cases that were available and tried to be
helpful to the committee by, I would say, boiling it down to
several cases which he thought would be most helpful. He
notified you, Mr. O'Donnell, that the rest could be made
available.
Mr. O'Donnell. May I interject at this point, Mr. Lyons
made available at my first meeting with him at the Pentagon
approximately fifteen case files which probably were the best
case files in his unit from an evidentiary standpoint. There
were cases which probably would have been tried if the War
Tribunal Plan had gone into effect. At that time he also
informed me that we could have anything in his unit. So there
was complete cooperation with Mr. Lyons as far as I know.
Mr. Carr. However, as Ray points out, of the fifteen cases
all except one of those fifteen have been incorporated in this
report.
Mr. O'Donnell. That is correct.
Mr. Anderson. That is the point I wanted to establish.
Mr. O'Donnell. That is correct.
Mr. Carr. Now, of the original number of seventy-eight, or
seventy-four perhaps--
Mr. Lyons. Roughly around seventy.
Mr. Carr. It appears that all of these cases have been made
public at this time. What we have to come up with, I think, at
this time is some additional cases which have not been made
public which are, it seems to me, equally infamous. I think we
have to have some more positive assurance from the Defense
Department that the Defense Department is fully cooperating
with Senator Potter in this matter. We do not wish to appear
this morning to be in the role of complaining, other than the
fact that we cannot afford to let Senator Potter go into this
matter, and then have it exposed before he has had his full
chance to do it, especially when it seems to me that Senator
Potter was perhaps the most cooperative committee member that I
have ever seen on the Hill. His whole attitude was one of full
cooperation with the department in this matter. He made it
quite clear that he wanted his program to be coordinated into
the overall picture. He did not want to upset any applecarts
that were already under way. But by his coordination into the
general picture, I am sure he did not intend that he be
coordinated right out of the thing. It is like a fellow I knew
at law school who once said that the dean said he should do a
little relaxing, so he proceeded to relax himself right out of
law school.
That is the problem we are faced with this morning and we
want to come to some solution to this thing. We feel we must,
and we are definitely going to see that Senator Potter's
program in this matter is fully protected as well as it can be
at this stage. We would like to have any suggestions that you
might have on this matter.
Don, from your contact with Mr. Lyons and the others at the
Department of Defense, is there a possibility of there being
other cases?
Mr. Lyons. Could I interrupt before Mr. O'Donnell answers
that question?
Mr. O'Donnell. Yes.
Mr. Lyons. I will probably address my remarks more to Mr.
O'Donnell, because we sat down at that first conference. If you
will remember at that hearing when we spoke to the senator of
the officer who investigated, he said he would prefer to have
GI survivors as his witnesses. That, of course, immediately
lessened the available number of cases that we could give you,
because there were only a small percentage. I think as I said
that morning at the hearing, of the roughly seventy cases we
had then, only about forty involved Americans as the victims,
and of that forty, a smaller percentage were cases in which
there was an available U.S. survivor. So that in itself was the
reason why only roughly fifteen cases were offered to Mr.
O'Donnell at that time.
Mr. Carr. I might say, Mr. Lyons, we are satisfied with
that phase of the thing. The problem presented to us, now, of
course, is since those cases were so few in number, the
exposure of those cases, I might say personally, prematurely,
does place us in the position where the possibility of other
cases is very limited or almost the point of impossibility.
Mr. Lyons. I wonder if it can be said that making public
the information that has been made public in these cases has
destroyed the value for the committee. You have no eyewitness
testimony in these thumbnail sketches that have been given out.
Do you think that one of these good cases, the tunnel massacre,
has been spoiled because one paragraph has been given out? We
could bring in ten or fifteen or twenty witnesses who actually
saw the killing.
Mr. Jones. May I add this information which is a statement
made by the senator in the executive session. It reads:
Gentlemen, I think one of the main purposes of this
committee will be to get the greatest psychological value we
can from the hearings. It would seem to me from the questioning
here this morning that it would be more desirable to work with
yourself, Mr. Lyons, the JAG office and also others,
particularly the Psychological Warfare Division, to get the
names of eye witnesses where the soldiers are back here now.
Bring him in for the purpose of the hearing. I think it would
be much better to have a former GI himself tell his story than
it would be for an officer to relate the story.
That is the end of the quote.
Subsequent conversation with the senator on this particular
point cleared it up to this extent, that the senator would
prefer that a GI--and when he is thinking of a GI, he is
thinking of a non-commissioned officer and soldier, rather than
have the officer in the Pentagon relate the story.
Mr. O'Donnell. I think that was clearly understood. May I
interject at this point that according to the information I
received at the Pentagon the other day, and this is from Major
Robert Cook in the Office of Public Information, photostatic
copies of complete raw files on forty-two cases which came out
of your office with certain phases deleted, such as names of
survivors and the face, etc. blacked out, were made available
in toto to the press. He further informed me that he had
photostatic copies of two hundred of your thumbnail summaries
which would be presumably the better cases of your sixteen
hundred, and if any member of the press desired the raw file
case based on that summary, it would also be made available to
him. He further advised that this particular release, and the
availability of the files, was to be a continuing one, so that
any member of the press could come in at a later date and
review a file, which leaves us in the apparent position of only
having the possibility of live survivors to testify. But all
the other information is readily available to the press,
according to that office.
Maj. Kelleher. May I make a suggestion, sir? First I would
like to say that with regard to our original meeting with
Senator Potter, please believe me there was no intention of bad
faith or anything in the way of the manner in which the thing
developed. Senator Potter did make one statement at the October
6 meeting that sticks in my mind which may have been overlooked
where he said he was specifically interested in about 950
people whom we knew or had felt were still in the hands of the
Communists and still alive. That particular aspect of this has
not been gone into at all. It might be a very relevant point
and could be gone into. It seems to me that there should be
among the returned GI's in the United States now plenty of
people who were those individuals who gave us information when
repatriated as to the existence and the fact these individuals
were alive and know they had not been repatriated. That was one
point I thought Senator Potter was specifically interested in.
I think it was pretty early in the meeting that he brought up
this point.
Mr. Jones. I recall. I think it was 944 missing.
Mr. Carr. That is right.
Maj. Kelleher. When these people came through the
repatriation center, one of the first questions they were asked
was to name specifically anybody they knew of who was up there.
Then by a matter of comparison and elimination we came up with
a list of about 944 of the people we felt that the Commies
still held, and were alive, and we made a formal demand on the
Commies at Panmunjom to produce the people. They came back with
a list that said forty-eight people were repatriated, and the
others never existed. We still think they do and have evidence
to that effect. That thing stands right at about that point
now.
Mr. Carr. However, I think it was quite clear that Senator
Potter wanted roughly atrocity cases.
As I said before, we do not want to sound as though we are
sitting back here crying that we have been injured in the
thing. We want to salvage what we can from what we consider was
a mistake or perhaps a misunderstanding on somebody's part--
definitely a mistake--and it seems to me a definite slighting
of the senator's interest in this thing. The way the senator
wanted to cooperate, we feel that if they were going to make a
release, the very least they could have done was to have sent
the release out in the form of a notice to the senator that
this thing was being done. We do not want to continually harp
on that. We feel that the damage has been done.
I agree with Mr. Lyons that there is probably something we
can salvage from the thing, and that is what we have to do now.
I have to rely on Bob and Ray on this part, but I think the
senator was primarily interested in atrocity cases.
Mr. Anderson. That is correct.
Mr. Carr. It is true he did show some interest in these 944
cases. He also expressed a passing interest in the twenty-two,
but he indicated that he was not going into it. That is my
understanding. His prime interest was in the atrocities. Can we
work out some arrangement whereby he can still go into this
atrocity picture? What is the possibility on that, Don?
Mr. O'Donnell. The possibilities on that, as I see it,
depend on the number of cases that are released to the press
over and above those that are included in the report. Of
course, they do not have the individual survivors. Also, I
understand there may be some difficulty in using some of these
individual survivors in open hearings. So our field is
definitely limited.
Maj. Kelleher. I don't understand.
Mr. O'Donnell. There is a possibility that some of these
survivors gave the statement to the army on a confidential
basis, and did not want their names divulged at any time.
Maj. Kelleher. I am not aware of that.
Mr. O'Donnell. I picked up that information at the
Pentagon.
Maj. Kelleher. I see how it could be possible, but I knew
of no specific case.
Mr. O'Donnell. That was told to me by Major Cook.
Mr. Lyons. That may well be on cases involving
collaboration, but I find it difficult to understand that a
statement that would back up one of our atrocity cases, for
example, supposing we got hold of somebody who survived the
march, I don't think his statement would be confidential.
Mr. O'Donnell. If that is the picture, we could use the
individual.
Mr. Lyons. You remember what I said that morning, that when
we had determined the cases you wanted, then we were going to
go after the Big Switch returnees to see if it was possible to
turn it in later.
Mr. O'Donnell. That is right.
Mr. Lyons. We did submit eighty-three or eighty-four names.
Mr. O'Donnell. Eighty-three.
Mr. Lyons. Yes, from that batch of cases as a possible
start. I don't know to what extent you feel we can still use
those names in the original cases. I honestly believe we can.
Mr. O'Donnell. We can, but we are faced with this factor.
We don't know to what use the press will make these individual
cases available to the public between now and the time of the
contemplated hearings, which was indicated by Senator Potter as
December 10 of this year. So we are faced with an unknown
quantity as to what we are going to combat. We could
conceivably work up possible cases within the week before the
scheduled hearings, and have all of our material available to
the public by individuals of the press who have access to these
cases.
Maj. Kelleher. If they are not already out, certainly we
can reserve ten cases, or something like that, can we not?
Mr. Lyons. Mr. O'Donnell is correct when he says that
everything we have received from the field has been made
available to that channel. Either the photostats have been
delivered, or the cases have been examined, and they know that
the cases are in our possession and are available for their
use. That is why I brought up here roughly fifteen or twenty
cases that are not in that summary. They are cases where
Americans were the victims and there are American survivors.
Some of them I think are very good cases. I say to you either
the photostat of that case is in the Office of the Chief of
Information, or he knows that the case is in our office.
Maj. Kelleher. Mr. Lyons, I am not quite clear, but even if
the cases are in the Office of the Chief of Information, have
they also been made available to the press at this point?
Mr. Lyons. Not all of them.
Maj. Kelleher. I don't see why we could not get a stop on
some selected cases, and hold it up.
Col. Fleischer. Mr. Carr, the reason I have not been
getting into this, I have been getting filled in on it like you
have, on behalf of Secretary Seaton. Listening to this
conversation about these files, I will certainly go back and
talk it over with Mr. Seaton, as Mr. Kelleher has suggested to
see if cases in which you people have an interest can not be--I
hesitate to use the word ``withheld''--but shall we say just
withdrawn or not made available. I must confess my surprise at
the moment to the fact that these things were made available on
such a grand scale. I don't know the reasoning behind that.
That is something I am not familiar with, nor is Mr. Seaton. I
will be glad to go back and talk it over with him, and see what
we can do in that respect. I fully understand your position.
Mr. Carr. Our position, I think, is plain. I want to
emphasize at the risk of repeating myself, it might be perhaps
a little different from many investigations conducted by
committees on the Hill, this one Senator Potter was confident
was being conducted with full cooperation with the department,
and he was trying to coordinate his efforts into that of the
overall program. He did not express any desire, and did not
have any desire, to upset anything in the overall picture. He
realized it was a big picture. He realized, as Major Kelleher
said in the record the last time, Ambassador Lodge might kick
the thing off with some of these pictures at the UN. He
realized somewhere in the statement that somebody said it was
possible the president might even kick the thing off. The thing
was a program. He expected to be coordinated into the program
voluntarily. He was giving up a sort of prerogative of his as a
senator to go in there and demand things. He wanted to be part
of the program. He wanted to be helpful to the program. It was
his understanding that he was being helpful to the program by
holding some open hearings on the thing. We just get down to
this position that somewhere along the line, the thing has
gotten snafued and what appears to have been his contribution
to the program, exposing publicly some of these worst
atrocities, seems to have been usurped and already exposed.
Now we want to salvage what we can from that situation by
complete cooperation. If we can work out, Bob and Ray, some
arrangement whereby the Department of Defense would--I don't
like to say withhold, because it puts you in the position of
withholding information--would not make available to the
general public certain cases that we could possibly use from
the remainder, we might salvage something from that. I think
the department has, whether intentionally or unintentionally--
we do not want to get into that phase of it--has very
definitely slighted the Senator, which in my opinion is a very
unfortunate thing to happen. I think we should have some sort
of a statement from the department recognizing the fact that
Senator Potter has been in this thing, and is in this thing.
Bob, can you elaborate on that a little?
Mr. Jones. I have one question. May I inquire as to who is
the official liaison between this committee and the Pentagon
here this morning?
Mr. Carr. Col. Fleischer is the liaison with the Department
of Defense.
Col. Fleischer. I will say now it has gotten up on the
defense level. In other words, when Mr. Anderson talked to
Secretary Seaton, and Mr. Seaton asked me to discuss the
background and look into what had gone on before, and meet with
you people, I would say the assistant secretary of defense for
legislative and public affairs is now the liaison in this case.
Mr. Jones. Does that mean that from here on in you will be
the active liaison between the committee and the Pentagon in
the conduct of these investigations?
Col. Fleischer. It will probably boil down to being Col.
Britton in my office.
Mr. Jones. Does that action supersede Mr. Adams and Mr.
Haskins?
Col. Fleischer. I would not say it is a question of
superseding the Department of Army, because they have the
action responsibility, the files, the personnel, the know-how
and so forth. But when you get into a position as we are in
now, where a committee of Congress feels that a defense-wide
operation--I say that because it was not only the Department of
Army as such, but also General Erskine's office, Office of
Public Information and the Office of Secretary of Defense--we
now get into a position, as I see it, whereby this thing has
actually gotten up on the secretary of defense level.
Mr. Jones. In other words, in the future if Mr. O'Donnell,
or the subcommittee staff, or Senator Potter's office, wishes
at any time to gain access to any Department of the Pentagon,
it would go through your office as liaison to this committee?
Col. Fleischer. That is right.
Mr. Anderson. May I also make this attempt to clear this
up, Colonel? Secretary Seaton has control of the release of all
information from all branches of the service with respect to
the release to the press.
Col. Fleischer. I am sorry to say that I am a little hazy
on that problem, because up to the time that Mr. Seaton came
into the office, I was only concerned with legislative liaison.
I would be glad to go back and check that for you. I am not
quite clear in my own mind. As you probably know, the three
departments have their public information services, as well as
the Secretary of Defense. However, the release on this came out
of the Office of Secretary of Defense, Mr. Seaton's public
information division as distinguished from legislative liaison.
Mr. Jones. Yet that went out over the signature of the
secretary of the army.
Col. Fleischer. That is right.
Mr. Carr. That seemed to be one of the problems in this
general snafu. Without getting into why, how or where, perhaps
the liaison was not fully known. I don't see why it should not
have been, but perhaps it was not fully known. Perhaps
something could have been fouled up along the line that
obviously was not made known to the liaison that was dealing
with the situation. So we won't run into the trouble again, if
it is now on the defense level, the possibility of such a
release should, it seems to me, be taken into consideration by
your office with some sort of arrangements with the other
agencies.
Col. Fleischer. I might go a little bit further. In reading
over this transcript yesterday and talking once or twice with
Mr. Anderson and also the people in the Department of the Army
and also with Secretary Seaton, I came up, I guess, you might
say, unilaterally with the same suggestion that we discussed
here this morning, that we attempt to salvage as much as we can
for your committee.
I think, too, that some of these cases ought to be
developed as rapidly as possible so that you can get the
maximum benefit from them. I do not think in the month's time
you have left you have too long for both the army and our
people to help you develop these things, because you do have a
problem with the survivors and locating them.
Mr. O'Donnell. The actual number of cases that were made
available to the press as of Wednesday, the 28th, when I was
over there, there were thirty-four files that were available to
them as of that day. That is the photostats of the complete raw
files. Eight more were in the process. That made a total of
forty-two, which were as of that day available. Of course, some
of those forty-two involve atrocities not from the American POW
soldier standpoint, but from a civilian standpoint, cases in
which we would not be primarily interested. So there are cases
over and above that number, as Mr. Lyons pointed out, and some
of them are here. But whether or not it can be worked out so
that a stop can be put on those cases being released to the
press, I don't know.
Col. Fleischer. I don't know either, offhand. I just made a
note when you first mentioned that problem here, and I will
talk to Mr. Seaton as soon as I go back about the problem with
a view to him talking to the people in public information of
the army and also the other departments. I can see your point.
Certainly if you get ready, say, the day before your hearing,
and two or three of the magazines and the other press media
pick up either accidentally or on purpose the exact cases you
are about to have a hearing on the next day, that is going to
be a very difficult situation for everybody concerned.
Mr. O'Donnell. That is right. There is another thing here,
if I may, that is supplemental, but it is something we have
been completely lacking in from the knowledge standpoint of the
subcommittee staff. What is the specific program of the
department, particularly the Psychological Warfare Unit,
specifically in the future. We didn't know, for example, as of
Wednesday, and this is not in the nature of criticism, but lack
of information on our part, that General Dean was going to
appear on the TV show. We contemplated the possibility of using
Dean ourselves. We did not know that a movie was in the
preparation of release. We did not know, of course, that this
interim report was being published. We did not know to the
extent of it being made available to the press. This is only
part of it.
We didn't know that U.S. Steel was going to put on the TV
hour show.
Maj. Kelleher. We didn't either.
Mr. O'Donnell. You didn't? Well, that was on the other
night. We had no breakdown as to the positive program that was
under way by the army.
Col. Fleischer. If we learn in advance that certain of
these people are going to appear on a program, would you like
to know that?
Mr. Carr. Yes, if Don could keep a real cooperative liaison
with you, as I said before, this is the sort of thing in which
we are trying to work together with you, and if Don could be in
the position of knowing that, it would be helpful. I think also
if he is in the position of giving you any information he has,
it should be fully worked out. We don't want the situation to
arise again whereby we are caught off base. It seems to me also
that the UN was caught off base.
Mr. Anderson. It is my understanding that the UN was
completely caught off base, Colonel.
Mr. Jones. Who authorized it to happen so fast?
Col. Fleischer. I have not been able to determine that as
of yesterday.
Mr. Jones. How many cases have not been made public, Mr.
Lyons?
Mr. Lyons. I can't give you that answer. As far as being
made public, as far as I am concerned, concerning that,
everything that has come in has been made available to the
chief of information. At least they have knowledge of it. I
can't tell you.
Mr. Jones. In your original testimony here, you had
mentioned that sixteen hundred cases in the War Crimes
Commission in Korea were continually and daily being
supplemented, is that correct?
Mr. Lyons. That is right.
Mr. Jones. Have any of those cases been completed to your
knowledge since you were here last?
Mr. Lyons. An additional thirty or thirty-five. I think the
round figure now is around 110, of which possibly between sixty
and seventy involve GIs. Of that group, those in which there
are survivors that would be made available to the committee are
here, the ones Mr. O'Donnell saw, and one here that the file
was not available to me last night.
Mr. Jones. Will it be possible to have any of those files
in Korea brought over here?
Mr. Lyons. We have everything here from Korea that is of
any value at the moment.
Mr. Anderson. In other words, the cases are as complete as
you expect them to be developed at this moment, Mr. Lyons?
Mr. Lyons. At the moment. When they get this information
back on Big Switch, and when they can correlate it to what they
have over there, there will be a large number of cases,
particularly cases of mistreatment in the POW camps. But those
cases are months and months away. This report does not touch
that material at all, because it is not available. It is coming
in from the field very slowly.
Mr. Jones. That is the point I was trying to establish. I
think that might be a source of new material that this
committee could use, but you say that would be months and
months.
Mr. Lyons. For the Big Switch, yes, months and months. For
the committee I used seventeen hundred open files, and a batch
of closed files that were in the process of being re-examined.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lyons, what exactly are these ten or twelve
files you have here?
Mr. Lyons. These are cases of GI victims, GI survivors whom
we think can be made available as witnesses, and the cases are
not referred to in this report.
Mr. O'Donnell. For example, these would be some of the
cases that we would like to have stopped that are available to
the Office of Public Information and through them to the press.
Mr. Jones. These have been made available to the Office of
Public Information?
Mr. Lyons. Some of them have. The chief of information
knows that everyone is in the office. Some of them he has
photostated copies. That does not mean that they have been
released.
Mr. Jones. But they would be released if the press
requested that information.
Mr. Lyons. Yes. I couldn't say to you that somebody is not
over there this morning right now.
Mr. Anderson. Mr. Lyons, in your opinion are these
outstanding cases?
Mr. Lyons. I think some of them are very good cases. Some
of them are not. I have gone over them very, very roughly. Some
of them are good cases.
Mr. Anderson. Comparable with the others that have been
pointed out to Mr. O'Donnell and made available?
Mr. Lyons. I think they are comparable to three or four of
those good cases that Mr. O'Donnell saw. The big march case and
the tunnel case, they are not comparable to those two big
cases.
Mr. O'Donnell. There is a possibility that we could still
use those seventy-five or seventy-six cases.
Mr. Lyons. I still think you can use seventy-five or
seventy-six. There are some good cases here.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lyons, how long have you had these files
here in your possession?
Mr. Lyons. Early in October they started coming in. Wait a
minute. I have to go back on that. They started coming in the
latter part of September.
Mr. Jones. You will recall the day following our executive
hearing on the 6th of October I called you on the phone and
asked you for eight or ten of the more outstanding cases, as
Mr. Anderson just asked. You gave me those cases or a synopsis
of those cases over the telephone.
Mr. Lyons. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Included in those cases were the tunnel
massacre, the death march, and a few of the others, which you
considered to be the more outstanding cases.
Mr. Lyons. That is right.
Mr. Jones. Those were the cases that were in turn released
to the press. These were in your possession at the time.
Mr. Lyons. That is right.
Mr. Jones. You said the more outstanding ones were the ones
you gave me which were in turn released to the press which
would more or less reduce these to a secondary level in
importance.
Mr. Lyons. Yes.
Mr. O'Donnell. Mr. Lyons did not release it to the press.
Mr. Jones. No, he did not release it.
Mr. Lyons. You wanted to make a quick speech for the
senator that day, and I had a report on the desk and gave it to
you.
Mr. Jones. I was simply trying to establish the importance
of these documents as compared to the others.
Mr. O'Donnell. If I may, I would still like to go back to
the complete program in the Pentagon as affecting the war
atrocities because I think it is most important that we be
aware of that program from a knowledge standpoint, and be
alerted as soon as any aspect of the program comes to light,
whether it emanates from the Pentagon or outside source. I
think that is one of the difficulties in this unfortunate
situation. If we had known that this report was in preparation
for at least a month, and apparently it was, it would have
given us a different aspect. I would not have been over on any
of these fifteen cases that Mr. Lyons made available.
Mr. Jones. That is water under the bridge. Our job here is
to salvage something.
Mr. O'Donnell. That is right, but if we know the complete
program, it will help us immeasurably, because we don't know
what will develop to offset contemplated plans we might have on
a salvage basis.
Maj. Kelleher. The foreign exploitation will be a
continuing thing which falls outside of the domestic public
information situation. That will be right down the line on this
material that has been released. In other words, the material
that is over in the chief of information's office that is
available to the American press is by the same right available
to the U.S. Information Agency, which carries out the overseas
exploitation. So as far as the basic material is concerned, it
is exactly the same thing. This is one of those cases, call it
propaganda of truth, if you want to, but the story that is told
the American people is just as powerful a story to tell on the
local basis.
Mr. Jones. Did Dr. Charles Mayo work with you?
Maj. Kelleher. No. He gets his Washington support from a
division of state, which is just called backstopping. They
backstop the U.S. delegation from the Department of State here.
Mr. Anderson. That is C. D. Jackson's organization?
Maj. Kelleher. No, sir. C. D. Jackson is the president's
assistant on psychological warfare matters, but his activities
are with the Operations Coordinating Board of the NSC. Then the
OCB in turn assists the deputy secretary of state, deputy
secretary of defense, the director of foreign operations, Mr.
Stassen, and Mr. C. D. Jackson sits there as the White House
representative.
Mr. Jones. What then is General Cutler's position?
Maj. Kelleher. He is the president's assistant for the
National Security Council and the OCB in turn is an arm of that
organization.
Mr. Carr. To sum up a little bit here, I think by working
through Colonel Fleischer's office we can avoid this sort of
snafuing of the information by one agency without the other one
knowing it. I think we can avoid that by working through
Colonel Fleischer's office.
Mr. Anderson. Is that your opinion, Colonel?
Col. Fleischer. Yes. I might say that in saying what I did
a few minutes ago, where I am actually bringing in a new aspect
to our office, on our level with our contact with public
information of the Department of Defense, with General
Erskine's office, with the army and air force and navy, if the
occasion arises, I think we have a better hold on the big
picture than any one of the individual departments. This thing
is a good example of when we get into a program of this scope,
you almost have to have somebody topside who has quick access
to all these different arms that are working on one of these
programs, and also be able to pick up a piece here and there
and fit it all together. Oftentimes in this instance the case
was to do it in a big hurry. When it is operating for one
department, the army was the action agency on this and will
continue to be. As I said before, they have all the files and
most of the personnel and so forth. It is a little difficult
for them sometimes to know about something that is going on on
the defense level or General Erskine's office or the State
Department. In the secretary of defense level we have more
ready access to that sort of information.
Mr. Jones. Colonel, do you know who gave authority to Life
magazine to go in there a week ago?
Col. Fleischer. No, I do not. On that I only heard about it
yesterday afternoon. I heard that they were going to have
access to some of the pictures which come out in their issue
this week.
Mr. Jones. Who would ordinarily give authority to a
publication to come in and see files of this nature?
Col. Fleischer. Normally the chief of public information
who has the material in his possession. On the other hand, you
sometimes have a department, for example, ordnance, that has
material on a new weapon or something like that, and they might
in turn alert the press to what they have and make it available
to them through the chief of public information. So you can't
say on every occasion it would be the chief of public
information who would make something like that available.
Normally he would make it available.
Mr. Jones. Did not the authority who gave that
authorization realize that these were the very files that were
going to be used by the Senate committee in pursuance of this
investigation?
Col. Fleischer. That is a point. That is the reason I
brought up about the secretary of defense level getting into
the liaison in this, because it is quite conceivable that the
people who released that information were completely unaware of
the committee's interest in the same information, if you see
what I mean. It would be like saying that somebody gave
something to the Senate Armed Services Committee on a subject
that you were working on up here.
Mr. Carr. By handling it on a liaison basis through your
office, Colonel, we can check this sort of thing.
Col. Fleischer. I hope we can.
Mr. Carr. I know you can't guarantee that it won't happen
because things do happen.
Col. Fleischer. That is right.
Mr. Carr. That is our best available way of handling the
situation.
Col. Fleischer. I think so, Mr. Carr. In trying to salvage
this thing for you people, we have quite a job to do. The thing
that I am primarily interested in is seeing that nothing else
happens to this thing. While I am taking on the responsibility
in this area, I would rather do that than have this thing jump
the track again.
Mr. Carr. Now, as to what can be salvaged from this thing--
--
Col. Fleischer. Could I interrupt you a moment to explain
one thing?
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Col. Fleischer. In working through my office and Col.
Britton, your gentlemen of the staff here, I want you to
understand that you can still through Col. Britton and his
assistants deal completely with the army. As you are quite
aware, they have all this information.
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Col. Fleischer. Working through us and now that we are in
the public information business, too, if we have an inkling of
some other aspect of this thing that is coming up, since we are
constantly attuned to your problem here, we can stop the thing.
I have done it before. In the last four years I have been in
this business we have had many occasions where I have made it a
particular point to see that a committee or in a couple of
instances every member of Congress was informed of something
well in advance of its happening in the Defense Department.
That is a part of congressional relations.
Mr. Carr. Now, as to what can be salvaged from this thing,
how are we going to work that out?
Col. Fleischer. The only suggestion I have to make on the
thing is that we try to pick out some of these cases that you
people can develop. When I go back I will talk to Mr. Seaton. I
know he in turn will talk to the secretary of the army and the
information people about withdrawing from circulation those
cases which you people feel you have an interest in.
Mr. Carr. What possibility is there of doing something with
the cases, particularly the seventy-five or seventy-six?
Mr. O'Donnell. I think there is a strong possibility
depending on what publicity is given to those cases between the
time of now and when we have our hearings. If the two major
cases, seventy-five and seventy-six, are thoroughly related,
their value will be lessened considerably, but there is a
strong possibility of using those two cases, and probably three
or four in addition to the others that have been available.
Mr. Carr. Is all the information released?
Mr. O'Donnell. All the summary concerning those cases has
been made available to the press by having photostats of the
raw files, with certain phases, such as names of survivors,
deleted.
Col. Fleischer. If I may interrupt, again, I can picture,
however, that as a result of the interest focused on this
particular document, probably now following up the exploitation
of these cases, because I am pretty sure they are not going to
let these lie around. So you do have the risk of those being
exploited faster than you could ever keep up with them.
Mr. O'Donnell. That is right.
Col. Fleischer. Don't you agree, Mr. Lyons?
Mr. Lyons. Yes, I do.
Col. Fleischer. Once you give the press something to start
working on, that is what happens. We get several of the out of
town papers in the office, and I think it was yesterday's New
York Journal American which carried a feature article by one of
the CIC officers, a detective of the New York police force, and
they immediately grabbed him and ran a feature story on some of
the cases which he had investigated.
Mr. Lyons. That is something you can't control, the
investigators back in civilian life.
Col. Fleischer. But they probably got the lead from that
report.
Mr. O'Donnell. Or anybody who wanted to could go to the
press, and for a couple of hundred dollars give them the story.
Mr. Anderson. Colonel, do you have any knowledge that
further releases are contemplated on this same problem?
Col. Fleischer. I have no personal knowledge of it.
Maj. Kelleher. I think in that respect it is pretty safe
that the secretary of the army's release on that subject will
be the only one that is an official Department of Defense
release. The exploitation follows, of course. If they follow
past practices, there is one release on it which is in the form
of an announcement.
Col. Fleischer. I will make a note of that.
Mr. Lyons. I would like to offer for your consideration,
Mr. O'Donnell, that we gave some consideration to cases not
where there was a survivor, but where there was a witness. Take
this particular case [indicating].
Mr. O'Donnell. I see no objection to that as long as U.S.
soldiers are the victims.
Mr. Lyons. We had ruled those out because it was a witness
and not a survivor.
Mr. O'Donnell. We want primarily American troops to
testify.
Mr. Lyons. There are a couple of others of the same nature.
We have another case I think we could use where a medic found
the bodies. He was not a witness at all, but his testimony
would be worthwhile.
Mr. O'Donnell. I think we definitely should consider those
cases in the light of what has happened.
Mr. Carr. Bob or Ray, to make the best of this situation I
think we should consider the possibility of a release by the
Department of Defense of some sort of a story or some sort of
information to the effect that Senator Potter's probe into this
matter is still going on, that Senator Potter is being
furnished with information which has not been made available,
and that his probe will disclose additional information. What
thoughts do you have along that line?
Mr. Anderson. I think that is important. You will recall at
the executive session on the 6th, the senator said, ``I think
one of the main purposes of this committee will be to get the
greatest psychological value we can from the hearings.''
It is my opinion on behalf of the senator that if the
Department of Defense, in a news release, points up what you
have suggested here, it will fit into the program fully here to
emphasize the hearings that will take place early in December.
Col. Fleischer. We better have a little discussion on
Monday with you people to see what approach we are going to
use. The reason I say that is because I think that is an
excellent suggestion, but I think we have to make sure it is
carefully worded for this reason. We do not want to start
pressing about trying to beat you to the punch on some of these
cases.
Mr. Anderson. It was not my feeling that a release to that
effect ought to be made immediately.
Col. Fleischer. No.
Mr. Carr. No, that is right. From reading many of the news
stories on this thing, there is a definite impression left with
me that Senator Potter is entirely left out of the picture.
Mr. Anderson. That is right.
Mr. Carr. I think that should be corrected.
Mr. Jones. I think it ought to be clearly established,
Colonel, in this release that all future pronouncements on this
subject will be made by the senator and the Senate committee.
Mr. Carr. I would say the senator.
Mr. O'Donnell. Isn't it true it has reached a stage where
press inquiries are being received?
Mr. Anderson. Yes, they are constantly coming in.
Col. Fleischer. Did you see the last paragraph of the Star
story? I just happened to notice it this morning. I wonder if
that was supposition on the part of the press.
Mr. Jones. That was yesterday's Star?
Col. Fleischer. Yes. That provides a little lead to develop
whatever time you consider appropriate.
Mr. Jones. That was the only paper in which it was carried.
Col. Fleischer. Yes, I noticed that.
Mr. Carr. Just repeating myself again, but it gets right
back to the point that Senator Potter is not trying to grab the
thing. He wants to be a part of the thing and coordinate with
the department. I might say on behalf of Senator Potter--I
don't know whether he would say it himself--we don't intend to
see him coordinated right out of the picture.
Mr. Anderson. The senator made very clear at the close of
the hearing on October 6 that he was working very closely with
the Department of Defense.
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Col. Fleischer. I noticed that in the transcript.
Mr. Anderson. That does not appear to be evident.
Mr. Carr. I think in connection with this proposed release
some time in the immediate future, not today or tomorrow, the
release should be worked out primarily, Ray, through you or
with you, so that the senator can be closely advised as to what
is in this thing.
Mr. Anderson. That is right.
Mr. Carr. I think the terms of the thing can be worked out.
There won't be any real problem on that. That I think will
salvage some of the problem here.
The other points, as to the actual cases and what we can
salvage from the already released cases, Don will work out with
your office, Colonel, and with Mr. Lyons.
Mr. Anderson. I think that would have to be done quickly.
Mr. Carr. That is right. I think you should take under
advisement this problem of further release of additional cases,
and consider the advisability of whether or not the extent of
the release should be cut off at any certain point, realizing,
of course, that you can't withdraw ones you have released, but
consideration should be given to that. Unless you have any
further points on this thing, Ray, to bring up----
Mr. Anderson. It is my understanding that Don will
immediately get together with Mr. Lyons to segregate these
cases that can be used. Is that your understanding?
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Col. Fleischer. I think that would be the first step to
really get your hand on what you want to start working with;
the rest can be dovetailed into just exactly what you want.
Mr. Lyons. You will be changing the department flow. We are
under instructions to do all of our coordinating through Mr.
Haskins.
Col. Fleischer. When you get to the department, I will have
to work that one out.
Mr. O'Donnell. I would say probably the first step would be
to find out exactly how many files have actually been made
available, and whether or not those that have not been made
available can be withheld. Then let Mr. Lyons and I take it
from there as to what cases are available and which are the
more immediate of those cases.
Maj. Kelleher. When you get that set of files selected for
this committee determined, I would like to have that, Mr.
Lyons.
Mr. Lyons. Yes.
Mr. Anderson. When do you think, Colonel, that we could get
together on this release? In other words, I assume you are
returning to talk to Secretary Seaton about this whole problem.
Col. Fleischer. Yes.
Mr. Anderson. What is your suggestion with respect to
issuing the release and working that out between us?
Col. Fleischer. We can do that some time the early part of
next week. Whatever time you think is best. We could start in
on it, and have it all ready for release at any appropriate
time, but I would suggest we get together with you in the early
part of next week.
Mr. Anderson. You are likewise going to take steps, as I
understand it, Colonel, to avoid any further releases from the
various departments.
Col. Fleischer. I have that double checked and marked all
over it on this paper.
Mr. Jones. I assume your contacts in that direction will
involve finding out who the authority was who released this?
Col. Fleischer. I would prefer not to go that far.
Mr. Jones. At least that person should be informed by
memorandum, or something.
Col. Fleischer. I think so.
Mr. Carr. Do you have anything further, Bob?
Mr. Jones. No.
Mr. Carr. Concerning this release, I am particularly
anxious that it be handled through you, Ray, because I want the
senator to be fully posted on it.
Mr. Anderson. That is right.
Mr. Carr. Concerning the cases, Don, you will immediately
be in contact with Mr. Lyons on this problem.
Mr. O'Donnell. That is right.
Mr. Carr. I think we can salvage something from this thing.
I think we can come up with something that will be very good. I
think the whole situation, as it has developed, has been
unfortunate. I know Senator McCarthy feels that it is
unfortunate. I think that Senator Potter feels it is
unfortunate. As I said before, we do not want to be in the
position of complaining, yet on the other hand we want to be
sure that you understand our position on the matter. We do feel
that something has been really snafued on this coordination of
his activities with the program. We now have that behind us,
and we are now trying to reestablish the cooperation that we
wanted to establish in the first place.
Mr. Jones. Just one other thing, Colonel. I wonder if we
may have from the secretary a letter to the senator designating
yourself as liaison to this committee. I ask this in view of
the fact that a liaison was named at the last meeting of this
group, and you yourself said you were named today. For the
record, and for the senator's information, if we may have a
letter from the secretary, it would help establish
responsibility and authority.
Col. Fleischer. Yes.
Mr. Anderson. Is it your opinion, Mr. Lyons, that
worthwhile cases can be developed for the hearings?
Mr. Lyons. I am of the opinion that we can develop
worthwhile information for the committee for this public
hearing on the 10th of December? I am going a little bit
further. I honestly believe when we finish by working with Mr.
O'Donnell, you can say that no harm has been done. I think we
can put that over.
Mr. Anderson. Is it also my understanding, Colonel, that
such cases will not be made available to the press prior to the
hearing?
Col. Fleischer. When I go back, Mr. Anderson, I will tell
Secretary Seaton the results of this meeting, and my belief
that we should withdraw from circulation those cases in which
you are interested and prevent new cases from being made
available until we have had a chance to discuss it with you
people. I hesitate to go so far as to say that these will not
be released, because I am a little bit apprehensive that the
press may have gotten hold of a couple of these already through
circumstances which we just discussed. I will assure you of
doing everything I can with Secretary Seaton and the people
over there to see that your interests are protected.
Mr. Anderson. I think that is all.
Mr. Carr. Thank you very much, gentlemen.
[Thereupon at 11:30 a.m., the executive session was
concluded.]
KOREAN WAR ATROCITIES
[Editor's note.--1st Lt. Henry J. McNichols, Jr.; Pfc John
E. Martin; and Sgt. Carey Weinel testified in public on
December 2; Sgt. Barry F. Rhoden on December 3; Capt. Linton J.
Buttrey, on December 3 and 4; and Col. James M. Hanley and
Capt. Alexander G. Makarounis on December 4, 1953.]
----------
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:30 a.m., pursuant to notice, in
room 357 of the Senate Office Building, Senator Charles E.
Potter, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senator Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan.
Present also: Robert Jones, research assistant to Senator
Potter; Francis P. Carr, staff director; Donald F. O'Donnell,
assistant counsel; Robert J. McElroy, investigator; Ruth Young
Watt, chief clerk.
Senator Potter. Gentlemen, before we proceed I would like
to say again I am most appreciative of the cooperation of the
army and those of you who are now civilians and working with us
on this investigation.
You are not being investigated. I want to make that clear.
We are calling upon you to aid us in an investigation of the
enemy which we have been fighting. You can feel free to make as
complete a statement as you care to. This is a closed hearing.
Nothing you say here this morning will be known to the press.
We plan on holding two days of executive session. This is
not for publication as yet but we are planning to hold open
hearings beginning Wednesday morning. The open hearings will be
much similar to the hearings we plan on starting today.
I am sure you have been advised by the military personnel
here that you can speak freely. I think the only requirement
that they have made is that you not mention a person's name who
has suffered atrocities. You can tell about the incident and
you can tell his rank or whatever that may be. But don't
mention his name. The same thing is true with any aid you might
have received from Asiatics; don't disclose their name. But
outside of that, that is the only security restriction that you
have.
If, during the course of the testimony, something of a
security nature should come up, we can easily take care of it
here in executive session without your violating any security
code.
We will call Lieutenant McNichols.
STATEMENT OF 1ST LT. HENRY J. McNICHOLS, JR.
Senator Potter. Lieutenant, we do not want to put a man in
the military under oath, so we don't have to worry about that.
Your word is sufficient.
First, if you would identify yourself for the record,
Lieutenant, and give your full name and your present
assignment?
Lt. McNichols. Henry J. McNichols, Jr., First Lieutenant,
0-228401, Infantry School Attachment, Fort Benning, Georgia.
Senator Potter. Where is your home, Lieutenant?
Lt. McNichols. As a professional soldier, actually I was
born in St. Louis.
Senator Potter. You are regular army?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Lieutenant, what unit were you assigned to
in Korea?
Lt. McNichols. Company E, 5th Cavalry Regiment, sir.
Senator Potter. When did your unit first go?
Lt. McNichols. My unit arrived in Korea, Pohangdun, 19 July
1950, and I went in first as a weapons platoon leader of Easy
Company E and became the company executive officer, and I was
captured--do you want me to go through this?--I was captured on
the 10th of September 1950 in the vicinity of actually a little
north of Hill 203 in the vicinity of Taeju.
Senator Potter. Can you point out the approximate vicinity
on the map right behind you?
Lt. McNichols. Yes. It was approximately here, near Taeju.
Senator Potter. That was during the major flurries of the
North Koreans, wasn't it?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, the UN defenses there.
Senator Potter. Right up to the Pusan perimeter area?
Lt. McNichols. My unit was in the town of Waxwon and along
the Naktong River we pulled back from there about the 5th of
September, succeeding pulling back about a mile the first time,
the second time possibly a mile or two miles; but actually
about three miles south of the town of Wagwon, it is.
Senator Potter. At that time you were commanding Easy
Company?
Lt. McNichols. No, sir, I was executive officer.
Senator Potter. Company E executive officer?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
The night of 10 September I was separated from my unit, and
we pulled off a hill and I went back up on the hill to try to
get a wounded man off; I think I walked into an ambush. They
had a habit there, if you ever did have occasion where there
was a wounded man behind, they would jab him with a bayonet to
make him scream and before we got him off, I walked into an
ambush.
I was separated from my unit, and the Americans had pulled
on back then I was in between, and in fact actually the way I
came off this hill I ended up to the rear of their lines. The
next morning I became a member of the North Korean Army then,
and they had me from the 11th actually, caught me the morning
of the 11th and they had me until the night of the 20th.
Senator Potter. Were you captured by military personnel or
by civilians?
Lt. McNichols. By military personnel, North Koreans. I
don't know what units or anything that I was mixed up with.
They kept me ten days.
Senator Potter. Did they keep you in that vicinity?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, approximately about a five-mile square
area there.
Senator Potter. Were there other PW's with you?
Lt. McNichols. No, sir, I never ran into another PW.
However, they did show me a lot of AGO cards and not dogtags or
anything, but AGO cards and class A passes and what have you
that did belong to other soldiers.
Whether they got them off bodies or not, I don't know. They
did have these psychological warfare sheets and they used to
have a picture of the officer, usually up in one corner there
saying ``stay out of the capitalistic war,'' and then signed by
the man, and his name and rank and unit down there. They showed
me quite a few of those, also.
Senator Potter. You say they had a picture of an officer,
an American officer?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, Lieutenant Granberry, who never
showed up on the list.
Senator Potter. And that was one of those confessions?
Lt. McNichols. So-called, yes, sir.
Senator Potter. That it was an imperialistic war and that
was the nature of it?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, and stay away from MacArthur, the
warmonger. They did make me broadcast one day, and they gave me
one of those, and we wrote it to place my name and I was
supposed to read my name where the other man was and they had a
loud speaker set up. Actually it was in a South Korean sector
where it was, a little to the right of where the First Cavalry
Division was when I was there. And I read this thing.
Senator Potter. Was that in the same area?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, it was all back in the same area.
Senator Potter. What pressure did they use on you to get
you to broadcast?
Lt. McNichols. Well, first of all I had them believing I
couldn't read, and then they found out--I guess they figured
all officers were supposed to read or something--and finally
the colonel came up and said you will broadcast. We fooled
around and when they finally did take me, they had me with one
unit and they handed me over to this propaganda outfit, and we
went up into a farmhouse, actually a regular North Korean hut,
or South Korean in that case, and they had a generator and a
regular sound system and they gave me the thing and told me to
read the thing.
Persuasion, they stuck a pistol at my head; but that first
five days I got a lot of that.
Senator Potter. They put a pistol to your head which
implied if you did not do it, you were not long for this world,
is that true?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Do you know whether that type of broadcast,
was that heard by Allied troops?
Lt. McNichols. To the best of my knowledge; no, sir. I have
talked to a lot of officers that have come back from there, and
no one heard it, and well, I sound like Seoul City Sue, if you
ever heard one of her broadcasts; a dead, low monotone, and I
did the same thing. In fact, he was afraid I was talking too
fast and by the time I got finished my own brother wouldn't
know who was broadcasting. At the beginning I was supposed to
say ``I am Lieutenant McNichols.'' I said ``I am a lieutenant''
and I went on from there. So I didn't identify myself over it.
Senator Potter. How long a document was it?
Lt. McNichols. Sir, it wasn't but a piece of 8\1/2\ by 11,
regular typewriting paper, Korean type, that is what it was. I
wouldn't say it was over 250 words.
Senator Potter. Did that ask for other soldiers to
surrender?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, to stop the capitalistic Wall
Street fight and that kind of stuff.
Senator Potter. Do you know whether that was recorded or
not?
Lt. McNichols. No, sir, it couldn't have been. The
loudspeaker set-up they had, we use them at the Infantry School
and I am sure you have seen one. It is a generator system and
then the sound box, actually it was stamped USIS, and they must
have got it around Seoul. They had two loudspeakers and that
was back here by the farmhouse and I couldn't even hear the
thing going on. I could hear it away out in the distance.
They had a couple of girls there in this propaganda outfit
and they used to sing songs and then the various propaganda
about coming over and join our side and I didn't understand
Korean, but I imagine that is what they were putting up there.
Senator Potter. How long were you in this area?
Lt. McNichols. Well, actually, sir, they only had me ten
days altogether, and in that ten days I stayed right around in
this more or less immediate area. Actually there was an enemy
regimental or division CP, and I was questioned by four or five
people there and then turned over to this propaganda outfit and
when I was turned over to the propaganda outfit we actually
bore southeast.
Actually we were going to the right of Wagwon, and we got
that one broadcast in and they wanted to do it again, but the
Americans were pushing them too hard and they never got a
chance to set it up again.
Senator Potter. What else happened to you during that
period?
Lt. McNichols. Well, as far as the treatment went, there
was never--they scared me quite a few times there with the
various cases of the pistol flashing and so on, but I ate the
same thing that the Koreans got around there and we had a
bucket of rice.
About that time the rains had started and their underwater
bridge across the Naktong River then was about out of business
and they weren't getting any supplies either, and they were
hurt just about as bad as I was.
To the last night I actually had good treatment.
Senator Potter. Did they beat you at all?
Lt. McNichols. No, sir. The first day they had me they
walked me into the rear, that night, and put a load of rice on
my back the next morning and I walked that up to the front line
troops, which I think is a violation of the rules of warfare.
Senator Potter. They used you as a supply carrier for their
troops?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What happened in the last day?
Lt. McNichols. Well, the last day the Americans had started
to break out from Pusan and the rest of them had come in at
Inchon, and we had been in actually a ravine right outside of
this Korean area there and we stayed there until approximately
5:30 or six o'clock when it got dark, at which time they wanted
to cook and started a fire.
Usually when I left I had about seven or eight prisoner
chasers on me, and one at either side and one at the foot and
one outside the door, and my case of trying to get away, it was
a little too late then. I was pretty well covered.
Senator Potter. Were you confined then in a house of some
kind?
Lt. McNichols. Actually put in a house, sir, and put in
there usually at dark, and brought out again in the morning
when we would go and hide some place from the air force and the
artillery spotter planes.
At any rate he woke me up, and I went to sleep, and he woke
me up about eight o'clock at night and I heard, or later found
out it was a jeep that hit a land mine and I heard a lot of
Americans yelling. But I didn't have any idea what it was, and
this lieutenant came and got me and the rest of the unit
there--there were about nineteen in all--and took us up to the
top of the hill and he told me to sit down and be quiet, at
which time he tied my hands behind my back and further tied my
hands then to a tree, and then went up actually to the lip of
this hill. There were actually two hills, and the shorter and
then the main peak of this hill; I was in a gully right in
between. The First Cavalry stopped at the first peak. They
started up with a good yell, and there wasn't much artillery
fire, and all of the Koreans ran out with the exception of this
lieutenant. He came over and shot me then.
Senator Potter. While you were tied?
Lt. McNichols. I was tied to the tree, yes, sir.
Senator Potter. In other words, your hands were tied behind
your back, and then that was that you were also tied to a tree?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Were you alone at that time?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, I was the only prisoner that they
had, the only American prisoner that I saw in the whole time
that they had me.
Senator Potter. It was a North Korean officer?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, a first lieutenant.
Senator Potter. Was he right up beside you when he shot
you?
Lt. McNichols. About four feet from me, I guess.
Senator Potter. Did he pull out his pistol?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. How many shots did he fire?
Lt. McNichols. Well, I only remember one. However, I ended
up with four bullet holes; four in and four out. I imagine the
first one, I got shot through the mouth and I remember my mouth
and my nose running, and I imagine the first one I got through
the mouth.
Senator Potter. Did he assume that you were dead?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, I think I did a pretty good job of
playing dead then, and all I remember was seeing the sparks,
and my mouth and my nose running. That was all I remember until
I woke up about, I guess I came to about, four o'clock in the
morning and I started yelling then. The soldier didn't come out
and get me because of the same fact of this using of wounded
for ambush purposes, but at daybreak they did come out and get
me.
Senator Potter. When did the shooting take place; what time
of the day?
Lt. McNichols. Approximately ten o'clock at night, sir, and
it would have been the 20th of July, 1950.
Senator Potter. And you were recovered by our troops then
on the following morning?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, about 7:15, 21 July.
Senator Potter. Where else were you hit besides in the
mouth?
Lt. McNichols. Two of them went in the neck, and one in the
shoulder, and I was shot through the leg the day they captured
me. I didn't get my medical treatment from them because I don't
think they had any. However, they all looked at it, and they
got some water out of a stream there and rinsed it off for me.
But no other form of medical aid.
Senator Potter. What type of pistol do the Communists
carry?
Lt. McNichols. It is not tovarisch, it is the only piece of
equipment that they had that didn't have a hammer and sickle on
it, that I saw, even enemy equipment.
Senator Potter. Most of their military equipment?
Lt. McNichols. Everything I ran into with the one exception
which was an officer's pistol, and I did run into one guy with
a Mauser, and he put that at my head and he said he liked my
shoes and I was without shoes for the rest of the time.
Senator Potter. When you were captured, they took your
shoes?
Lt. McNichols. After a day, yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did they take any other articles of
clothing?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir. When they frisked me they got
everything out of my pockets, and I got shot through the
pocket, and I had a Rosary and my wallet; I had an AGO card,
and identification card and a scapula medal and that is all.
They took all of that, and just peeled it right out.
Right after that some guy grabbed me and took my dog tags
off, and one time there I got into a Korean house and I found a
pencil and a piece of paper. I started to write my name and
address and stuff it in my pocket and they caught me at that
and took it off my pockets.
Senator Potter. Did you have any jewelry on you; a ring or
anything?
Lt McNichols. No, sir.
Senator Potter. Or watch?
Lt. McNichols. No, they were disappointed about that. I had
a busted fountain pen and they were put out that I didn't have
a wristwatch or a cigarette lighter.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did they take your clothing away?
Lt. McNichols. No, sir, they didn't. In my case, they got
my shoes and they gave me first some of these, they looked like
Keds, and I guess they were about four sizes too small, and
then I ended up, I went to a good house in one, or Korean
house, and I found they look like rubbers and they hook about
here and back here, and they are very hard to walk in and very
hard to keep on. But I did use those the rest of the time.
I had the army wool cushion socks which came in very good
and for a time I walked in my stocking feet.
Senator Potter. What time of the year?
Lt. McNichols. It was September of 1950, and it was just
before the cold weather.
Mr. O'Donnell. It was prior to the cold weather?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. Could you describe exactly in detail,
Lieutenant, the manner in which you were tied to the tree?
Lt. McNichols. Well, they got me out of the house and we
went up to the top of this hill and they told me to come with
them. So we got up there and this Korean first lieutenant
couldn't speak any English, nor could I speak any Korean.
However, with the colloquial Japanese between the two of us he
informed me to stay where I was and keep quiet.
However, he had rice linen, that white clothing which a lot
of them and quite a few of the soldiers they use it actually to
keep themselves warm and they could always throw it off and
look like a civilian. He took strips of that, then, and made it
into one long strip, and then tied my hands behind me and made
me sit down, and then tied me to the tree and told me to stay
there and he would be right back, and to be quiet while he was
gone.
He went then actually up on this lip of the hill, and when
the Americans started up the hill, all of the soldiers ran out
and took off north, and none of them came anywhere near me.
However, this guy did go by.
Mr. O'Donnell. You are speaking of the North Koreans?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. Actually you were tied; your hands were tied
behind your back and then you were later tied to the tree?
Lt. McNichols. Actually, it happened all at once, and first
he tied my hands behind me and made me sit down and then
whether he put the bindings to my hands to tree or not, I don't
know.
Mr. O'Donnell. What would be the reason as far as you know,
or do you know, the reason for the shooting?
Lt. McNichols. The only thing I can think of is just the
Oriental point of view. We shoot them and he doesn't come back
and fight us again. And in my case there I would have
undoubtedly fallen into American hands at that time. This is
hearsay evidence, but we had a company in my battalion who at
one time I had been a platoon leader over there, but not at the
time, that they shot the whole company of them, twenty-eight or
twenty-nine. They captured them, and when we organized a
counter-attack, immediately when we started into the thing,
they lined them up in a ditch and shot them. The only thing we
can figure is that they will kill us so we cannot come back and
fight.
Mr. O'Donnell. How long did it take you to recover from
your wounds?
Lt. McNichols. Six months, sir. I went back to duty the 9th
of March 1951.
Mr. O'Donnell. How long were you actually hospitalized?
Lt. McNichols. Actually, sir, I was in the hospital until 9
March 1951, until I was released from Fort Sam Houston, Texas.
Mr. O'Donnell. What condition are you in today, Lieutenant?
Do you have any reaction from those wounds?
Senator Potter. First, have you gone before the board as
yet?
Lt. McNichols. I am trying to make the regular army, but I
was disqualified because of wounds, but I do have a profile
change, and I am getting hard of hearing in this ear, rather,
and I have got what is known as a horno? I don't sweat on this
side of my head and I do sweat on this side of my body, and
this lid doesn't go all of the way up and this pupil is
smaller. Actually I went from astigmatism to farsightedness.
Senator Potter. Where did the bullet enter your head?
Lt. McNichols. One of them came in here, in this dimple and
came out over here, and two of them went in right here, and one
came out down here and one back here; and the other one was
through the shoulder there.
Senator Potter. What is your regular army profile now?
Lt. McNichols. I have got two two's, one on my shoulder and
two on my hearing.
Senator Potter. All of the rest are one's?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. For the benefit of the civilian, what is a
two and what is a one?
Lt. McNichols. A one is a warm body ready for duty; and a
one is actually, according to the army standard now, and the
army standard would actually vary depending upon whether it is
an all-out situation or a peacetime again, such as we have now.
Two is in the case of my right shoulder, a weakness in it,
and not a full ability to pull a full weight with it. When you
get up to three's and four's, then it is these guys who are
crippled, and in fact I had a friend who has a wooden leg and
they gave him a four on his leg.
Mr. O'Donnell. Actually you are useful to the army--your
usefulness hasn't been impaired apart from your physical
suffering?
Lt. McNichols. No, I don't think so. I can still carry a
rifle and squeeze the trigger.
Senator Potter. Lieutenant, you have seen the enemy at
first hand and you witnessed their attempts of indoctrination.
I can ask you the question for your opinion, and you do not
have to answer it unless you want to: Do you think that the
Communists in the United States are different than the
Communists that you were fighting in Korea?
Lt. McNichols. Do I have an opinion, Colonel? Actually, we
don't have any opinions. Let me make a statement. We have a
board of officers and we ask not to write these things. When I
came back to the States in 1950 I was one of the first returned
prisoners and we had an occasion in St. Louis, there of two or
three women put an ad in the paper to get our sons home from
Korea, and what have you.
I got very browned off and wrote to the paper and told them
to cancel my subscriptions. However, I found out later that
that was going on all over the states and they are organized.
Senator Potter. I had some visit my office.
Lt. McNichols. They probably know a lot more about you than
your wife does.
Senator Potter. I am afraid they do.
I think in order that the record may be complete, what
happened after you were tied to the tree. You say that you were
rescued in the next morning and just how did that happen? Can
you go into more detail how that came about?
Lt. McNichols. Well, the soldier who came out and cut me
off got killed about three or four days up the road,
unfortunately. However, I have run into quite a few who heard
me out there yelling all night. As soon as I came to, I could
hear some sound out there and of course I didn't know who it
was and the only Korean word I knew was ``Oiy'' which means
either, hey you, or something like that. So I yelled ``oiy''
and ``help'' the rest of the time and I was having quite a time
as far as my mouth was concerned. I got about six teeth that
were running loose in my face and I was spitting those out and
so on, but I sat there and yelled.
Senator Potter. You were still tied to the tree?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, and they heard me. However, they
waited until about daybreak when they came out and got me and
they brought a litter and actually the man with the Carbine
bayonet which is a pretty sharp piece of merchandise, usually
you will find them a lot sharper than the M-1 bayonet, he spent
almost three or four minutes cutting all of that stuff off to
get me off the tree. He did quite a tying job on me.
Senator Potter. Were you rescued by your own unit?
Lt. McNichols. No, 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry.
Senator Potter. Then you were evacuated immediately to
Pusan?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir, I went to the regular evacuation
channels, and they ran me down to the bottom of the hill and
back again.
Senator Potter. And you arrived back in the States when?
Lt. McNichols. I got back in the States the 18th of October
1950. I stayed in the Tokyo Army Hospital for twenty-three days
and whether the fact I had head wounds and they wanted to let
them dry out before they shipped me or not, I don't know, sir.
Senator Potter. Are you now on active duty?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. The question I asked you about whether you
felt your opinion of American Communists--I am sure that the
military has no objection to you expressing an opinion on that
if you care to do so. I will tell you frankly the reason I am
asking this question. You will find many people today in our
own country who have an idea that the Communist party of the
United States is a political party, and that is something
entirely different from communism elsewhere. One of the
purposes of the hearing is to let the people know the type of
enemy that we are fighting.
While it is true that the killing has stopped in Korea, the
war hasn't stopped as you well know, and the war is still in a
cold stage at the present time, but the war between communism
and free people is still in effect.
I think no greater service can be rendered than by people
like yourself, Lieutenant, and others, who have seen the enemy
firsthand. This is not newspaper accounts or some fuzzy-
thinking professor, but you have seen the Communists firsthand,
and if you have strong convictions towards it I am sure
military personnel would have no objections to you expressing
it.
Lt. McNichols. I have never had any dealings, that is
trouble, and you don't know whether you would have dealings
with a Communist, and you don't know whether your best friend
is one. I am a Catholic, also, and in my case where I went to
school communism was recognized way back in 1937, probably long
before that, and so we were always instructed in that affair.
Actually in our case, in the case of a Catholic, his religion
in itself, has been fighting communism as long as it has been
going on over there.
Senator Potter. That is true.
Lt. McNichols. However, if we get an opinion, if they can
run them out of business we have got a tendency to be too soft.
Senator Potter. Is it your opinion that the Communists of
the United States receive their orders from the same source as
the Communists of Korea or China or wherever it may be?
Lt. McNichols. I don't think that there is any doubt of it.
Senator Potter. Colonel, do you have any questions that you
would like to ask?
Col. Hanley. Due to the short time that you were held by
the enemy, I don't presume they tried to put out any propaganda
efforts?
Lt. McNichols. I did get a quizzing by a political officer,
some rather fantastic questions at times. They wanted to know
if my father was a worker or capitalist, and they were
particularly interested in the amount of time I had in the
service. And they called Harry Truman a rascal and MacArthur a
war monger, and they had a set up.
The thing they tried to get out of me was my home address.
I told them my mother and father were dead and I had no family,
and let it go at that and they never pressed it, the fact that
they didn't get my home address out of me in that respect. But
they were decidedly looking for the home address, there was no
doubt of that. Seoul City Sue did declare me dead on her
program, but the only thing, when I got promoted to 1st
lieutenant and I left the orders in the CP and they might have
found that order and some of my mail that was up there in a
bag.
Senator Potter. Did Seoul City Sue--is that the Korean
equivalent of Tokyo Rose?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. In the broadcast when she said you were
dead, did she know you were alive?
Lt. McNichols. Actually, it happened about, they picked a
broadcast up in Japan, some of the people over there, some of
the wives heard it; I didn't hear it and I think it happened
during the time I was a prisoner and she called me Nichols
instead of McNichols, but she had the right serial number and
the Second Battalion and she had quite a bit of information.
Therefore I think the way she got it, she must have found some
mail or they found this promotion order. That is the only thing
I can figure.
Senator Potter. Are there any further questions?
Mr. O'Donnell. Lieutenant, after you were shot and regained
consciousness, and started to yell, it was quite some time and
it was nearly daylight until you were actually rescued by our
forces, and now the reason for them not coming to rescue you
sooner, I think you mentioned, was because they were afraid of
an ambush?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. Was it a common practice to use a captured
PW as bait to get our boys to come into an ambush?
Lt. McNichols. I don't know whether in the other outfits, I
can only speak for my own experience, we did have occasions
where they worked over the wounded. In the cases we did come
over a hill and a man was wounded when we came down the side of
a hill and they would get him or any of these stragglers, and
in one case of pushing him with a bayonet and making this guy
scream. Now, the one I went up after, I talked to some other, a
sergeant in my company, and they went up the next morning to
try to find me and they did find a boy's body and he had been
both stabbed and shot.
Mr. O'Donnell. You would have to assume that they forced
him to yell?
Lt. McNichols. He was yelling, there was no doubt of that.
Senator Potter. And then they killed him?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, they probably did.
Senator Potter. He was found dead?
Lt. McNichols. It was very dark, and there was a moonless
night, and I don't imagine I was more than five yards from him
when I did walk into this ambush, and actually there were just
four of us coming together in the dark; three North Koreans and
myself, and that was it.
Senator Potter. I would like to also go back to questioning
by the political interrogator when he asked you if your father
was a working man or a capitalist.
Did they ask you whether you owned an automobile?
Lt. McNichols. They wanted to know who owned the jeep in
the company, and the argument was that a company commander had
to buy his own jeeps in there and they were curious about that.
One other thing might be for your interest: While I was a
prisoner, I had occasion to meet one who wanted to come over to
Westinghouse and study how to be a sound engineer.
Senator Potter. One of the North Koreans?
Lt. McNichols. He was from Seoul some place or other, and
my number one prison chaser has been a bartender in an
officers' club in Seoul, and a houseboy for a lieutenant
colonel up there. The first time that I was quizzed by this
colonel, this guy was interpreter, and I got talking to him in
strictly the Brooklyn colloquialisms and I said ``you have been
a bartender in some officers' club,'' and a couple of days
later he admitted he had been.
Quite a few of the North Korean soldiers still had drivers'
licenses from the 219 Battalion in Seoul.
Senator Potter. Do you have any notion as to whether they
were Communists by indoctrination or whether they had been
forced to fight with the North Koreans?
Lt. McNichols. I had quite a few that used to come up, and
say ``Capitalistic Dog'' and so on, and one kid--he was
strictly a kid, I think he was about seventeen years old--
wanted to come over to Westinghouse, and I think he was going
where the rice was at the time. What his bargain was and so on,
they used him for an interpreter and I remember we got a big
harangue from some colonel and he sounded about as bored as I
was when he interpreted the thing about the warmongers and what
have you.
But the great majority of them there were decidedly
Communistic, and there was no doubt of that, and decidedly
indoctrinated.
I ran into another one who got thrown out of Seoul in 1946
and was going to the University of Seoul, and he got thrown out
of school and I think out of South Korea for his Communistic
leanings. They used him for an interpreter when I was in this
regimental or division CP.
Senator Potter. Was he an officer?
Lt. McNichols. Sir, I don't know, he never wore a shoulder
board and I imagine he was, though.
Mr. O'Donnell. The only suggestion I have, when we go into
public hearings, it is for the benefit of civilians and will
you spell out the terms?
Mr. Carr. Lieutenant, this lieutenant that actually fired
the shots that hit you when you were tied to the tree, was that
as far as you could determine, an individual action? Everybody
else, you say, was getting out of there.
Lt. McNichols. It looked decidedly like an individual
action because this colonel that was with this propaganda
group, I hadn't seen him for better than two days and this
lieutenant was in charge of the bunch, and it seemed to be an
individual action that he did himself.
Senator Potter. Was this lieutenant in charge of this
group?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. So that actually he was the commander of
the group that did it?
Lt. McNichols. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. It wasn't just an individual soldier?
Lt. McNichols. It was the commander, himself.
Senator Potter. Do you know his name?
Lt. McNichols. No, sir, he didn't speak any English, and I
spoke very little Japanese, and about the only way we could do
it was through Japanese and he didn't have much to do with me,
and I could sit there and look him right in the eye and he
would turn away. The one I was telling you about, the sound
engineer, he and I got to be great buddies, and he actually
helped me out. I don't know where he used to do it, I was the
only one who was smoking cigarettes and he would go out there
and get them for me. The lieutenant was very uncommunicative
and decidedly a Prussian type of officer and strictly divorced
from the men.
Senator Potter. You mean to tell me in the Communist army
they had a caste system there?
Lt. McNichols You bet you they do.
Senator Potter. I have no further questions.
Lieutenant, the tentative plan will be for us to hold
public hearings beginning Wednesday morning, and if you could
be available--I do not know the schedule yet as to whether you
will go on Wednesday or Thursday or Friday--but we will
certainly appreciate it if you could stay around. You have a
story that should get out.
Lt. McNichols. Thank you very much.
Senator Potter. We will call Corporal Wilton.
STATEMENT OF SGT. BARRY F. RHODEN
Senator Potter. Will you have a chair, Corporal. Will you
identify yourself for the record, Corporal, and give your full
name and your present unit.
Sgt. Rhoden. You are mistaken, Senator. My rank is
sergeant, and my name is Barry F. Rhoden; Sergeant Barry F.
Rhoden, RA 1432093. I am assigned to the 35th, in Jacksonville,
Florida.
Senator Potter. What is your home address?
Sgt. Rhoden. McClenny, Florida.
Senator Potter. You are not kicking about your assignment?
Sgt. Rhoden. No, sir.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, would you tell the committee what
unit you were assigned to when you first went to Korea?
Sgt. Rhoden. I was in training with the Second Infantry
Division in Fort Lewis, Washington, when the Korean War
started. We were alerted for Korea, and on the 22nd of July we
left the States for Korea. We landed on about the 1st of August
in 1950. About the 30th of August of 1950 we were up on the
line, the Neptung River; and the exact position I do not know,
sir.
Senator Potter. Can you identify the approximate location
on the map behind you?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes. Right around here near Taeju
[indicating]. It was to the left of Taeju.
Senator Potter. That was also on the Pusan perimeter area?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. That was the western boundary of the Pusan
area?
Sgt. Rhoden. The whole time I was there I did not know
north, south, or what; but it was in the area near Taeju. The
exact dates, sir, I am not sure. In the affidavit I said on the
31st of August, sir, but I remember now when we were joking
with each other about payday. That was the next company day. So
it was on the 30th of August, sir, when the North Koreans hit
us there and my unit was surrounded.
On the morning of the 31st of August we were taken
prisoner. We had no ammunition. I, along with sixty other
fellows, was trying to move back to our lines. We were opened
fire on by some of the North Koreans.
Senator Potter. What was your duty with the company?
Sgt. Rhoden. I was the assistant squad leader, sir, in the
57 Millimeter Recoilless Rifle Squad. We were trying to get
back to our lines, sir, and we were kind of off to the side of
our company--on an outpost. When they overran the main
positions we were firing and they missed us. We were throwing
grenades in to a bunch of them, and they did not even notice
us. I do not know what was wrong, whether they were doped or
what.
After we were out of ammunition, we were trying to get back
to our lines. We were moving along the edge of the lake or a
little trail and we could hear the firing. We knew our lines
were there some place, and we were trying to get to them.
About a platoon of them opened fire on us from up on the
mountain. We began to run. We had no ammunition. We knew it was
the North Koreans and that they were after us. There was a bend
in the trail--it went around the edge of the mountain--and out
across the rice paddy I could see a bunch of fellows moving.
They looked to me like GI's. I looked through binoculars and I
could see they had on their GI uniform, the fatigue, the GI
boots, and the steel helmets. We actually thought they were
GI's, sir. We had been chased a while and we were going to let
them chase us right on into a trap, and it worked the other
way. When they opened fire on us, the North Koreans opened fire
on us. They came off the hill on us. The lake was at our back,
sir, and we were helpless there.
Senator Potter. How many of you were there in the group?
Sgt. Rhoden. There were seven to start with, sir, and three
of the fellows were killed while we were being taken prisoners.
We had just a few rounds each, sir, and our bayonets. We did
the best we could, sir, but three of them were killed. The
other four of us they put to carrying ammunition for them
during the day. The lieutenant mentioned taking the dog tags.
They took our dog tags. The officer who was in charge of the
group that we were with, he had a nice roll of chains and he
was making a collection of them.
Senator Potter. That was the Korean officer, the North
Korean officer?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir. Thereafter we were taken prisoner
and there was this one officer--they wanted to shoot us several
times and he would stop it. I take it he was the political
officer. He had a little briefcase with a lot of papers, of
propaganda, and pictures and so forth, and he would let us read
those.
Senator Potter. Were those the individual North Korean
soldiers?
Sgt. Rhoden. The North Korean GI's He would let them beat
us but he would not let them shoot us. As long as you would
look him right in the eye, it was all right; but if you turned
your back, he would hit you. They hit us with their rifle
butts. Maybe they would kick us or spit on us or beat us with a
stick or something.
They took all of the stuff we had on us--our billfolds, our
watches, and our papers--and it was like a kid at a Christmas
tree. He enjoyed getting all of it. We were put to carrying
ammunition for them.
Senator Potter. That was the same day?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir. They had loaded us down with the
ammunition, sir, and some of us were loaded pretty heavy. When
we would fall we got a flogging, sir. They had taken our boots
and our jackets. The North Koreans, none of them could speak
English, sir, and I could not speak their lingo. So the
questioning they did was by drawings on paper and signs. They
would draw a picture of a plane and they wanted to know how
many planes we had. So we put down ten planes--you had to put
something. I did not know, sir, and I tried to let them know I
did not know; and I would get a beating. So I got so I would
mark and he would draw a plane. He would want me to mark how
many and I would fill the page up. If I put maybe ten or twelve
down, I got a beating. So I filled the page up and just kept
going until he stopped me, and then he was satisfied. The same
way with the tanks and the artillery.
Senator Potter. This was all done by drawings?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, and by signs. He would draw his rank and
I would draw my two stripes down.
Senator Potter. Do you know what rank he had?
Sgt. Rhoden. No, sir, I do not. It was all confusing to me.
Senator Potter. But he was an officer?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir. He had the runners coming to him,
and when he gave an order the fellows jumped around. One time
when he was questioning me, sir, he got a little rough with me,
and this other fellow----
Senator Potter. What do you mean, he got rough?
Sgt. Rhoden. He put the pistol to my head, right up here
[indicating], and motioned I had better come across or else.
This other fellow came up and run him away and then he sat down
there with me, the old buddy-buddy. He pointed to me and then
to himself, and he would go like that [indicating] and I would
play dumb. He would go through the motion again, and again I
would play dumb. So the next time he went through the motion,
he took my hand and shook hands with me. I motioned I knew what
he meant.
The other fellow said, ``He is trying to get friendly. Ask
him for something to eat.'' We were all very hungry; our
rations were running low before we were taken prisoner. So we
asked him for something to eat. He went into a rage. He beat us
around a little.
Then the fellows told me, ``Ask him for some water.'' So I
asked him for water and they did give us a little water. But
all of the questioning was by drawings, sir, and signs.
After the questioning there, sir, where he tried to get
buddy-buddy with me----
Senator Potter. Was this the first day?
Sgt. Rhoden. This was all in the first day that I was taken
prisoner, sir. From there we went on. They had a unit
surrounded and they set up a road block. There was one vehicle,
an army truck, trying to get in to the outfit and they knocked
the truck out, killing the driver. Then there was one trying to
get out from the unit that was trapped and they knocked the
vehicle out. There were two GI's there and one of them got
away; he was wounded but he made it back down.
We could see the unit out in the valley. An American
infantry company started up to see if they could knock out the
road block. They left a few there to try and hold them back
while the main body of the ambush pulled back. They had us with
them and it was getting along late in the afternoon. Just about
dark, about two or three miles from where they had the unit
surrounded, they stopped us. A new officer had taken over, the
one that had been questioning us, and he had stayed behind I
guess. I did not see him anymore.
This new officer went through questioning me again by
drawings and signs. The rest of them were sitting up on the
hill. We were on the little trail right by a rice paddy. They
asked the other fellows questions. I was the squad leader at
the time, and the fellows would look at me before they would
try to give any answer. So they were really questioning me.
They thought I knew all the answers.
After questioning me he gave me a little piece of paper
about so long and so wide which was mimeographed. It had Korean
writing on it and also English. The statement was, ``You are
about to die the most horrible kind of death.''
Senator Potter. That was the statement that was given to
you?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir. He gave me the statement and told me
to read it to the fellows.
Senator Potter. What did it say, again?
Sgt. Rhoden. ``You are about to die the most horrible kind
of death.'' That was all there was to it, sir. I guess they
wanted to maybe make us run, sir, or something, and have a
sport with it. When I read this statement, the other fellows--
we had been expecting it. We had read of what had happened to
some of the prisoners.
After I read the statement I crumpled it up in my hand. I
wanted it there when they found us. They took the statement
away from me; they would not let me keep it. I do remember some
of the fellows saying, ``Well, they are finally going to shoot
us,'' or something like that, sir.
So he motioned me to go where the other fellows were
standing. They were just about the length away from us as we
are here, sir, and as I turned around to go--I did almost an
about face. He had the burp gun over his shoulder--they carried
it with a strap--and as I turned around, sir, I was shot in the
back with the burp gun. The bullet knocked me down, sir. As the
lieutenant said, I did a good job of playing dead, sir. It did
not knock me out. I lay there. The way I fell, I could see the
fellows out in front of me being shot.
Senator Potter. He shot you in the back and then he shot
the others?
Sgt. Rhoden. They shot me in the back, sir, and I laid
there praying and pretending I was dead, sir. They shot the
other fellows and then stopped over me and bayoneted the other
fellows a time or two. Then they left. After a while they left.
After they had gone, sir, I began to move around when I thought
it was safe. I was paralyzed from my waist down. I pulled
myself around, and I noticed the other fellows were still
alive, too. They were moving around. I went over and made them
as comfortable as I could.
There was a little embankment there and I pulled them down
over it. A couple of them helped them get down. I stayed there,
sir. I do not remember just exactly--I know there were four of
us when we were shot. There is one fellow that I am in doubt as
to just what happened there. I understood later that he made it
back to the States.
I do remember two fellows there. I bandaged them up the
best I could. I blacked out, sir. When I came back to what I
was doing, I was still there and it was dark. I felt the two
fellows and they were stiff. I do not know how long I had been
out there. The other fellows were definitely dead. I do not
remember the third one. I am kind of foggy. I do not know if I
could find them, and I do not think that I could find the other
fellow.
Senator Potter. You remember that two of them were dead?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes. I know I found two. The third one I am in
doubt, sir. I do understand this other fellow made it back. I
do not know if he is still in the army or out, sir. I crawled
off to a little stream and drank some water. When I drank the
water, sir, I blacked out. I do not remember anything else
until----
Senator Potter. This was at night?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir. They captured us in the morning and
they shot us that night. I guess it was the same night, sir.
When I drank the water I blacked out and I do not remember
anything else until I was wandering around calling one of the
fellows that had been shot with me. And then a patrol of North
Koreans--I saw them just about the same time they saw me--took
a shot at me, sir. The bullet missed me. It was at awful close
range, though.
They came up where I was at and made me get up and walk up
the side of the hill. They had me standing there and they were
kind of a half circle around me. One put his rifle up and made
like he was going to shoot me. Then they would all laugh and he
would take his rifle down and the next one would go through the
same motion.
At the time, sir, I was in such pain that I began to want
to get it over with. I felt I would be better off. I sat down,
and it made them mad, sir. I was actually trying to provoke
them into getting me out of my misery, sir. They were in a
stew. Then I saw this little plane circling around. I do not
know if he knew what was going on, but our planes started
strafing them.
When the planes started strafing them, one of the North
Koreans--the one in charge; I guess he was an officer, sir--was
hit. I picked up the little pot he had, the one he mixed his
rice in, and started off down the hill. At the bottom of the
hill there were two of them who came from behind a rock with
burp guns on them. They wanted to know in sign language where I
was going. I motioned to the ones on the hill and motioned they
were sending me to the stream to get water to take up to them.
I got that story like I did the pot.
When I got to the stream, it had pretty steep banks. I hid
in a small pea patch. I pulled the vines over me. I had my
little pot full of water. They came looking for me but they did
not find me. The rest of the time, sir, I would hide out during
the day and move at night. Sometimes I do not know what I did.
Sometimes I would be running around in the day time. Then I
would hide out.
Later I found out it was the 7th of September. I was just
fixing to hide out for the day. I was almost ready to give up
when I heard the vehicles, the motors, and I looked. I could
see the big white star. I knew it was our boys, sir, but they
got by before I could get there at the time. I would raise up
and just stumble until I would fall. I would give myself a pep
talk and I would go again. I knew I was so near our lines.
I made it out to the road. There was a jeep coming and a
tank, and then a truck loaded with GI's. I guess they were
replacements, sir. I guess as the lieutenant said, sir, with
the wounded they usually had an ambush waiting. So they were
kind of leary there. I began to think they were going to shoot
me. But they got down and the sergeant got out of the jeep. I
was doubled up and I did not have any shoes or any shirt, The
sergeant asked me, ``What is the matter? Do you have a cramp?''
I told him, ``Yes, I have got a cramp.'' I asked him if he
would take me to the aid station.
I do not know what unit it was, sir. I was so glad to get
back.
Senator Potter. How long were you behind the enemy lines?
Sgt. Rhoden. I was taken prisoner and shot on the 31st of
August of 1950. Later I found out it was the 7th of September
when I made it back to our lines.
The affidavit I have there, sir, I believe it says I was
captured and shot on the 1st of September. On my medical record
they say I made it back to my lines, or I was wounded, on the
7th of September. That is the date I made it back to our lines.
Senator Potter. Whereabouts were you shot in the back?
Sgt. Rhoden. The bullet went in just below my belt in the
back and fractured my spine and nicked my spine. The reason I
was paralyzed, the bullet went through my bladder and out
through the front, sir.
Senator Potter. That is certainly quite a story. What time
did you get back to the States?
Sgt. Rhoden. I believe, sir, it was the 27th day of
September of 1950. I was awfully glad to get back, though.
Senator Potter. I can well imagine. Actually, you are the
only one of the seven who came back, outside of this one man
that you are not sure of?
Sgt. Rhoden. I was under the impression he was, sir. I saw
a picture in a magazine of my old top kick, the first sergeant,
sir, and I wrote him a letter. He was in a hospital, sir, and I
wrote him a letter. He wrote back and told me that this other
follow had made it. I began to check around, and I think that
he did make it, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. I think we can let the record show that
there was another survivor. The other survivor's story up to
the point of the shooting completely corroborates Sergeant
Rhoden's story.
Sgt. Rhoden. His name, sir, when I made my affidavit I saw
from the War Crimes Section a little statement there that he
had made it. His name was Updegraaf, George Updegraaf. He was
from Kansas City, I believe, or Oklahoma City.
Mr. O'Donnell. We should have that in the record, that it
is completely corroborated.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, did they try to indoctrinate you
at all?
Sgt. Rhoden. He gave us a lot of the literature to read.
They have a picture up in the corner of an officer, always an
officer. They have a long list of stuff there, about how nice
it was, to come on over. They wished we would come on over and
join with them; why fight the people? It was the same old Wall
Street story and the capitalists. There were remarks about our
president, sir, and it was all phony. You could see it was
phony, sir, every bit of it. You could see right through it.
Also, when we read the stuff we would laugh and joke about it.
None of them could speak English, so we did not have to worry
about what we said too much.
Senator Potter. They did not have an interpreter with their
group?
Sgt. Rhoden. There was no one. I heard one word I could
understand while I was a prisoner, sir. When our planes were
strafing them and the marine corps were there, he called it
whispering death. He said ``whispering death'' as plain as I
can say it, sir. They cut their engines in to throw the
rockets. They wanted to know about the planes, and they kept
questioning us about them. They did not like them too well.
As I said, we marked down ten planes and we got a beating.
If we filled up a couple of pages, then they were satisfied.
Senator Potter. I want to make sure that I have this
clearly in mind. As I understand, after you were captured the
second time by this group and our planes strafed the group,
their leader was killed?
Sgt. Rhoden. There were several of them killed, sir, out of
the bunch. I say ``several,'' sir, but there were three or
four. Actually I will tell you, sir, I saw this little plane up
there circling. I guess it was an artillery or an observation
plane. As I said, I was trying to provoke them into shooting
me. My tummy felt like I had hot lead in it, sir, and I
actually spit at them when they were trying to make me stand
up. Then all of a sudden the plane was there. When the plane
started strafing them--I do not know why I picked the pot up
off the officer's pack, but I grabbed the pot. I do not know,
sir. When I saw the plane strafing them I was ready to give up,
but when the plane hit and I saw I had a chance, it gave me the
pop to try it again.
Senator Potter. Then you ran down towards a creek and you
met two other North Koreans and they thought you were going
after water for them, is that right?
Sgt. Rhoden. Well, sir, I was stumbling down the hill and
the planes were still strafing up behind me on the hill where I
had just left. These two North Koreans came from behind the
rock and they wanted to know where I was going. They saw I was
wounded, and when they made me walk up the hill I started
bleeding an awful lot. My pants were all bloody and they wanted
to know ``bang-bang?'' I motioned ``bang-bang'' and they had to
look to see where I had been shot. It pleased them, sir.
Then they wanted to know where I was going and I motioned
that the ones on the hill were sending me to get the water. I
got the story like I did the pot. I had a good line, sir. The
planes strafing up there, they fell for the story. They stood
there and watched me. The stream was about one hundred yards
away and I kept looking back, and they were watching me. When I
got to the stream it had deep banks, but the water was only
about a foot deep. So I went up and hid in the pea patch.
When it got night, I started moving back to our lines.
As for the treatment we had, sir, this one officer would
let them beat us up but he would not let them shoot us. When we
asked for something to eat we got a beating. But he did send
off to get some water for us. He sent off the little pot for
the four of us, and when they brought it back there was about
an inch of water to the pot. I split the water with the other
fellows. He did not know what to think about that. The water
was for me and he did not care about the other fellows at the
time he was trying to get stuff out of me.
Senator Potter. During that seven-day period, you had no
food?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir, I managed. The North Koreans had
been through the area, sir. Actually, the most of what they ate
was what they could get out of gardens. I found one little
cucumber about so big and I ate the cucumber, but it made me
sick and I wished I had not eaten it. I had one little
cucumber.
Senator Potter. When they would beat you, would they beat
you around the head or where?
Sgt. Rhoden. Well, mostly, as I said, sir, if you could
look him in the eye--I do not know why it was--but you would
stare him down and he would not do it. Usually we were carrying
equipment or something, and if we fell then they beat us on the
backs with their rifle butts. Maybe he would come up behind you
or if you walked by him going along, as you passed he would
reach out and hit you with his rifle butt. They always hit us
from behind, usually up and down in the back. I got hit once
right behind my neck. That was about the only time I was hit
around the head. I did have the pistol--they keep punching you
with a pistol when they wanted information and they thought you
were not telling them. They keep poking you with a pistol. It
was a pretty gun and made on the order of our 45. It had the
big red star in the handle. There was a little hole in there.
There was a red star and USSR, sir.
Senator Potter. A Russian pistol?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir. I saw the USSR.
Senator Potter. The leader was the one--he allowed the
beating but at that time he did not want any of the men to
shoot you. But was it the leader that shot you?
Sgt. Rhoden. Well, sir, let me straighten this out now. The
first one--which I take it was the political officer, as he had
the briefcase with the stuff--he is the one that would not let
them shoot us. But he was separated from us when this one
infantry company was coming in there, sir, and they moved up
and got in their skirmish line and started forward. There was
about a battalion of them that had us.
There were a few hundred of them. They left just enough to
hold the company off, and they began to actually run. We tried
to make a break there, sir, even while the planes were strafing
them we would try and we could even plan and, talking just like
I am, what we were going to do. When the planes started
strafing them, they would always circle us, and point their
guns at us, and when they started running I began to fall back
and tell the other fellows to fall back, and we were going to
jump them when we got back on the end. But they caught on to us
and wouldn't let us.
But the political officer, what I take is the political
officer, he stayed behind and we were separated from him while
we were running there, sir. Then when they stopped us there----
Senator Potter. When you were shot, was it the leader of
the group that did the shooting?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir, he was the leader of the group. I
guess he was, the rank, sir, I don't know what it was. The
piece of paper I had crumpled up in my hand, his aide was there
to get it away from me. There were runners coming to him and
leaving him.
Senator Potter. You assume he was an officer?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir, when he gave the orders, you could
see them jump around.
Senator Potter. It was an officer that shot you?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir, he had the burp gun and shot me.
They got right up to my face to question me and they were
trying to get into my face, and I did an about-face and I was
shot by this same follow.
Senator Potter. How far were the other men away from you at
the time?
Sgt. Rhoden. Approximately as far from me to you, sir.
Senator Potter. About twenty-five or thirty feet or
something like that?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And he shot you and then he shot you first
and then he shot the others?
Sgt. Rhoden. He shot me, and the bullet knocked me down,
sir, and of course there was no pain at the time and when I
fell I was kind of like this and I could see the way the
fellows were, and I see them as they were being shot.
Senator Potter. And they were shot and then some were
bayoneted, is that true?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And afterwards you helped take care of a
couple of them so that you know that some of them were bayonet
wounds?
Sgt. Rhoden. I talked to them for a while, sir. They lived
for quite a while and I don't know just how long. They were
talking, though, trying to pep each other up.
Senator Potter. But they died that night?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir, they did.
Mr. O'Donnell. I would like to go back to when you were
seven and the seven were overrun for lack of ammunition and you
held out as long as you could, and three of you were killed.
How were the circumstances of those three deaths?
Sgt. Rhoden. Well, sir, they were closing in on us, and as
I said they were coming up behind us, and from out in the rice
paddy and the lake behind us, and they were just about fifty
feet up there, just swarming off like ants. This one fellow,
the squad leader, a bullet creased him along the side of his
head and he fell and before he fell, sir, he said ``I am hit,''
and he was right by me. I know he was playing dead because he
stayed there for just a few minutes and a few seconds, and
fired his rifle the last couple of times there, and he fell,
sir, and I saw him look a couple of times. I was looking around
to see how many of us there were. Then the squad leader fell
and he was playing dead, sir, and the other two fellows, I
don't know how badly they were hit.
After they got us there, sir, they went over and they
bayoneted the fellows, and the other two fellows and shot them
in the head and I don't know if the other two were playing dead
or not. But I do know----
Senator Potter. Whether they were dead or not, they shot
them?
Sgt. Rhoden. They were the three of them were down, sir, on
the ground and they went up to these two and shot them and
bayoneted them several times, sir, and the squad leader, here
he was my very good friend and I know he was playing dead and I
was pulling for him, and maybe he could make it, sir, but they
walked up to him and this officer, he was the one that was in
command of the troops, sir.
Senator Potter. He wasn't the political officer?
Sgt. Rhoden. Not the political officer and he stuck a rifle
right down to his head and shot him. I know he was playing dead
because after he shot him, you could see him moving, you know,
and you could tell he was dying. I know he was playing dead,
sir, when he was shot and the rifle was put right to his temple
and he was shot.
Mr. O'Donnell. Were any of the four who were captured,
wounded?
Sgt. Rhoden. Maybe one or two creased, sir, and one nicked
me across my stomach, and he was fixing to bayonet me and I had
one round left and I had a pistol, a 45 automatic and one round
left, and I was saving it for myself, sir. I was going to shoot
myself before I would be taken prisoner, and I just didn't have
what it takes to pull the trigger and the excuse I made to
myself was as long as I have got a breath I have got a chance.
I looked and he was coming down, and we were right by a
little embankment and he was fixing to bayonet me and the
bayonet got me along the side here and I shot him, sir, with
the last round.
I was wounded just a little place along my ribs where the
bayonet hit me and the other fellows had been creased with a
bullet, the best I can remember, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. The prime reason they didn't kill the four
who were not seriously wounded was because they needed them to
pack ammunition and water, and so forth?
Sgt. Rhoden. I take it, sir, they did load us down, and
they gave us a tremendous load to carry. And it was an awful
load and they kept prodding us, too. It was heavy, actually it
was pretty rough going. It was just about all that you could
prod along with and it was enough that you would fall with it.
None of us were seriously wounded, no, sir. When we fell we
would get flogged.
Senator Potter. What type of ammunition were you carrying?
Sgt. Rhoden. Ammunition for about a 50-calibre that they
had, and I had a bag of ammunition for that, a big sackful, and
some of the follows, one of them had a big mortar plate for
their big mortar, and some ammunition for the mortar and a lot
of the personal gear of the fellows, and they would throw their
personal gear on it, and we were all loaded on ammunition with
the exception of the one who had the base plate for the mortar.
Mr. O'Donnell. How far would you estimate you actually
carried the ammunition?
Sgt. Rhoden. I would say approximately, sir, about eight or
ten miles, and all day we were going around this.
Mr. O'Donnell. During this period of time were you given
any food at all?
Sgt. Rhoden. No, sir, I asked for food once, and that is
when I got the beating.
Senator Potter. Do you have any questions?
Did the North Korean soldiers eat any food while you were
carrying this?
Sgt. Rhoden. Oh, yes, they had the rice there, and they had
a powder looking stuff that they eat, and it was like a meal
and they would mix it with water and eat it, and also they
would tell us we could eat and maybe we would find a potato
patch and they would tell us we can chop-chop, you know, and
motioned to help ourselves. Then we would dig the potatoes and
they would take them away from us and so we quit digging. As
long as we would dig the potatoes, they would take them away
from us.
I saw one eat a part of a pumpkin and they had to eat, and
they carried it in a nasty bag, this powder-like stuff, a meal,
and they would mix it with water and eat it just like that.
They didn't cook it, sir, a cold meal.
Senator Potter. But they had food?
Sgt. Rhoden. Definitely.
Senator Potter. But they did not give any food to you?
Sgt. Rhoden. No, sir.
Senator Potter. Or to the other men?
Sgt. Rhoden. No, sir, and I didn't see any get any food.
Senator Potter. How long were you hospitalized, Sergeant?
Sgt. Rhoden. I was released from the hospital--I made the
trip back to the hospital, sir, to our aid station, on the 7th
of September, and I was released from the hospital in January
of 1951.
Senator Potter. Are you on active duty now?
Sgt. Rhoden. I am, sir.
Senator Potter. Do you have any permanent injury as a
result?
Sgt. Rhoden. Well, sir, sometimes yes, I have a little
trouble. It is with my legs, sir, I do.
Senator Potter. You are not on limited duty, you are on
active duty?
Sgt. Rhoden. I am on active duty, sir, but I have the
profile, a three on my profile which is a 3-D, and it limits me
to my assignments as to the places I can be assigned to.
Senator Potter. You are limited to service in the army, but
on active duty?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, do you mind if I ask you the same
questions I asked the lieutenant? You have an experience first-
hand, and do you have any comments that you would like to make
concerning the Communist movement here in our country?
Sgt. Rhoden. Well, sir, I was fighting in Korea, sir, and I
hated them, and after I arrived back here, of course, we didn't
hear too much about communism.
Actually, sir, I didn't actually know what it was until the
Korean War started and I began to see what I could find out
about it. I finally made Korea and I hated them and after I
went into the hospital I was on a public appearance tour, and I
received some letters from them, around, and it is all the way
I take it, sir, for the same purpose. They are trying to
overthrow our government, and it is all for the same purpose.
If I hate them in Korea I see no reason why I shouldn't hate
them here. You asked me my personal opinion, sir, and that is
the way I feel about it.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, did the political officer, you
mentioned he asked you about the number of planes and the
number of tanks and so forth, did he ask you any political
questions about your home life or anything of that kind?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, he wanted to know where I was from, and
the way he would draw a map of Korea and he put Japan and the
States, and then he wanted to know where I was from, where I
come from, from the States to Korea or from Japan to Korea, or
what.
I was confused by doing this. I didn't know, and then he
would get rough and so I motioned the States and he wanted to
know maybe in the States and he wanted to know what point.
As for my address, sir, I had a lot of stuff in my wallet
and I didn't have time to get rid of anything, and they had all
of the stuff I had, as to the information as to the addresses
and so forth. They wanted to know where in the States I was
from and so forth.
Now, I got some pretty nasty letters, from the time I was
on the tour, sir, a couple that made some pretty----
Senator Potter. Do you have those letters with you?
Sgt. Rhoden. No, sir, I don't have them with me, and I
turned them over to our intelligence officer, sir, at district
headquarters.
Senator Potter. Could you give us the essence of what they
said in the letter?
Sgt. Rhoden. Well, sir, it was along the same line we had
over there, maybe it was put together a little better. Actually
I didn't read it too thoroughly, or try to memorize any of it.
You could tell from where it was from, one point in the state
and one from another, and none of them were signed. They called
President Truman at the time, sir, a puke from Missouri, and
about MacArthur, remarks along the same line. I turned the
letter over to----
Senator Potter. The letters were postmarked from the United
States?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir, the one calling Truman a puke from
Missouri was from Daytona Beach, I believe. I turned the letter
over.
Senator Potter. Do you know where the other one was
postmarked from?
Sgt. Rhoden. From St. Petersburg, Florida, and maybe one
was Coral Gables.
Senator Potter. Colonel Whitehorn, do you suppose we could
get those letters from G-2?
Col. Whitehorn. I wouldn't know. I can check on that.
Senator Potter. Were you intimidated in any other way after
you got back from the Communists?
Sgt. Rhoden. No, sir, just the letters. I was encouraged in
the letters to write my congressman, and so forth, and try to
get the useless killing stopped in Korea and if you have got
the letter you will get an idea, all of them are along the same
line.
Actually, sir, at the time when I got the first letters, I
didn't turn them in, and I might still have some of them. What
I did get, if I have them I don't know, sir, but I have to
check through that, but this one or two that I turned in, sir,
they are all along the same lines, sir, and I turned in two
that I know of.
Mr. Jones. Let me get this information for the record.
The basis of your conversation with the political officer
in Korea was reestablished again in the form of a letter to you
mailed in the United States, is that correct?
Sgt. Rhoden. Well, sir, the letters were on the same line
as the pamphlets he gave us, yes, sir. It was on the same line.
Senator Potter. Capitalistic war and so on?
Sgt. Rhoden. Yes, sir, the same stuff and you read one
letter and the next one in the same way, and they don't vary
such.
Senator Potter. But the correspondence corresponds with the
type of indoctrination they tried to give you in Korea?
Sgt. Rhoden. Oh, yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. And we would assume that your name was sent
through the regular Communist channels to the Communist party
in this country?
Sgt. Rhoden. I wouldn't know that, sir.
Mr. Jones. That would very likely be the way they would
act.
Senator Potter. You had made some talks?
Sgt. Rhoden. They had me on this public appearance tour, as
soon as I could get around, and going before the various clubs,
and the Lions Club and the American Legion and so forth, and
giving those talks about my experience, sir, and how our
equipment compared to theirs, and so forth.
Senator Potter. Colonel Wolfe, do you have anything that
you want to add?
Thank you kindly, Sergeant.
I would like to call Captain Buttrey.
Captain, will you take a chair? You hadn't arrived when we
first opened our hearings, but I want to take this opportunity
to thank you ahead of time for being with us.
The purpose of this hearing, of course, is to aid us in the
investigations and to let the American people better know the
type of enemy that we have been fighting. We have nothing, and
we are not investigating anybody here, we are just trying as a
matter of securing information, to buttress our efforts in the
United Nations, and to secure public information.
Would you identify yourself for the record, Captain?
STATEMENT OF CAPT. LINTON J. BUTTREY
Capt. Buttrey. My name is Linton J. Buttrey, sir, 0407113,
and I am stationed at Replacement Training Center, Camp
Pickett.
Senator Potter. I have had some memories of Camp Pickett,
and I do not know that they are the most pleasant, but I was
stationed there at one time. I thought Camp Pickett was closed.
Capt. Buttrey. No, sir, it was very active Friday when I
left, sir. I think most of the people there are hopeful that it
will be closed.
Senator Potter. I was there in 1942, in Advance Training
Area before I went overseas.
What is your home address, Captain?
Capt. Buttrey. Nashville, Tennessee, sir.
Senator Potter. When did you first go to Korea, and what
unit were you with?
Capt. Buttrey. I was with the 19th Infantry, 24th Infantry
Division.
Senator Potter. What was your assignment?
Capt. Buttrey. I was assistant battalion surgeon, with the
first battalion. I am a medical service officer.
Senator Potter. Now, would you give us your account of how
you were captured, and what took place?
Capt. Buttrey. Well, sir, it was on a Sunday, 16th of July,
Sunday morning, and I use the vernacular, the old army talk,
when all hell broke loose in those rice paddies over there.
Senator Potter. This is 1950?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir, that was the 16th of July, 1950.
We were told to evacuate, and it was probably about 6:30 or
seven o'clock in the morning. We didn't evacuate right then. We
fought in and out of this little valley there on the Koon River
but in the afternoon we had to organize and protect the unit
itself, and all of our equipment.
But that night we had to abandon and leave it and move out.
I suppose we got out over the hill, the ridge, about midnight,
I am not sure, and no one paid too much attention to time under
those circumstances; but it must have been around midnight.
Senator Potter. And were you overrun?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir, we were. Of course, my job was as
a doctor there and we had two doctors in there. I don't
remember, but we had many patients and we were getting them out
all along the afternoon if we could run a roadblock--they had
set up a roadblock.
At night they would infiltrate and surround us, and as you
know the American forces were not large in numbers then, and so
they infiltrated and surrounded us and set up a roadblock the
night before, and they attacked in the morning, which occurred
about 6:30 or seven o'clock.
Senator Potter. Would they fire on an ambulance?
Capt. Buttrey. Well, yes, sir, they would fire on any
vehicle at that time. What actually happened, where the
ambulances were concerned, and I didn't witness this but the
ambulances were shot up, any of them that would come out and go
back, in case they didn't try to get back in, they were shot
up.
Senator Potter. Of course, our ambulances are very vividly
marked with the Red Cross.
Capt. Buttrey. They make good targets, and it was a
beautiful day.
Senator Potter. Captain, would you tell in your own words
after you left it, I assume it was your battalion aid station
about midnight?
Capt. Buttrey. Well, sir, we moved the battalion aid
station back to the regimental aid station, and that was prior
to our being completely blocked, but I suppose the regimental
commander and his officers expected to get out, which we
didn't. He was wounded there, too, the regimental commander
was.
But in the afternoon, probably three or four o'clock, when
we set up our convoy hoping to run this roadblock and put the
troops out on either side of the flanks to defend us after we
got out, their forces were stronger so I was told, and what
would have been our rear and we couldn't make it and so we had
to abandon the convoy and in doing that we had many patients. I
don't know just how many patients, sir, we did have. We had
some trucks loaded with them, and the signal told me there was
no doctor there then and he was attending other patients. But
in my immediate area we didn't have enough transportation to
get them out.
I couldn't think of leaving them, so the signal told me I
could unload their trucks, and they had two, I believe, in
there. Once we started to do that, but then that wasn't
feasible, all of the men weren't mobilized yet. So I asked for
enough people to help us take the patients over the hill and
they did. They let me have them and, of course, they had their
arms and it was dark by this time, you know, so they helped
carry the patients by litter over the hill.
In getting over there, there was no vegetation in South
Korea, that is trees, and there was a small cemetery there, and
they are just mounds--I believe they tell us they bury their
dead sitting upright, but anyway they are huge mounds. The only
vegetation there at all of any site, that is trees, there are
probably half a dozen of greens and they were tall and not much
foliage on them. But my idea there was we had this great number
of patients and we would have to move them and the sun would be
hot the next day.
So I asked them to put them down there, and then another
thing I requested of the troops themselves. They were still
fighting out there, and the officers who were present agreed
that every time we could that four men would take one patient,
and I don't know how many patients got out that night. But many
of them did and many of them died on their litters and we could
find them later, or they were found, so we were told later.
That was on the night, Sunday night of the 16th of July,
1950. All night long the chaplain, he had remained with me,
too, and about daybreak----
Senator Potter. In other words, you and the chaplain stayed
with the wounded?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir. There will be a little humor in
this. You know how we Americans are. It is bad enough, but I
like to think of the humorous side of it, too. I mentioned in
my report a corporal that got out and he did get out and I made
the remark that many of these people, patients now, dragged
themselves out. Well, he exemplified what I mean. He was from
Texas, and if there are any Texans in here you should be proud
of this. But the humorous article, I had asked each patient
during the night when they were calling for me and I would
adjust their bandages, and so forth, and give them any
medication, I would ask them--I didn't think we would get out--
and I would ask them: Do you think you can walk? And I intended
to get everyone out I could.
And Taylor, his name is, I would like to know where he is;
he is out somewhere. He was a skinny youngster and about
eighteen or nineteen years old, and when I got to the litter I
asked him, I said: ``Corporal, can you walk?'' And I had known
him in Japan and I had been on a trip with the navy and taken
thirty troops on a tour with them early in the spring. So he
said: ``Yes, sir, I think I can.''
I looked and he only had one boot and so in the old army
way I said, ``Where in the hell is your other boot?'' And he
said, ``I don't know, sir, I don't need it.''
I said ``We are ten or twelve miles away from any
medication, and you need it,'' and I said ``I will get one off
another patient.'' He said ``No, sir, I can go back for it''
and I said ``Oh, you damn Texans, I don't care how you get out
if it is on your head. If you can walk, get going,'' and so he
did. He was willing to just get out any way and so he did. I
will advance this a little bit, and so I find myself in Japan
and they were very nice to me in the hospital and bring me the
roster every day of those who had been admitted. So one day I
looked about a week or two days later, and here was Corporal
Taylor, and I didn't think he would get out, but by virtue of
his not accepting the boot, sir, I am pretty sure that that is
the only thing that made him get out. He was too weak
otherwise, and he couldn't have carried that extra boot.
But the pity of it now is this: I went to the ward and they
wheeled me to the ward to see him and he was in very bad shape
and he had been shot in one leg and he was almost paralyzed in
that, however he did get back. The one that was paralyzed, and
had no feeling, not necessarily paralyzed, but had no feeling
in it, he had dragged that leg until there was no skin on it to
speak of, from the knee to the end of his toes.
That is the circumstances under which he evacuated himself,
and he didn't have the feeling to know that he was doing that
apparently to himself.
Senator Potter. It was about a twelve-mile trip?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir, ten or twelve miles; yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Then did the North Koreans overrun your
position?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir. It was on Monday morning and I
don't know but it was seven or eight o'clock and the chaplain,
he saw them coming first, and I was administering to the
patients, and he just signaled to us that he saw them coming. I
don't know how many there were, but there were enough. And when
you get over there you have a lot of hills and you can see them
coming across these little ridges in great numbers. But
naturally they didn't get into us, all of them, at least I
don't think they did. But we were overrun and they were quite
gleeful and excited about it.
A thing that drew their attention quite a bit was our GI
ration cans, or C ration cans, the few we had had been thrown
out, and they picked them up and talked about them. I don't
speak Korean and they weren't speaking English, but they were
very happy about it and they were shooting some of them, and
they shot the rest of them.
Senator Potter. You mean they would shoot the patients?
Capt. Buttrey. The patients on the litters, and some of
them tried to flee, and those who, I expect they, like anything
else, they mustered a lot of courage, and some of them tried to
run and tried to got away, and they were shot in the back or
just shot.
Senator Potter. Did they shoot any right on the litters?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir, right on the litters.
Senator Potter. Did they shoot you, Captain?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir, I was wounded there, too, and they
shot me.
Senator Potter. Were you wearing an arm band?
Capt. Buttrey. On the arm, yes, sir, a medical brassard.
Senator Potter. And I assume the chaplain was similarly
identified?
Capt. Buttrey. He had on his, yes, sir, the chaplain's
brassard.
Senator Potter. Was he shot, too?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir, he was killed.
Senator Potter. About how many wounded were there at this
point, at that time?
Capt. Buttrey. About how many were there?
Senator Potter. Yes, sir, how many Americans.
Capt. Buttrey. Shot on the litters? It is only a guess,
sir, but I don't know, fifteen or twenty, and I don't know. You
see we had probably sixty or seventy to begin with, but many of
them, you see, were taken out, and many of them were able to
walk out. They weren't all originally on litters and we didn't
have that many litters, and so many of them had gotten out.
Senator Potter. Out of that group that were shot on their
litters, or at this collecting point, how many are alive today?
Capt. Buttrey. I don't know, sir.
Senator Potter. Where were you shot, Captain?
Capt. Buttrey. In the left thigh.
I suppose the one who shot me couldn't have been over five
or six feet away.
Senator Potter. So there was no doubt that they knew that
you were a doctor?
Capt. Buttrey. Oh, no, sir, I am not sure about that. There
were no matured individuals with them, all of them impressed me
as being just youngsters in teenage, and some of them may have
been twenty-one years old, and I doubt that.
Senator Potter. Was there a leader in the group?
Capt. Buttrey. You couldn't discern that, and you could not
identify any leader as such. It was sort of like a riot, you
know, just a bunch of youngsters.
Senator Potter. Were any of them bayoneted?
Capt. Buttrey. No, sir.
Senator Potter. They were all shot?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. When were you recovered, Captain?
Capt. Buttrey. I got out the next day, I think it was.
Senator Potter. How did you get out?
Capt. Buttrey. I had to walk out, sir. It was a miracle,
almost, sir. Lucky my leg wasn't broken, and the artery wasn't
cut and the muscle wasn't torn. I bled very little and, of
course, I became infected and I was in the hospital several
weeks.
Senator Potter. Did they assume you were dead?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir, I hope that is what they did,
because I had to feign death there, and they shot at us after
they got away. They would shoot back in the area and they would
shoot from the hills and in fact all day long they would just
shoot over into the area from both sides.
If they had had mature leadership, sir, I don't believe
that they would have done that. I think they would have
probably killed us all, but I think they would have just done
it differently.
Senator Potter. It was more like a riot of hysterical kids?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes. Back somewhere, I am pretty sure they
had a mature leader, but just where, I don't know.
Senator Potter. Did any of the group speak English?
Capt. Buttrey. No, sir.
Senator Potter. So there was no interrogation of any kind?
Capt. Buttrey. Oh, no, sir, their only motive there was
just to intend to kill everybody.
Mr. O'Donnell. Was there any resistance offered by you, the
chaplain, or any of the seriously wounded litter patients?
Capt. Buttrey. No, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. Could those youngsters, those North Korean
troops, could they other but help to see that they were going
in to helpless men?
Capt. Buttrey. Surely they understood that; I am convinced
they understood that, that they were helpless. You see, they
laughed all of the time and it was a joke to them.
Senator Potter. Were you armed at the time?
Capt. Buttrey. I had had a 45, and I don't remember. I
think I had disposed of it already, and I never had used it.
And in fact I never had even thought about it, sir, and we were
too busy. The day before you see, there had been hand-to-hand
combat as we all know that were there, and you know that since.
But up to the river side, my executive officer was killed and
nearly all of the officers were killed and right on down the
line. I don't know but one or two who got out.
Senator Potter. Did I understand you to say you are in the
medical service corps?
Capt. Buttrey. Medical service corps. I am not a doctor.
Senator Potter. At that time had they started arming any of
the medics?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. As a result of the early atrocities, we had
to arm them over there to protect them?
Capt. Buttrey. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Are there any questions?
Mr. Carr. Well, Captain, as I understand it, then, it was
your group from maybe fifteen to twenty-five men wounded by the
time they actually came down on you, and you were there alone,
and there were no combat troops with you when they swept down
on you and shot your men without any resistance from you or the
wounded, and then went back up into the hills or back across.
Capt. Buttrey. They just passed on, yes, sir; just passed
on.
Mr. Carr. Thinking that they had killed everybody?
Capt. Buttrey. I hope that is what they thought, yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. I think the record should show that all of
the litter patients were actually killed, and that Captain
Buttrey's story has been completely corroborated by other eye
witnesses who were not litter patients, but who saw it; one a
master sergeant who viewed the entire atrocity through field
glasses.
Senator Potter. If there are no other questions, thank you
very much, Captain, and you weren't here when we were
discussing this before.
We will probably begin our public hearings Wednesday
morning and this is an executive session now so that we know
just where we are going and what we are doing, and see whether
there is any testimony that should be made public.
As we get closer to Wednesday morning, you will be notified
about what time you will appear.
Capt. Buttrey. Very well, sir.
Senator Potter. It is 12:30 now, and I agreed to have lunch
recess at 12:00. If we can recess now, will an hour and a half
be sufficient time? We will stand in recess until two o'clock
and we will continue with the other two men we didn't have this
morning.
afternoon session, 2:30 p.m.
Senator Potter. The hearing will come to order.
Sergeant Weinel? Do you want to take a seat and identify
yourself for the record, please? Give your full name and your
unit.
TESTIMONY OF SGT. CAREY H. WEINEL, 504th MILITARY POLICE
COMPANY, FORT EUSTIS, VIRGINIA
Sgt. Weinel. Master Sergeant Carey H. Weinel, RA 37009511,
presently on duty with 504th Military Police Company, Fort
Eustis, Virginia.
Senator Potter. Where is your home, Sergeant?
Sgt. Weinel. Kansas City, Missouri.
Senator Potter. And when did you go to Korea, and what unit
were you with?
Sgt. Weinel. I went to Korea in August 1950, joined the
Second Division, 23rd Infantry Regiment.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, what was your duty?
Sgt. Weinel. I was a squad leader, sir.
Senator Potter. A squad leader.
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. I wonder if you could tell the committee
the circumstances under which you became captured.
Sgt. Weinel. We was holding a perimeter of Pusan there, and
it was right on the Naktong River there, near a village, think
Chinju, what they called the village. It is right along the
Naktong River.
Senator Potter. Can you point that out on the map?
Sgt. Weinel. Right in this vicinity here [indicating]. We
had just moved into that position and activity was light when
we first moved in there but we heard of an attack coming, while
we didn't know when it was going to come, and we were alerted
for it.
Senator Potter. Were you in a holding position at the time,
a defensive position?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir. And due to the lack of personnel,
our replacements were awful thin. They were spread out quite a
ways. When they made the push on us, that was on the 30th of
August, that is when they made the push against us----
Senator Potter. Was that a night attack?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir. We got the attack about two o'clock
in the morning, the final attack did come at about two o'clock
in the morning, and they more or less just run over all of our
positions, all positions overrun, and I stayed in my position
until I knew they was all around me, and the only thing I could
think of was getting back to our company CP, our command post,
and seeing if we could reorganize what men we had left, to see
if we could reorganize and start to hit them again.
Our orders was to hold at all costs, and that is what we
was doing, we was holding at all costs. That was our final hold
there, at the command post. After we formed----
Senator Potter. Then did the North Koreans overrun your
lines?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; they overrun our lines completely.
Then they finally had us surrounded there, in the CP, and the
only thing for us to do was to try to make a break to our own
lines. They know where we was at and tried to throw mortars
into our position there. We organized what men we did have and
tried to fight our way back to our lines but we didn't last too
long. When it finally wound up there was something like
fifteen, I think, fifteen of us.
Senator Potter. Captured?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir. Myself, I got hit in the foot and
one in the hip. When I got hit in the hip it knocked me plumb
out. When I come to one was standing over we with a burp gun,
motioning for me to get up. I could move all right. It didn't
break no bones, it was just a flesh wound. I got up and the
first thing he did was take my shoes off and the next thing
they did was grab my dog-tags and throw them away.
Senator Potter. They took off your shoes first?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. That seemed to be a common practice.
Sgt. Weinel. They was hurting for shoes. It started to get
cold and all they had was tennis shoes.
Senator Potter. What time of year was this?
Sgt. Weinel. This was the last of August. And so after they
collected us all up and hid us in a ravine there, they brought
in about three more prisoners, and then this here officer
started interrogating us. He couldn't talk no English at all
and he had an interpreter with us, and the interpreter wasn't
too good. But he give us the idea if we would tell him the
truth and don't lie to him, that we would go to Seoul to a big
prison camp. He mentioned many, many Americans there.
And that we would have medical care and so forth and so on.
They took our names, all of our names and serial numbers and so
forth and so on, and he asked us as a group about our own
forces and tanks and so forth and so on, how many tanks we had
and so forth and so on. There was a few of them that did give
that information. But there was others of us that didn't.
Senator Potter. Did he ask you any other questions
concerning any personal questions about your families?
Sgt. Weinel. No, he didn't there. He was so interested in
the UN he wanted to know if any UN troops had entered into the
fight yet. That is what they was interested in more than
anything else. It seemed they were trying to find out whether
the UN troops was into the fight yet or if they wasn't in yet.
Senator Potter. Did this interrogation take place the same
day that you were captured?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; the next day.
Senator Potter. How many were captured in this one group?
Sgt. Weinel. There was fifteen of us.
Senator Potter. Fifteen?
Sgt. Weinel. Approximately fifteen of us. Then they took us
to our own command post, and let us eat our rations, our own
rations, and they treated us pretty good while we was there.
But up until that time they didn't take any prisoners at all.
So we got the idea through this interpreter that they had been
promised that if they take prisoners they would get two
thousand dollars in American money for every American prisoner
they took.
Senator Potter. You felt that that was true as a result of
the conversations that took place with the interpreter?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right. He give us the idea that they
would get two thousand dollars American money out of each one
of us, is the word I got from him.
Senator Potter. And he also told you that prior to this
time they had not been taking prisoners?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right.
Senator Potter. They were killing them as they captured
them?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, that is right. Then, of course they went
ahead and had all of our watches and everything like that taken
away from us, all of our personal articles, and was starting
into going down through the dead bodies and get the articles
off them. They kept us there in that one, in our own command
post there for three days.
Senator Potter. But you had rations, your own rations to
eat?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, plenty to eat there. Then on about the
third day--I mean, they didn't pay too much attention to our
planes. They was running around there all the time, and never
paying any attention to us. The third day, however, the planes
come in there and they strafed us, and there was three of our
boys killed outright and there was two injured pretty seriously
by our own planes.
Senator Potter. In other words, the strafing killed three
of the prisoners?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right.
Senator Potter. Three out of the fifteen?
Sgt. Weinel. And the rest of us we got out of the building
and they collected us up and got us in a ravine there and hid
us there until night, and when night come they started us back.
They had a hospital, they had set up a hospital right next to
this town there, and we left what men was really wounded bad,
that couldn't hardly even walk, they left them there at this
hospital and that left us about ten men or less than ten men to
make the forced march.
Senator Potter. And where did you march to?
Sgt. Weinel. They took us to Taejon.
Senator Potter. How far was that?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, we rode the train the last twenty miles
to Taejon, that was all. The rest of the time we walked. It is
about, I guess, seventy or eighty some miles.
Senator Potter. You pointed out in the map your position
when you were captured, the lower part of the Pusan perimeter.
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; right in here, sir [indicating].
They moved us into Taeju and then on to Taejon.
Senator Potter. And you marched that whole distance with
the exception of the last twenty miles?
Sgt. Weinel. We rode the train from this twenty miles here
into Taejon. That is where we rode the train in.
Senator Potter. How long did you take to make that
distance?
Sgt. Weinel. I don't have any idea, sir. I lost track of
all time. They was just giving us what we could barely get by
with to eat.
Senator Potter. Did they feed you once a day or twice a
day?
Sgt. Weinel. Once a day, just about. And that was very
skimpy.
Senator Potter. What would you have?
Sgt. Weinel. Most of the time it was rice, either a rice
ball or rice soup. There wouldn't be too much of it, either.
Senator Potter. Did you got any medical treatment at all?
Sgt. Weinel. No, sir, no medical treatment at all.
Senator Potter. What were the conditions of the march?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, we lost two men on the march.
Senator Potter. There were ten of you that started off, you
say?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; and lost two on the march.
Senator Potter. They died en route?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right. We picked up some other
prisoners at one of the towns later on, we picked up some more
prisoners there. Of course out of that bunch we lost heavier
since we picked them up than we did any other time. At one of
the towns on the way we picked up, I would say about twenty of
them, twenty other prisoners.
Senator Potter. That was on the way on the march?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes. At Chinchon there, they put us in cells
there, in a jail there, they put us in these cells and our
planes come and strafed the jail we was in. As luck would have
it only one man was hurt, he got a board splinter from one of
the boards that hit him in the back but it didn't injure him.
But they was doing a good job of tearing the jail up, though.
Senator Potter. Did they destroy the jail?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; they done a good job on it. I think
that was the only building that was left. There had been a big
prison there, I think, at one time, and that was the only
building that was left, you know, in the ring of this concrete
wall around it, about the only building left standing.
Senator Potter. What was the cause of the death of the two
original ten?
Sgt. Weinel. What was that, sir?
Senator Potter. What caused the death of the two that died
en route?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, one was dysentery, and the other was--he
got stomach cramps. I don't know. He got stomach cramps and he
never could straighten up. He just doubled over and we couldn't
get him straightened up at all.
Senator Potter. Were they given any medical attention?
Sgt. Weinel. No, sir; they wasn't. However, all of us had
stomach cramps at one time or another, for lack of food and
what food they did give us just seemed to cause stomach cramps.
Senator Potter. What was the treatment of the ones who had
physical disabilities or had dysentery or stomach cramps?
Sgt. Weinel. Didn't have any, sir, no medical care at all.
Senator Potter. Did they try to have them keep up with the
march?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir. They marched us awful fast, I mean
they was moving us awful fast, and after we got back to
Chinchu, they turned us over to, I think they called them
civilian police. It seemed like to me from what I gathered they
had been trained at Poyang, to take over these villages and
towns as they took them over, and establish law and order. As
they take us from one town to another, when they change their
guards, and have new guards all the time, they was constantly
trying to move us faster than we could move. I mean, they was
all the time rushing us.
Senator Potter. Did they beat you?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; they did. If you didn't keep up or
for any reason you lagged back, they would take a rifle butt
and hit you with the rifle butt, or some of them would even
kick you. That is, to have you keep up with the rest of them.
We had some men that--especially, you know, they give you a
little break and start you out again. That was always the
hardest, starting out after a break, if they give us a break.
Of course none of us had any shoes, and walking on that
ground all of our feet was--well, there was scars on top of
scars, you might say, and blisters on top of blisters. They
finally got us up there and got us on the train and then they
took us on into Taejon and put us in prison there.
Senator Potter. You stated that enroute you were
transferred from the North Korean military guard to some type
of civilian guard?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Was the treatment of the guards any
different?
Sgt. Weinel. I think that the civilian guards, I think
their treatment was rougher than the military guards.
Senator Potter. Rougher than the military guards?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did they parade you through any of the
towns enroute?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; they did. They paraded us pretty
near all the towns that we come through. They would parade us
through mostly in the day time. They would always try to move
us out in the daytime, and then by the time we get out of town,
you know, it would be dark. By the time we got out of town it
would be dark, and we would march all night in the dark. That
is after the planes got so heavy that we could not march on the
roads in the daytime. Our planes, any time we was on the road,
would get them, so they started marching us at night. But up
until that time if the planes left them alone, they just
marched on the road in broad daylight and after the planes got
pretty thick, every time they would hear one, they would go for
cover too like the rest of us would.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, did they endeavor to humiliate
you as you went through the towns? Did they try to incite the
civilian population?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, we would have them strike at us with
their fists as we would go through, as we marched through. Some
civilians would strike at us while we was in line. They would
strike at us or try and kick us, one or the two. But we didn't
have too much of it, but we had it happen, in certain
instances.
Senator Potter. Did the guards try to keep order, try to
keep the civilians away from you?
Sgt. Weinel. No, sir; they didn't. They didn't try to keep
them away at all. After we got to Taejon to the prison there,
it was just more or less--I don't know. They had kind of an
open house to all the army personnel. All army personnel and
high officials, they could come in and molest us all they
wanted to. I mean, the guards didn't pay no more attention to
them as though they wasn't even there.
Senator Potter. They would come in and beat you?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right. Specially for clothing. They
would come in, like some of us still had socks, and if they saw
a pair of socks that didn't have no holes in them they would
take them. Or trousers the same way, or jackets. We finally
learned that is what they were doing, so we started tearing
holes in the fatigues so they wouldn't take them, tearing the
pockets off.
Senator Potter. From the time that you were captured until
the end of this march, were you interrogated?
Sgt. Weinel. We were interrogated several times, yes.
Senator Potter. Several times?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes.
Senator Potter. And what course did the interrogation take?
Was the interrogation entirely on military intelligence, or
what?
Sgt. Weinel. No, they tried to question us about our
families, about our families and----
Senator Potter. What type of questions would they ask you?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, they would ask us where our home was
first, and ask us where our home was, and after the home they
would ask us if we was married, if we had children, also if we
had cars, and if our families had cars, and such things as
that.
Senator Potter. Did they try to indoctrinate you in any
way?
Sgt. Weinel. They did while we was at the prison, yes. They
give us these books, they had books, about that thick
[indicating], and they would give us them, and they told us we
were going to have to sit up an hour every day reading, have
one of our own men read the book to us, and explain it to us.
But somehow or other they never did follow through with that.
Senator Potter. How long were you at this prison?
Sgt. Weinel. We was there about I would say around eighteen
days, or something like that.
Senator Potter. About eighteen days.
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And what was the general treatment in the
prison?
Sgt. Weinel. The general treatment in the prison was pretty
bad. I mean, they wanted us to know that they was the boss and
they didn't want no foolishness out of you, out of none of us,
and they would take a delight, it would seem like, and just
antagonize you, just to get you mad, you know, just enough to
keep you mad, and keep you upset. They liked to do that. It
seemed like little things that could upset you, they would just
keep it up, just keep a steady role of it at all times.
Senator Potter. Were you placed in a cell in the prison?
Sgt. Weinel. We were placed in one room all together.
Senator Potter. How many in the room?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, at the prison there, when we got to the
prison there was approximately sixty Americans and the rest
were South Koreans. They had us divided off, had all the
Koreans, South Koreans together, and they had most Americans
all together. They had some of them in the room with the South
Koreans but not too many of them.
Senator Potter. In the room you were in, how many were in
the room?
Sgt. Weinel. In the room I was in, I would say there was
about forty.
Senator Potter. It was a very small room?
Sgt. Weinel. I would say about the space of this right
across here [indicating].
Senator Potter. Not much more than ten by ten.
Sgt. Weinel. That is right. That is about what it would
amount to.
Senator Potter. Could you lie down to sleep?
Sgt. Weinel. You could lay down to sleep, yes. It was a
concrete floor. It had been one of the modern buildings there
that had been concrete, and it was a concrete building. It did
have concrete floors, and you slept on the concrete floor, and
a few of us had mats, they brought in some mats, but not enough
to go around. And some of them had to sleep right on the
concrete floor.
Senator Potter. What was your food ration?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, we got--you could either have a rice
ball or the rice soup, whichever one you wanted. They would
give you merely a small bowl. What it was was just the starch
off the rice, the skim off the top of the rice, and if you
happened to get a few grains of rice in it that was fine, but
most of the time they made sure you didn't got too much rice in
there.
Senator Potter. How many times a day were you fed?
Sgt. Weinel. We was fed twice a day. But, as I say, it was
one small rice ball.
Senator Potter. What were the sanitary facilities?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, they had a latrine downstairs.
Downstairs they had a headquarters set up downstairs and the
guard says whenever you wanted to go, one of the guards would
go down with you.
Senator Potter. They would take you?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, and bring us back up.
Senator Potter. You stated you were there about eighteen
days?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What type of interrogation did you receive
there?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, we had one of the boys that could speak
Russian who was with us, in the prison camp.
Senator Potter. One of the boys, is that one of the
prisoners?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes. He could speak Russian, some Russian, and
he was the first one they took out, when they found out he
could speak Russian they took him right up to some of the high
officers, and later on they would come down and take us, or
themselves, in the prison, and would ask us everything about
our own equipment, you know, and they had captured a few of our
new bazookas, and they was wanting there some of our boys to go
and show them how to fire it, the new one. They was wanting the
boys to show them how to fire it. But as far as I know, there
wasn't any of them that showed them how to fire it. Also they
was trying to get ones that knew something about mechanics to
work on their jeeps, what they say would miss, you know, put-
put, in other words missing on them. It was missing on them,
that is what they were trying to tell you, and they wanted to
get the missing out of them, on the jeep. And then--I don't
know exactly the date, around the 28th of September around the
26th of September, rather, we could hear, you know, from the
concrete, sleeping on that concrete floor, you could hear a
dull thud in the far off distance, and we thought the Americans
was moving up. We didn't know for sure but we had an idea that
is what it was. Very next day one of our boys died in the
prison there, he had dysentery, and we had a burial detail out
to bury him and one of our planes come over and dropped
leaflets. They had the scissors cutting across Korea, by Inchon
up there, and so we knew then that they had made a landing up
above us. Then along towards that evening, some of their troops
was going south, coming from the north, and they was really
beat, so we know darn well that the Americans had landed and
was pushing, was on the push. So as soon as them leaflets come,
as they dropped them leaflets, they doubled our guards on us,
doubled our guards right then. We started getting mortar fire,
I mean artillery in the town, and that is when they started
moving. They started moving out then.
That night, a lot of rumpus was there, you could tell they
was moving furniture and everything. About four o'clock in the
morning they come up and woke everybody up and told us we were
going to Seoul, that they was taking us to Seoul, that we would
have blankets and everything in Seoul, that they was going to
take us all to Seoul. So we could see through the window, and
they had a partition in the building on the side where the
South Koreans were and we could see them, they was tying them
all up, tying all their hands together. After they got all
their hands together they took them outside and it was shortly
after that we heard rifle fire. It wasn't too long until here
they was coming back up for us. So we figured then what was
coming off, I mean what they was up to.
Senator Potter. Before you go into that part of it, you
stated that at the prison they gave you certain books to read,
is that true?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes.
Senator Potter. What were the books?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, it was more or less the Communist aims
and their plans. It was more or less their plans of their
government and so forth and so on, like that.
Senator Potter. Did they ever question you, or try to
propagandize you into accepting communism, and that the
Americans were the aggressors?
Sgt. Weinel. They started. They kept questioning us about
why we was fighting, why we would fight and everything like
that. They wanted to know the reason why we fight them, that
they wasn't wanting to fight us but they had to have their
freedom. Of course they was the North Koreans, of course. And
that that is the only way that they could see they could have
freedom, was by fighting the South Koreans, and that we had no
business in it, that we was more or less intruders into the
fight.
They tried to a certain extent, but not too much.
Senator Potter. Can you recall the exact titles of the
books or documents you might have read?
Sgt. Weinel. No, sir; I can't.
Senator potter. That is, at the prison camp.
Sgt. Weinel. I do know, though, that the book had been in
Russian and somebody had interpreted it into English. But a man
would pretty near have to know something about Russian before
he got too much out of it. You would go on and pretty soon you
would find a Russian word that you wouldn't know anything
about.
Senator Potter. You stated in the beginning that they told
you that you were to study an hour a day.
Sgt. Weinel. Yes.
Senator Potter. Did they ever enforce that?
Sgt. Weinel. No, sir; they never did enforce it.
Senator Potter. Did you have any so-called classes while
you were in the camp?
Sgt. Weinel. No, sir. They were supposed to have them but
for some reason or other they never did start them.
Senator Potter. Were you ever called before any of the
officers there for interrogation?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir. They interrogated all of us there.
Senator Potter. How did they handle you when they
interrogated you? Did they beat you at that time?
Sgt. Weinel. No, they would threaten you. They would
threaten if you don't tell the truth that they would shoot you.
They put that very plainly. They was all the time pointing a
gun at you for some reason or other, if for nothing else for
the fun of it. They try to threaten you with the weapons, yes,
but I don't think many were frightened too much on it because
by that time they were getting pretty well used to having to
look down a rifle barrel. But other than that, they didn't beat
us to that extent, but they did while we was in the prison,
they did, they was constantly beating and hitting somebody.
Senator Potter. You say they allowed a lot of other people
to come in and have sort of a field day?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir. It was more or less like a three-
ring circus, what it was. Of course, I was a little older man
than the rest of the boys and they couldn't get over how long I
had been in the army and not being more than a sergeant. They
said in their army you would be at least a major, if you had
been in the army as long as I had. That is the way they were
working it. I didn't try to explain it to them, sir.
Senator Potter. And when these unauthorized persons or
apparently they were authorized but they were not part of the
prison force, when they would come in, I understand that they
would not only steal your clothes, but they would also beat you
up?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right. You see, they hated, for some
reason or other--if you couldn't talk their language, they
would get awful mad at you, and when they got mad they would
start swinging. It is one of those things. One incident in
particular, he is a little joker anyway, he would come in there
and we come to find out he was a captain, equal to one of our
captains, and he was in the tank outfit. He come over to me and
he motioned me to stand up. I stood up and he started jabbering
to me in Korean, and I told him no understand, no savvy, and it
made him mad. He just doubled up his fist and hit me in the
stomach as hard as he could hit me. Naturally, I didn't have
anything on my stomach and I just keeled over. That is one
incident that happened, but it was nothing, because that
happened every day.
Senator Potter. All right, then. You stated that they
started to move out about in the middle of the night?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes. They doubled our guards on us and they
tied us and tied the Americans, tied the Americans six and
seven men to a group. They just had a piece of communication
wire and they would just tie seven men together. Then they
would take them out. Shortly after they left the building, we
would hear another firing. The bunch that was tying us up was
all the time tying. Myself, I kept moving towards the rear.
Every time they would tie some up or anything like that, I
would move back, and I figured if they made a slip I was going
to make a break for it, figuring that it was pretty well to die
making a break for it as to let them take me out and shoot me.
But they didn't make no slips.
Senator Potter. How did they tie you together?
Sgt. Weinel. They tied us together with wire. There is the
scar on my wrist there from the wire they had around me. They
would tie your hands to the wire. They had a string of wire and
they would make a loop in it and stick your wrist in it, and
tighten the wire. They would go to the next man and do the same
thing, whatever it happened to be, the right or left wrist,
whatever they could got a hold of to turn him around. That is
the one they tied into the wire. Towards the last they got
hurrying pretty much, and the group before me, they got us in
both groups downstairs, and I got to watch them shoot the group
just before me. I mean the group that they took out.
Senator Potter. You watched them shoot that other group?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir. The first thing I knew when I
stepped out there was they had M-1 rifles, and armor piercing
ammunition they had captured from the 24th Division when they
was in there before, in Taejon.
Senator Potter. How many men did they have doing the
shooting?
Sgt. Weinel. They had six or seven of them doing the
shooting.
Senator Potter. All with rifles?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; all with rifles. And they had a
ditch dug around the court, the wall inside the prison yard.
They had a ditch dug around this here wall that come up this
way and then up to an ``L'' here.
Senator Potter. An ``L'' shape?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes. And when I stepped out there they had
shot all the South Koreans up in the upper part here, and they
then started on the Americans, finished out up here, and
finished down this way.
Senator Potter. When they were taking them off to this
trench, what would they have them do, just stand there?
Sgt. Weinel. Sit down in the bottom of the trench.
Senator Potter. Sit down in the ditch?
Sgt. Weinel. And the minute they sat down, they would open
up on them. The group I was in, we was sitting, they were
making us sit down, and we just sit down and they opened up on
us. I was sitting down, you know, sitting down in the ditch
with my neck up this way, with my hands on my leg like this,
and like that, and they couldn't have been any more than two
yards away from us, shooting down on top of us. He got me in
the hand, hit my hand. So all of a sudden the firing stopped
and I was still alive. I didn't know just what I should do or
shouldn't do. So I figured well, I better start doing something
or something is going to happen for sure. So I just jumped over
against one of the other men and just laid there. The next
thing I knew I heard shovels, they started burying us then.
They started at the other end of the line and just come on up
and throwed enough dirt on us to cover us up. When that dirt
was coming up towards my head, I come darn near getting
panicky, but I made myself sit there and hope and pray that
they didn't put enough on me to smother me.
Senator Potter. You laid there and they covered you over
with dirt?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; they covered me over with dirt, too.
It was just loose dirt, with enough to cover my head up. I laid
there and after they got through I could breathe through that
loose dirt, enough to get enough air to hold me for a while,
and then after they got us all covered up they come back over
again and took care of any of them that moved, any personnel
that moved. They would finish them off then, give them a
finishing shot. They was ready to take off. They left us to the
last thing to take care of. They was all ready to go, they had
everything ready to go to move out of town and left us for the
last thing to take care of, They was burning the records there.
That is the only light they had, when they was burning the
records there.
Senator Potter. We have some photographs here, Sergeant.
They were taken apparently from that same camp. Can you
identify the photograph [presented to witness]?
Do those look like the trenches you were put in?
Sgt. Weinel. No, sir; this isn't it, sir.
Senator Potter. That is not it?
Sgt. Weinel. I don't believe so, wait a minute, let me make
sure. This looks like it here.
Mr. O'Donnell. Check the number on the back of it, will
you?
Sgt. Weinel. It is in the same order as this, yes, just a
deep ditch. I believe the ditch I was in was a little deeper
than that, at least a little deeper than that.
Senator Potter. It was a deeper ditch than this?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes.
Senator Potter. This could possibly be the ditch where the
Koreans were in?
Sgt. Weinel. It could be, yes, sir.
Senator Potter. All this while you were still bound
together by this wire?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And after they buried you over and then
they went back, if there was any movement they shot again.
Apparently you were pretty quiet and that one shot was all----
Sgt. Weinel. I decided not to move at all.
Senator Potter. And you showed good judgment.
Sgt. Weinel. I guess it was for about a half hour, I didn't
move at all and finally I had to get more air and so I moved my
head until I got a hole down to my nose. It looked like a
pencil nose, what it looked like, from where I was at it looked
like a pencil hole, you know. Where somebody stuck a pencil
through the dirt. I stayed that way, I guess for about two
hours, until I made sure that they were gone. When I didn't
hear too much movement or anything, I got my head out, stuck my
head out, and I stayed that way until night. After dark I tried
to dig my way out but I couldn't dig my way out at all. I had
too much dirt that I couldn't throw away. This hand here was
tied with these other follows and I couldn't get it loose, and
on this one the flesh was just hanging from the back of it,
where they busted it all up.
Senator Potter. Did you say your back was broken?
Sgt. Weinel. The back of my hand, you can see it there.
Senator Potter. How did that happen, Sergeant?
Sgt. Weinel. That happened there, with the shot.
Senator Potter. That was when you were shot.
Sgt. Weinel. It struck my neck with one, in my collar bone,
but the only real damage was to my hand. I mean it just barely
broke the skin on my collar bone and neck. But when it hit my
hand it shattered all the bone on this side of my hand. Of
course it busted out the whole back of my hand and that was the
only hand I had free that I could dig with. I dug out as much
as I could, but I couldn't dig out enough dirt to keep from
sliding back in on me, or throw it far enough away from me.
So I stayed in that position all that day, and all that
night, and the next day I got hurting pretty bad, I had managed
to get on my knees but I couldn't get my weight off my legs.
All of my weight was resting right on the back of my toes. I
managed to get up enough to where I could get sitting up but I
couldn't get out, because one of these bodies was pinned across
my legs. I couldn't move him to get the rest of the weight up.
If I could have moved him I could have gotten up and got
out myself. But I got to hurting so bad, so I started hollering
for help. One of the boys said to holler [?]. That is the only
thing I know in Korean. I started hollering it and as luck
would have it some South Koreans found me. They was pretty slow
about getting me out, of course. Bodies was all around me and I
was down in all them bodies, and it took them quite a while to
get me out of there, Besides that, our planes was working over
Taejon pretty good about that time, too. Their women folks had
those white aprons and they was flagging to our planes.
Senator Potter. Because the enemy had left at that time?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, they had left by that time. But they had
been running patrols back into the town. The enemy had been
running patrols back into the town. But most of the main forces
had taken off from the town, yes. They had taken off from the
town. They took and hid me out for, I guess it was a day or two
days, I don't remember which one it was, the South Koreans hid
me for two days in one of the houses, until the Americans came
in. Major Jones from the 24th Division was the first man to me,
when I was liberated. Then I went through the normal procedure
of coming back to the hospitals, and I spent about eight weeks
in Japan, recuperating there before they sent me on.
I want to Camp Atterbury Hospital, at Camp Atterbury, and
stayed there until I was released, which was in January 1952.
Senator Potter. What is your medical rating now, Sergeant?
Sgt. Weinel. I have a U-3 profile, sir. That is upper
injuries and the hand. Other than that, I am in pretty good
shape, except for my legs. My legs--I can't stand too much
walking any more. I don't know whether it was caused by the
pressure on my legs or what it is, but I can't do the walking I
used to do. But other than that, my physical condition is in
good shape.
Senator Potter. You are not a good man for a twenty-mile
hike?
Sgt. Weinel. I think I would have to pass that up.
Mr. O'Donnell. How long would you figure you were actually
buried alive?
Sgt. Weinel. I would say just for about two hours, sir. It
would be longer than that, it was two hours that I stayed
without moving at all, about an hour before I moved any at all,
and then I got the pencil hole. I would say it was about six
hours.
Mr. O'Donnell. Six hours all told?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, because it was early in the morning and I
waited until that evening before I come out. It would be six or
eight hours at least.
Mr. O'Donnell. Sergeant, how many American prisoners were
taken out in groups of seven that were tied and shot that day?
Sgt. Weinel. I don't have any idea, sir. There was sixty
Americans, and forty South Koreans in the prison where I was
at. And to my knowledge, as I heard later on from different
sources, another bunch, a group about two miles from there,
there was three hundred of them in there and not a man came out
alive, out of three hundred.
Senator Potter. Not a man came out alive?
Sgt. Weinel. Not a man.
Senator Potter. And as far as you know, you are the only
man from there?
Sgt. Weinel. I came out and a little Pfc came out with me.
He was from New York. But he died two hours after we was back
in American hands.
Senator Potter. Did you know him when you were trying to
get out?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, he was way up at the other end, sir. But
we did holler back and forth to one another, when we dared to,
just enough to find out who he was and he found out who I was.
But other than that, when I started yelling for help, he was
starting to holler, too.
Senator Potter. You say he died soon after that?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; he died two hours after he was in
American hands.
Mr. O'Donnell. That number, sixty Americans PW's, is that a
pretty firm number in your mind?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir. You see, they had a chart on the
inside of the prison with all of our names on it, and would
count how many of them. It would run around sixty.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know anything about any other than
South Koreans and American PW's that were killed?
Sgt. Weinel. That is the only one I saw. Like I say, about
two miles from there there was some. I heard it was a church, I
heard it was a church and I heard the other three hundred were
massacred there, mixed Americans and South Koreans, both.
Senator Potter. Any others?
Sgt. Weinel. I don't know for sure. That is just hearsay.
Mr. Carr. Sergeant, when you finally did get up with the
help of the South Koreans, was it at night at that time?
Sgt. Weinel. No, it was daytime.
Mr. Carr. Did you at that time get a chance to look around
and see the extent of the ditches in the area, how big this
``L'' ditch was?
Sgt. Weinel. No, I didn't. They made a stretcher and got me
out of there as soon as possible because they were afraid the
enemy would come back into the village.
Mr. Carr. One other thing, Sergeant: You were wounded
before you were captured.
Sgt. Weinel. That is right.
Mr. Carr. So that at the time you were captured you already
had a wound in your leg and hip, I think?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right.
Mr. Carr. And then you sustained these additional wounds in
your hand and shoulder or collarbone?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes.
Mr. Carr. All the time during this march you had no
treatment? Until you were taken back to the Americans, you had
had no treatment for any of these wounds?
Sgt. Weinel. No, I didn't have any treatment for any of the
wounds, only what I could find, you know. I found clean clothes
in some of these houses we would stay in, and I used that to
bandage my own wounds but other than that there was no medical
care at all.
Mr. Carr. At the time you were noticing through this
opening that the South Koreans were being tied together and
taken out and subsequently you would hear shots, it was very
obvious to you that the evacuation of that particular area was
taking place?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right.
Mr. Carr. And along with this?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right. They had their packs already
packed, the rice bags hanging to their packs and so forth and
so on.
Mr. Carr. So what would appear to be their last official
act in evacuating the town was to massacre the remaining
prisoners?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right. We had a few wounded men that
couldn't even walk and after they took all of us out that could
walk, they went back up and carried them down and throwed them
in the ditch, just bodily threw them down there in the ditch
and shot them.
Senator Potter. And they then shot them?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes.
Senator Potter. Did you witness any of them being hit in
the head with any objects to kill them that way, or to finish
them off?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, I imagine shovels, they used the shovels
to a certain extent, yes.
Senator Potter. When they would shove them in, they would
hit them?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes. Because out of the whole bunch that was
shot there, I never heard one man ask for mercy, none of them
did. In fact, there was one of the boys that wasn't hit good
and he even asked them to give him another. Out of that many
men, no man cracked, I thought that was quite unusual.
Senator Potter. It certainly is.
There is a photograph here that was in the War Crime
Commission report. I am wondering if you might identify that
trench.
Sgt. Weinel. This is it right here. I will never forget
that as long as I live.
Mr. O'Donnell. We have a positive identification on this.
Sgt. Weinel. And I come out about right down in here, I
think, my location [indicating].
Mr. Carr. Sergeant, there is no question, then, in your
mind, that this was an official act?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right. It come from a higher up some
place. The only man mostly that we got to see was one fellow
they called Sarge. I don't know him. He was a regular Korean
soldier. The guards was all civilians, civilian guards. But
every once in a while this here fellow they called the sergeant
would come in and check us over and ask us a few questions and
so forth and so on, like that. I think he was the man that was
in charge of us.
Mr. Carr. If this was an official act of international
communism, I don't suppose, then, you have any great admiration
for American communism?
Sgt. Weinel. Not a bit, sir. No use whatsoever.
Senator Potter. Have you ever been contacted since you have
been home by Communists?
Sgt. Weinel. No, sir; I haven't, sir. My wife has been
scared of the thing ever since I come home. She thought maybe
they might try and got a hold of me there, but they never did.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, after all you have gone through,
I do not think you have anything to worry about.
Sgt. Weinel. I am not scared of them, anyway.
Senator Potter. You mentioned that one of the GI's spoke
Russian and they used him or took him out for an interview
first.
Sgt. Weinel. That is right.
Senator Potter. Do you recall, was he returned to the unit?
Sgt. Weinel. He was returned to the prison, yes.
Senator Potter. Was he shot with the rest of them?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, he was shot with the rest of them. We had
a few of them collaborate with them, a few of the prisoners,
and they still shot them, too, right along with the rest of us.
Senator Potter. You had some that tried to play ball with
them?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes.
Senator Potter. As I understand, the prison was in charge
of civilians.
Sgt. Weinel. That is right.
Senator Potter. But you had some military people as well?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, the headquarters they had downstairs was
all military.
Senator Potter. All military?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes.
Senator Potter. Who was in charge?
Sgt. Weinel. That is what I say. I think this sergeant, he
was a fellow they called the sergeant. He seemed to be one that
was in charge of the prisoners, and also of the guards that
guarded the prisoners. But when they doubled the guards, they
put army guards on us then, army guards with the civilians.
Senator Potter. Who did the shooting? Was it army personnel
or civilian personnel?
Sgt. Weinel. Both, sir.
Senator Potter. Both?
Sgt. Weinel. Both, yes, sir. One thing I might say, too, on
that, in the prison there they had what you call these
meetings, they had these big high official meetings, and they
would have a speaker come and speak to them. Boy, he would give
them--he had a line of propaganda. We couldn't understand
anything he said, but according to the men's actions when they
left that meeting, it was pretty inspiring to them, you know.
It was very inspiring to them.
Senator Potter. Now, those were meetings of the civilian
personnel at the prison?
Sgt. Weinel. To the military. No, their own military.
Senator Potter. Their own military.
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; their own military personnel.
Senator Potter. And after these meetings they would be
pretty well charged?
Sgt. Weinel. They would come out of there like nobody's
business.
Senator Potter. And as a result of those meetings and what
actually happened, there can be no doubt in your mind, then,
that this was a planned command action?
Sgt. Weinel. That is right.
Senator Potter. It wasn't just a result of some local
commander?
Sgt. Weinel. No. Because as I say, they had everything
ready to go, everything was ready to go and they left us to the
last thing to take care of. They even had soldiers waiting
around there to move out, with their full gear on. They just
left us to the last detail to take care of.
Mr. Carr. Do you recall whether or not there was one of
these haranguing meetings to their military personnel shortly
before this action?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, there had been.
Mr. Carr. Is your memory fresh enough on that after this
experience to recall whether or not it was just shortly before,
any idea about how long before?
Sgt. Weinel. Well, about every three days they had a
meeting, sir, about every three days.
Mr. Carr. Do you recall whether or not they had this type
of meeting on the day it happened?
Sgt. Weinel. Not on the day it happened, no.
Mr. Carr. Not on the day it happened?
Sgt. Weinel. No.
Mr. Carr. Do you remember whether it was the day before?
Sgt. Weinel. The day before. I think they had one the day
before.
Mr. O'Donnell. That becomes very important, Sergeant. Can
you be sure that it was the day before that they had a meeting
of this nature?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes, sir; I am almost positive it was the day
before, I know it wasn't the day, the night--like today and the
night, it wasn't like that. It was the day before that.
Mr. O'Donnell. What was the highest ranking officer that
you saw while you were in the prison?
Sgt. Weinel. I don't know too much about their rank, sir,
but there was four of these stars across here. I don't know
what their rank is.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, the reason that this is important
is the fact that evidence has been secured, starting the 26th
or 27th, that practically all over South Korea at that time the
North Koreans were killing their PW's. So it had to be a
command order rather than just a prison order.
Sgt. Weinel. That is right. Because up until that time they
wouldn't let any of them shoot us, but they could beat us all
they wanted to. They didn't care about beating us at all. Of
course, the guards they threatened to shoot you a few times
every once in a while, but that was just a more or less
everyday occurrence.
Mr. Carr. But you did find out, after you were rescued--
that may not be the word, but after you were taken from the
ditch by the South Koreans, you did find out that there had
been a similar incident about two miles away?
Sgt. Weinel. Yes.
Mr. Carr. And in which you had heard, at least, there were
three hundred persons?
Sgt. Weinel. Three hundred South Koreans and Americans
both.
Senator Potter. Well, thank you kindly, Sergeant. We will
probably have your public testimony some time Wednesday.
Colonel Hanley? Colonel, we would be interested in getting
your observations. You heard some of the experiences that the
men have testified to this morning and this afternoon. I know
that you were in on this war crimes atrocities from the very
beginning. I would appreciate your giving your observations as
you see fit to present them. I would like, first, to have you
comment on the Taejon massacre that was just mentioned.
TESTIMONY OF COL. JAMES M. HANLEY, U.S. ARMY, CAMP ATTENBURY,
INDIANA
Col. Hanley. I haven't had an opportunity to----
Senator Potter. Colonel, first would you identify yourself
for the record?
Col. Hanley. James M. Hanley, Colonel, United States Army,
stationed at Camp Attenbury.
Senator Potter. Where is your home?
Col. Hanley. Mandan, North Dakota.
The Taejon massacre is, as you were told and are well
acquainted with, is well documented. It was one of the larger
cases and one of the very early ones that we ran into and was
worked on over a period of many, many months, in securing
affidavits and photographic evidence that you have, the details
of which I have not yet had a chance to refresh myself on at
this time.
There were those killed in the prison as has been
mentioned, and also a warehouse, I am quite certain it was,
where some three hundred or something in that neighborhood,
were also killed. As far as I can recall, I do not think there
were any survivors out of that second three hundred group.
Senator Potter. You think they were all killed?
Col. Hanley. I think they were all killed. And as you know,
there were one or two survivors out of the jail. Whether or not
these things were done under orders of Korean higher
headquarters of the North Korean army, I don't know. There is
nothing in the record, at least there wasn't by the time I left
the war crimes section, to indicate that any orders to that
effect had been issued.
But as Mr. O'Donnell has stated, the fact that these things
took place around the same time, on the 27th of September, when
the North Koreans were retreating, would give some credence to
the thought that there must have been some plan, something that
came down, from higher headquarters as to the disposition made
of the prisoners. I know that at Mokdow, which is over on the
southwest coast, way down in the corner of Korea, that there
was large massacres of civilians, and there is quite a detailed
story in the files as to a meeting held by the jailers and
North Korean army personnel, the civilian personnel, who were
at the jail and in Mokdow at that time. It is a very
interesting story, if you can get a hold of it, to read. There
this meeting was set up for the purpose of discussing what to
do with the prisoners. The matter of taking them with them was
quickly disposed of as being impractical. They realized they
couldn't do that. The other alternative of disposing of them in
some manner was the only other thing discussed. It is rather
surprising to read that document, that story, and realize that
no one suggested the possibility of just leaving them or
abandoning them or turning them loose. That was not even
mentioned.
Senator Potter. That was not an alternative?
Col. Hanley. That was not an alternative that was discussed
or suggested.
Senator Potter. And those were civilians?
Col. Hanley. Those were South Korean civilians. They
disposed over those civilians over a period of about three
days, taking them in large groups out to a coal mine up in the
mountains and shooting them and taking some to an airfield and
shooting them there.
Senator Potter. Did this include women as well as men?
Col. Hanley. Yes, sir; it included women as well as men,
too.
Senator Potter. When did that take place?
Col. Hanley. When?
Senator Potter. Yes.
Col. Hanley. About this same general time. A great number
of those war crimes took place in the withdrawal of the North
Korean forces into North Korea. So far as we know, that is. Of
course, there are many others that took place while they were
in South Korea, and afterwards. But in many cases it wouldn't
be discovered. I think one reason that we know about so many in
that period is that we discovered them immediately.
Senator Potter. You came right through, yes.
Col. Hanley. We came through and discovered them. Mokdow is
also one of the cases in which we had very extensive
investigation. I had investigators over there at Mokdow for
many weeks, going into that particular case.
Senator Potter. Can you give us the information you secured
concerning the so-called death march from----
Mr. O'Donnell. That was the Seoul death march, that was the
principal one, and the secondary would be the Sunchon massacre,
and the other would be about thirty miles north of the Sunchon
Tunnel, a general picture, if you will.
Col. Hanley. From the case files, that whole story is a
little confused because a lot of that comes from North Korean
prisoners whom we had captured, who participated or knew about
it, who had been in on the marches, a lot came from survivors.
The average survivor would know just a little bit. Sometimes
the story is a little confusing, sometimes dates are wrong, you
can't be too sure. So the story, unless it can be verified in
talking with people from little switch and and big switch,
unless that can be clarified, the story is confusing.
But the fact that there was such a death march, the fact
that they were forced on these marches at rapid speeds, under
severe guards who wouldn't put up with any lagging and so
forth, is well established.
How many died I don't think anyone will ever know. It is
impossible to get at the number. But the men did receive
severe, harsh treatment, and they certainly had a lot of
casualties. Some of them probably natural. With some of them
their physical condition wore out on them and they finally
died, others were killed, shot, some perhaps trying to escape,
but it was a very severe march.
Mr. O'Donnell. Colonel, taking the Seoul march, from whence
did the American PW's originate that participated in that
march, from one point or several points?
Col. Hanley. There in a big prison in Seoul, where they had
assembled a large number of American prisoners. They marched
them north to Pyongyang. They collected them, of course, from
the Pusan area up until the time of the breakdown.
Mr. O'Donnell. According to the army records, based on the
affidavits, there were 396 American PW's who started out on the
march. I believe that is the accurate figure. And they ended up
at Pyongyang with 316. So they lost eighty men enroute. Do you
have any comments on those figures, and the causes of death
developed by investigation by members of your staff?
Col. Hanley. Well, I wouldn't at this point, without going
back and checking those files, want to go into the details of
that. I know my memory is that in some cases they were killed,
shot. In other cases they probably died from exposure and
wounds and so forth.
Mr. O'Donnell. Briefly, our problem is this: As I mentioned
before, Colonel, and we took you by surprise, I know, on the
Taejon massacre, the request I would like to make is that you
do do a little research, if you can, tomorrow, on case twenty-
eight, which is the massacre case, to give us a general picture
based on the investigative file in the possession of the army.
I know it is hearsay, but is information that has been----
Col. Hanley. Well, it is information I was responsible for
gathering, initial records.
Mr. O'Donnell. You were in charge at that time. I would
like to touch briefly on the approximate number, and I know it
cannot be put down to a definite figure, the number of
civilians killed. There is an indication it was one to five
thousand South Koreans killed at the same time. We would also
like to request that you go into cases seventy-five, seventy-
six and sixty-three, and as to figures on causes of death and
so forth. Because although we have some survivors, we can not
bring in the complete picture as I indicated to you this
morning and have it correlated in essay form. If you can
portray those pictures for us, we would very much appreciate
it, because it would be the background and it would alert the
American public as to what was coming, and then these other
fellows that went through these atrocities can actually get up
and tell their stories from a life standpoint. Can you do that
for us?
Col. Hanley. Yes, sir; very good.
Mr. O'Donnell. The other point would be, and it is a most
important one, if you could have--I am sure you can get a lift
on it--brought in, and it is going a little outside of our
actual survivor testimony, the other areas in which these
atrocities were occurring, around September 25, 26, 27 and 28,
which would indicate a definite overall plan. As you said,
there was no alternative of leaving them. It is in point with
what we are doing, although we will have no life survivors
because it involves South Korean civilians. But we would like
to develop from the dates in those cases to indicate fairly
conclusively that there was a definite pattern established by
the Chinese and North Korean command, probably North Korean, to
liquidate rather than to evacuate or leave. Could you go into
that for us?
Col. Hanley. I certainly will. I kept, when I was chief of
the War Crimes Section of the Eighth Army, a monthly--well, I
had these figures compiled by months. There was a big peak in
September. Now, whether that information is assembled over here
and whether the War Crimes Section at the Pentagon has that, I
don't know. But I certainly will attempt to find out and if it
hasn't, to try to reassemble some of that information.
It is very obvious that the big peak in numbers of victims
was in September of 1950.
Mr. O'Donnell. Of course we are primarily concerned with a
pattern. As I indicated this morning, we intend to use
Lieutenant Colonel Todd to give the overall picture from the
organization, plus statistical data to the present day. We
would be interested in statistics, but not in each and every
case. We are interested in the pattern as a planned operation
at that time.
Senator Potter. When you were with the War Crimes
Commission, did you make reports to General MacArthur? He was
commanding general at that time?
Col. Hanley. Yes, sir. He was Far East commander.
Senator Potter. Did you make your reports to General
MacArthur?
Col. Hanley. We did a report to the Far East command which
went to the judge advocate's office of the Far East command,
which in turn was utilized by General MacArthur's staff, to
send the same figures that went into the United Nations report.
It was a monthly report made by General MacArthur to the United
Nations. Those figures contain all the statistics on the number
of victims as of that time.
Senator Potter. What we thought we would do, Colonel, would
be to have you give that picture and then to have, as Mr.
O'Donnell said, some of the men who experienced certain
atrocities, or with eye witness accounts of such atrocities,
either on the march or at those places, amplify from the
specific atrocities that were committed. I think your
background coming first and then with their experiences, would
give a better picture for somebody who is not familiar with the
program.
So I hope we can plan on that. Our public hearings will
begin Wednesday morning. I don't know just when we will have
you, but I assume you will probably on Wednesday.
Thank you very much, Colonel.
Private Martin?
TESTIMONY OF PFC JOHN E. MARTIN, 359 ENGINEER AVIATION SUPPLY
POINT COMPANY, BORDEAUX, FRANCE
Senator Potter. Will you help yourself to a chair.
Will you identify yourself for the record, giving your full
name and your present unit?
Pfc Martin. Pfc John E. Martin, 359 Engineer Aviation
Supply Point Company.
Senator Potter. Where is that located?
Pfc Martin. Bordeaux, France.
Senator Potter. You are back in France?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. You do not feel too unkindly toward us for
bringing you away from France?
Pfc Martin. No, it didn't hurt.
Senator Potter. What is your home address?
Pfc Martin. 590 East Lewiston, Ferndale, Michigan.
Senator Potter. I want to compliment you on coming from my
state.
Would you tell the committee when you went to Korea and
with what unit?
Pfc Martin. I landed at Pusan the 20th of July with the
29th Regimental Combat Team.
Senator Potter. And when were you captured? Will you tell
the committee some of the particulars on how you were captured?
Pfc Martin. I was captured the 31st of July at Chinju.
Senator Potter. Can you point that out on the map?
Pfc Martin. I don't know whether I can or not.
Senator Potter. Is that near the perimeter?
Pfc Martin. I walked all over this place but I never looked
at a map of it. Here it is, right here [indicating].
Senator Potter. What were the circumstances of your
capture?
Pfc Martin. Well, we were retreating pretty rapidly, losing
a lot of ground for ten days that I was there, and we had a
battle, on the 27th at Haedong, and ever since then the outfit
had been more or less split up. We weren't operating too
closely under battalion headquarters. We were, but we were
spread over such a thin line of communications----
Senator Potter. You were pretty much on your own?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir; just about.
Senator Potter. What was your duty with the company?
Pfc Martin. A rifleman, sir.
Senator Potter. Were you operating pretty much as a company
unit or platoon unit?
Pfc Martin. We were actually down to squad level. Our
platoon had four hills to hold in an engagement. The order came
down to retreat but there didn't seem to be any well led plan
for the retreat and during it our squad was separated from the
rest of the platoon. So we reported to battalion headquarters.
We got in there about six o'clock in the evening. That was in
Chinju. They were evacuating all the wounded, burning the
records, getting ready to move out. They told us to go upstairs
and sleep with the I&R platoon in their billet and if they came
up and called these people not to bother falling out because
they would be going on patrol, but when they came to get us, we
had to be ready to move. They came up about two o'clock in the
morning and told us to get ready, and we got on a truck. I
thought we were going south but we didn't. They put us on a
hill and told us not to fire at any troops on the roads because
it was our battalion retreating. We sat there all night long
and the sun came out in the morning and the gooks were walking
down the road. Somebody forgot to put a checkpoint there.
Senator Potter. Your unit had gone by?
Pfc Martin. The battalion had gone by and the North Korean
army had been going by all night long. And they didn't know we
were up there and we didn't know they were there. We clobbered
them for a little while. But my squad was the only regular
infantry there.
The rest of them were truck drivers they just grabbed
because they needed them in a hurry and people like that. We
didn't have any machine guns or bazookas or anything. We had a
fire fight until about 12:30 that afternoon, and this one
sergeant called attention to the fact that there was help
coming, there were some tanks coming from Chinju. But they were
North Korean tanks. They kind of leveled the hill out. So about
four o'clock that afternoon there wasn't very many of us left,
and they kept yelling up for surrender, surrender.
This one little guy in a raincoat, a lieutenant, he would
stick his head out and yell ``Hey, GI,'' and a couple of
strange words, I don't know whether you want them, ``come down
and surrender,'' and then stick his head back in.
Senator Potter. That was a North Korean?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. Nobody else was firing, and I was
beginning to get a little worried. He yelled at me a couple of
times, and shot around my hole a little too close. So I yelled
at the guy to throw me a grenade, a buddy of mine.
This hill was a Korean graveyard and they had little mounds
all over. He was on the other side of this mound. He was going
to throw me one. The grenade landed on the side of my hole, and
I picked it up and looked at it. It didn't have a pin or a
handle on it. I threw it away but the concussion got me a
minute. The next thing I knew a guy was standing there and this
lieutenant was yelling surrender. So I didn't have a chance.
Senator Potter. How many were captured at that time?
Pfc Martin. Three of us. There were more men on the hill,
and when they got the three of us at the bottom they said to
tell the others to come out. We said there wasn't any others,
and he said, ``Yes, there is plenty up there.'' We said there
wasn't any. He yelled up there again, and said, ``Look, these
guys are here, and we are not shooting them. Come on out.''
A couple of wounded guys came out and they shot them.
Senator Potter. Shot them as they were trying to give
themselves up?
Pfc Martin. As they were trying to give themselves up.
Senator Potter. Then what happened?
Pfc Martin. They took us into this aid station of theirs
and there was two more Americans in there. We stayed in there
for about an hour and they threatened us and waved guns at us
and all of that stuff and finally told us to come outside, and
they made us line up. So we lined up and I guess everybody
thought they were going to do it right then but they didn't.
They marched us into Chinju.
Senator Potter. How far were you from Chinju?
Pfc Martin. Three miles, sir. We met seven more Americans
there.
Senator Potter. During this time did they beat you at all?
Pfc Martin. Just slapped us around a little bit, sir. They
were pretty teed off at us at the time. They just took us into
Chinju and a man met us and said he was from the International
Red Cross. He was a Korean, he had a little red arm band on,
and he told us we would be given all the consideration under
the Geneva Conference and all of this stuff, and let us make a
litter for one man that was pretty badly shot up. In fact, two
of the guards even helped us carry the litter for a couple of
blocks there.
They took us in front of this big house in Chinju, and he
told us that we would be given food and billets there. We ended
up where we slept out in the yard in front of this place. We
had about four little rice crackers apiece for our food. We
never did see him again. I don't know what happened to him.
Senator Potter. Do you know whether he was a representative
of the Red Cross?
Pfc Martin. He didn't show any identification. I don't
believe he was, personally. I didn't have any way of knowing.
Senator Potter. He just wore a little red cross arm band?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. I think he was just for propaganda
purposes. We left the next morning for the march to Taejon.
Senator Potter. How many of you were in that group all
together?
Pfc Martin. At that time there were twelve of us, sir. I
don't know exactly how long it took us to get to Taejon, to
tell you the truth.
Senator Potter. It is quite a way, isn't it?
Pfc Martin. It is a pretty good way, sir.
Senator Potter. About how far would you say it would be in
miles?
Pfc Martin. As the crow flies it may not be very far, but
it is a pretty good distance walking up and down hills and
around curves and so on, and we went cross country a good part
of the way anyway.
Senator Potter. You do not recall how long it took you?
Pfc Martin. No, sir, I believe it took us about five days.
Senator Potter. About five days?
Pfc Martin. We didn't travel too fast the first five days.
Senator Potter. Did you travel day and night?
Pfc Martin. Just at night, sir.
Senator Potter. Then what would they do with you during the
day? Put you in houses or what?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir, in a house. And once they hid us in a
big drainage ditch.
Senator Potter. A drainage ditch?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. During that march how many guards did you
have for the twelve of you?
Pfc Martin. I think we had about eight, sir.
Senator Potter. About eight guards for twelve men?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Were any of you wounded?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. There were, I believe, seven out of
twelve wounded.
Senator Potter. Did they receive any medical attention?
Pfc Martin. No. They let us clean them up as best we could,
and a couple of us had our first aid packs left, and they let
us put those on the men. But actually as far as any drug or any
real medical treatment there wasn't any at all.
Senator Potter. What happened during the march? Did the
guards beat you at all?
Pfc Martin. The guards, sir, the first ones we had until we
got to Taejon, didn't treat us too badly.
Senator Potter. Were these military guards or civilian
guards?
Pfc Martin. They were soldiers. They were part of the
organization, the regiment, that we had been fighting, and I
imagine they were quite happy to get away from the fighting.
They were living off the fat of the land and any time they
wanted something off South Korea, they took it. If they wanted
something, we would stop at a house and they would have the
people kill a pig or something like that and didn't treat us
too badly.
Senator Potter. Did you share in their loot?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And then after you got to Taejon what
happened?
Pfc Martin. We stayed there--when we first got there, there
was quite a large group of prisoners there. Major McDaniel was
there, and I believe, I am not sure, but I believe there were
about sixty men there.
Mr. O'Donnell. I don't believe the major is living any
more. We will have to eliminate that name in public.
Senator Potter. This was a regular prison or prison camp?
Pfc Martin. I believe it was the upstairs of the old police
station. I may be wrong, but I think it was the same building
that the sergeant stayed in.
Senator Potter. How long were you there?
Pfc Martin. We were there about five days, sir. While I was
there that is the first time I ever really ran into the type of
brutality or anything. On the way up there to Taejon, the
reason it taken us so long was we had to travel across country
to get away from their troops coming down at night, because
they would just make a punch bag out of you all the way up the
roads as you passed.
Senator Potter. So they took you across country?
Pfc Martin. To keep us away from that. But when we got to
Taejon is when they first claimed they were going to give
medical aid, they took one man over and cut his leg off. I
wasn't there when the actual operation took place, but the
medico was there that is alive today, and he said they did not
give the man any anesthetic at all. And people were beginning
to die then of dysentery. Those people had been there three
weeks or so before we got there.
Senator Potter. When you arrived, they had some PW's that
had been there for three or four weeks?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. You stated that there was a good deal of
brutality at this prison. What form did that take?
Pfc Martin. Well, usually, sir, it was stealing. I had a
pair of pretty good boots. When I got to Taejon they told me I
better cut them up or do something, because if I didn't the
Koreans would take them. They had already taken my cigarettes,
watch and everything when they got me. I didn't have a chance
to cut them up. I went downstairs to the latrine and there was
a little guard down there and he saw my boots and started
sticking at me with a bayonet and told me he wanted the boots
or told the interpreter and the interpreter told me. I didn't
want to give him the boots and he jabbered some more and hit me
on the leg with the rifle.
The interpreter said I better give them to him. Finally he
told the interpreter if I didn't give him the boots, he would
stick me with the bayonet. I asked the interpreter if he really
would do it, and he said personally he thought he would. So I
gave him the boots. I wear a size ten boot, and that man wore a
size five, probably, in ours. He gave me his for mine.
Senator Potter. Did you get them on at all?
Pfc Martin. I had to cut the toes out of them. I still have
the scars on my feet today where my feet stuck out about that
far from the end of the boot. But I had no choice. I had to
wear something for my feet. Walking on those rocks would tear
your foot to pieces.
Senator Potter. While you were there, were you
interrogated?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What questions did they ask you?
Pfc Martin. At that time they weren't really interested in
military information. At least they didn't bother me too much.
Maybe it was because I was only a private. They wanted my name,
rank, serial number and organization, and I told them I was
with the 999 Smoke Company, or something, I don't know what it
was. It was some outfit that wasn't even there. We had already
been told when we got into Taejon that they know every outfit
in Korea, and just to give them some phony name, something that
couldn't help them. But at the same time if you didn't give
them something, they would beat you until they got some answer.
Senator Potter. Did they ask you about your home life, what
your father did?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir; they wanted to know whether my father
was a worker or capitalist. I told him he was an electrician
and that seemed to make them happy. I don't know, they said
they were looking for reactionaries. They wanted us to be
Communists and sing all these Communist songs. But one thing,
they couldn't make us do that because they were all in Korean
and we couldn't speak it.
Senator Potter. You couldn't do it anyway?
Pfc Martin. No, sir; not if we wanted to.
Senator Potter. Did they have any publications, magazines
or books that they required you to read?
Pfc Martin. They forced some pamphlets on us, but that is
all. We didn't get any books at all there. We did get a
lecture. This guy came around. I believe the people that were
there before had said he had been there before, and in fact he
told us he would be around again this week. He came up there
and yelled and ranted and raved for about an hour, how we were
all Wall Street imperialists, and slaves of the capitalists,
and finally this lieutenant stood up and asked him if we were
slaves how come we had cars and refrigerators and they were
still running around with lice in their hair.
Senator Potter. What did he say?
Pfc Martin. The guard slapped the lieutenant down pretty
hard.
Senator Potter. Was this lecturer a Korean?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did he speak good English?
Pfc Martin. Very good, sir. He was in civilian clothes but
he acted like he was a military man. I don't know, just the
appearance, you know, of a professional soldier more than
anything else.
Senator Potter. I assume this prison was under the
jurisdiction of civilians, is that true?
Pfc Martin. No, sir; this wasn't.
Senator Potter. This was under military control?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir; under military jurisdiction.
Senator Potter. And you were there approximately five days?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What transpired? How did you happen to
move? How did that happen?
Pfc Martin. Well, they always talked----
Senator Potter. Before we go into that, while you were in
prison were any of our men killed?
Pfc Martin. While I was there?
Senator Potter. Yes.
Pfc Martin. No. We had some died.
Senator Potter. But none were shot?
Pfc Martin. None were shot, no, sir.
Senator Potter. And they died of dysentery?
Pfc Martin. Dysentery, and when I got back, I found out a
good deal died from hepatitis, yellow jaundice. We all had it
pretty bad when we got back.
Senator Potter. Was medical treatment available? You
mentioned this amputation.
Pfc Martin. Well, a doctor came in, at least he came in and
claimed he was a doctor, and went around and asked people what
was wrong with them. You could tell him what was wrong and he
would just nod his head. He spoke fairly good English, but he
never did anything, he never gave out any medicine, never gave
anybody any advice or anything, but would just turn around and
leave. He came back a few days later. The Koreans seemed to
delight in telling us that they were sticking to the Geneva
Conferences, that doctors were coming around. We asked them
about food and they said they only have to feed us twice a day
under the Geneva Convention because we were not working. They
were feeding us twice a day, a rice ball.
Senator Potter. How big is a rice ball?
Pfc Martin. About as big as your fist.
Senator Potter. What is it, just a ball of rice?
Pfc Martin. It is a ball of rice steamed and then just
packed together. It is rice and millet, usually. I don't know,
I think they use some barley in them.
Senator Potter. Are you fond of rice today?
Pfc Martin. No, sir. I don't like it.
Senator Potter. What happened then? Go on into how you
happened to leave the prison.
Pfc Martin. I don't know. I imagine the eventual plan, from
what they told us, was to move us to Seoul which was supposed
to be a large temporary camp, and from Seoul north to Pyongyang
and a few camps up there. They kept telling us that there had
been large groups of Americans ahead of us, that had already
gone up there. And they kept talking--is it all right to
mention life survivors?
Senator Potter. Yes.
Pfc Martin. They kept talking that General Dean had been at
Seoul, and General Dean was with this large group.
Senator Potter. They told you that General Dean had been
through there?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. When did you leave the prison, in the
daytime or at night?
Pfc Martin. I don't even remember now, sir.
Senator Potter. Was it a large group?
Pfc Martin. About eighty of us.
Senator Potter. And was this a march?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir; definitely.
Senator Potter. Under military auspices or civilian?
Pfc Martin. Military, sir. We were given instructions
before the march, and told that we would march under regular
North Korean conditions, regular marching conditions. Most of
us thought it would be our own, a certain cadence, say 120 or
130, whatever it is, and maybe a break and then start out
again. It didn't work out that way at all.
Senator Potter. How did it work out?
Pfc Martin. We just started walking and finally when just
about everybody was falling down, we quit.
Senator Potter. You would quit then for a break?
Pfc Martin. No, sir; there wasn't any breaks.
Senator Potter. You wouldn't quit then for a break?
Pfc Martin. No, sir; there wasn't any breaks.
Senator Potter. No breaks. Did they march you at a fast
rate of speed?
Pfc Martin. Well, we wore out two sets of guards before we
got to Seoul.
Senator Potter. They changed guards on you?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What happened to the ones that couldn't
keep up?
Pfc Martin. They were shot.
Senator Potter. They were shot?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did you witness any of them being shot?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Who was in charge or command of the guards
there, do you know?
Pfc Martin. I wouldn't know his name, sir.
Senator Potter. Was it an officer?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir; a captain, I believe.
Senator Potter. Were you given food twice a day on the
march?
Pfc Martin. No, sir; once a day.
Senator Potter. And what did that consist of?
Pfc Martin. The same thing, rice. We would stop in a
village at night to eat, and go around and rummage up some
rice, and eat that and start out the next morning.
Senator Potter. Was it a march all the way up to Seoul?
Pfc Martin. I couldn't tell you. I believe it was about ten
miles in trucks. But they didn't care to go any further in
trucks and we didn't either because it was in the daytime and
our air force naturally had no way of knowing whether we were
enemies or not, and they gave us a pretty bad time there for a
little while.
Senator Potter. Was your march along the road?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And it was mostly at night?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And they would put you up in houses during
the day or hide you?
Pfc Martin. We would hide in some of these houses
somewhere, but twenty or thirty in one little house and twenty
or thirty in another one.
Senator Potter. Did the guards beat you during the march?
Pfc Martin. If you could keep up, sir, they didn't bother
you too much, but the ones that began to straggle, and fall
out--they were all suffering pretty badly from dysentery at the
time. If a man had to fall out and wasn't quick enough catching
up, they would slap him around a little bit.
Senator Potter. Would they slap them with their fists or
rifle?
Pfc Martin. Depending on how angry they were, sir. Usually
they just took the rifle butt and kind of poked you around.
Senator Potter. How many started out on this march?
Pfc Martin. I believe about eighty, sir.
Senator Potter. And how many finished?
Pfc Martin. I think we lost twelve men.
Senator Potter. And were those twelve men shot or did some
of them die?
Pfc Martin. I think only one man died, sir.
Senator Potter. And the rest were shot because they were
stragglers?
Pfc Martin. As far as I know, yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did they assign certain Americans as
leaders of the group at all?
Pfc Martin. No, not exactly. Naturally, the highest ranking
man there was more or less recognized as our leader. They
didn't break us up into groups exactly, but the highest ranking
officer would be at the head of the column and according to
them were supposed to set the pace, which they tried to do
quite a few times. They tried to slow down the pace and most of
them took a pretty bad beating over it.
Senator Potter. What was your highest ranking man in your
group?
Pfc Martin. A major.
Senator Potter. How long did it take you to get to Seoul?
Pfc Martin. The last couple of days, sir, are kind of hazy.
I don't even remember the night we pulled in there.
Senator Potter. After you got to Seoul, then what did they
do?
Pfc Martin. Well, there were already quite a few PW's
there. I don't have any idea as to the number, except that it
was over a hundred, easily. They put us in these two rooms,
about thirty or forty men to a room, and the next morning the
interpreter came through, this Mr. Kim, that is the only name I
ever knew him by, and told us what to expect.
Senator Potter. What did he tell you?
Pfc Martin. He was so full of hatred and so bitter he
actually couldn't get anything out except dogs and so on and so
forth, and they were going to straighten us up, and they hated
all America and so on. I don't know. He was just full of
baloney. Actually, I think he wanted to take us all out and
shoot us then.
Senator Potter. Was he an officer?
Pfc Martin. He was a South Korean.
Senator Potter. Was he in civilian clothes?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. How long were you in prison school or
compound?
Pfc Martin. I would say a month, sir.
Senator Potter. A month?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And how was your treatment there?
Pfc Martin. Well, we weren't fed very well. We did not have
any work to do or any marches but they wanted to indoctrinate
us, was the whole thing, classes, books, even had a movie and a
big meeting in a gymnasium one time.
Senator Potter. And what took place there?
Pfc Martin. Well, they had a big thing they wanted all of
us to--I believe they wanted our cooperation, kind of a
propaganda deal. They were taking movies to show the North
Korean people. They took us outside and lined us up, there were
about three hundred of us then, and they wanted us to carry
those banners. I don't know what they said, they were in
Korean. They were going to march us down around this tour,
about a mile and a half away, and back again. We didn't have
much choice but to march. They marched us down there and
around, and the guys kept dropping the banners and stuff like
that, and it got them kind of mad. They brought us back and
took us into the gymnasium there. Some guy got up and made a
speech. To tell you the truth, I don't know much of what he
said. I didn't pay much attention to it.
Senator Potter. That was a North Korean officer or
civilian?
Pfc Martin. Officer, sir. He was on the theme that they
were right and we were wrong, and we were invaders, and they
were defending North Korea after South Korea tried to invade
it, and they were going to prove this to us, and they wanted us
to go along with them and denounce the United States, and they
wanted us to make records for this whole thing for this woman
propagandist that was on the radio, and then they asked us all
to write and give them an essay on why we should not be in
Korea, and why we were in the wrong, and why the peoples
republic was so right. They said that the best one, whoever
wrote the best one, got to get on the radio and give a
propaganda statement.
Senator Potter. Did everyone have to write one?
Pfc Martin. They asked us all to write them. We were all
supposed to. I don't know. Everybody would write a couple of
lines and throw the thing in. Nobody ever wrote much. In fact,
I think most of the old-timers just wrote ``Go to hell'' on
them. They had a movie there, though, that was in Russian,
sound and all, and the Russians, you know, before our--whatever
you call it, who it is produced by and so on and so forth, at
the beginning. All of that was in Russian writing. I can't
speak it or read it, but I know Russian when I see it, and it
was about the meeting at the Elbe River of the American and
Russian troops. They made us out as-well, we had ridiculous
uniforms, the overseas cap having a point about that long on it
[indicating], and the troops were in Class A in the fighting.
The Russians stood on the south shore, all big, brave, smiling
men, and a bunch of little fat guys jumped to the water and
swam across, That was supposed to be us. They shook hands with
the Russians.
Then as the picture went on, from what I could see, it
showed that the Russians were actually--well, we were finally
realizing that the Russians were up to no good at all. They
were trying to put that idea over to the people. It showed us
black marketing. It showed them beating up colored officers and
throwing them out of the Officers Club, and I think they
lynched one later on.
Then there was an American major and Russian colonel that
were fairly good friends. The American major seemed to disagree
with his superior and his superior, naturally, was a big, gross
man who was stealing everything, taking beautiful paintings off
the walls and sending them home, and all of this thing. So this
major was sent up, supposedly, done away with, and this Russian
colonel was very sad, and that was the end of the movie. It
smelled pretty bad.
Senator Potter. They did not compare with a Mickey Mouse?
Pfc Martin. No, sir.
Senator Potter. Did they have material that they required
you to read?
Pfc Martin. Yes.
Senator Potter. Do you recall any of the pamphlets or
articles that you were required to read?
Pfc Martin. The one, probably the most famous, is by Karl
Marx. I don't know the proper title. It is something about the
capitalist system. It is his idea of the economics.
Mr. O'Donnell. Das Kapital?
Pfc Martin. That is it.
Senator Potter. Did you see the Daily Worker over there?
Pfc Martin. Not to my knowledge, sir. There were a lot of
books that they passed around, and most were about Russian
heroes in the Second World War. Right in the front was the
acknowledgment of some Soviet printing company translated into
English. They were all about Russian heroes.
There was a few about this other--they kind of sent it
around, the same thing--when the Russian met the American, how
he was so sad to see what a heel he was, and everything. And
one about Christmas, when the Americans had more than the
Russian people. They admitted that. But the colored people had
to go into one room and were treated pretty shabbily, and there
was not any love there, and they all got drunk. So this Russian
went back to his little party, where everybody had a good time
and everybody was hunky-dory.
Senator Potter. In this prison camp with you, did we have
any colored American troops there?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did they make any effort to instill hatred
in the colored troops?
Pfc Martin. I think they made a large effort and it didn't
do them any good.
We had at the time three, I believe, and one had been there
for so long that he had just about homesteaded. He was one of
the first in there. But they didn't impress that man at all.
He was, I would say, in his early forties. He was mature.
They always made him in the front of everything. If they wanted
somebody to carry a banner or something, they always made that
poor man do it because they wanted the idea--they were always
trying to take pictures of these things and they wanted the
idea that the colored race was being suppressed and were
fighting back.
Senator Potter. Did they try to get confessions from you on
certain things?
Pfc Martin. No, sir. They had not started that germ warfare
business yet. They were still winning the war. They made us
listen to this woman's broadcast every night, though.
Mr. Jones. Was that Sioux City Sue?
Pfc Martin. We used to call her Rice Ball Maggie.
Senator Potter. How long were you in the camp?
Pfc Martin. Thirty days, sir, about.
Senator Potter. Then you were moved from there?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. We were moved from there the 20th of
September.
Senator Potter. And where did you go and how did you go?
Pfc Martin. Well, a day or so before that, the navy was
blowing Inchon apart, and the air force was kind of tearing up
Seoul. We figured that the invasion was starting, and then we
were quite sure of it.
The South Koreans, the prisoners in the compound next to
us, told us that our troops had landed and broken out of the
perimeter. We managed to hear a couple of these Tokyo radio
broadcasts. So we were expecting to be liberated.
They put more guards on us and decided to move us out the
night of September 20, about 10:30 or eleven o'clock at night.
We came down and the whole sky was lit up. They got us and
started to move us out. We went one way and turned around and
came back, and then we went another way. We were all thinking
about trying to break them because there were about 390, I
believe, of us then. But it seemed that we were surrounded.
Every time we would walk a few miles in one direction, we would
have to turn back and walk again.
Senator Potter. They were American troops?
Pfc Martin. We still don't know. I don't know whether that
was the case or not. I imagine it was. We finally went through
part of the town that was burning. They told us when we started
that we only had to walk one kilometer. They said for all too
sick or too badly wounded to fall out over in one spot, if they
couldn't walk. Some twenty or thirty fell out.
We started walking and crossed the North Korean Parallel in
one day. I think the city was Kaeson, or something like that.
We were there just a few hours, a very few hours, maybe twelve
hours, when these other men that were supposed to have been too
sick to walk one kilometer came in. They had forced them all
the way up there.
Senator Potter. I assume there was quite a hike in one day
for that distance, was it not?
Pfc Martin. It is a pretty big distance.
Senator Potter. Will you point it out on the map?
Pfc Martin. It is from Seoul to the parallel line. I don't
know exactly how far it is, but it is a pretty good distance.
We lost quite a few men on it.
Senator Potter. You lost quite a few men?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. How did you lose the men? Did they fall
out?
Pfc Martin. A few, I believe, tried to escape. I don't know
how many made it, after we got going, and I think the majority
that fell out were shot.
Senator Potter. They were shot as they fell out?
Pfc Martin. Well, they didn't make much effort to get them
to come on once they did fall out. I don't know the exact
number. I was toward the head of the column and I was so
doggoned tired I wasn't paying much attention anyway. I was
just trying to keep moving.
Senator Potter. Who was in charge of that march?
Pfc Martin. He was, I believe, a captain, again, that had
been in charge all the time we had been at Seoul. I am not
positive. But he showed up later on when we hit this next town,
so it must have been him.
Senator Potter. When these men were shot, the ones that
could not keep up, were they shot by the guards or by the man
in charge, or both?
Pfc Martin. Well, sir, the only shooting I ever saw was
done by the guards, there.
Senator Potter. After you got to the 38th Parallel, and the
ones that were left behind because they were too weak to make
the march finally, what happened then?
Pfc Martin. Well, this part, I have lost three or four days
at a time in there. I know we moved from that city into another
one. It did not look like--well, it was supposed to have been
an old school building, but it was actually built like an old
factory.
We stayed there for three or four days, I guess. It was
such a good target for planes that the guards wouldn't even
live in there. They went out and dug holes around outside by
the road. We were bombed there once. They wouldn't let us out
of there, either. A B-29 came over and dropped seven bombs,
thinking, I suppose, that it was a factory, and they wouldn't
let us out of the place.
Senator Potter. They kept you in the building?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did they lose any men as a result of the
bombing?
Pfc Martin. No, sir, we were lucky. We found out where
their storehouse was for their food, the North Korean kitchen.
Some of the guys started going down there at night. They were
coming back with sweet potatoes and all kinds of stuff,
stealing it, and they found out about it and took them out and
beat them up pretty badly. But they wouldn't feed us, and we
had to do something.
Senator Potter. From the time you left Seoul, did you get
food every day or not?
Pfc Martin. The day after we left Seoul, if I remember
correctly, all we got was a bunch of crackers and some water. I
think we got some rice again the next stop, but I am not
positive.
Senator Potter. Just carry on. You say you miss a day or
so. Do not worry about that. After that point, where did you
go, and what happened?
Pfc Martin. From then on, sir, it was just a series of
march, march, march, all night, and fall into a town, and then
get up that night and march, march, march, again, just the same
thing over and over.
Senator Potter. Did the same thing continue with the men
who could not keep up? Were they shot?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. That is when we started to lose men a
lot. We went from a group of 396, and at the time we hit
Pyongyang, I don't think there was 280.
Senator Potter. Where is that on the map?
Pfc Martin. That is the North Korean capital, right on the
coast.
Senator Potter. You almost walked the whole length of
Korea, did you not?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. You do not have any idea how long it took
you?
Pfc Martin. About fifteen days, I would say.
Senator Potter. Did you still have the same commander in
charge of the march?
Pfc Martin. No, I believe that we changed officers about
halfway through that, sir.
Senator Potter. And the treatment was still the same?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir, it never changed. In fact, it got
worse.
Senator Potter. As you kept going north it got worse?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. We would begin to pass bunches of
bodies, three or four in a group. South Koreans had started
ahead of us, and we all thought at the time that that is
probably what it was, that they had shot their stragglers right
along.
Senator Potter. When they would shoot them, would they
shoot them on the road where they were walking?
Pfc Martin. Most of the time they would move them off a bit
and then shoot them.
Senator Potter. Did they make any effort to bury them?
Pfc Martin. No, sir, not then.
Senator Potter. They just left them there and kept walking?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. They had another little trick they
used to pull. You would come into a town and have quite a few
men that were very badly off, that wouldn't last much longer.
They would say they would leave them in the town where they
would be well taken care of. We no more than left there when
they did away with them.
Senator Potter. The people in the town would bury them?
Pfc Martin. Yes. We buried as many as we could, and the man
in charge had to always take the name, rank, and serial number
on a piece of paper and try to put it in a bottle or something,
and put it in the grave. But they wouldn't let us mark the
grave.
Senator Potter. They would not let you mark the grave?
Pfc Martin. No, sir.
Senator Potter. Then what happened after you got to
Pyongyang?
Pfc Martin. We got in there at night and they put us up in
a school building again. That is about the only building, I
guess, that could hold all of us. They didn't feed us rice
then. They brought in this bread, about six inches long, I
would say, and about two inches high and wide. We got one of
those a day. It was awful hard stuff. It was so hard you
couldn't eat it, actually.
Senator Potter. Was it dark bread?
Pfc Martin. No, it didn't seem to be. It was pretty light
in texture.
Senator Potter. But it was hard?
Pfc Martin. Hard as a rock. I don't know whether it was
baked that way or that stale, or what. You couldn't just bite
it. You had to break off a chunk and chew it.
Senator Potter. Were you given any medical attention there
at all?
Pfc Martin. Not too much, sir. We had people dying of
dysentery right and left, four and five a day then, easily.
They just told us to put them all in one corner of the room.
They made us move them all into one corner of the room, and
they were lying there with flies and everything.
Senator Potter. They left them right there in the room
after they died?
Pfc Martin. If somebody died, we had to wait for them to
get around to it before they would let us take them out and
bury them.
Senator Potter. How long were you there?
Pfc Martin. I don't know. I would say three days at the
most.
Senator Potter. And then where did you go?
Pfc Martin. Then is when we started to move out to
supposedly another camp up north. They told us all kinds of
stuff, that it was a great big camp where the PW's worked and
they had a big school there, and all, a bunch of stuff. They
took us down to this train and put us on a train at Pyongyang.
We stayed on the train for about ten days.
Senator Potter. On the train for about ten days?
Pfc Martin. Not right on it. They put us in coal gondolas,
those open things. We would ride a few miles and get off the
train and go out in to the field. We would sit out there maybe
all day long. Night would come, and they would put us back in
the gondolas and we would ride a few more miles. They never
seemed to make much headway at all. We finally pulled into the
tunnel.
Senator Potter. How did that happen?
Pfc Martin. We went into the tunnel there, and they were
afraid to move any further up because of the planes. The planes
were coming over awful low at the time. We found out later they
were looking for us. They found out we had been on the train.
They put us there one day and we didn't get hardly anything to
eat that day, even less than usual. We had three men die that
day, the first day in there. I think they took a burial detail
out and buried them. The next morning we still didn't get fed.
We found four more dead men, and they made us pile them up by
the side of the railroad tracks outside the tunnel.
Before the burial detail got ready to go out--that was
about four o'clock in the afternoon--there was three more and
we had to put them in there. Then that evening they say--well,
not evening but late that afternoon--that they are going to
feed us. That is when they took the men out in groups.
Senator Potter. Do not go into too much detail on that
phase of it.
But they told you they were going to take you out and give
you some chow, is that right?
Pfc Martin. They took the highest ranking man we had and
the man who had been acting more or less as our mess sergeant
whenever we had a chance to cook any of our food. They came
around and asked us for all the money we had, in case we had
any, and give it to this one man because the North Korean said
if we wanted anything, any vegetables, we had to buy them. They
said they were not in South Korea and could not pick whatever
they wanted but they had to buy it.
I don't know where the guys got the money, but some of them
had some, and they took all the money.
I believe there were two sergeants, one officer, and
another man who went out with the Koreans supposedly to get
food. They left at two o'clock in the afternoon, maybe, and we
never saw them again. But they came in there about 4:15 or 4:30
and said they were going to feed us, but it is a chesei house,
a small house, and they couldn't take us in and feed us all at
one time, that they had to take a few in at a time, a small
group.
We were hearing small arms fire before, not too heavy
bursts but scattered fire. All of us thought the UN troops were
getting pretty close. So they took the first group out and
actually, I think, everybody was more or less just about on
their last legs, in a daze, because when we did hear that fire
it didn't register. Personally, I never thought a thing about
it.
They came back fifteen or twenty minutes later and said it
is time for the next group to go.
We all grabbed up our little bowls and got ready to go out
there. We walked down the railroad tracks and they kept saying,
``Hurry, hurry, hurry.''
Senator Potter. How many were in the group?
Pfc Martin. In the group I was in, the second group, I
think there were about forty men. They let us down the railroad
tracks three or four hundred yards, and there was a paddy, as
this hill came down, and more or less leveled off, there was a
paddy, and an irrigation ditch, one at either side and then
with the bank. There was only three guards with us at the time.
As they went up on this bank, they started yelling ``Airplanes,
airplanes, get in ditch.'' And we all got into the ditch. We no
more than got in the ditch than they just seemed to come up
from the other side of the bank, and they went forward and just
started.
Senator Potter. Do you mean with burp guns?
Pfc Martin. Both, rifles and automatic weapons.
Senator Potter. Were you hit?
Pfc Martin. No, sir, I wasn't hit at all.
Senator Potter. But you pretended to be dead?
Pfc Martin. I was the last man to come around. I was having
trouble with my feet. I just got around into the ditch more or
less when the firing started and I fell up against the
embankment.
Senator Potter. Then I assume that they assumed that you
were dead?
Pfc Martin. They never actually checked me. They came down
the line and never got down as far as I was. They were in a
hurry. They wanted to get out of there. They wanted to get it
done and get out.
They were ready to roll, I guess, because just a half hour
after they finished all of that stuff, they were on the train
and the train had gone.
Senator Potter. Did they have other groups after you?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Were they brought to the same place?
Pfc Martin. No, sir, they were not.
Senator Potter. They were taken to other places?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Were there any other of your forty that
were still alive?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. There were quite a few left alive,
pretty badly shot at, but there were a few others that were not
hit at all, and a few with flesh wounds. There were quite a few
of the guys that died during that night that were left alive
after the thing was over.
They came down and checked but were in an awful hurry. They
would dump this guy and if he groaned they would shoot him and
then go after a few more.
Senator Potter. You say they left within a short time?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. I would say within a half hour.
Senator Potter. Within a half hour. They got back in the
train, did they, or was the train still in the tunnel?
Pfc Martin. I heard the train whistle and everything.
Naturally, I never actually saw the train leave but I assume
the train left.
Senator Potter. Then what happened?
Pfc Martin. Well, another guy and I decided we better get
out of there in case they did come back or in case there were
any more running around there. We called off and hid inside of
a bunch of sugar cane stocks, after the harvest, I guess where
they pile them up like a corn shock. We were in there for about
three or four hours, and it was dark, and we heard somebody
crashing around out there and thought it was a North Korean. We
looked out and just this little ways away there was this other
guy going around bashing open these things. He was a GI. He was
looking for another American. So we dragged him into ours and
stayed there until the next morning.
Senator Potter. Had he been one that had been on the train?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir. He had been in a different group than
we had been in. He had been shot in the leg. The next morning
we looked out and didn't see any soldiers but we saw a lot of
Koreans running around there, and we didn't think it was safe
to go out yet. We waited a little longer. I don't know actually
what time of the day it was. We heard people yelling, ``GI's,
come out. GI's, come out.'' But when we looked out there, they
were Koreans. They had on uniforms, but half of the Koreans
would wear fatigues when their uniforms were gone anyway. We
stayed a little longer, and finally decided we would take a
chance, and we went out and it was the Americans and the South
Koreans.
Senator Potter. So then you were back ready to go back?
Pfc Martin. Right.
Senator Potter. Ready to come back to the States?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. We have a photograph. I do not know whether
you can identify it, but it is a photograph taken of the
massacre, the tunnel massacre. [Handing document to witness.]
This is a photograph that the War Crimes Commission put out
in their report of the remains of one of the prisoners that
they found slain in that same incident. Here is a train. See if
that is the type of train that you were on. [Document handed to
witness.]
Pfc Martin. It looks a lot like it. This isn't a whole
train, is it?
Senator Potter. Apparently not.
Pfc Martin. There was some box cars on the train.
Senator Potter. Did they have troops in the box cars, too?
Pfc Martin. No, I don't think so. They had mostly supplies,
and I believe they had some of the things that you use to mint
money for the North Korean government on there. We started to
tear some boxes open once, looking for food, and they were
great big heavy plates in there.
Senator Potter. We thank you for giving us the benefit of
an experience which I know has not been pleasant and no doubt
you would just as soon forget it if you can. But I can well
appreciate with all the moving around they had you do how it
would be very easy to have days slip your mind.
I wish to thank you for a very complete story. We will hear
you either Wednesday or Thursday, probably, in a public
hearing.
Pfc Martin. Thank you.
Mr. O'Donnell. This may have been covered, but I do not
know for sure. How much weight did you lose?
Pfc Martin. I went from 165 to 118.
Senator Potter. 165 to 118?
Pfc Martin. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Thank you very much.
Capt. Makarounis?
Captain, I am sorry that you had to be here all day. I hope
it has not been too uncomfortable.
Capt. Makarounis. In fact, I would like to come tomorrow
and hear the other gentlemen, too.
Senator Potter. You may, if you care to.
STATEMENT OF CAPT. ALEXANDER G. MAKAROUNIS
Senator Potter. Captain, I wonder if you would identify
yourself for the record?
Capt. Makarounis. Alexander George Makarounis, captain,
infantry, United States Army.
Senator Potter. You are now convalescing at Walter Reed
Hospital; is that correct?
Capt. Makarounis. I am a patient at Walter Reed Hospital,
presently on sick leave, waiting for my next operation.
Senator Potter. Where is your home, Captain?
Capt. Makarounis. My home is 548 Fletcher Street, Lowell,
Massachusetts.
Senator Potter. Captain, would you tell the committee when
you first went to Korea, and with what outfit?
Capt. Makarounis. Yes, sir. In the middle part of July of
1950, I was a member of the 29th Infantry Regiment stationed on
Okinawa. We were alerted. The tentative plan was duty in Japan.
The plans changed a few days later, after the alert, and we
were told we were leaving directly for Korea.
The regiment could muster but two battalions, breaking up
one battalion. Even so, we were under strengthened. We gathered
the remainder of our strength from troops that had arrived on
Okinawa on the 21st of July.
Shortly after midnight of the 21st, which would make it the
22nd of July, two battalions of the 29th Regiment, sailed for
destination Korea. We first went on the outskirts of Japan
where we formed part of a convoy. On the 24th of July, we
entered Pusan, North Korea. We disembarked there, secured the
remaining equipment that we were lacking in our units, and
immediately proceeded to our destination of Maoson by rail.
From Maoson, we went by truck to Chinju, where we became
attached to the 19th Infantry Regiment. I might say the
remnants of the 19th Regiment.
Senator Potter. What was your duty? Were you a platoon
leader?
Capt. Makarounis. I was commander of I Company. That
evening we got our mission at Chinju. We were to move to the
vicinity of Hadong, South Korea, to engage about two hundred or
more guerrilla forces that were disturbing the citizenry and
recruiting for the North Korean Communist Army.
We moved out by truck and then by foot. Our first major
engagement--we ran into the elements of four North Korean
divisions that were making that sweep to form the Pusan
perimeter defense as we commonly know it.
Our battalion, the 3rd Battalion of the 29th Infantry
Regiment, was practically wiped out. By that statement I mean
that we did not have sufficient troops to cope with the
situation. Rather than moving into the guerrilla activities, we
moved into the elements of the full North Korean divisions,
according to a New York Times report which is all I base it on
sir.
I might say all of this information I have in a scrapbook
at home, newspaper articles and information from other
personnel.
I Company was in reserve and soon the S-3 officer, now
Major Robert Flynn, committed my company, which was to support
L Company on the left flank of the defense line.
As my platoons got to the prescribed terrain, I was
beginning to make a reconnaissance of the situation when I
received an order from the first order of headquarters company
battalion. The order was to withdraw.
I complied with the order, ordering my platoons back. It
was at this point that we met men from the other companies who
were moving also back through the only route left, the route
that I Company had taken to get into position.
I was bringing up the rear of the withdrawal when we were
pinned down heavily with mortar fire and machine gun fire. It
was so much so that we could not move. There were approximately
fifty to seventy-five men left in the group, not many from my
company but from the other units. We were pinned down in the
rice paddies of the field. There was no further withdrawal for
the remainder of us, and that is where we were all shot in the
rice paddy fields when the Communist troops came down upon us
and we were taken prisoners.
Senator Potter. About how many of you, Captain? About
fifty?
Capt. Makarounis. About fifty to seventy-five, sir, that
were pinned down, but many came out of that alive. I would say
around the 50 percent mark. They shot and killed those troops
that were in the rice paddies. They came down and shot and
killed them with the submachine guns, the Russian type burp
guns, as I called them, having seen them before.
I might say we were pinned down and we were all shot. I was
shot through my back and as I lifted my head to cough, one of
the men behind me, a man from my home town, stated
``Lieutenant, they're taking prisoners.''
We looked up and they were signaling to those who could get
up to raise their hands, throw off their clothing, fatigue
jackets, take off their watches, pen and pencil sets, rings,
and throw them in the rice paddy fields. They then marched
those of us who could, and those who could help the wounded
prisoners, to a Korean trail, I might say, and there they let
some of our own men get first aid packs and dress our wounds.
That night was the only time that four North Korean
Communist medical men dressed the wounds, about thirty of us in
this one building. We were the seriously wounded personnel who
could not even move.
They came in, sprinkled a little sulphamilamide powder, and
put a thin gauze bandage on, and that was the one and only time
that we ever received medical treatment by the Communist army
troops.
I might say that the next few days had the town of Hadong
strafed and bombed by our air force, practically leveling the
town. It was a small Korean village or city, I might say.
During this strafing, the other prisoners who were in
walking condition were in a Christian church in the town of
Hadong. The building was hit accidentally and less than ten
soldiers died in this building. The rest were taken out. The
ones who were wounded built our number to about fifty in this
one building. The remainder were taken out and marched all the
way up to Seoul. These were all men from the 29th Infantry
Regiment, 3rd Battalion.
Daily for about the five days following my capture, the
town of Hadong was strafed continuously all during the day. At
these times, we moved up to the hill which was to the rear of
the building, a large concrete building that we were staying
in. We moved up in the trees, and in two or three caves, that
were in the area. About the fifth day following this, it was my
decision at that time that I would die there, so then I planned
to escape rather than die in the town of Hadong.
Along with two other soldiers from my company, we escaped
at night, crossed the river across a sand bar, and took off
across country.
About five days later, twenty miles as the crow flies, we
were recaptured in a small South Korean village as we were
attempting to dress our wounds by breaking into a supposedly
doctor's office in this village, who was not there.
We were turned over to the police authorities in the next
city by what I term quizzing personnel.
Then started a trek from this area down to the southernmost
large city that I believe is in South Korea called Kwangju. I
believe it is near the coast. It was at this point, while we
were getting down to this city, that we were always confined in
civilian type jails with civilian prisoners, South Korean
civilian prisoners. This, to me, seemed strange, since we had
on our army fatigue clothing and I remembered, by handling
prisoners of war in World War II, that none of this came under
the Geneva Convention rights. It was at Kwangju, I believe,
sir, that we met three Columban Father missionaries. They were
Roman Catholic missionaries in Korea, who were taken prisoner
in the town of Mokpo, and were transferred to the town of
Kwangju.
I would like to say I would like to leave this article
which is published by the Columban Fathers, and which will tell
the story there how we split at Taejon.
Senator Potter. That will be made a part of the record.
Capt. Makarounis. From Kwangju, we went all the way to
Taejon.
Senator Potter. By walking?
Capt. Makarounis. By truck and walking. Most of the way by
broken down trucks with about thirty-two prisoners, the three
Columban Father Missionaries, five, including myself, American
prisoners, and the South Korean prisoners.
Senator Potter. You were guarded by military personnel?
Capt. Makarounis. We were guarded by Communist soldiers,
yes, sir.
During this trip to Taejon, the hands of all five of us
were manacled together by hand irons. The hands of the
missionaries were tied together with rope.
Senator Potter. Are they like handcuffs, hand irons?
Capt. Makarounis. Handcuffs, right, sir. At Taejon we
stayed but a few hours together, the three missionaries and the
five soldiers, including myself, and there we were split.
We were taken to this large building in the city which at
one time, I believe, was the temporary headquarters of one of
the regiments defending Taejon, of the 24th Division, and
which, I believe, was a permanent police building. It had a
large courtyard.
As we entered there, they singled out the soldiers and had
us sit down, and had photographs taken, numerous ones, of us.
As we moved up to the second floor of this building, we met
approximately one hundred other American soldier prisoners.
This was the first large group of prisoners I had seen. This
was a couple of weeks after I had been captured.
I might say that back on the 27th of July1950, the day that
we were captured, there were between twelve and twenty-four men
who were wounded badly. An example is my company messenger, who
was shot in the neck, in the shoulder, and in the chest. These
seriously wounded men who could not even get up were taken to
the road junction where we were first assembled, about one
hundred yards from the place where we were cut down, and they
were left there. These soldiers I never saw again nor have I
heard of what happened to them. They are still carried, I
believe, as MIA. It is the common knowledge, among us, that
they were shot and killed immediately by the Communist
soldiers.
I might say that while at Kwangju, the Columban
Missionaries told us that we would go through the same
procedure they had gone through. They were taken out
continuously and interrogated at length by North Korean army
officers. I am not sure but to this day they stated that they
were given the statements to sign dealing with many subjects.
What was in the statement, I don't know, but it had to do with
the invasion, as they called it, of Korea by the United Nations
forces.
Senator Potter. In other words, they were confessions of
American guilt?
Capt. Makarounis. It was bordering on that line, yes, sir.
I might say that one of the missionaries, a Monsignor, was
an American. The other two were from Ireland.
The day that they took us out, they took us to a Christian
church. The church had many tables and chairs in there for
interrogation. They were using the church as an interrogating
point. They put me in a chair beside one desk, with a Korean
Communist captain. This captain was a young man, as much as you
can tell the age of a Korean. I would guess it would be in the
twenty-thirty bracket. He was quite angry because it took at
least one hour or so to find an interpreter. As it was, we just
sat there.
All through the questioning, the captain kept getting mad
every once in a while. He would say things against General
MacArthur and against President Truman, and that it was all
Wall Street's fault that there was this war.
He also wanted to know about my family, too. He kept saying
what did my father do, and I said he was retired but that he
had been a worker in the woolen mills in Lowell. This seemed to
please the captain when I gave him this reply. He also got
quite a charge out of the fact that my mother was Ukrainian and
was born over in Austria. When I told him after he asked me a
question about owning property, he grinned from ear to ear when
my answer was ``no.'' It seemed like if you were a man of
means, or had any information to give them that you were on
what they call the capitalistic side, they definitely were
opposed to you.
Senator Potter. They gave you a hard time if they thought
you had property. Ownership of any property, I assume, then
meant you were a capitalist.
Capt. Makarounis. Yes, sir. That definitely to them was
their thought.
I might say that during this interview, all three of us,
the two men who are not here today and myself, the
interrogators would take a revolver out, which seems to be a
fancy of theirs, to acquire revolvers, and American pistols,
and tell us that we would sign statements and confessions, and
point the revolvers to our head. The three Columban
Missionaries had explained that this would happen to us.
As soon as I got into the room with the other American
prisoners, they were divided into two rooms. Two master
sergeants explained to me to tear up and cut up my clothing and
shoes. If I did not, these would be taken away from me in that
the Korean Army soldiers were acquiring all soldiers' shoes and
clothing that was in good shape, that was not torn and ripped.
I immediately ripped my fatigue jacket and trousers and cut the
toes out of my shoes, and slit them. But they were useful, they
had soles on them.
In the room I was in, a big room, about forty by sixty, I
guess there were maybe sixty GI's. In the other one, just like
it next door, were thirty more Americans, plus a lot of South
Koreans. In my room were two young soldiers who had each had a
limb amputated by a Korean doctor. One had lost his arm almost
up to his shoulder, and the other had his foot removed above
the ankle. They were supposed to be recuperating in this room.
This is what they had been told. The condition of the room
could not be described, and the floor was covered with filth
where GI's had relieved themselves, since they would not let us
go out of the room only once in the morning and once in the
evening.
Senator Potter. What place are you talking about?
Capt. Makarounis. Taejon. This is the first group of
American soldiers I had met in captivity.
On the evening of the second day in Taejon, the guard said
for all that could walk at all to fall out in front of the
building. Then they marched up and down past us, counting how
many there were. There was ninety-one. One of them said in
broken English how many of us could walk twenty-two miles. He
said we were going on to Seoul and that after we had gone
twenty-two miles there would be a train and we would go on to
Seoul in that. Seoul was about fifty miles or so beyond. Eighty
of the men said, ``Okay, sure,'' they could make the twenty-two
miles. Eleven stayed behind and we never saw any of them again.
The trip was quite a march in itself. Of the eighty, I would
say that more than half had been wounded in one way or another.
A few of their wounds had healed by nature's own course.
We started off and that first night alone we must have
covered the twenty-two miles and perhaps more. In addition to
the GI's there were a lot of South Korean prisoners but how
many I don't know. All of us were in columns of four, and we
had to keep abreast all the time. Maybe once every two or three
hours they would give us a break, ten minutes, and if you
couldn't keep pace, you would get a rifle butt in your back.
I might say here, sir, that at all times while North Korean
army soldiers guarded us, they had bayonets. Their bayonets are
not like ours. They come to a sharp point and are oval in
shape. But to me this distinguished whether or not the person
guarding us was a Korean soldier or a civilian guard because
the guards never had bayonets on their antique, actually,
rifles. I never saw civilian guards with these rifles. The
majority of the time, after the first two weeks of capture,
they were all military guards.
As we got into the city of Seoul itself, it must have been
about eight in the morning. There was an air-raid going on,
with B-29's, fighters, and all. The fighters were strafing some
of the streets in the city. Fortunately, however, they either
didn't see us or did and recognized us as Americans. They did
not harm us.
The streets were crowded despite the raid, and there were
these kids with little baskets of cookies and breads, and we
yelled at them to throw some cookies, and some did.
Capt. Makarounis. Finally, after they marched us up one
street and down the other, sort of a Cook's Tour, I call it,
with all the people lining the streets and looking at us, we
got into a courtyard. There was a wall around it and inside the
wall there were these three buildings, all fairly large and
leaning out the windows were what seemed like hundreds of men.
They were Americans. They kept shouting at us and some I knew
by name. Some were from my company, from among those who stayed
behind at Hadong. You can imagine what our first question was.
Somebody shouted, ``How's the food situation,'' and they
told us soup twice a day and bread twice a day. It wasn't so
bad, they said. It was a chance to wash twice a day, too, and
plenty of water to drink, but no Red Cross and no chance to
write letters. That's the kind of information they shouted down
to us from the windows.
We probably would have learned much more except around now
I heard this voice say, ``Get the hell away from those windows,
you bastards, and stay away.'' This was my introduction to Mr.
Kim that the other prisoners have mentioned. That's all we knew
him by, Mr. Kim. He was a man whom all the soldiers hated most
of all.
At that time I was lying on the ground and all around me
were men who passed out, out of what you might call sheer
exhaustion. Mr. Kim herded us into the building.
Before he did this, though, he had us all put down our
name, rank, serial number and organizations.
As he herded us into the rooms I was put into what they
called at the time B group. He opened the door to this room. I
walked in. There were a lot of other men, including a few
officers. I was standing there inside the door when this light-
haired captain came up to me and smiled and said, ``I'm Captain
Locke.'' He introduced me to the other officers, a Lt.
Blaylock, who is now back in the States, and a Lt. James Smith.
Lt. Smith was a colored officer.
That makes five officers and there were probably forty-five
enlisted men in the room. Captain Locke also told me, or maybe
later, there was a major who was in charge, being the senior
officer. There were also three other lieutenants and a captain,
which makes a total, I believe, of ten officer captives.
This evening--and I have it labeled it as September 11--we
got a bowl of soup that had some kind of greens floating around
in it and a small loaf of bread with a hard crust.
On the bread that we got in the cities of Seoul and
Pyongyang, the bread was colored such as our wheat bread is
colored, but they never used salt in their bread. We had our
own medics, that is, enlisted corps men, first aid men, who
were prisoners also with us, just a mere handful.
Senator Potter. How long were you a prisoner in Seoul?
Capt. Makarounis. Sir, I have the date set at September 11.
That was my first evening. I have the date set as the evening
of the 20th that we left.
From about the 10th of September or so the air raids on
Seoul seemed to be intensified and there were lots of jets and
fighters around. Also from anywhere around the 18th until we
took off we heard artillery and some of the men said it was
from 16-inch guns on ships. It wasn't until later, of course,
that we realized we had been hearing the buildup for the
landing at Inchon. On the evening of the 20th just after dark
we were all set to go to bed when a guard came in and ordered
us to fall in outside the building. We lined up in this
courtyard where the North Korean troops used to have bayonet
practice every morning and then the guards had us all sit on
the ground.
There seemed to be a full moon and for some reason I
remember that. That was the start of the death march, so-called
Korean death march from Seoul to Pyongyang. I figure that the
number of prisoners in Seoul was about approximately four
hundred.
We did leave twelve or fifteen behind who just couldn't
even get up to move, sir, and they were supposedly left behind
in the sickroom along with one first aid man, a Private Eddie
Halcomb. This Mr. Kim stood in front of us and he asked one
question: ``How many men cannot walk one mile?'' Quite a few of
the men fell out. I would guess between twenty and thirty. Mr.
Kim walked up and down in front of them and he asked each of
them, ``What's wrong with you?'' When they began telling him he
would start cussing, and I would say he sent almost every one
of them back into line with the exception of maybe two or
three. The few that he sent up to the sickroom, I should say,
were carried up because they were men who couldn't even walk a
step.
The guards kept getting us to stand up and then ordering us
to sit down continuously over and over again. This was for the
purpose of a head count that they took many, many times in this
one courtyard. A corporal from my company who had made the
first escape with me passed out completely and some of the
other prisoners started to pick him up to carry him back to the
sickroom. Mr. Kim said, ``Bring that blank back.'' Those were
his exact words, and they did.
Then Kim gave us a little speech. He said that it would
become very dangerous there in the city of Seoul. He said the
front was getting very near. Mr. Kim made one final inspection
of the sickroom. He sent all of the men that he thought were
even halfway capable of walking out again. While he was gone
the other soldiers took this corporal from my company back into
the sickroom.
At about nine o'clock, somewhere about that time we started
out of the courtyard for our death march.
Senator Potter. Nine o'clock in the morning?
Capt. Makarounis. In the evening, sir.
First we went across the main part of the city of Seoul and
then on to the country. We must have walked a good five miles
straight north it seemed and the pace was fast. The Korean
pace, when they walk, sir, is much better than the 120 that we
use in the military. They are naturally very hardworking
people, the farmers in what they do, and carry heavy loads.
Senator Potter. Is it a shorter stride?
Capt. Makarounis. It is a short fast clip, yes. It is more
or less, I would judge it, a run for us. About an hour or so
after we headed out a North Korean army officer on horseback
rode up and started to shout something to the guards. There was
a lot of jabbering and grunting. Then they turned us around and
marched us right back into the city the way we came from. We
kept on marching and we went out another route out of Seoul.
I might say here that we did see those flares that were
sent up by our mortar fire on the outskirts of the city,
lighting up the city. We heard distant gun fire too from
artillery. A little while later as we were going on the
outskirts of the city we started through a sort of small
forest. Captain Locke came up to me and told me that two of the
lieutenants had escaped from the column. I have never seen
those two gentlemen to date, nor have heard that they have come
back.
We started out with the number of 376 prisoners. When the
two lieutenants escaped that brought us down to 374. I would
say we walked roughly twenty miles that night and toward
morning we crossed the 38th Parallel. It was just like any
other place except there was a marker on the road and it meant
something. Until then we had hoped we would be liberated, but
at the time we didn't know if American troops would ever cross
the 38th or not.
A little while after daylight a couple of planes came
over--Captain Locke said they were Marine Corsairs--and the men
started to scatter and so did the guards. Captain Locke shouted
to stay put and most of us did. We waved everything we had,
white rags, our jackets, and we shouted, although I don't
imagine they could hear us.
I don't think any of us even breathed for a minute while
there, while we waited. Then these two planes circled us again
and they came down low and dipped their wings. That was their
recognition continuously on our death march when we were
walking during the daylight. They started marching us off in
the evenings and they always had us in school buildings. Every
town we would come to they seemed to have school buildings and
they always kept putting us in these school buildings.
You asked one of the former witnesses about the size of the
rooms of the Korean buildings. I would say it would be
approximately one-half the size of this room here, or perhaps
even smaller. A majority of the time the floors were wood, but
in many cases they were concrete floors in the permanent type
buildings that had brick. They would crowd us in and at night
time falling down we couldn't stretch out flat on our back. We
would have to be on our right side or left side. This served a
dual purpose. It provided enough room for all of the prisoners
to enter the room and also by sleeping body to body it kept us
warm, which was necessary. There was no clothing issued. There
were no blankets. They had none themselves to issue. I don't
imagine. The only thing that we would do, as we marched some of
the men took these sort of, not bamboo, but these sacks that
they keep their rice in and they would keep us a little warm.
We would throw them over us. The nights were extremely cold as
we kept going north.
Senator Potter. Did you witness during this march when a
person couldn't keep up that he was shot?
Capt. Makarounis. I witnessed everything except the actual
shooting of the prisoners, sir. There were many, many--and by
many I mean between twenty-five and thirty-five--who perhaps
would come into that total that fell back, perhaps a little
lesser figure than that, and although I did not see a person
shot by this North Korean army Communist lieutenant--and I say
he was a lieutenant because of the epaulets they wear, bearing
one star with the Russian type insignia on the epaulet.
Senator Potter. Second lieutenant?
Capt. Makarounis. The lowest second lieutenant, yes. They
had three grades of lieutenants I believe and the captain I
know to be four stars on the epaulet.
Senator Potter. When I was a second lieutenant, they said
there was nothing lower. What was the total number on that
march that you gave?
Capt. Makarounis. The number that started out of Seoul,
South Korea was 376. The total number that wound up in
Pyongyang alive was 296. Those were from our own counts that we
used to take along with the army guards.
Senator Potter. Besides the men that you lost on the march
as a result of not being able to keep up and who were murdered
by the Communist guards, did others die of their wounds or
malnutrition?
Capt. Makarounis. Yes. In the so-called sickroom of Seoul
there was one who died of his wounds and malnutrition. He died
right in front of my eyes, because I was in the sickroom. There
was one lieutenant who passed away from pneumonia and
malnutrition on the death march.
Senator Potter. How long did that trip take altogether from
Seoul to Pyongyang?
Capt. Makarounis. I have the date set as September 20th
that we left Seoul, South Korea and arrived in Pyongyang, North
Korea on the 10th day of October 1950. I used that figure
pretty definitely because we were in Pyongyang, Korea, for four
days and nights and it was the evening of the 14th that they
took the prisoner group out, my prisoner group out, and put
them on trains, as I recall, from information given to me. That
was the evening I made my second escape.
Senator Potter. Did you escape from the prison in
Pyongyang?
Capt. Makarounis. In Pyongyang, Korea, the evening that
they took the prisoner group out, and this was on the 14th,
since I was hidden six days and nights in my second escape, and
the city fell on the 20th of October 1950, and I was liberated
on that day.
Senator Potter. How did you manage your escape?
Capt. Makarounis. One day--I believe it was the 13th of
October--Captain Locke and I were sitting out in this large
courtyard along with the other prisoners, killing all the lice
on our bodies. That is about the only way you could get rid of
them. He asked me what I would do if I had a chance to bug out,
as we called it, which meant escape. I explained to him I would
give my right arm right up to the shoulder to get in on
something concrete like that. He explained the situation to me,
stating that a Japanese-American soldier, a Sergeant Kumagai
had arranged to have three escapes effected by contacting three
Korean underground schoolmen who were in the building. The
reason that this was done by Sergeant Kumagai was he could
speak Japanese. Japanese was the only language allowed in Korea
from 1905 until 1945, I believe. They did not allow the
teaching of Korean in the schools.
The plan, as Captain Locke explained to me, was that the
senior officer, the major, himself and Sergeant Kumagai, would
be hidden out by these three Korean teachers who signified they
wanted the senior officer also. The major declined the
opportunity, being a West Point graduate, stating to Captain
Locke that he felt as the senior officer he felt that his
responsibility was with the men. I might say that the major was
very, very weak. He had pneumonia and he was, I would say, a
man that didn't have any food for three months, so what would
you call that body, a starved body, along with the sickness.
Senator Potter. Did the major return, do you know?
Capt. Makarounis. No. That is why I am not mentioning his
name. He did not return. He was the major who was taken out on
a pretense of feeding them along with my mess sergeant, who was
the mess sergeant of the prisoner group at the Sunchou tunnel
massacre. When the major declined the opportunity for some
reason or other they wanted two other officers with Sergeant
Kumagai, and Captain Locke told me I could make the escape with
him.
Senator Potter. How was that affected?
Capt. Makarounis. That was affected in the building that we
were quartered in. On the evening of the 14th, just about one-
half hour to forty-five minutes before they moved the prisoner
group out for boarding the trains to move out of the city of
Pyongyang, there were no guards in the corridor. Sergeant
Kumagai had already made the contact with the underground
school teachers and knew where to take Captain Locke and
myself. We slid down the rear stairway, down to one of the
numerous large rooms that were in the building empty, and went
to a corner of the room where there was a trapdoor about one
foot square. He moved the table and we entered this trapdoor.
We got into the what I call a cellar, but it is not, since it
is only about two to three feet high, and there we stayed for
six days and nights. The underground school teachers, one of
them anyway, daily would come and bring us water, and a couple
of times brought us rice and this poached corn, this roasted
corn, like the Koreans roast their corn.
Senator Potter. And you were there until you were liberated
by the American troops?
Capt. Makarounis. Yes. I believe the book, sir, will bring
out--I will look it over well and make a condensation of the
thing--the points that you mentioned.
Senator Potter. Yes. You do that. We do not know just what
day it will be, but we will notify you ahead of time as best we
can. Thank you kindly.
Capt. Makarounis. Thank you, sir.
Senator Potter. We will be in recess until tomorrow at ten
o'clock.
[Thereupon, the hearing recessed at 6:00 p.m. Monday,
November 30, 1953, to reconvene Tuesday, December 1, 1953, at
10:00 a.m.]
KOREAN WAR ATROCITIES
[Editor's Note.--Cpl. Lloyd Kreider and William L. Milano
testified in public session on December 2; Cpl. Willie L.
Daniels, Sgt. George J. Matta, and Sgt. Wendell Treffery, on
December 3; Lt. Col. John W. Gorn, Lt. Col. James T. Rogers,
Sgt. Orville R. Mullins and Sgt. John L. Watters, Jr. on
December 4, 1953. Sgt. Robert L. Sharps and Donald R. Brown did
not testify publicly.]
----------
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:15 a.m., pursuant to notice, in
room 357 of the Senate Office Building, Senator Charles E.
Potter, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senator Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan.
Present also: Robert Jones, research assistant to Senator
Potter; Francis P. Carr, staff director; Donald F. O'Donnell,
assistant counsel; Robert J. McElroy, investigator; Ruth Young
Watt, chief clerk.
Senator Potter. We will proceed.
For the benefit of you and others who were not here
yesterday, Colonel Gorn, this is an executive session, and the
purpose of our hearings is to develop the facts and to let the
American people and other free people know the type of enemy
that you men have been fighting.
While I am sure we are all thankful and appreciate the fact
that the war in Korea, or the fighting and killing in Korea,
has ceased, our battle against communism hasn't ceased. The
beast-like atrocities that have been related here which you men
are most familiar with is a pattern of the character of the
enemy. The more people that know the character of the enemy,
the better off we are going to be.
Now, Mr. Gorn, will you proceed?
We plan on holding public hearings beginning tomorrow
morning at 10:30. We have a full schedule today, and we are
going to have to rush along as fast as we can; and then we will
prepare to go to open hearings tomorrow.
Now, Colonel, will you identify yourself for the record,
giving your name and your unit?
STATEMENT OF LT. COL. JOHN W. GORN, OFFICE OF THE
CHIEF OF LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, DEPARTMENT OF THE
ARMY; FORMERLY EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE WAR
CRIMES SECTION, EIGHTH UNITED STATES ARMY IN
KOREA, AND CHIEF OF THE INVESTIGATING
BRANCH OF THE WAR CRIMES SECTION
Col. Gorn. Mr. Chairman, I am Lieutenant Colonel John T.
Gorn, presently in the Office of the Chief of Legislative
Liaison, Department of the Army, but formerly from December
1950 to July 1951 I was executive officer of the War Crimes
Section of the Eighth United States Army in Korea, and chief of
the investigating branch of that section.
I might say in regard to my discussion of the particular
case assigned this morning that I am not an eyewitness to the
case, but I am acquainted with the facts through my official
capacity as chief of the Investigating Section of the War
Crimes Commission.
Senator Potter. As I understand, in the War Crimes
Commission they had an investigating staff and an interrogating
staff, is that true?
Col. Gorn. That is right.
Senator Potter. As a result of the interrogations, certain
statements were made, and it was your job as head of the
investigating staff to investigate and determine the validity
of the statements?
Col. Gorn. That is right. We correlated not only the
information that we got from our interrogation, but also
information we got from field reports, and correlated them into
particular war crime cases. This particular case is War Crime
No. 164, or as it is commonly called, the Bamboo Spear Case,
and it occurred in the vicinity of Mooju, which is to the
southeast of Taejon. It is on 13 December 1950.
The committee no doubt will recall, though, at that time
the actual combat area in Korea was considerably to the north,
the Chinese Communists having just launched their first
counterattack north of Pyongyang.
Now, despite the fact that the combat area had moved to the
north at that time, from the time of the initial breakout from
the Pusan perimeter, in September of 1950 until this time, and
even throughout 1951, the area over here south and southeast of
Pusan, a very mountainous area, was infested with guerilla
activity coming from Communists and remnants of the North
Korean Peoples Army.
So much then for the background, as far as the tactical
situation of this case is concerned.
On 12 December a convoy of twelve vehicles manned by
personnel of the Eighth Fighter Bomber Wing of the Fifth United
States Air Force, left an airfield up in Seoul headed for Pusan
down in the southern part of Korea. The convoy reached Taejon
on the evening of the 12th and left three vehicles there for
maintenance, and then proceeded on. This was in the middle of
the night, close to midnight.
Shortly after going beyond Taejon, the column apparently
made a wrong turn and got off the main supply route. Five of
the vehicles continued on, and the sixth vehicle stalled, and
those were all heavy vehicles, most of them with trailers, and
the sixth vehicle in the column stalled so that the column
behind it was held up, but five of the vehicles continued on
down the wrong road. Although they knew they were on the wrong
road, they could not turn around because the road was so
narrow, characteristic of most Korean roads.
Finally they reached a spot in the road where there was a
filled-in bomb crater, and they halted down around the vicinity
of Meouju because they were not sure the filled-in crater would
support the heavy vans they had in the convoy. They waited
there until daylight, and then at daylight one of the vehicles
with two of the men decided that they would back-track up the
road to contact the rest of the convoy.
Meantime the other four vehicles and eight men were to
continue on the road they were on slowly and let the rest of
the convoy catch up with them.
These two men and their vehicle rejoined the balance of the
convoy at about nine o'clock, and the evidence is obscure
there, but at any rate the balance of the convoy continued on
to Taeju; instead of going on the wrong road, they turned
around and hit the road. Upon arriving at Taeju they waited a
considerable length of time, and the other four vehicles did
not show. So they proceeded to Pusan, and an investigation was
started to see whether or not they could locate the four
vehicles, and this was started by the Somber Wing.
Senator Potter. This is air force personnel?
Col. Gorn. Yes, sir; air force personnel.
On the 17th of December, two members of the 565th Grave
Registration Company in Taejon were in the vicinity of Meouju,
and they had heard that the four missing vehicles in question
had been ambushed south of Meouju at about 900 hours on the
13th of December.
They got the support of about thirty soldiers from a
Republic of Korea battalion stationed there and there they
found three bodies. They were scattered among the vehicles. The
vehicles were partially burned out and had been abandoned. The
bodies, some of the bodies were burned.
Senator Potter. Some of the bodies were burned, as if
burned in the vehicle?
Col. Gorn. From the report we have, apparently they were
either killed in the fight, shot in the fight, or burned in the
vehicle. In sweeping through the area down to the scene of the
ambush, the Republic of Korea troops took four prisoners, none
of whom were in the so-called guerrilla band that had ambushed
the convoy. However, one of the prisoners stated that he had
heard from other sources that the guerrillas had taken five
other Americans from the group and taken them to their party
headquarters at Maesonri.
He also stated that these men had been stripped entirely of
their clothing. The clothing, of course, was taken by the
guerrillas themselves.
On the 27th of December, information was received at Taejon
that the Republic of Korean troops operating in the vicinity
there had found five more American bodies South of Meouju,
between Chochonri and Maesonri. Unfortunately, I cannot find
those locations on the map there. These bodies were recovered
by the Grave Registration Company.
When the Republic of Korea troops found them, the men were
entirely naked and their hands were tied behind their backs.
Upon further examination, all of the bodies showed multiple
puncture wounds throughout, mainly on the chest and arms, but
also in the face and the neck and the upper abdomen; and the
number of puncture wounds on the bodies varied from three to as
many as fifteen to twenty.
It was the opinion of one of the doctors who examined the
bodies that the wounds were probably caused by some sharp
instrument, and that they had undoubtedly resulted in prompt
death because there were no signs showing later infection or
healing. These five bodies as well as the previous three that
had been found were identified as being the missing members of
the lost convoy. It accounted for all eight of the members of
the convoy.
Senator Potter. Were they buried or just lying on the
ground?
Col. Gorn. My information on that is obscure, Senator. As I
recall the grave registration account, I cannot recall whether
they had to dig up the bodies or not.
Some period later, at least it was after I left the War
Crimes Section, certain natives of the village were
interviewed, and they stated that the vehicles had been
attacked by remnants of the North Korean Peoples Army operating
in the area as guerrillas. There was evidence that this attack
was carried out by a so-called Anson group and the prisoners
were taken to the headquarters of this group after the ambush.
One of the guerrillas later was taken prisoner by the
United Nations forces and interrogated by members of the War
Crimes Section, during which time he admitted shooting three of
the Americans two hours after the ambush on orders from a
Lieutenant Lihanson, and that he thereafter, also on orders of
this officer, stuck the bodies with bamboo spears. He stated
that the other prisoners had been killed by another guerrilla
about a day or so later.
We were never able to locate the reported other guerrilla,
and Lihanson was killed almost at about the same time we
received a report on the case. Apparently the strength of the
force was about eighty that attacked the convoy.
Senator Potter. You do have an account that at least this
one soldier was killed at the direction of the officer in
charge?
Col. Gorn. Three of them were.
Senator Potter. Three soldiers?
Col. Gorn. Three of them were killed at the direction of
the officer in charge.
Senator Potter. It would be a natural assumption that the
others were killed under the same directions?
Col. Gorn. That is right.
Senator Potter. Now, Colonel, you have used the term
``Grave Registration.'' I know what grave registration is, but
it would be well for our public hearing to just briefly state
what you mean by ``Grave Registration.''
Col. Gorn. Grave registration unit, of course, has the
unhappy task of recovering the bodies mainly of our dead; and
consequently, whenever casualty reports are received,
particularly areas that are off the beaten path of normal
collection, the grave registration unit is assigned the duty of
locating any bodies and identifying them for the purposes of
future casualty reports.
Now, as far as the operations in Korea were concerned, of
course, the so-called Indian country which existed so much
beyond the Pusan perimeter made it necessary to have grave
registration teams operating continually in that area, because
very often bodies were located some months after combat had
passed through them.
Senator Potter. Was it their job to try to locate the
bodies and to identify them?
Col. Gorn. Yes, and then take them to the central
collecting or temporary burial spot.
Senator Potter. Now, I think, Colonel, that is what we
wanted you to present; and we have some pictures. Did you see
the bodies?
Col. Gorn. No, I did not.
Senator Potter. It was your teams that got the reports?
Col. Gorn. That is right.
Senator Potter. We have a Colonel Rogers with the Medical
Division, I believe. Colonel Rogers, will you come forward?
STATEMENT OF LT. COL. JAMES T. ROGERS
Senator Potter. Will you identify yourself for the record?
Col. Rogers. Mr. Chairman, I am Lieutenant Colonel James T.
Rogers, presently with the Medical Section, Headquarters,
Fourth Army. At the time that these atrocities were committed,
I was with the Medical Section. It was the ``I'' Corps in
Korea.
Senator Potter. What is your home address?
Col. Rogers. My home address in 16 Calhoun Avenue,
Greenwood, South Carolina.
I viewed these atrocities of five soldiers at the National
Cemetery in Taejon, Korea. These five soldiers, in my opinion,
were subject to multiple wounds of the face and chest and
abdomen as a result of some sharp instrument which caused their
death. I am of the opinion that this sharp instrument was
heated.
Senator Potter. It was heated?
Col. Rogers. I felt like it was red hot, and these bodies
were probed and stuck, and you could see where the tissue
receded and where it was all pitted. I am also of the opinion
that as a result of these multiple perforating wounds, these
individuals died from internal hemorrhage.
Senator Potter. We have here a couple of photographs that
are purported to be of the five men that you mentioned, and I
will give them to you to see if you can identify those
photographs as being photographs of the men that you examined.
Mr. O'Donnell. Those are from the official army files in
the case.
Col. Rogers. These are the men.
Senator Potter. Colonel, is it your belief that they were
punctured by bayonets or by bamboo poles or by both?
Col. Rogers. I felt like in review here of the statement
and the certificate that I submitted, I remembered that one of
them apparently was bayoneted up under the chin. One of them
seemed to have a gunshot wound in the head. The others had all
of those multiple perforations that appeared to be with
something that was red hot and we just made an assumption that
those were the result of maybe the heating of an iron rod or
the heating of some bamboo sticks.
Senator Potter. The multiple wounds that you examined, they
alone would have caused the death of these men?
Col. Rogers. Yes, with the multiple wounds and then the
fact that they stuck them apparently, we thought maybe they
must have tortured them to begin with and then they stuck them
into their abdomen and chest which resulted in hemorrhage.
Senator Potter. Thank you kindly, Colonel.
Col. Rogers. One question that you asked or something about
them being buried. These fellows gave no indication of having
been buried when I saw them; they were stark naked and lying
out there and there wasn't any dirt or anything else in ears or
anything like that that would indicate that they had ever been
interred.
Senator Potter. It would be your assumption that they were
just left there on the ground where they were killed?
Col. Rogers. That is right.
Senator Potter. I do not know just when you will be
scheduled to appear, Doctor, except probably Thursday. So,
thank you for coming down and you are through for today. If you
want to stay, you are perfectly free to do so; however, if you
care to leave, why you can, and we will notify you. I would
appreciate it if everyone would be here later.
Will Corporal Kreider come forward please?
STATEMENT OF CPL. LLOYD KREIDER
Senator Potter. Corporal Kreider, will you state your name
and your unit for the record?
Cpl. Kreider. Corporal Lloyd D. Kreider, RA 13266788, 307
Medical Bureau, Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
Senator Potter. What is your home address?
Cpl. Kreider. Westwood, Pennsylvania.
Senator Potter. Can you tell me when you went to Korea and
what unit you were attached to at the time?
Cpl. Kreider. At the beginning of hostilities in Korea I
was a member of the 34th Medical Company, 34th Infantry
Regiment, 24th Division, and I was with the first outfit that
landed in Korea.
Senator Potter. Can you briefly give us a little
description of how you were captured?
Cpl. Kreider. It was on about August 4; 34th Regiment was
overrun that night, and I was an aid man, and I was taking care
of some wounded and trying to get a man back to the rear, and
it seemed that they annihilated the 34th Regiment at that time.
I could not find the rear. So I carried this wounded patient on
my back for awhile and then he died, and I left him lying in
the weeds.
Then I hid out that night and all of that following day,
figuring that the Americans would come back and maybe I would
be liberated. So then the following day, the following night, I
tried to make it back through the dark, and I could not find my
sense of direction so well, and I stumbled along all night
long.
Early next morning, it was getting daybreak, and I saw a
communication wire and I figured it was an American army
communication wire, and I followed the communication wire, and
it went between two ridges. I followed that wire for about five
miles, and I saw on a hill it looked like American soldiers,
and I went up towards them, and I was certain it was American
soldiers; and I yelled, ``Wait on me,'' and I was hysterical,
and I did not eat for quite a while, and I was glad to get
back. And it was a bunch of North Koreans came walking out and
started shooting at me, and so I yelled to them in Japanese--
and I can speak fluent Japanese--not to shoot me.
At that time it seemed like the sergeant or whoever was in
charge of this group of North Koreans held back their fire. And
a few minutes later they started shooting again, and I acted
like I was hit and I rolled down over the hill, and I went in
the opposite direction.
Then I walked all of that day and towards evening and I
heard some more Koreans patrolling yelling at me. I didn't want
to turn around and I kept going, and they started shooting, and
I was so fatigued and tired, and one piece of shell bit me
along the eye, and I passed out, because I fell.
When I came to, there was this North Korean, North Koreans
standing there in front of me. They asked me for my rifle, and
I told them I was a medic and I did not have a rifle. I asked
them in Japanese if I could have a drink, and they let me drink
some water.
So they told me they would take me to a school to learn
communism. So I stayed in their line about one week, the front
line, and then they took me down to Naktong River.
Senator Potter. What did you do while you were in their
lines? Did they put you to work?
Cpl. Kreider. At that time they did; during the day I was
carrying water for them out of the stream; and a lot of
American aircraft were in the area, and they were afraid to go
out of the holes, and I would go out and get water for them.
And during the night they had a guard watching me. That lasted
for about one week and then they took me across the Naktong
River, and there were about fifteen other prisoners there, and
they kept us there one day, and most of the men were wounded,
pretty badly.
So they kept us there; and they moved us out, and we all
had to walk. And one boy was shot right below the heart, and he
had a hard time walking, and I remember the guards used to kick
him and we would pick him up. They would tell us to leave him
behind, but we tried to take him along with us, because we knew
they would shoot him. Later that day, finally, they made us
leave him behind, and we do not know what happened to him until
later.
Senator Potter. You never saw him again?
Cpl. Kreider. No, sir. Then I was taken a few miles back to
the rear and stayed there another day, and then we kept on that
way, each day we kept moving back in the direction of Seoul and
Taejon. The further back we went, the more American prisoners
they would have, until we had quite a few, and I do not recall
how many there were. I would say approximately fifty on that
march.
Senator Potter. After you were captured, did they take away
any of your clothes?
Cpl. Kreider. The first thing they did was take all of my
clothes except my pants, and they took my shoes and everything
I had, and they gave me only one boot. It was tight and I could
not put it on, just one big Russian boot it was; and so they
didn't give me anything since then the whole time I was
prisoner, to wear.
It was better out of clothes because they had so many lice,
you could take them off by the handfuls on their body, and they
had no medications, and they got in your clothes and it
bothered you more with clothes. When the winter came, and it
was colder, a lot of the men died from malnutrition and from
exposure.
Senator Potter. During the march back to Seoul, did you
witness any men being killed by the guards?
Cpl. Kreider. Yes, sir; the men got weaker and weaker as
each day went by; and the Korean guards, we know they were
shooting them, but we were not sure at first. The North Korean
guards told us not to take them with us because one rotten
apple would spoil the whole bunch, and if one man is carried by
two healthy men, we will get weak and we would also die.
Finally, they would not let us carry them any longer. They took
them into villages, and we heard them shooting, but I did not
witness any killing at that time until we got close to Seoul,
and then we were getting so weak and they wanted to move us
fast. Then I saw them shoot one man on the road march; there
was only one man I saw get shot.
Senator Potter. Can you tell us what happened with the man
who got shot?
Cpl. Kreider. What happened, a few of them were shot, and
he came back to the column, and we were marching north, and
they took some of the men who were so weak and they had their
legs swelled up from beriberi or lack of food, and they went
out of their mind, and they did not want to walk, and they
would fall, and it is better to be dead, and we tried to drag
them with us.
The guards would tell us to move on, and they would take
them back, and we heard them shooting; and I saw one guy make
it back to the column, and he was shot in the leg, and he died
the following day. And that is how I know that they were
shooting the prisoners at the time.
I didn't witness any more killing except from men who would
die from malnutrition and on the wayside, and many men would
die from malnutrition.
Senator Potter. Can you estimate how many men died or were
killed on that march up to Seoul?
Cpl. Kreider. Sir, I think it was about one-third of the
men, approximately one-third of the men. Along the wayside they
were taken out, ten or five at a time, and we accumulated
different men at different points.
Senator Potter. Most of the march was made at night?
Cpl. Kreider. All made at night, until we got to Seoul, and
we walked all night long and part of the morning, and then when
the sun would come out they would hide us in a field or put us
in some school building or a church.
Senator Potter. Did they feed you on that march?
Cpl. Kreider. If they had any food, and sometimes we walked
all night long and the men were so hungry and weak they could
hardly stand up, and we would fall, and actually we were all
casualties and we were picking each other up, and we got to a
town and they would say there is no food, and we would go one
more kilometer, and one kilometer is not quite a mile; but they
would make it about twenty-five miles for one kilometer; and we
would go to another village. Some days we got a rice bowl, and
some days we got nothing. That is what the men were dying from.
Senator Potter. Did they march you through the town for
public display?
Cpl. Kreider. It was the main thing; they stayed in towns
and a lot of civilians would come around, and I remember one
said ``American spy,'' and he spit on my face. They used to
make a public display out of us because we were so weak and
undernourished, and they were telling the people that that is
the way we were in the United States, and we didn't have food,
and they used it for propaganda.
Senator Potter. Were you beaten on the march?
Cpl. Kreider. On the march to Seoul I was just pushed and
kicked around, and everybody was treated cruelly, but actually
I was not inflicted with any wounds, but many other men were
inflicted with wounds.
Senator Potter. After you reached Seoul, how long were you
there?
Cpl. Kreider. I went to that girls' school in Seoul, and I
was there approximately three weeks, and in that school they
tried to teach propaganda. They had an officer come around and
read us lectures on Russia, and we had a lot of books made from
the Moscow Language Institute, and I noticed that on the cover.
Senator Potter. They were made where?
Cpl. Kreider. Moscow Language Institute. They used to teach
communism as the New Russia, and we would argue with them and
tell them how poor it was, and they said it was New Russia.
Senator Potter. Did they endeavor to try to make you sign
statements?
Cpl. Kreider. They wanted us to write out, and they gave us
speeches, and they wanted us to write an essay, and I never
signed a statement that I recall, but they made us sign our
name on a blank piece of paper, and there were about seven of
us, and I don't know if they wrote something to that blank
piece of paper or not, but I never made any broadcast. They
made some of the men make broadcasts on the radio.
Senator Potter. Did they ask you about home life, about
your parents, what your father did?
Cpl. Kreider. They wanted to know, that was one of the
first things they wanted to know, if my father was a
capitalist, and I said he was a carpenter. And he said he liked
carpenters and farmers, and so everybody turned out to be
farmers after a certain length of time.
Senator Potter. You were treated better then?
Cpl. Kreider. They wanted to impress everybody. In a movie,
they showed us one movie of Washington, where they had a fat
man sitting up drinking wine and all people raggedly walking
around, and it was a lot of propaganda, and someone who lived
in America would know it was all foolish propaganda; but they
tried to impress upon us that the American people were living
in undernourished state.
Senator Potter. In what form did these interrogations take
place? Were you called into a room?
Cpl. Kreider. We had three rooms, and they kept some of the
officers in Seoul in one room for awhile by themselves, but
most of them were usually under confinement because, I guess
they did not want them to be with the enlisted men.
In this one room they made us read, I believe, about four
hours a day, books, and they had one man stand up and read to
the rest of the men, and then sometimes the North Korean high-
ranking officer would come in and give lectures, and he had an
interpreter, and they showed us a movie, and also he said in
the lecture how the South Koreans invaded North Korea. And
first he said they sent a peace delegation and they never
returned, and that is when they were mad, and then they still
didn't fight and the South Koreans asked them for a peace and
they attacked back.
Senator Potter. They were trying to tell you that it was an
act of aggression by South Korea rather than by North Korea?
Cpl. Kreider. We knew it was foolish propaganda, but they
tried to make us believe that.
Senator Potter. When you were being interrogated, did they
beat you at all or pull out their pistol?
Cpl. Kreider. Many times they did that; they threatened to
shoot us, and they asked me how many planes I had, in Japanese;
and they used to interrogate me a lot because I could speak
Japanese, and I would always say approximately five or ten, and
they would get mad until they got fed up with it, and I figured
they would shoot us. I said everybody had their own airplane.
Then they said, ``Where is your airplane?'' And I said that I
wrecked it, and they never asked me after that. I believe they
believed it, and they believe fantastic stories sometimes.
Senator Potter. How many times were you interrogated at
Seoul?
Cpl. Kreider. Mostly I was interrogated on front line, at
school it was mostly all propaganda and they were trying to
teach us communism and talking about the evils of capitalism,
so-called, and they were trying to impress how good they lived,
and I could see they didn't live good, and that is what they
were mostly trying to impress on us.
Senator Potter. Did they ever ask questions or try to
propagandize you against the American army and against American
officers?
Cpl. Kreider. No, sir, I don't recall them ever talking
against that. They were just talking about why were we in the
army and they thought we made good money, and they figured we
were in the army because it was the only way we could make a
living.
Senator Potter. Did they ask you whether your parents had
an automobile?
Cpl. Kreider. Yes, sir; that is one of the things, if I had
an automobile, and I said that I did, and they thought I was a
capitalist. It was before I got to Seoul, and this North Korean
officer wanted to shoot me, and I got in friendly with this one
North Korean who seemed to be an American sympathizer, and he
used to tell me what was going on and he told me they wanted to
shoot me and said since I was an interpreter they saved my
life. I think he was telling the truth.
Senator Potter. Did you know a Mr. Kim, was a Mr. Kim
there?
Cpl. Kreider. Yes, sir. I cannot say what he is, but he was
about as low down as they come, I think. He was supposed to be
a newspaper reporter in Seoul, and he said he was a Communist,
and he was taken over when the North Koreans took over that
camp, but he called us low-down names and names that could not
even be mentioned and he used to kick us around.
They had a radio in our room, and we were supposed to
listen every evening to Seoul City Sue; and one evening we
turned on to Tokyo, and they must have had it wired, and they
knew we had it on, and he came in and kicked everybody around
and they took it down to the mess hall, and every evening they
made us all go down to listen to that broadcast from Seoul City
Sue.
Senator Potter. Was he in charge of the propaganda?
Cpl. Kreider. I don't know if he was in charge. I was not
sure about that, but he was probably the best speaking English,
and that is why they used him here, but I don't think he was
actually in charge. I noticed they had a Russian civilian came
around three or four times to that building.
Senator Potter. A Russian civilian did?
Cpl. Kreider. And they took pictures of us, two men
together, and the North Korean officer and the civilian, and
twice he came to the building, and we were sitting down and
they told us to stand at attention, and this Russian civilian
and a North Korean officer just looked over the building and
asked if we liked the food. We didn't have any food that day,
but we had to say we liked it. We said it was okay, and that is
all we said to them, because it would not be any use to say
anything else.
Senator Potter. The movie that they showed you, was that
Russian made?
Cpl. Kreider. They were Russian speaking, because the
speaking was in Russia and the characters were Korean
characters, and so I believe it was for propaganda for Korean
soldiers, and they had the Korean PW's to see the movie also.
We had movies in Japan that were the same way, and they had
English speaking and they had them in Japanese, and so I figure
they were Russian movies for propaganda in Korea.
Senator Potter. Have you ever been contacted by the
Communists since you have been home?
Cpl. Kreider. By whom?
Senator Potter. Have you ever received any letters?
Cpl. Kreider. No, sir, I never have, and I don't expect to
either.
Senator Potter. What happened after you left Seoul?
Cpl. Kreider. Well, that is when it really got bad, and
they really got cruel with us. When the Inchon landing came on,
we had a South Korean that was driving a truck in that school
that had a lot of North Koreans, and this South Korean was
driving a truck and he brought in supplies, and he told us that
the Americans were a small way from here and he saw the flares
coming, and we knew that there was going to be a landing, and
they were coming up from the south.
They moved us out one morning early in the morning, and it
was dark and they moved us out and said we had to move out, and
we would go one kilometer, and that is when they took us up to
Pyonyang.
Senator Potter. This was on a foot march again?
Cpl. Kreider. All of the men were so weak they could not
even sit up, and they just laid down like a corpse, and they
could not even sit up, and some of them as soon as they got to
the area died, right away some of them died. I believe they
left some of them in the building, and I don't know whether
they were ever repatriated or not or were shot.
Senator Potter. There was a considerable amount of cruelty
exhibited on this last march?
Cpl. Kreider. On the way to Pyongyang there were many
people falling out from the march, because they had no food and
very seldom got anything to eat; and each day it got worse and
worse, and the men were going down, and each day the number
increased that would fall out; and we never knew what happened
to the people who fell out, because we figured they would be
shot.
The guards would let them come back and would catch up with
the group. We heard them shooting, but I wasn't an eyewitness
at that time, but when we got to Sunchon.
Senator Potter. Who was in charge of this march? Did they
have Korean officers?
Cpl. Kreider. I understand there was a lieutenant, and I
don't know the insignia too well, but there was a young
officer, and he was a clean-faced officer, no marks I could
recall, and he was small featured, and he did not weigh much
more than one hundred pounds, and I really don't know who it
was.
Senator Potter. Did he order----
Cpl. Kreider. I saw he was the one who shot one of the men,
also.
Senator Potter. He shot one of the men?
Cpl. Kreider. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. So from what you witnessed on the march, it
was evident that it was a command decision, and it was not just
some guard, but it came as orders from the officer?
Cpl. Kreider. It was from the officers.
Senator Potter. Do you know whether this was the same march
that Corporal Martin was on?
Cpl. Kreider. From Seoul, yes, sir; it was the same march.
Senator Potter. All right. Then what happened?
Cpl. Kreider. We kept going until we had approximately 370
men when we left Seoul, and they marched us on the way to
Pyongyang, and I am not sure how many died on the way, but I
know a lot of them died from malnutrition, and we got to
Pyongyang, and they kept us there a week or a week and a half
in another building, and we saw the flares coming over there;
and they moved us out again and the same way as before, and the
men were weak, and they would not give them any food or would
not let them go to the latrine, and it was in horrible
conditions, and a lot of men could not stand up and could not
even close their hands.
Senator Potter. It was in this confinement at Pyongyang?
Cpl. Kreider. Yes.
Senator Potter. How long were you there, about a week?
Cpl. Kreider. Approximately a week.
Senator Potter. And you could not leave the room to go to
the latrine?
Cpl. Kreider. A lot of the men were so weak they could not
even stand up, and they would black out and they were just
living corpses, but a few of us, we had to talk to the guard,
and they would not let us go, and the guard wouldn't let us go
to the latrine; once in a while they would let one or two of us
go, but most of us never had a chance.
Senator Potter. Were conditions much the same there as when
you were confined in Seoul?
Cpl. Kreider. I believe they were worse, sir. Every time it
seemed that they would retreat, when the North Koreans were
retreating, they would always get rough with us, but as soon as
they thought they were winning, they would be nicer to us
because they figured maybe they could teach us communism.
But I always was under the impression if it got so bad that
they were going to lose the war, I knew they were going to kill
us sooner or later.
Senator Potter. Did they try to give you any Communist
propaganda while you were there?
Cpl. Kreider. No, sir, I don't believe they had time; all
they did there was just let us lie around. I went out with a
detail to the graveyard and they had a few men die every night,
and we used to carry them out there, and they would take me
along as interpreter, and we would bury a few men every day,
and I found leaflets dropped from the air, one of them had a
picture of General MacArthur and Mr. Truman on it.
Senator Potter. These were Communist leaflets?
Cpl. Kreider. No, sir; they were dropped from the air, from
our forces, and they were calling for Kimysong, calling on him
to surrender, and that was one of the leaflets; and we knew
then that the country was being taken over by the United
Nations.
Senator Potter. They moved you out of there?
Cpl. Kreider. Yes, right before our forces; and the same
condition was there at Seoul, a lot of men could not even stand
up, and they would hit them over the head with the rifle butts
and kill them right there on the floor. Some died outside the
building after we carried them out.
Senator Potter. In other words, the men that could not get
up to go to the march were beaten to death with rifle butts?
Cpl. Kreider. Yes, sir, and we could not carry them all; we
had so many we could not carry them, but each one of us was
helping to carry someone. We were all weak and we could not do
much about it. They took us on a train at Pyongyang and took us
right outside of the city a few miles, and I don't know exactly
how long later, a few days later, right close to a week, they
took us out into a field and he was supposed to be a South
Korean guard, or he said he was, but be told me that they were
going to shoot us.
I didn't know if he was telling me that to scare me or
really believed it, but he took us out on a field and American
planes came out and then they took us back to the train, and
the American air force knew where we were, and they were scared
to do anything because they would follow us, and they knew we
were on the train. And other times they would move us out at
night. I was wondering why they moved us out at daytime and the
air force knew we were in there.
That same day they took us to Sunchon, above the city,
right to a tunnel, and they put the train cars in the tunnel;
and some of us were in a coal car. They left us in that tunnel
until it got evening.
Senator Potter. Were you in a coal car or boxcar?
Cpl. Kreider. Sir, I was in a coal car before we got to
Sunchon, and I believe they disconnected some of the cars there
for some reason and put another train on. I believe they just
took boxcars then to the tunnel, and I think that that is what
I was in at the tunnel; it was in a boxcar. They took us out
there, and that day or that evening and they said they were
going to give us chow. They wanted about forty at a time to go
to eat. That very morning they took all of the officers out
from the group and they said they were going to take them to
Manchuria; I don't know what they did, but they told me that.
That evening they took us out, by groups of forty, and I
was in the second group, and they took us along an embankment,
and they told us to sit down; and I figured what was going on.
Everybody was too weak to run or too weak to even walk hardly,
and they just set there and they opened up fire, six guards;
and one boy fell on top of me, and he had his arm up over my
face, and I guess they figured I was dead. That is why they let
me go.
Senator Potter. Were you hit?
Cpl. Kreider. Not seriously, just grazed on the knee at the
time. So then there was one more man that survived, Master
Sergeant McFadden, and he was pretty weak, and I think he was
out, and I helped carry him back, and we went back to, part
way, to Sunchon, and it was too cold to walk. So we laid in a
corn shock, and the next morning the North Korean civilian gave
us food and he took us back to Sunchon where we met up with
South Korean forces; and from there we were taken back to Japan
and the States.
Senator Potter. Corporal, I assume because of your
knowledge of the Japanese language that you were able to
receive much more information then the average man who had no
knowledge of the language, and you certainly saw the Communists
operate at first hand. Do you have any expressions that you
would like to make on your own as to that?
Cpl. Kreider. I noticed one thing especially in North
Korea. I spoke with many, many civilians at the graveyard and
especially crowded around when we were burying the dead, and we
would read the Bible, and the North Korean guards didn't like
it. This old woman she went okay and folded her hands like she
was praying, and the guards jabbed her with a bayonet.
Senator Potter. The guards jabbed this lady?
Cpl. Kreider. And I noticed North Koreans were very
sympathetic to us, the civilian population, and they would
sneak apples to us, and I was standing there and one boy
touched me, a little boy, and he gave me some North Korean
money and gave me an apple. And on the way back to the camp
after burying the dead, I asked if I could buy some apples, and
he said, ``Where did you get the money?'' And I said that I
found it, and that is where I got a little food in there at
Pyongyang that way, through the help of the civilian
population.
I noticed that the people who had been living under
communism, I believe, hated it more because they know what it
is, and I noticed the North Korean civilians hated it much more
than the South Korean civilians did.
Senator Potter. It is a form of government you hate to see
come here, isn't that true?
Cpl. Kreider. I think that I would sooner be dead than
living, under communism, myself.
Senator Potter. Thank you, Corporal.
We will let you know when you are to appear.
Senator Potter. I would like to call Sergeant Sharps.
TESTIMONY OF SGT. ROBERT L. SHARPS
Senator Potter. Sergeant, would you state for the record
your name and your present outfit?
Sgt. Sharps. Sergeant First Class Robert L. Sharps, 14 AAA
Battalion, Fort Monmouth, Virginia.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, what is your home address?
Sgt. Sharps. High Point, North Carolina.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, you have heard some of this
testimony. Were you here yesterday?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And you heard Corporal Martin's statement
and you have heard Corporal Kreider's statement this morning.
If my information is correct, you were on the same march, is
that correct?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And were you in the tunnel massacre?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. I am wondering if you have anything to add
to the story of the march. Was your march much the same and did
you have the march up to Seoul first?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir, my march up to Seoul, none of these
fellows were with me, I was on a different march.
Senator Potter. Did the same conditions prevail?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes sir.
Senator Potter. Did you witness, or were any of the men who
couldn't keep up, were they shot by the Communists?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir, they were.
Senator Potter. Did you witness any of them being shot?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Would you mind telling us some of the
experiences or what you witnessed?
Sgt. Sharps. I was a medical aid man in Korea.
Senator Potter. First you might tell us the unit you went
over to Korea with and when you went to Korea.
Sgt. Sharps. I went on July 4, 1950 with the 19th Infantry
Regiment. I was assigned to George Company of the 19th Regiment
as medical aid man.
Senator Potter. Will you tell us how you happened to be
captured?
Sgt. Sharps. We were cut off after the Communists crossed
the Kum River and my company was cut off, and due to misguiding
or misleading information, my platoon was left behind and we
stayed behind for an extra day.
When we came to realize it, we were far behind the enemy
lines, and we walked into a trap and the enemy fired and there
were forty-three men in this platoon, and at this particular
time they killed all but four of us.
Senator Potter. In that first fighting?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir, and when it came dark they came down
and searched the bodies, and bayoneted quite a few people that
weren't dead. I was one of the lucky ones that didn't get hit.
I know that they had bayoneted them because I was a medical aid
man and after the Communists left I went to them and helped
them as much as I could.
Senator Potter. The ones that were wounded, they went and
bayoneted them and killed them?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir. The four of us went to hills and
tried to find our way back at nights, but after four days
without anything to eat I went to get some food and I was the
only one who wasn't wounded, and when I was down to get food
the Communists caught me. They ran at me and forced me to
surrender, and they started asking me right away political
questions.
Senator Potter. Right away?
Sgt. Sharps. They asked me what I thought about General
MacArthur, and what I thought about the president and so forth
and so on.
I had to play ball with them. I did because they would have
killed me. They took me to Taejon then and put me in prison,
and there were some thirty to forty other guys there when I
arrived.
They had no medical aid at all. I tore the clothes up, my
clothing, and theirs, and patched them up the best I could, but
they had no medical aid from the Koreans whatsoever.
Senator Potter. When you were captured, did they take your
shoes away from you?
Sgt. Sharps. They did.
Senator Potter. And other personal effects?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir, and they told us that from Taejon
they were going to take us to Seoul and we would be put aboard
planes and flown back to the States. That is what they told us
to get us to march. The men that could walk were started on the
march north and we went to Seoul.
All the way up to Seoul people that couldn't make it were
shot. Mine differs from most of these people because they
didn't try to hide it; they didn't try to hide the shooting of
people.
Senator Potter. Did they have Korean officers in charge of
the march?
Sgt. Sharps. There was one Korean officer and he was in
charge and the rest of the people were guerrillas or police.
Senator Potter. Did the Korean officer do any of the
shooting?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. So that it was part of their command policy
then to just shoot the ones that couldn't keep up with the
march?
Sgt. Sharps. In my opinion that is what they did.
When we were staying in buildings, it seemed that we were
put in the buildings that were the most conspicuous ones they
could find, and we were put in a lone building some place and
our planes would strafe daily. They would kill quite a few of
the prisoners because there was no way that they knew we were
in those buildings.
Senator Potter. There was no markings at all?
Sgt. Sharps. No.
Senator Potter. No markings that there were prisoners in
there?
Sgt. Sharps. No, sir, our rations up until we arrived at
Seoul were about one rice bowl a day if we were hungry. The
only time we could eat was when we went through towns.
Senator Potter. Did they do the same with you? Did they
march up through towns for public display?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir, they did. They had no restriction on
who could talk to us, and who could harass us and who could
beat us and there was no restriction. Civilians, the kids, and
soldiers, and anybody.
Senator Potter. They would come up and beat you?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir, that is what they did.
Senator Potter. Then when you arrived at Seoul, were you
confined in the same building that Cpl. Kreider was confined
in?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir, and in those buildings it was a
school for girls and it was laid off like one of our schools.
They had different sections and they split the prisoners up in
there, and we had mandatory classes and Communist literature
that we were required to read. And they had movies, and in the
movie that fellow mentioned yesterday, something he left out
about the movie, there was some American officer in the movie.
I don't know who was playing the part, but they always made him
out as a drunk and he was always drunk and he never was sober.
Senator Potter. In other words, the man who was playing the
part of the American officer was always the drunkard?
Sgt. Sharps. He was always intoxicated.
Senator Potter. Did they interrogate you while you were
there?
Sgt. Sharps. They asked me what my family were, and I told
them that they were workers and they didn't like white collar
people, or people that had important jobs. Most of the fellows
told them they were either farmers or machinists or something
like that.
Senator Potter. If they told them that, they didn't treat
you badly?
Sgt. Sharps. That is right. They told us the history of the
second war, that when Japan surrendered we failed to go into
South Korea, and the Japanese had torn the country to pieces.
And when we wouldn't go in and stop them, the Russians moved
right away and stopped the Japanese from tearing the homeland
up and the Americans didn't care. They didn't care why or
anything about the Korean people. One of the officers who is
still alive now would argue with them on points like that.
Senator Potter. How would they react when he would argue
with them?
Sgt. Sharps. They didn't like it at all, and they didn't
bother him physically.
Senator Potter. Was this Mr. Kim there when you were there?
Sgt. Sharps. I don't know exactly what his job was, but he
could speak perfect English and he knew all of the slang, too.
He knew all of the American slang and he could understand
anything you talked about. I don't know exactly whether he was
in charge or not. I don't think he was, and I just think that
he was an interpreter. We had Russian people come there, too.
Senator Potter. You had Russians, civilians, going into the
camp?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What would they do?
Sgt. Sharps. They were always accompanied by the North
Korean high officers, and they didn't have anything to say much
at all, except we had to stand at attention.
Senator Potter. Did the North Korean officers give them a
great deal of respect when they came in?
Sgt. Sharps. They did.
Senator Potter. We can assume that they were influenced by
these Russians and the people coming in to look the camp over?
Sgt. Sharps. That is right, sir. I remember one time when
they had come and they took us all and gave us haircuts and
tried to get us to looking as best they could when they came.
Senator Potter. So that you are of the opinion, as a result
of that and other things that they had a great deal of
influence on the operations of the camp and they wanted to
impress their superiors?
Sgt. Sharps. That is right.
Senator Potter. Do you have anything else you would like to
add that hasn't been covered by the prison conditions at Seoul?
Sgt. Sharps. Not at Seoul, no, sir.
Senator Potter. Then you were on the march after the
landing, they took you out of Seoul?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Were you on the same march as Corporal
Kreider?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Do you care to add anything to what he
stated about the march?
Sgt. Sharps. Only that there was food on the march; there
was food available. Pumpkins and apples on the roads at the
side of the roads and it would have been no trouble for them to
let us have them, but they wouldn't let us do it.
Senator Potter. They would not let you have them?
Sgt. Sharps. No, sir, some of the fellows who were hungry,
and the worse ones, would run out into the fields and they
would shoot them. The only time we could get water was when we
would stop and some of the fellows were drinking out of mud
holes. That is the way we got water. We carried water, but they
would not let us have any.
Senator Power. Then you arrived at Pyongyang?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes.
Senator Potter. Were you confined in the same place as
Corporal Kreider?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And do you have anything you would like to
add to that?
Sgt. Sharps. I know they had a sick room, a special sick
room, and they didn't set the room up; we did. We kept the
people that couldn't move in this one particular room, and in
this room when they told us we were going to move again, and we
were going to the Manchurian border, the people in this room
could not move and they were weak and the guards came in and
they killed almost all of them with their rifle butts. They
refused to let us carry them because they were in a hurry.
Senator Potter. They would hit them in the head with a
rifle butt?
Sgt. Sharps. They would hit them in the head, or any part
that they could just hit. They hit them all over.
I know of one case of a man in charge who begged them not
to kill the people and they did anyway.
Senator Potter. Were you there at the time?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Then they moved you out of there when the
Allied march got closer?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What happened? Were you placed aboard a
train?
Sgt. Sharps. They placed us aboard a train.
Senator Potter. And were you in the tunnel massacre?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Will you relate your own experience there?
Sgt. Sharps. In a process of about five days, I don't know
exactly how many days, but we left Pyongyang and we arrived at
this Sunchon. The train was put inside of a tunnel to keep our
planes from tearing it up. They told us that they were going to
feed us, and they were going to take us out in groups of
thirties or forties, take us to individual Korean homes and
feed us.
We went outside and they took my particular group into a
little ditch outside there and all of the fellows sat down and
they had bowls with them and they thought they were going to
eat. I heard a rifle bolt slide forward and I looked around and
I jumped up and I was the first one to jump. They shot us and
when they shot me, it spun me around and the people started to
falling on top of me and I would say for twenty minutes they
fired. When they had finished firing they came around with
their rifle butts and checking the people to see if they were
dead.
Senator Potter. If they thought they weren't dead, they
bayoneted them?
Sgt. Sharps. Three of my ribs were broken.
Senator Potter. With a rifle butt?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes.
Senator Potter. Where were you hit?
Sgt. Sharps. In the arms and legs.
Senator Potter. They had assumed that you were dead?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Or they would have finished you off?
Sgt. Sharps. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What happened after that? How did you get
away?
Sgt. Sharps. After they left; after they had done.
Senator Potter. Apparently they left pretty quickly after
they did the killing.
Sgt. Sharps. They did. It is my opinion they took a train
and went further north; I don't know. But I crawled away and
there were seven in the group of the thirty or forty that they
didn't kill outright. I understand some of them died later but
they didn't kill them outright. There were two of us that could
move and we crawled away and we waited until the American
forces came in and I weighed 165 pounds upon capture and I
think that I weighed less than one hundred when they found me.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, I want to say to you and to all
of the others who have testified so far, that you certainly
experienced treatment that is beyond the realm of civilized
thinking.
If you have anything, as a result of your experience, that
you would like to comment on concerning the Communist
doctrines, please do so. Do you think the Communists in the
United States are much different than the Communists elsewhere?
Sgt. Sharps. They tried to teach us communism, and even the
people that were masters at teaching it, they couldn't put it
across. I don't think that there was any reason, any reason at
all, why anybody should be a Communist.
I have my own opinion of them and it is not very good. I
think anybody that is a Communist in a great country like we
have is worse than what I had to fight.
Senator Potter. Thank you.
We will call Mr. Milano.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM L. MILANO
Senator Potter. Will you identify yourself for the record?
Mr. Milano. William L. Milano, 7056 Regal, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.
Senator Potter. When did you go to Korea?
Mr. Milano. July 10th, with the 27th Infantry, 25th
Division.
Senator Potter. What were the circumstances under which you
were captured?
Mr. Milano. Well, on November 6th we got orders to go out
on a patrol, I would say fifty miles southwest of Kaeson, and
we were supposed to get in contact with them and find out their
strength.
We left in the morning about six o'clock on November 6th,
two platoons. About eleven o'clock we met these two South
Korean policemen which they told us up to two days ago there
was enemy around here. We dismounted our jeeps and the drivers
followed behind us and we went on patrol; we walked.
Senator Potter. What type of platoon were you with, a rifle
platoon?
Mr. Milano. Reconnaissance platoon, and we have one platoon
from K Company and they were supporting us.
Senator Potter. What was your duty and rank?
Mr. Milano. A scout and driver.
Senator Potter. All right, go ahead.
Mr. Milano. We dismounted and there was a bridge where you
could see they must have put a grenade to it and blow half of
it away, and so we had to go under the gully and so we did, and
we walked for about, I would say, half a mile, and the jeeps
followed us--the whole convoy was about a mile--and we were
separated and as we walked along on the left we saw three
civilians with their hands tied behind their back. You could
tell they were just shot because you could see it was fresh
blood, maybe a couple of hours before that.
Senator Potter. It was three South Korean civilians?
Mr. Milano. Yes. So we went up, I would say a good mile,
and still nothing. So our platoon leader told us to jump in the
jeeps and it was like the first squad. There was a hill here
and a hill there and we had to go around a bend. The mortars
was about a mile in back of us and we were all spread out and
so we jumped in the jeep.
Senator Potter. It was Communist mortars?
Mr. Milano. It was ours, it was in case we got into
trouble. So we got in the jeep and we turned the bend and then
they hit us, and they were right on top of us.
Back at the platoon of mortars, they could hit first, and
they sucked us in a mile, and this major said there were about
two thousand of them. This was during the push.
So we dismounted from the jeeps and we hit for the ditch. I
would say they had us pinned down there for about three hours
and you could hear them talking and they just had us cut right
in with that machine gunfire.
About two o'clock they throw a Banzai attack, four or five
hundred of them and they overrun us. They took thirteen
prisoners and the ones who were wounded were left there and
couldn't walk.
They marched us around a bend and as soon as we got around
the bend they had some officers there and they told us to
strip, so we did. They took our shoes and everything except our
pair of fatigues. They got about four guards with burp guns and
they told us--nobody could speak English then--to march and so
we did. I figured we marched for a good hour and we marched
about ten miles.
On the left there was a house and they took us in there and
they had their medics there and we had some wounded and they
put clean bandages on our wounded and they gave us a pair of
North Korean shoes and North Korean jacket, and they gave us
apples and they gave us cigarettes.
So I figured we stayed there for about half an hour. Then
the guards, they could only motion because they couldn't speak
English, and they motioned this way. It was like a dried-up
gully there was a village and they took us down there. They
lined us up outside and seven or eight officers came out.
Senator Potter. That was in the little village?
Mr. Milano. Yes, sir, and seven or eight officers came out
and still the interpreter didn't come yet and so they took us
inside a big hut, and they had guards all around us. So after a
while a civilian came in and we had two officers with us at the
time. The civilian told the officers that he was a North Korean
officer and he would like to ask me a few questions.
Senator Potter. He could speak English?
Mr. Milano. Yes, good, too. All during the interrogation,
he would say to the officer, ``Are you hungry'' and he must
have said it seven times, and like he would skip around and he
would say you shut up. Like he asked me ``how old'' was I, and
I told him nineteen years old and he asked another guy what
grade of school he was in. And one officer he would ask were
any Chinese Communists in Korea yet?
Senator Potter. One of those captured was an officer?
Mr. Milano. He said he was. He asked another officer who
was the greater man, Stalin or Truman.
Senator Potter. I am trying to figure out this civilian who
was acting as interpreter. Was he asking these questions of the
prisoners, of you and other prisoners?
Mr. Milano. Yes, and he was asking the officers.
Senator Potter. Did you have officers?
Mr. Milano. A platoon leader and an artillery officer. He
was asking us such questions as where was your regiment, and
how many tanks and how many men. They didn't tell them anything
and that was going on for about an hour and a half, and I
figure about seven times he said ``Are you hungry?'' The
officer said ``yes'' and he said ``We have nothing but rice''
and the officer said that would be all right and so he said ``I
will bring you back in the morning, and we will question you
again.''
Before he took us out, this other officer that didn't speak
English, he looked like he was in charge, and he told everybody
to empty their pockets out which we did. We had our dog-tags
still on and we took them off and laid them down. As we walked
out of the hut, two guards walked with you and I was the last
one out and I only had one guard and he walked out with me and
so the North Korean interpreter said he would bring you back in
the morning and question you again. He said he was going to
take us to chow.
As we were walking along, he gave an order or something and
so they started marching us and we went around the bend and
there was a hill, and the North Koreans were standing there.
About thirty of them. Most of them with burp guns and rifles.
Senator Power. Were they North Korean military soldiers?
Mr. Milano. Yes, from the North Korean green uniforms on
and all.
However, the other officer must have given a command in
Korean, for what he said I don't know, but, say I am facing
this way, I heard a bolt go back and I went like this, and he
fired and caught me in the right hand and threw me, and as it
did I figured the blood hit me in the face, and he took another
shot and he hit me underneath the leg and just took a piece of
skin away and it was getting near night, like twilight, and you
couldn't see too good. The third shot he took and hit me right
behind the foot and I just felt the dirt and all.
Still, after the shooting was over, the officer must have
said something and they started laughing. The guard I had come
over and kicked me once, but never checked me, and he took the
shoes I had on, the rubber shoes and he took them off. So they
just laughed and they started walking away. So after they
turned the bend I got up and I went and checked all the rest of
the twelve guys and they were all dead and I thought it was
best to get out of there. So I went over a hillside, 150 yards,
and down on the main road, and the North Koreans, I was
seventy-five yards up on an angle and the North Koreans were
walking there and I figured I had better hide for a while and I
started losing a lot of blood and I was getting weak and I
couldn't move.
Before that, though, they must have gone back and shot them
again to make sure they were all dead right after I got away
because I heard shooting right in back of the hill again.
Senator Potter. Right where you had been shot the first
place?
Mr. Milano. I found myself, it was on a little hill about
seventy-five yards, cornstalks and I got in the middle of them
because I figured they couldn't see me and I got there. I woke
up three days later; two civilians were waking me up and I
looked up because all during these three days I was delirious
and I was dreaming I had a cold glass of beer, and I looked up
and you know I didn't know for sure and I didn't know how to
speak Korean.
I said in Japanese, I asked them for some water and a
cigarette and something to eat, and then I went back to sleep.
I don't know how long after it was that they came and woke me
up and they had shoes for me and bandages and water, and they
had rice and some corn silk to smoke.
They were trying to tell me--I didn't know it at first--
that the Americans were out in the main road, my own regiment
was pushing there. They had come about fifty miles and I just
wanted to get away from there. I couldn't walk because both of
my feet froze, and my hand froze.
Senator Potter. What time of the year was this?
Mr. Milano. It was November 6th.
Senator Potter. It was cold?
Mr. Milano. Yes, it wasn't snowing yet. So I said, the guy
must have been about fifty years old and I don't know if you
have ever seen them, the way they carry their wood, and they
picked me up there and just put me on his back and carried me
to the main road. There was an American platoon setting up a
roadblock and they called a jeep and took me right to the
medics.
Senator Potter. How far did this Korean have to carry you?
Mr. Milano. I figure it was a good four miles.
Senator Potter. You were the only one that survived?
Mr. Milano. There was another kid, I heard, that they took
out and he wasn't there when the interrogation was going on,
and he was taken prisoner with me. They called him to drive one
of our captured jeeps and when I heard from a buddy of mine, he
said that they told him they would give him one hundred yards
start, and he outrun them and Australians picked him up fifteen
days later.
Senator Potter. They were using him just for sport?
Mr. Milano. Yes, but he outrun them.
Senator Potter. Thank you kindly for coming down here, and
giving us this story.
Do you have anything you would like to add of your own
volition? You have seen the type of enemy first-hand.
There is no doubt in your mind that an officer gave the
order?
Mr. Milano. Yes. And I think the interpreter mostly there,
the way he smiled, he knew they were going to take us out there
as soon as we left the building. It wasn't four minutes later
when they opened up.
Senator Potter. So you think----
Mr. Milano. They must have known I had escaped because when
I was in the building they counted thirteen, and this major, I
met him in San Antonio, Texas, and he was in charge of the 1st
or 2nd Battalion and he said he took a company of men on patrol
and he didn't know if the enemy was on patrol, and they found
the bodies all buried, all unrecognizable. It said they buried
them about three feet.
Mr. O'Donnell. I think we can let the record show that the
War Crimes Division did actually find twelve dead American PW's
at the particular scene of this atrocity.
Senator Potter. Thank you.
We will recess now until 1:30.
[Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m. a recess was taken until 1:30
p.m. the same day.]
afternoon session
Senator Potter. The hearing is reconvened.
I would like to call Sergeant Treffery.
TESTIMONY OF SGT. WENDELL TREFFERY
Senator Potter. Sergeant Treffery, will you identify
yourself for the record and give your name and the unit that
you are attached to now?
Sgt. Treffery. My name is Sergeant Wendell Treffery, RA
115660, presently at Army Hospital, Walton, Massachusetts.
Senator Potter. What is your home address?
Sgt. Treffery. Todd-Hollow Road, Terryville, Connecticut.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, could you tell the committee when
you went to Korea, and what unit you were assigned to?
Sgt. Treffery. October 1949 I volunteered for Far East
command and the last part of November I started for Japan and
landed in Japan Christmas Eve. I left San Francisco in
December.
I was immediately sent to northern Japan, to Mikado,
northern Japan. There I was a ski instructor for the first two
months, first part of '50.
Senator Potter. You were a skiing instructor?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, and from the last of February of 1950
to May '50 I was in pharmacist school down in southern Japan.
I went back to northern Japan when the war broke out. That
is where I was.
Senator Potter. When did you go into Korea?
Sgt. Treffery. I landed with the Seventh Division, at
Inchon.
Senator Potter. What were the circumstances under which you
were captured and what was your duty at the time?
Sgt. Treffery. I was medical aid man attached to Major
Company, 31st Regiment, Seventh Division.
Senator Potter. How were you captured, Sergeant?
Sgt. Treffery. Sir, on November 29, at six o'clock in the
morning, the 1st Battalion of 31st Regiment was attached to the
1st Marine Division and we had driven up from Hamhung to 1st
Marine Division CP, which was almost to the Chosen Reservoir.
We were attached to them and kind of formed a company,
battalion, to head for the reservoir to help the men out who
were stuck up there, surrounded by the Chinese.
Senator Potter. This is what time of the year?
Sgt. Treffery. November 29, sir, six o'clock in the
morning. We pushed up on attack on the morning of the 29th, 1st
Battalion, 31st Regiment when we went up through the valleys
and the 1st Marines took the hills. We got up about four miles
and the Marines came down out of the hills and we loaded on the
trucks and headed for the Chosen Reservoir.
We got along about two miles, just getting dark, and a
machine gun opened up on us from the right and one of the
aircraft dropped a napalm on it and destroyed that. We
continued about a mile and everything opened on us from both
sides, front, and both sides.
We disembarked and took cover and started to fight. That
fight lasted all night long, up until six o'clock in the
morning. During the night our airplanes overhead dropped flares
trying to spot us and trying to give us a helping hand, but
they couldn't find us.
In our convoy several trucks had caught fire and lit our
area up and we were sitting ducks for the Chinese. Six o'clock
in the morning came and it is about 120 of us walking, most of
us wounded, and there is about 350 to start with.
A marine major had answered a call of the Chinese
interpreter from the army, and he hollered down for us to
surrender. And because we had no chance, we were very out-
numbered and the marine major talked it over with the other
officers, of what was left, and decided it would be best if
they gave us a good deal to surrender to them because we had no
chance.
So the Chinese agreed with the marine major to turn all of
the wounded back which we had quite a few of, to our lines if
we would surrender to them. The major thought it was a good
deal and so he surrendered us.
The Chinese moved in and before they moved in everybody had
a chance to destroy their weapons and everything like that,
valuable to them. The Chinese got us into two files to march us
up to two cabins on the mountain. There we stayed until
December 1. It was about seven o'clock in the morning, and we
couldn't build any fires because the Chinese figured we would
get spotted.
About six o'clock on the first of December 1950, they
started us back the same way we came up, and past the convoy
that had been ambushed the night before that, and to take us on
the way to march us north. They backtracked us by a convoy and
our wounded we had left there a couple of days before were
frozen. It had snowed and this snow had covered the bodies.
Senator Potter. They hadn't evacuated the wounded?
Sgt. Treffery. No, sir.
Senator Potter. After they said they would?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. You were captured by the Chinese?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. When you were captured, did they leave you
your clothing?
Sgt. Treffery. No, sir, they stripped us of our outer
clothing, heavy clothing, and we had most of us to wear
fatigues, and it was twenty-five to thirty below zero; it was
pretty cold. We came down out of the cabins, by the convoy and
as we went by, I found two rubber boots on the road, both for
the left foot and I picked them up and put them on.
Senator Potter. You didn't have shoes at the time?
Sgt. Treffery. No, sir, not at the time.
Senator Potter. They had taken your shoes?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, all of our heavy clothing, except
fatigues. We marched the first night, we bunked down in some
hay on some snow and we kept warm by huddling together. Then
the next day they marched us mostly by night and it is only
about fifty miles from where we were captured to the Yalu River
and we marched eighteen days.
The second night they put us in some cow stalls, pig pens,
about six or seven inches between the logs. They put us in
there to sleep and that night I froze my feet and the third
morning they let us out immediately to start marching again. So
we marched and I kept on marching until about the 17th day, and
all during that march, all of the skin came off and nothing but
bones left on my feet.
But one time my mother told me, keep your chin up and
things will get better, and so I never could see dying over
there.
So I always kept going and I had to keep going, and put my
mind to get going, and we got to Kanggye.
Senator Potter. How far is that from the Yalu River?
Sgt. Treffery. The town is closer than sixty miles; it is
pretty close to the Yalu River.
Senator Potter. The Seventh Division was the farthest
advanced of any division up there?
Sgt. Treffery. We got to the Yalu at one time. We got to
Kanggye and during the march the men who were wounded, I had a
medical aid kit but all of the bandages I had used except for
three boxes of morphine and a lot of the wounded men, you
couldn't administer morphine on account of head wounds and
stomach wounds or any wound like that, you couldn't give them
morphine. Morphine makes you weak and you might kill them.
I had three boxes of morphine left over and I had them
under my belt. The Chinese never confiscated those because they
never found them. On the march I used it on these guys who were
wounded pretty bad in the legs and arms and the hip. So I used
up all of my morphine on those wounded guys, but they never
made the march. They were left behind and the men who were too
weak to go, they just dropped out and you didn't dare look
behind because you were afraid to get a bayonet in the back,
and you would hear a shot about two minutes after they dropped
out, but you didn't look behind to see what happened.
After arriving at Kanggye, very few of us were left, about
a third of them didn't make it. After arriving in Kanggye, they
were dying off one after the other, and the food was getting
very small, a bowl of maize. And you gentlemen are probably
familiar with maize, or sorghum you call it in the Middle West.
You grow it for cattle and pigs and they feed us a little bowl
of that in the morning and a little bowl at night.
Senator Potter. Was it hot?
Sgt. Treffery. Sometimes hot, sir, and sometimes we would
got these sorghum balls of frozen ice. Above all we tried to
get some water and we had to march, and you get awful thirsty
and they wouldn't give you any water.
So we were walking down the road and there was a little
water running down off the mountain frozen in the middle of the
road, and I kind of kicked my heel into it and got a mouthful
before they grabbed me. That kept up and we arrived in Kanggye
and it wasn't too many of us left and after we once got there
they were still dying off from malnutrition and some men had
pneumonia. They kept us there until the first of January 1951.
Senator Potter. How many started this march?
Sgt. Treffery. One hundred twenty.
Senator Potter. How many finished it?
Sgt. Treffery. I would say about eighty. They kept us there
until the first part of January 1951, and the Chinese came
around one night, twelve o'clock, and said all sick and wounded
were going to move to the hospital. We knew better than that.
We figured they had one under the ground. There was some train
tunnel. Everybody had to go and there was no other choice, and
everybody crawled out to those ox sleds and they hauled us all
night long and arrived in a little valley, just south of
Kanggye, I would say about five miles south of Kanggye.
They kept us there until April 25, and during that time we
were there, it was about eighty of us went there and after
arriving in Kanggye there were other PW's there besides us and
eighty of us went to this so-called hospital, and while we were
there there was about fifty of us come out; about thirty died
there.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, would you hold up a minute?
Sgt. Treffery. All right.
[A short recess was taken.]
Senator Potter. I am sorry, Sergeant. Can we proceed?
Sgt. Treffery. They took all of the sick and wounded to
this valley and they kept us there until April 25, and during
the time we were there, the first three days we were there they
gave us medical attention, once every day, for the first three
days, and they gave us half decent chow.
Senator Potter. Were you billeted in buildings?
Sgt. Treffery. We were four in a building, a mud hut. I was
in charge of the other three, like a squad leader. So they said
``you must take care of these other three'' and I couldn't even
take care of myself. So I said, ``Okay.''
One of them had frozen feet like myself, and the other two
there was nothing wrong with the other two. But by April, all
of the other three had died off, one by one. For the first
three days I was unconscious, and I was talking out of my head
and talking crazy like. Every man died that I have seen before
they die they start talking crazy, and when I came to, what
made me come to I don't know, when I did come to the guys told
me that I was accusing them of stealing my cigarettes and my
food and I didn't have any to steal. So I said don't pay any
attention to me, I didn't know what I was talking about.
One died off and we didn't know what was wrong with him,
and he was eating this little bowl of chowder, and as each meal
would come along he would eat less and less, and I said you had
better eat. It isn't fit for the pigs, but you must eat it. And
he said ``I can't do it,'' and one night he didn't eat hardly
anything and he said ``I can't eat it.'' I said ``Did you say
your prayers?'' And he said ``yes,'' and he went to sleep and
when we woke up in the morning he was dead.
The next one he had frozen feet, a marine. I kept telling
him to take care of your feet, and I had a comforter and we had
one apiece, and I had a pair of fatigues which I ripped up and
made bandages. Twice a day I could take a comforter to take
care of my own feet and absorb the puss and blood coming out of
my foot and use those fatigues I ripped up for bandages. Twice
a day I would take the dirty cotton and throw it away and put
on some new cotton and by spring I didn't have any cotton left
in my blanket.
So he said ``No,'' his blanket at the bottom was getting
soggy, and I said you had better take care of your feet. That
poison is going to backtrack up in your system and kill you,
and he said ``I can't take care of my feet,'' and I couldn't
figure it out. So he died.
There was one other man left and he got malnutrition and he
got beriberi and all kinds of diseases and about a week before
they moved us, he died too and left me there all by myself.
So I asked this Korean woman, how about some water to
drink, and I could speak a little, a few words and she told me
to go out there to the spring water running out of the rice
paddies, and the rice paddies, they use human manure in the
rice paddies. I said ``if I drink that it will surely kill
me.''
So as soon as spring came, I went out in the fields and dug
up some dandelions and different kinds of greens and took them
and got a steel pot and some chips out of the door guard, and I
boiled those greens down and I ate the greens and drank the
juice. I did that about a week and it really helped me out.
April 25 came around. Chinese came up with ox carts and I
am getting a little ahead of myself here.
On January 15 this Korean woman came around and was
supposed to be a nurse and she was about eighteen years old and
she had a bag here and she had a big pair of shears and she had
some newspapers stuffed in that little bag, and she asked me
what was wrong with me. So I stuck my feet out from under the
blanket and it was nothing but bones, and she told me to lay
down on my back. So I did what she told me and so another guy
came with her to assist her and sat on my chest and she started
clipping off my toes with this big pair of shears, it looked
like hedge shears.
Senator Potter. Clipped off your toes with those shears?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes. She left two big toes on my feet, and I
think I was making quite a bit of noise, after she did that.
Senator Potter. There was no anesthetic?
Sgt. Treffery. No, and she took some dirty newspaper and
she did that and it was bleeding, and put it over the nub, thin
dirty newspaper, and tied it with a piece of string and I
looked at her and I cursed her in English up and down and she
didn't understand me; a good thing.
After she left I tore that off and I took cotton out of my
blanket. After she left, they never did come back. The two guys
with me they died off and on April 25 the Chinese came and
picked us up, and then I weighed seventy pounds. I found out
after I got back, this camp here, camp number one, they brought
us up there, on April 28 we arrived there. They took us up in a
truck, it took us three days to get there.
After I arrived there, I saw a lot of my buddies, and I
thought they had just died off and I never thought they existed
anymore. It was like a reunion to see them again.
We got there and they put about fifteen of us in a room,
about fifteen by fifteen, or fifteen or twenty of us in a room,
and we were so snug together we didn't hardly breathe, and all
of that winter I had been under the blanket for quite a few
months and my legs up under me so far. By the time spring came,
the muscles of my legs had drawn up and I couldn't straighten
out my legs.
Senator Potter. What was the name of the camp where they
cut off your toes?
Sgt. Treffery. This didn't have a name, it was just a
little valley about five miles south of Kanggye.
Senator Potter. Were there many other prisoners?
Sgt. Treffery. Ninety of us sick and wounded. It was about
thirty of them died and there were about fifty left.
Senator Potter. Did you give the place any name? Was it
known?
Sgt. Treffery. We called it ``Massacre Valley,'' but the
PW's came back, they had another valley they named that name,
so you might get the two mixed up.
After arriving in Camp 1, April 28, 1951, a lot of my
friends were there, and the Chinese said they were going to
give us sick call. It was to dress our wounds. I still had two
big toes on, nothing but bones. Then they waited about eight to
ten days before they gave us sick call. They kept with excuses
and didn't have the stuff to do it or something was wrong.
That second night after I was there they fed us dough
balls. They were little balls of dough, strictly dough, and
made out of rice flour. Some of the guys there ate thirty or
forty of those; four of them died. Some went down to the creek
behind camp and ate a lot of cold water and just swelled up;
three or four or five of them died.
After that they started feeding us cracked corn, and just a
little bit of rice, you could hardly notice it. From that corn
a lot of guys got dysentery, and your insides would be so
scratched up and bleeding, and infected, and myself, I got this
dysentery.
So many of the guys, I would say at least ten or fifteen a
day just laying around the ground, too weak to get up, and I
was too weak to help them and you couldn't help anybody. They
were so weak, a couple of days after they would be dead. About
eight hundred died there in about four months time. One guy
helped carry a fellow up on the hill and the next day he would
go out.
Senator Potter. What do you mean by carrying them on the
top?
Sgt. Treffery. They planted them all on the top of a big
hill, and they would bury them in a three-foot grave, and the
first rain storm would wash all of the dirt off and it would
leave the body open to the air. Then the dogs would take over,
and you see a lot of dogs up around there.
About the last of May I got dysentery pretty bad and I
couldn't sleep in a house. Everybody had dysentery. I was
sleeping in mud huts and they couldn't get out quick enough and
the place would be an awful mess. So I decided one thing, I
would go out in the air raid shelter and sleep, and my first
sergeant and I slept out there. He and I were pretty sick and
we had dysentery, and we slept out in the air raid shelter. It
was a big hole and we would get out of bed at least, and then
in the morning clean it up, and that is the best you could do.
So we slept out there until about the last of June. He was
taken to the hospital and they threatened to take me to the
hospital on account of my feet, those two big toe bones
sticking out. So they took me up to the hospital after my first
sergeant went up there on sick call. So I went up there about a
week after he went up there and after I got there I made up my
mind to see him and see how he was making out. So I got up
there and it looks like a Japanese castle on the side of the
mountain; alongside the castle they had stalls which looked
like race horse stalls, and there were about like a small box.
There were two men in there, my first sergeant and another
guy and they were both naked, and the last of June and July is
pretty hot weather and the big green flies flying around there,
and if you didn't have enough strength to brush them off, they
would plant eggs and maggots would start. And my first sergeant
and this other guy was lying naked on the floor and I opened
the door and saw them both lying there and I said ``What is the
matter?'' I said ``put something over you, those blow flies are
giving you the works,'' and he couldn't even talk to me he was
too weak, both lying there.
While I was there I saw the maggots working on them,
rectum, and the eyes and ears, and the maggots would start to
come out of the eyes. I said, ``My God, something has got to be
done,'' and I went to the Chinese doctor, and I said ``Can't
you do something?'' And he would say ``later date, later date,
later.''
I said ``They won't be here later,'' and you couldn't talk
sense to them.
Eventually I heard that both of them died, and along with
many, many more up to about 90 percent or 95 percent of the men
up there died. Very few of them came out of the hospital, and
so they threatened to take me up there. This Chinese doctor
came in and he said you go hospital, and I said ``for what?''
He said ``your feet'' and he leaves the room for about five
minutes, just long enough for me to break them off. And around
the base of the bones it was decaying, around the base of the
big toe bone; and all of our hair was along down to our
shoulders, and the fingernails were long and dirty. So I took a
long finger nail and punched it around the bone and I broke it
off at the base.
Senator Potter. You broke off your own big toe?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, and I broke them off. As I gave them a
big push to break off, they would break off and go across the
floor. The Chinese doctor came in and he said ``you go to
hospital'' and I said ``nothing doing, my feet were okay,'' and
he said ``let me look.'' And he took a look and I had the bones
broke off, and he said ``okay'' and so he went outside the door
and never bothered me. I figured if I went to the hospital I
would never get out of it.
In July, after July 15, the peace talks started up in
Panmunjom and things started to improve after the peace talks.
The Chinese figured so many men had died, they couldn't afford
to let any more die because they would have nothing to turn
back, and so they started feeding us a little better, and they
started giving us pork once a week. You got a piece of pork
about the size of a quarter, and you were lucky. The first
piece of pork I wouldn't swallow it; I chewed on it.
Things started to improve quite a bit after that.
In July, about the 28th, around the 20th, around the last
part of July, all of the sergeants a way up in the northern
camp, Chingson, they kept us all there until August of 1952,
and we were all at Camp 4. It isn't marked on the map.
Up until that time things started improving quite a bit and
not too many men were dying like before. We had sick call quite
regularly. In August of 1953 all of the sergeants were moved to
Camp Fuller. I went along with the sergeants because I had made
a promotion in October, the first part of November of 1950, and
so my first sergeant notified me and I went along with the
sergeants.
We went to Camp Fuller in August of 1952. When we got there
the Chinese wouldn't mark the camp. We asked them why and they
said UN didn't recognize it. I said ``What did you move us here
for, you are endangering our lives.'' So they said they could
bring us down there for more education, we weren't educated
enough, and they were moving us to a new university.
Senator Potter. Had you, prior to this time at the other
camp, been getting indoctrinations?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, all of the time, sir.
On May Day, 1952, we almost had a revolution there among
the POW's, quite a revolution almost. They were supposed to put
a play for us down on the square, and after they had made these
Communist lectures to us, and in going down to the square they
were going to make us carry the red flag for them. So, after
everybody filled out to go down to the square, about two miles
away, down the highway, they brought this red flag out to the
men in front of the column, and so when everybody saw that red
flag everybody scattered and then they called the regimental
commander up and they were going to have quite a stink raised
about it.
So the regimental commander said you men, students, fall
out, you won't have to carry the red flag. So we fell out, and
we marched almost to the square, and out comes the red flag
again and we couldn't turn back. We were outside the compound.
They gave it to one guy from Mulberry, Kansas and he took it
over and stands it against a telephone pole.
The Communists said you must carry this and he said ``I
ain't going to carry that'' and so they didn't force anything
on us at that time and they started marching us to the square.
Just when we got to the square we started singing God Bless
America and they didn't like that and we marched in the square
singing and the Chinese said ``shut up, shut up'' and nobody
shut up; everybody would keep singing.
So we were going to have a little play. The GI's were
putting on a little play just before the lectures and so this
one British guy got up in front of us on this stage and he
started telling us a little joke about the three soldiers going
on to the Golden Gate and St. Peter was going to let them in
and one GI went there and he said St. Peter said ``Who are
you'' and the GI said I am from the United States and St. Peter
said ``All right.''
And the Englishman came up and he said ``Where are you
from?'' St. Peter said ``Where are you from?'' and he said I am
from England, and St. Peter said ``Enter.''
And finally a representative from the Chinese Communist
forces came up and St. Peter said ``Where are you from?'' And
he said ``I am from China''' and he said, ``Go back, go back,
we can't cook Kemchun rice here for one.''
They didn't like that, and they threw him off the stage and
told him they were going to put him in jail.
So they went on with the lectures and everybody was really
riled. They said bring so and so back and they said do you want
to hear the rest of the play? And we said no, we want to go
back, and they started in, and they were pulling their hair
out.
So everybody started to get kind of hot under the collar
and some guards jumped out with some burp guns and they started
to open up on us and everybody figured we'd better stop, they
had the gun then. We all figured we had better go back and so
we went back and two days later the Chinese regimental
commander saw the mistake he made and so he came up and tried
to apologize to us, and nobody would listen to him.
And he told us about the facts; they always mixed up the
facts.
This one day, after our bomber had bombed us because our
camp wasn't marked, and it was October 13, our ``Bed-check
Charley'' was quite familiar with us and he raided us one night
and he bombed us because he didn't know. The Chinese cook was
cooking in the Chinese kitchen for the Chinese troops, and a
light came out and he swoops down and drops a few eggs on the
kitchen, and drops some on us, too.
The Chinese didn't like that, so about a week later, two
weeks later, the Chinese bring some dynamite around and planted
them in these bomb craters. They dug the hole a little deeper
and planted some dynamite in the holes. So they exploded the
dynamite and while they are doing that, they are taking
pictures.
Up until then they were always saying we make the facts,
and we don't lie, and we tell you the truth and this certain
day they really showed their true colors. Everybody was razzing
them and it was getting under their skin.
Senator Potter. What they were doing, they were taking
dynamite and putting it in some of these craters and exploding
them and taking pictures of it for propaganda purposes?
Sgt. Treffery. ``Why is American imperialists bombing their
own troops,'' that is what they said, because the Chinese
didn't even tell the Americans where we were so that in the
propaganda they had to put the dynamite in and blow the bomb
craters out.
After that we always razzed them, you make the facts, we
saw the facts. They would turn around because they knew we were
getting under their skin. We stayed there until August of 1952
and they moved us to Camp 4.
Why they moved us there we had a pretty good idea because
there was a camp of privates right next to us, and Communists
liked to pick on the privates and they could use their
education. They moved us out because we were telling the
privates to lay off.
They moved us to Camp 4 and while we were there they really
threw the work at us, very little sleep and very little chow.
That lasted about a mouth or two.
Senator Potter. What type of work did they have you do?
Sgt. Treffery. Wood details, I was in a crippled squad, and
some guys were wounded and couldn't do any work, and they put
us in that crippled squad. The other fellows had to build walls
six feet high to keep the cold out, and it wasn't even
sensible.
They fed us turnips, cabbage, and that stuff would be
burned up. They kept us there until about Christmas of 1952.
Then they gave us a pair of American-made socks which I found
out later the Red Cross had sent in to us.
Senator Potter. Did conditions get better?
Sgt. Treffery. As time went on they started improving a
great deal.
Senator Potter. Now I would like to ask you a little more
about the type of propaganda that they used. Did they give you
literature and require you to read certain literature?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, sir, they gave us so-called New York
Daily Worker, and San Francisco Daily Worker.
Senator Potter. You got the Daily Worker?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, and we got them about every two months.
And it would take letters four months to come through.
Senator Potter. Did you notice at any of the camps, did any
civilians go into the camp to give lectures?
Sgt. Treffery. No, we saw Russians on many occasions, and I
saw two Russian pilots after they were shot down, and I saw
Russian ack-ack man go through our compound in the daytime.
Senator Potter. What were they doing there?
Sgt. Treffery. Well, the ack-ack guns, and truckloads of
Russians manning the ack-ack, and we would holler Russian at
them and they would look around or wave a hand and there wasn't
anything oriental to them, sir.
Senator Potter. What type of questions would they ask? Did
they interrogate you?
Sgt. Treffery. They interrogated me once, and I told them I
was a medic and I knew nothing that they would want to know
about pills or bed pans or anything like that, and they didn't
bother me.
Senator Potter. Did they ask you any questions about your
home life?
Sgt. Treffery. Oh, yes, we had to write an autobiography,
everybody had to write one, or go to the turnip hole, and that
is like a jail; very cold.
I wrote an autobiography and they wanted to know if I
volunteered for Korea, and I told them yes, and they wanted to
know why and I said I like wars. They said you are a warmonger.
Then they furnished us with one handful of tobacco every
seven days, and no paper. When we had to write this biography
they furnished us with two paper sheets and we said we needed
more than that, because we would tear it up and use it for
cigarette paper. By the time they gave us six or seven sheets
we would write one, and they would say what happened to the
other paper, and we would say it was just a sample, just
scratch paper.
Senator Potter. You used the other paper for cigarette
paper?
Sgt. Treffery. That is right.
Mr. O'Donnell. While you were at Massacre Valley, Sergeant,
what did they give you to eat?
Sgt. Treffery. Very small bowl of maize, once in the
morning and once in the evening.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did they ever give you any dog food?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, I had dog one time.
Mr. O'Donnell. What was Massacre Valley? Was that a
collecting point for wounded prisoners, primarily?
Sgt. Treffery. No, we were the only ones that were there.
It wasn't isolated cases, as I figure it.
Mr. O'Donnell. Over and above the fact that your feet were
frozen, at the time you were captured, were you wounded?
Sgt. Treffery. I had a shrapnel wound in my chest.
Mr. O'Donnell. While you were at Camp 1, PW Camp 1, you say
about eight hundred prisoners of our boys died there?
Sgt. Treffery. In about four-months time, yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. If they had received, I know that you are
not a doctor, but if they had received proper food and medical
attention, would they have died?
Sgt. Treffery. I would say about 99 percent of them would
be alive.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know anything about the prison
confinement at PW Camp 1 and 4? If someone made a minor
infraction or major infraction of the rules, what would happen
to them?
Sgt. Treffery. They would be put in jail and once or twice
a day they would be stood on one foot and slapped down by
Koreans called in off the street.
Mr. O'Donnell. Can you describe the jail facilities? What
did it appear like?
Sgt. Treffery. I was never in jail, sir, but I had some
buddies who were in jail.
Mr. O'Donnell. What was it like?
Sgt. Treffery. They said in the daytime they would make
them sit with their feet under them and their hands like this
at attention all day, and you would be allowed to go on the
latrine once a day early in the morning, and once or twice a
day they would be stood on one foot and they would call
civilians in off the street and they would be slapped.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know whether any of the boys were
operated on for an experimental purpose?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, I know quite a few instances.
We call it monkey gland, and they cut you here, just right
under your arm, a little slit, and they put some kind of a
gland in there, and I forget what kind of gland. I think it is
a gland out of a pig or chicken liver, and they put it in there
and the Chinese say that would give you better appetite and you
couldn't eat in the first place and I don't know why a better
appetite. It would make you more spry, and give you more pep,
and make you stronger, and they should take some of that
chicken liver.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know what the real purpose was of
these operations?
Sgt. Treffery. Strictly experimenting, that is all I could
figure.
Senator Potter. Was there any bad effect in any of the men?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, I saw a lot of them festering up, and I
know one guy one night took his shirt off and opened up his
arm, it busted open, and it ran down his side and festered.
Mr. O'Donnell. Did you observe or do you know of any of our
wounded that were not killed and not buried, but were otherwise
disposed of?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, I got this one pretty first-hand, sir.
About this one GI on the march and he stopped along the road to
go to the latrine, and as he stopped there is a big cliff and
as he was going to the latrine the Chinese guard came and gave
him a kick and he went over the cliff. That is pretty well
true.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know if they ever did it to a group?
Such as ten or thirteen or fourteen men?
Sgt. Treffery. At a time, no.
Senator Potter. I don't care for any names, but while you
were at Camp 1 did they use any American PW's to try to
indoctrinate the rest of the men?
Sgt. Treffery. Oh, yes, sir. What they classify as squad
leaders and platoon sergeants and they would get them to help
them teach us songs and stuff like that.
Senator Potter. They did that under duress, by force, or
what?
Sgt. Treffery. I wouldn't say force, no.
Senator Potter. You would say it was done under force or
not?
Sgt. Treffery. No, I wouldn't say.
Senator Potter. That there were a few?
Sgt. Treffery. They were told to do it and they did it.
Senator Potter. We have heard a lot in the newspapers about
the so-called few progressives.
Sgt. Treffery. Those are ``boyces''; we had a triple A
organization to our camp.
Senator Potter. What is that?
Sgt. Treffery. Triple A organization, and those boys took
care of those progressives.
Senator Potter. How many American troops did we have in
Camp 1?
Sgt. Treffery. At that time in thirty-one it was all mixed
up, and we had 1st Company and 2nd Company and 3rd Company; and
2nd Company included the British, French, Turks, and along with
3rd Company. It was all mixed up.
Senator Potter. Could you estimate the amount of Americans,
would you say it was eleven hundred or one thousand?
Sgt. Treffery. I would say close to that, yes, sir, pretty
close.
Senator Potter. What would be the percentage of number of
so-called progressives?
Sgt. Treffery. I would say one out of a hundred; very small
minority.
Mr. O'Donnell. You mentioned one instance, namely after our
planes were bombing the camp because it was unidentified, that
the Chinese would use this dynamite and build it up as a prop
for propaganda purposes. Do you know of any other instances
where they would take one or more of our PW's and use them for
propaganda purposes? I am thinking in terms of taking them out
and giving them good food and taking photographs of them
eating.
Sgt. Treffery. One certain platoon in 7 Company, right next
to our company, they were called the movie stars.
Senator Potter. They were the ones used for propaganda
purposes?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, and the Chinese made a movie something
like the Steel Helmet, and I saw it posted it on our theaters,
this Korean wearing a steel helmet, and these guys went along
with them and made this movie.
Senator Potter. Have you ever seen this magazine, United
Nations PW's in Korea?
Sgt. Treffery. No, sir, I never have.
Mr. O'Donnell. Let me tell you what this is. This is a
publication which was not put out by the United States, I
assure you, but published by the Chinese Peoples Committee for
World Peace, and it purports to show the excellent treatment
that our PW's received when they were over there. Would you
just take a glance at it?
Sgt. Treffery. Sure.
Senator Potter. How would it be if we let you look this
over for half an hour and we will have someone else come on,
and after that you can come back?
Before you do go I have a couple of more questions I would
like to ask.
In this prison Camp Number 1, did you see any evidence of
the Chinese having any Communist facilities, or having any
medical facilities available, and did they have any medics?
Sgt. Treffery. After the peace talks started up on July 10,
they opened a so-called dispensary, and they had a hospital,
but the hospital I wouldn't put my bugs in. In the dispensary,
you go down there.
Senator Potter. Is it hospital 1 where you were talking
about your sergeant?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. In other words, it wasn't a medical
facility?
Sgt. Treffery. No, I wouldn't classify it as one. In this
dispensary, it was nothing except for a little tape, and a few
bandages, and a very small amount of medicine. If you got
dysentery they gave you two small chocolate pills and if that
didn't do it, it was too bad.
I took some of this sorghum crust and ate it and I figured
salt will heal an external wound pretty quick and why wouldn't
it heal an internal wound? I stole some of them and sucked them
3 or 4 times a day and within a week's time my dysentery was
gone. I don't know whether it was due to the salt or not, but
it was gone.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, did you ever have any
International Red Cross representatives?
Sgt. Treffery. No. They didn't allow Red Cross. They said
they were spies for Americans. They wouldn't allow them in.
Senator Potter. Would you care to answer what is your
physical condition today, Sergeant?
Sgt. Treffery. My physical condition, sir, is pretty good.
My mental condition is excellent.
Senator Potter. You can tell that. You have now the both
feet amputated?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, sir. My left foot is still open, still
getting medical attention on that one.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, you have seen communism first
hand, you spent a great deal of time----
Sgt. Treffery. I studied that every day I was over there.
Senator Potter. Would you have any comments that you would
like to make at this time?
Sgt. Treffery. Yes, sir; I have, I have quite a bit I would
like to say. Every day I was over there I took notice how the
people lived and how they operated. Believe me, it is rotten to
the core. It is no good. The Korean forefathers built the
towns, the streets, and the Chinese came in and they can't go
down the street, the Koreans can't, they have to go around the
mountain. When they leave the town, they have to have certain
passes to know where they are going. They grow a crop in the
springtime and harvest it in the fall and so much of that has
to go to the commissar, whatever it is, we called it City Hall.
Every day they would go into City Hall, take the bags of rice
and so on, and I have a pretty good Korean friend who told me
all of this, and he said they have to go in there and get
permission to sell that, what they are going to sell it for,
how much they are going to get, and what they are going to do
with the money.
If it is of benefit to the government, go ahead and sell
it, and take the money, as long as you benefit the government.
But if that was in the United States, if it is my car, it would
be yours, too. Everything is like that. Strictly it is out, no
good. Myself, what I think of the Communists in the United
States, I wish I had them under my thumb right here. If they
don't like our way of life, send them to hell over to Korea,
and let them eat rice for the next twenty years. Then it they
like rice that good, let them stay over there, otherwise let
them live the way we are living and like it.
It is a lot better than communism. It is a lot better.
Senator Potter. I want to thank you, Sergeant, for telling
us this experience. I know it has been probably an experience
you would like to forget. But there are too many people in our
own country that have forgotten it or also never knew it.
Sgt. Treffery. That is right.
Senator Potter. I think it is well for them to know.
Sgt. Treffery. I would say the biggest majority of the
people don't realize what communism is. But once you get a
taste of it, they will wake up to it.
Senator Potter. You fellows will perform a great service by
letting them know how you care about communism. If you would
like to go through that magazine and afterwards we can discuss
and see if you recognize any of that.
Sgt. Treffery. All right, sir.
Senator Potter. George Matta.
STATEMENT OF SGT. 1ST CLASS GEORGE J. MATTA
Senator Potter. Sergeant, will you identify yourself for
the record, give your name and your unit at the present time.
Sgt. Matta. Master Sergeant George J. Matta, 1202 ASU,
Boston Army Base, Boston, Massachusetts.
Senator Potter. What is your home address?
Sgt. Matta. 15 Grover Avenue, Brockton, Massachusetts.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, would you tell the committee when
you went to Korea and with what unit?
Sgt. Matta. I went to Korea on August 17, 1950, with the
Second Infantry Division, 38th Infantry, D Company. I went over
as a supply sergeant.
Senator Potter. And would you tell the committee the
circumstances under which you were captured?
Sgt. Matta. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And your duties at the time.
Sgt. Matta. It was around February 11 that our company or
battalion got surrounded by the Chinese South of Wonju.
Senator Potter. Do you have any idea where that is,
Sergeant? Well, that is all right. Go ahead.
Sgt. Matta. We were up in the front and when we got
surrounded we abandoned most of our vehicles so we could make
it out, we destroyed them, and we were making the march out. We
made it out the night of February 11, about two o'clock when we
actually got surrounded, and then we were fighting our way out.
We fought about three miles out this pass. Then we assembled in
this group, in this valley. We were getting shelled pretty
heavily there so we decided to make it out the best we could. I
went on a three quarter ton truck, one of our machine gun
platoon trucks, and we were doing pretty good--we got out, I
think it was about five hundred yards before we hit this bridge
and they hit our three quarter ton. We jumped off to the side
of the road and as we were firing across the road at the
Chinese on the opposite hill we didn't see the others, about
twenty Chinese, coming to our right. There was only four of us
at the time. So they came and we finally realized that they
were Chinese and they had us surrounded. We had to put our
weapons down. We knew we couldn't fight it then. But at that
time, if I thought I was going to go through what I did, I
would have fought it out then instead of going through what I
did. So they took us from there and brought us across the road
up on this hill, and then they started bringing in more
prisoners. There was about thirty of us at the time. They had
us segregated on this hill there. We stayed there all that day.
Then the next morning they brought us down the road and took us
about two miles into some valley on to another hill. They kept
us there three days on this hill. We didn't have no food or no
water in them three days.
Senator Potter. Was there a hut or something you were in?
Sgt. Matta. No, sir; just out on the open hill.
Senator Potter. What time of the year was this, Sergeant?
Sgt. Matta. February 12.
Senator Potter. It was pretty cold then?
Sgt. Matta. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did they take any of your clothing away at
that time?
Sgt. Matta. Not at that time. They searched us and took
most of our valuables and things but at that time our planes
were giving them such trouble. I don't think they was worrying
about taking our clothes. Then from there we marched one day
through those hills and we stopped in this village.
They put us in these buildings, about fifty men in two
buildings about ten by ten, rooms ten by ten. We had quite a
few wounded men with us that we had been carrying along. After
we laid the wounded men down, we was lucky if we could even
stand. They wouldn't let us go outside because they were scared
of our planes. Then we would march at night. I got captured
February 12 and we marched from about February 12--we was out
about eight days, I think, on the march, and me and three other
fellows and this South Korean decided we was going to escape.
So when we was marching out of this village and going along the
bank, we jumped over and laid in the bushes there. We pulled
our pants down as though we were going to defecate and we
stayed there until the whole column passed us. When we thought
it was safe we got up and started going out to the part where
the road was, so we could go toward our lines instead of
theirs.
On the way we run into a couple of Chinese and this North
Korean. This South Korean with us spoke to them in Japanese,
and in turn they thought he was bringing us to catch up with
the other prisoners and they let us go. As we got on the road
we went the opposite direction. We had about a five-mile pass
to make through. We had to make it on the road because it was a
steep valley and we didn't dare to get down there. So we
decided we would go on the road. We was walking up the road and
there were Chinese mule carts and trucks going by the same road
we was walking on. We would be smoking cigarettes and every
once in a while this Korean kid would speak to us in Japanese.
We was doing good. We was about fifty yards out of the pass
when we got stopped by these two North Koreans. This Korean kid
didn't have no papers or nothing to show them, so they brought
us into this house and searched us and the Korean kid got
talking with them. He was posing as an American Japanese. So he
got talking with the guards and they told him that they had an
alert out for two other American soldiers that escaped and got
caught and then overpowered the guard and took a burp gun and
pistol away and they escaped again.
Then they tied our hands behind us and marched us into this
little town about ten miles away and put us in a cement
dungeon. All there was was a cement block building about eight
feet, eight square feet, and about five feet high. It was all
cement and it had one steel door. They put us in there.
Senator Potter. No light?
Sgt. Matta. No light or nothing. There was a little square
hole on the steel door about four inches in diameter. They put
us in there and we couldn't go out. We did all we could to get
air. We had to defecate and urinate in there. They wouldn't let
us go out. We stayed in there three days. And in that three
days we had what they call a bean ball. It is nothing but
soybeans, half cooked, mixed with sorghum. They gave us one
each about the size of a baseball. About that time we were so
hungry it actually tasted good. So from there they tied us up
again. They had this wire around our hands.
Senator Potter. Your hand was still tied while you were in
there?
Sgt. Matta. No, sir, they released us there. When we got
out again they tied our hands behind us and then had a lead
rope to the other one. At that time they caught the two men
that escaped, that took the burp gun and pistol and put them in
with us. Then they took the six of us and tied our hands up. I
was in about the middle. One was pretty weak, he couldn't walk
too much in front of me, and he would fall, and as he would
fall the wires would cut into our hands. We must have marched
like that for about two days. We got to this place they called
the hospital. All it was was just about three or four buildings
and they had our men, they had about a hundred men there
altogether, and what it was was actually a place for the men to
lay and die, because they wouldn't give them no medicine and
the only food we had was like some kind of wheat. We would get
that once a day in the morning. It was very watery and wasn't
filling.
Senator Potter. You were given no medical attention?
Sgt. Matta. No, sir.
Senator Potter. That was supposed to be the hospital?
Sgt. Matta. That was supposed to have been the hospital.
While I was there I still had a little strength, and the ones
of us that did we took our underwear and made bandages for the
wounded men. The maggots were starting to get into their wounds
and everything and we cleaned them up the best we could. Then
about three days after that they got fifty of us that was able
to walk and they told us they were taking us to the rear where
it would be safer. So we left there around March 20, I think it
was, and we started to march back.
We were marching back towards Pyongyang. On the march each
day we would have to stay in these buildings. They would put us
in one room, about the thirty of us in one room. We couldn't go
outside. If you started to go outside, most of them had
dysentery and if they started to go outside the guards would
stick their bayonets at them. We had to do the best we could.
The men that had dysentery we would put in one corner and
let them go in one corner of the room.
Senator Potter. Were these Chinese or Koreans?
Sgt. Matta. Chinese. Then we marched. It was about the
third day march out and we stopped at this village. For some
reason we got hold of a big building. They kept us in there, a
school house. We had plenty of room but it was so cold we
huddled up together anyway. It was the only way to keep warm.
Then we were marching out and we crossed this river and were
going up a path. They sent the last four of us on the line back
to get some chow, they said. We went back and it was hard to
make them understand. We would tell them chop chop, and that
they had sent us back. As we were coming back, they kept two
there and me and this other kid started back for the line to
catch up with the rest of the men.
Senator Potter. Did you get the chow you went after?
Sgt. Matta. No, sir. We started to catch up with the men
and we heard three shots. We stopped because we thought they
were firing at us. Then we didn't see nobody around and we
started up the path again. As we was going up we could see
these three Chinese dragging something into the bushes there.
We didn't think nothing of it then but as we got up there, and
the guards didn't notice us and started walking, as we got up
there we looked into the bushes and we was going back and all I
could see was the heads and blood was coming out of their
heads.
Senator Potter. They were Americans?
Sgt. Matta. Yes, sir. So we kept on going and we caught up
with the column. There was this instructor they called Wong. He
asked us where we was and we told him we went back to get the
food and they didn't have no food. And he said did you see two
men back there. I said no, what two men. He said the two men
back there, and I said no. I said there were two men getting
food. And I said did somebody escape? And he said no, that is
all right, get up to the column.
When we got up to the column we asked the men what happened
and they said there were these two men that couldn't make it,
couldn't walk anymore, and they said they were going to put
them in the house back there until they got better. That is the
way of putting them in the house, to shoot them. It happened
many times, for men to fall back and stay behind. We tried to
carry them, as weak as we were, we would try to carry them but
we would be lagging behind and they would tell us that they
were going to leave them behind in a house. But as you would go
on a thousand yards you would always hear shots. So we just
about pictured what happened.
We was on the way to what is known as the bean camp, or the
mining camp. It has two names, the bean camp or the mining
camp.
Senator Potter. Where is that located? Do you know?
Sgt. Matta. South of Pyongyang, just before you got to
Pyongyang. I would say about twenty miles.
We left with fifty men and when we got to the bean camp we
had thirty-five men. Fifteen died on the way. We tried to
remember most of the names but what we did is we would write
their names on a paper or whatever we had. We got to the bean
camp, around April 17, and when I was there I ran into a lot of
my men from my company and they were pretty well down. What it
was, I think, was old Japanese barracks they had before, with
little rooms about six by six, and they would have about ten or
fifteen men in them, and they were pretty sick. When we got
there, they were dying, I would say, from an average of four to
five a day. They would carry them up the hill and we would take
them up there one day, and they would have little holes, I
don't think over two feet deep, and we would ask them for tools
to dig the holes deeper and they wouldn't do it. All we did was
put the bodies there and I think the Koreans must have buried
them because we would come the next time and the rain would
have washed the dirt away and there would be nothing there but
bones. We went back and we got on to them about it, about the
people digging up the graves and taking the clothes. They tried
to tell us it was the dogs that did it, that did the digging.
They must have had pretty smart dogs that could dig the graves
and take the clothes off the men.
So actually that is when I got my first taste of
brainwashing. At that time we didn't call it anything.
Senator Potter. That was at this bean camp?
Sgt. Matta. Yes, sir. The only thing we would call it then
to us was a bunch of bullshit. So they would tell us. This one
instructor was up there and he was telling us how the Chinese
and North Koreans are pushing Americans back, they were in
Taeju and they were going to push them off Korea. This one F1
didn't care what they told them. He told them the only way you
are going to get to Taeju is the way we got here, as prisoners.
He didn't like that pretty well, and they didn't give him chow
that night. But between us we seen that he had his chow.
What little there was, that is. At that time that is why
they called it a bean camp. All we got was a bean ball about
the size of a baseball, these soybeans, half cooked, and this
sorghum.
I would say due to that 90 percent of our men died due to
lack of food and proper medicine.
Senator Potter. How long were you at this camp?
Sgt. Matta. About seven days. We got there and we were
there for about seven days.
Senator Potter. Did they interrogate you there, or question
you?
Sgt. Matta. No, there they just give us them lectures and
took our names. Then they moved us from there, about 760 of us
altogether when we started. There was two groups. One left
today and the other group left the day after. I left there
April 24 with the first group, and we marched from April 24
until May 17, altogether. As we were marching, one or two men
would die each day and men who couldn't march any more would
fall along the side and we just had a picture to ourselves what
happened to them.
Then I think it was about three days out they put us in
these trains, boxcars is what it was, and they put about two
hundred men in one boxcar. We couldn't sit down, we had to
stand up, and we drove on them trains for about two days. We
got, I think, to Sinandu. We got out of Sinandu and we started
marching again. We was on a march every day except one day that
it rained and we stayed in this place.
On May 17 we was going up this steep hill and I made one
big hill with no trouble and then the second one I was going up
and I rested half way up and this Chinese guard came up and hit
me across my forehead before I even knew what happened. He
didn't knock me out but he just about did. He stunned me.
Senator Potter. Did he hit you with his fist?
Sgt. Matta. No, the butt of his rifle. I was disgusted and
ready and I said to hell with it, finish and kill me. My
buddies grabbed me by the arm and they got me to the top of the
hill. And then I went down, we went downhill, and I gradually
got my strength back a little bit and then we hit what is known
as Camp 1.
Senator Potter. You said there were seven hundred and some?
Sgt. Matta. Seven hundred and sixty.
Senator Potter. And how many reached Camp 1?
Sgt. Matta. Roughly I would say about fifty died on the
march. But from May 17 I would say--well, I better go on and it
will pick it up.
We reached Camp May 17. It was a little village. It is
known as Camp 1 now. They put about twelve of us to a room. The
rooms didn't have doors on them and half of the walls were
caved in. When we reached there we were so tired we just
dropped down and laid down. We didn't know, but we figured it
was just another stop on the death march, as we called it. But
one or two days passed and three days come, so we finally
realized we were going to stay there.
We started on ourselves and it was the first time I had
taken my clothes off since the time I used my underwear to help
the wounded. I took my clothes off. At that time when I got
captured I weighted 207 pounds, and I was pretty well built,
fat. When I took my clothes off all the hair was off my body
and I could practically see my ribs. I think I went from 207
down to 150 pounds in the space of that time. So I was pretty
weak, mostly from the blow on the head I got from the guard.
We had so damn many lice on us that we started a lice
killing campaign. The best way we could kill them was squash
then with our fingernails. By the time you got finished and got
half of them off, all of your fingernails were red. So it was
kind of hard.
Actually it is bad to say, but most of the men were too
damn weak and didn't have the strength. They wouldn't bother to
clean the lice off of them so we made them sleep outside. Where
we were there was this river. As cold as it was we went down
there and tried to wash half way decent. We never had a piece
of soap. We washed the best we could. We never shaved in that
time, about four months we didn't shave.
Senator Potter. You would have quite a beard, too?
Sgt. Matta. Yes, sir. It was almost down here to my chest.
We gradually got together and the ones that could get around
and could do things gradually fixed up the houses and cleaned
them up a little and washed what little clothes we had.
In all, that time, from May 17 to about August, I would say
the middle of August, it started out like in May, we were
burying from an average of six to seven men a day and at times
it went as high as 12 men. Before we had a chance to give them
a decent burial they were up the hill and they dug the holes
sometimes, but when we dug the holes we dug them as deep as we
could but they would always get on to us. I would say out of
the 760, one day we just sat down trying to figure how many of
us were left. I don't think there was a hundred men left out of
that 760 that left the bean camp.
It is something that is hard to make people believe, but it
is actually true. Actually, myself, I wouldn't believe it if I
didn't see it myself. Few people realize what has happened.
Senator Potter. While you were there did they try to
indoctrinate you, to get you into communism? Did they give you
a lot of Communist propaganda?
Sgt. Matta. Yes, sir. Well, they didn't bother us about the
first two weeks and then they had what they called classes.
They would pick so many men out of the squad and they went up
to the school house. That is when they started their communism.
Then it started to pick up and they brought us out to the
square. They would have this Chinese, that was supposed to have
been a regimental commander. He would get up and speak for an
hour in Chinese, and the interpreter would interpret him and
tell us what he said, and it was always the same old bologna
about our warmongers and how we were duped in going over there,
and things like that. Then I started getting very sick. I would
have these spells and blood would come out of my nose and I
would have terrific pain. They brought me up to the hospital.
You couldn't actually call it a hospital. It had two buildings.
One was like Treffery said, like a Japanese temple and the
other was these four rooms which we nicknamed the dungeon. When
I got up there I had dysentery and trouble with my head. The
only reason I didn't get in the dungeon is I was lucky enough
where I could get up and go to the toilet by myself. But any
man who couldn't get up and go around, they would put him in
the dungeon, where there was four rooms, they would put him in
there and wait for him to die.
They wouldn't bring them their food, they wouldn't bring no
medicine and we would go over to see what we could do for them
and they would run us away. That is why we nicknamed it a
dungeon, because they put them in there to die.
Senator Potter. They put them in there to die?
Sgt. Matta. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did you get medical treatment while you
were there?
Sgt. Matta. The only thing I got was charcoal. If I had a
terrific headache I got charcoal. It was the only medicine they
had at that time was charcoal. If you had dysentery you got
charcoal, or if you had a headache you got charcoal. This
doctor Wong, which we called the water doctor, would tell you
to drink plenty of hot water. He wouldn't let us go there and I
blame him for the deaths of all those men, because with just a
little proper medicine and proper food them men would be alive
today.
Senator Potter. They would be alive today?
Sgt. Matta. Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. Sergeant, I would like to get into this with
you for a moment, the filling out of various forms or peace
petitions and being placed in jail for refusing to so do.
Could you go into that for us, please?
Sgt. Matta. Well, what it was like this Treffery says, is
they would get us out there and read off the petition, I think
it was to go to the United Nations, a protest that we were
supposed to sign. They got us all out there and we fell out on
the road, and he explained it to us. He passed out paper and
nobody would take the paper and nobody would do anything. He
got kind of peeved. He said maybe you misunderstood me.
Everybody that wants to write go to this side of the road and
the ones that don't want to write go over here. So everybody
got up and went on the other side of the road and they just
about threatened us that if we didn't write them they were
going to cut our food down and everything. We didn't write at
that time. And there were many instances when they would call
us up by ourselves. They called me up one day, the one we
called Glasses.
Senator Potter. Was he a military man or a civilian?
Sgt. Matta. A Chinese military. He called me up to his room
and they usually start out and ask you how you feel and this
and that, and hand you a cigarette or a piece of candy, and
then you started with it. He wanted me to write my congressman
about the atrocities that our side was doing, and about the
holding up of the peace talks. So I told him no, I couldn't do
that. He said why. I said the people voted him in and the
people don't tell him what to do because they voted him in. I
said I can't tell him what to do. He said well you have to
write it. I said no, I ain't going to write it. So he got on to
me and I wouldn't write it.
Then he told me about mail. He said are you getting mail
from home? At that time I got one letter from my wife. He said
you don't want to go home, do you? I said what do you mean? He
said you are our prisoner, you are supposed to do what we tell
you to do. So I said, you took me prisoner, but I don't do what
you tell me. All I am supposed to do is give you my name, rank
and serial number. He got kind of mad and he let me go back. It
was that way.
It happened to quite a few. They would call them up and try
to get them to write to their congressmen or the United
Nations.
Senator Potter. Did they ever punish any of them for not
signing the petition or not doing what they wanted them to do?
Sgt. Matta. Well, the only way that they punished us was as
a whole. Like this time on that May first deal, when we
wouldn't march with the flag, this Company 7 right next to us
was getting this beef, a can of beef. They were getting one can
for two men and in turn our side was getting one can for six
men. In other words, you would just about get a taste.
Senator Potter. Was this Company 7 a more cooperative
company as far as that is concerned?
Sgt. Matta. No, I would say it was a company that were
mostly captured in the later part. Actually the Chinese were
babying them, I guess, to try to get them to go along.
Senator Potter. Keeping them fat for show purposes?
Sgt. Matta. That is right. There were a few, I would not
say there weren't any, but a few in there that didn't go along
with them. The majority didn't. But they brought them up in
October 1952, and they put them beside us. So we went to them
and told them that they could keep the beef if they was that
short of it. When we told them that 7 Company was getting two
cans per man they wanted to know how we found out, and we would
tell them the same old thing that a little birdie told us. They
kept us segregated from 7 Company. They kept us pretty well
segregated from there. At one time you do get a pass and go
over there, they would let you go over there for about ten
minutes and they would have a Chinese interpreter go with you.
In other words, you couldn't say what you wanted to say
when you went over there. I would like to add on to that what
you asked Treffery. Like on the movies, I used to get over to 7
Company to get around because I could sneak over there better.
What it was is they took these men out of 7 Company, they
dressed them in fatigues, our fatigues, and steel helmets and
everything, and gave them M-1 rifles. I think they took them
about ten miles out of camp, by this river, and they went up
there and the first day most of the guys didn't know what was
going on. They took them up there and got them up there and
they had them posing with the M-1's, and a bunch of Chinese
coming. They were making a movie is what it was. So the second
day, the men got wise when they found out what was going on and
a half of them wouldn't go out to make the movie. They
threatened them. The ones that went out, they got seven or
eight loaves of bread about the size of one of our buns, and
the men that didn't go out, they were given one bun and they
were cut way down on their chow. That was the deal on that.
They went out and made this movie. I mean, the Chinese
Communist propaganda movie showing our men being overpowered by
the Chinese.
And another thing on that movie that they made after the
bombing, what they did, I don't think that Treffery got down in
that end of town, but if you went down there was a building
that was bombed before, I think, before we even got there. They
molded it with straw and they had these two Negro boys--I don't
know their names, I forgot them--they had them all painted with
iodine and they set the building on fire and they had the
Chinese carrying them out on their backs.
In other words, the Chinese soldiers were carrying them out
on their backs and the movies were there taking pictures.
Senator Potter. Where was that?
Sgt. Matta. Right in our camp. They set fire to the straw.
They would actually make it look as though it was the real
thing. And another thing, like on their propaganda.
I was up at the hospital at the time. At that time this was
in May 1952, when the peace talks were going pretty good, they
had us up there and they had beds, they made platforms is all
it was, to get us up off the floor, and we were there and it
struck us funny when they came in and gave us two new decks of
cards and told us to play cards. We sat down and started to
play bridge, and some Korean girls starting coming around and
placing big numbers on the walls, and policing the place up,
and they brought us a white table cloth on the table. We were
sitting there playing bridge and wondering what was happening,
whether the Red Cross was coming or what. They were fixing the
place up and we figured somebody was coming up there.
We were sitting down playing bridge there, and I noticed
this cameraman coming in the door. Then it dawned on me what
was happening. So I got up and this kid that was playing with
me both got up, and went outside. Then they came in and these
two other Chinese, the first time we had ever seen the nurses
coming in with white uniforms, and arm bands, Red Cross arm
bands, and a hat with a little red cross and it was the first
time as prisoners we had ever seen them dressed like that.
Then they sat down, those two Chinese boys sat down, with a
big white uniform and a big red band on their sleeves, and they
were holding the cards and the cameraman taking the picture.
The other two GI's, I don't know whether they were dumbfounded
or what, but they stood there and let them take the picture.
In the meantime they got the nurse picking up one boy that
was sick, showing her feeding him. They took all pictures like
that. They had white sheets hanging up on the wall so it would
look all white. Then the doctor came out and tried to get me to
take a picture, guess because I had started to get a little
more weight back and looked like one of the healthiest ones
there. I wouldn't go in. I told them no. I said if they did
that every day and treated us like that every day, I would
gladly, I would be one of the first to have my picture taken.
But I said that is just propaganda, and what is going to happen
when the cameraman goes. I said it would be the same old thing,
and I didn't want my picture taken.
The next day they discharged me from the hospital.
Senator Potter. This was a hospital scene, the picture they
took?
Sgt. Matta. That is right. They had everything, nurses all
dressed up in white uniforms.
Senator Potter. But prior to that time or after it took
place, those conditions did not exist?
Sgt. Matta. No. In fact, we just got tobacco the day
before, and they come in with a big tray of tobacco and a tray
of apples, nice apples. So they took pictures showing the trays
of apples and tobacco and when a cameraman left, the apples and
the tobacco went back, the boys didn't see any of it.
Senator Potter. They took them away?
Sgt. Matta. They took them away. They just had them for the
pictures.
Senator Potter. Do you have anything else, Sergeant, that
you would care to add?
Sgt. Matta. Well, a little on this experiment on that
chicken liver. This has been the talk of what the Chinese were
supposed to have told the men in camp, that that was a Russian
experiment, that it was the first time they used it, that it
was a Russian experiment. That got around camp pretty much.
Senator Potter. As a Russian experiment?
Sgt. Matta. Yes, a Russian doctor's experiment. And they
were using it.
Senator Potter. And it was supposed to make them feel
better and have more strength?
Sgt. Matta. That is right. At that time, if you didn't take
them--I wasn't in the hospital at the time, but if the men
didn't take it, they wouldn't give them no treatment or
anything. So a lot of them just took it more or less thinking
that they would get better treatment or that it would help
them.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, you have had an experience which
you and the other men that have testified here have seen
communism work at first hand. Do you have anything you would
like to say along that line?
Sgt. Matta. Yes. I am glad you asked me that, because I
have come home and I made quite a lot of speeches, and many
people don't actually realize what communism is, and how
communism lives. Like you say, I have seen communism, I have
seen how they live under communism, how the kids in the street
don't have shoes or clothes, how they don't eat but about one
meal a day, and how they are being treated and how communism
lives.
To me communism is like a cancer; in fact, worse. That is
why myself I want to see communism wiped out as badly as we
want to see cancer cured.
Senator Potter. What do you think of Americans in the
United States who advocate the overthrow of our government to
establish a Communist society here?
Sgt. Matta. Well, if I had the power, my only way of
answering that is I would take them, and let them go to a
Communist country, let them live under communism, not this
built up communism that they have toward peace and people's
China, but let them live under real communism and see what
communism is. And then if they like communism, okay, let them
stay there. But me, on communism I would rather die than see
communism in the states, because I can never forget my buddies
on the hills. I have lost many good buddies there, and the
worst part about it is that they died and they didn't have to.
That was part of communism.
Senator Potter. Human life is pretty cheap to them is it
not?
Sgt. Matta. Yes. They could have saved them boys with just
a little proper medicine and food. It wasn't that they didn't
have it. The peace talks have proved that. Before the peace
talks we were getting nothing but cracked corn, soybeans, and
no meat, and our living conditions were bad. And then July 8
come around, the first word that we got was that the peace
talks were started. It was a funny coincidence but about three
or four days after that in comes the pigs, we had pork and
flour come in and we had steamed bread, and that from then on
the men actually stopped dying, they didn't stop right off, but
gradually what was left of us were getting better just from
getting a little good food. Why I say it is good food is
because it was better than we were getting. They stopped giving
us this sorghum and started giving us rice. Then they used to
tell us about the peace talks, about our side stalling the
peace talks. Once in a while you would hear a few guys saying
gee, I wish they would hurry up and get the peace talks over
with. I used to tell them it don't bother me, if they said two
years, five years or ten years, it is them peace talks that is
keeping us alive today, and we haven't any bitches about the
peace talks, no matter how long they take.
On our lectures, that is the main thing they would harp on,
how our side was stalling the peace talks. We knew that was a
bunch of baloney, and knew it was the peace talks that saved
us.
We had all the confidence in our side and knew that we
would eventually get what we fought for.
Another thing to add is that many people have asked me why
did we fight over there, what did we gain. The only answer I
got, like when they would say about all those boys dying and
being wounded over there. We actually won a victory, because we
went over there to do what we did. We went over there to stop
the spread of communism. We didn't stop it fully, because the
only way to stop communism is you have to wipe it out
completely. That is my way of saying that we won something, and
the boys did not die for nothing.
Senator Potter. We went there to stop a Communist
aggression, and we did.
Sgt. Matta. That is right.
Senator Potter. I think our American troops fought under
the most difficult conditions that any American soldiers have
been called upon to fight under. I think the stories that you
fellows have told here and the history of the Korean War will
go down in the annals of American history as the greatest
heroism and courage on the part of our men. I am mighty proud
to be an American. Thank you, Sergeant.
Corporal Daniels?
STATEMENT OF CPL. WILLIE L. DANIELS
Senator Potter. Corporal, will you give your name for the
record and your present unit?
Cpl. Daniels. Corporal Willie L. Daniels, RA 38136347, 6006
ASU Station Complement, Fort Lewis, Washington.
Senator Potter. Corporal, would you give us your home
address?
Cpl. Daniels. 623-58th Street, Oakland, California.
Senator Potter. Would you tell the committee when you went
to Korea and with what unit you were assigned at the time?
Cpl. Daniels. I landed in Korea August 16, 1950. I was
assigned to the battery of the 508 Field Artillery Battalion,
Second Division.
Senator Potter. You were with an artillery battalion?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Corporal, would you tell us the
circumstances under which you were captured?
Cpl. Daniels. Well, I was captured February 12, 1951. On
the 11th we got attacked about twelve o'clock at night. We
fought, tried to fight, but we couldn't do much good. We got
CSMO and we tried to pull out. Most of the fire power was
coming from our left front and left flank, and most of the men
had these tractors, you know, and most of the men, you know,
were on the side of the tractor, trying to shield themselves
from the firepower.
But during that time one of the men pushed me, and at the
same time another one of my men got shot and he caught on to me
and pulled me down. So that separated me from the unit at the
time. So I jumped and got in a ditch. I got there by myself for
about fifteen minutes and then I looked up and saw some men,
some men of my outfit, running across the field, and I cut over
to them. We fought all night, fought our way to several others,
until about nine o'clock the next morning. We was going forward
and taking a hill, or one side of a hill, it was, and by the
time we got up to the top, the Chinese on the other side had us
surrounded. At the same time the Chinese from the rear just had
us cornered off there.
Senator Potter. How many in your group were captured?
Cpl. Daniels. I think it must have been about forty of us.
Senator Potter. After you were captured, what happened?
Cpl. Daniels. Well, they took us in small groups.
Senator Potter. Where were you captured?
Cpl. Daniels. About twenty miles north of Wonju.
Senator Potter. Of Wonju?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir. They put us in groups and took us
on the side of the hills, under some trees.
Senator Potter. Did they take your clothes away from you at
that time?
Cpl. Daniels. No, sir; not at that time, no.
Senator Potter. Did they take your valuables? Did you have
a watch on or anything?
Cpl. Daniels. No, sir. A deck of cards was the only thing I
had with me. But I was feeling bad at the time. They took us to
a hill and left us all day in the cold and snow. At night about
dusk they marched us back about three miles in the woods. Some
of our artillery was over there, and they let us stay there
until about twelve o'clock. Our artillery was firing in, so
they moved us back a little more. We stayed there until early
morning and then they moved us back about two miles and put us
in a building on top of a hill. It was about five hundred
yards, I would say, where our position was the day before.
At the same time our air forces were coming in and
destroying our equipment and all the time they was coming over
and coming pretty close to us. Of course, they was out in the
hills, and in holes and stuff like that, and we were out there
on top of the hill in a little shack.
Senator Potter. You had no cover, but they had holes?
Cpl. Daniels. That is right. Every time a plane would come
over, one of the men would shoot at it with a rifle, I guess to
show them that they were there.
Senator Potter. Then they would come back on and go over
it?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes. None of the men got wounded there or
nothing, but later on that evening they started to march us
back towards the bean camp, although it took us quite a while
to get to the bean camp, I imagine about forty or fifty miles.
Senator Potter. How long did it take you, would you say, to
get back?
Cpl. Daniels. From that day about the 14th of February,
until about the 9th, I believe, of April.
Senator Potter. There were still about forty of you?
Cpl. Daniels. Well, some more joined.
Senator Potter. Some more joined during the march?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir. Also some South Koreans, they
joined.
Senator Potter. During that march back, did any of your men
die or were they killed?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir. A few died at that time. Some were
wounded and didn't get no medical attention, and some had
pneumonia. They died. They didn't get no medical attention
either. A few before we reached bean camp died. But after we
reached bean camp, seven men died from pneumonia, beriberi,
frozen feet and dysentery.
Senator Potter. How long were you at bean camp?
Cpl. Daniels. Until the 24th of April.
Senator Potter. That would be about how long?
Cpl. Daniels. About two weeks.
Senator Potter. About two weeks?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Was your experience at the bean camp much
the same as Sgt. Trefferey's?
Cpl. Daniels. My experience at the bean camp? They had us
all in rooms there and wouldn't allow us to go outdoors. We
didn't have no heat. The only heat we had was what we tore off
the house. We tore it off and put it in a bucket, a hot pot is
what it is called, and we would make a fire right there.
During the time the sun would come out, we would go out and
sun a little bit. They wouldn't allow us to stay out very much
because the air force would come over.
Senator Potter. Did they try to indoctrinate you at the
bean camp at all?
Cpl. Daniels. No, sir, not at bean camp.
Senator Potter. Did they take your clothing away from you
there?
Cpl. Daniels. They took my shoes.
Senator Potter. They took your shoes?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir. But they gave us some low quarter
tennis shoes about two sizes too small. I couldn't wear them.
Senator Potter. Shoes to the Communists must be quite a
luxury.
Cpl. Daniels. I imagine it was, sir. They had tennis shoes.
I guess they were used to it.
Senator Potter. When you left bean camp, how did you go?
Cpl. Daniels. Walked. We started walking with twenty men in
a squad.
Senator Potter. Twenty men in the squad?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir. On the way to Camp 1 there was
about three of us left about half way, I guess, by the time we
got the train. There were three of us left out of twenty men.
And then when we got to Camp 1 there was three of us left.
Senator Potter. How many got in?
Cpl. Daniels. Three.
Senator Potter. And there were just three that were left?
Cpl. Daniels. Three out of twenty, they put us in a ten-man
squad, and three of us left out of a ten-man squad. That made
about twenty-seven men died.
Senator Potter. About twenty-seven men died?
Cpl. Daniels. Out of thirty, yes, sir.
Senator Potter. How long a trip was that?
Cpl. Daniels. From the 24th of April to the 17th of May.
Senator Potter. To the 17th of May?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. You were put in, I understand, boxcars.
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And what did these men die of?
Cpl. Daniels. Dysentery and lack of food, malnutrition.
Senator Potter. Did any of them die of carbon gas?
Cpl. Daniels. I think there was two men died while we was
in a tunnel.
Senator Potter. They would put you in a tunnel to keep them
away from air raids?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir. And they died.
Senator Potter. And two men died because of carbon
monoxide?
Cpl. Daniels. I don't know what they died from, but they
died.
Senator Potter. They suffocated?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Then you went to Camp 1?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What took place there? You have heard the
statements of Sergeant Treffery and Sgt. Matta. Do you have
anything to add to it?
Cpl. Daniels. Well, when we got to Camp 1 our food wasn't
so very good, in fact it wasn't good at all. It was cracked
corn, millet, and some sorghum. Most of the men could not eat
the food the way it was cooked. In fact, I couldn't hardly eat
either, so I decided I would fry some of it, and see how it
would taste. I didn't have no wood, but I found a piece of
plank out there and taken it and burned it up and got a piece
of tin and fried me some. One of the Chinese guards caught me
at it and they put me in jail for three days. In fact, I was
supposed to stay three days, but I stayed fourteen days.
Senator Potter. You stayed fourteen days?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And the reason they put you in was because
you were trying to fry some of the rice or millet?
Cpl. Daniels. The reason they put me in was for burning
this plank, destroying Korean property, is what they said.
Senator Potter. What were the conditions in the jail or the
cell that you were in?
Cpl. Daniels. Well, the conditions, it was a little room
eight by eight, and my duties then was that I was on detail, as
soon as I came off one detail I would go on to another. I was
on the wood detail, ration details, brush details, broom
details, barrel details, all day long, back and forth all day
long like that.
At the time I got to Camp 1, I weighed about eighty pounds
from 135, my original weight. I was weak, just like all the
rest of the men was weak.
Senator Potter. In this jail was there plenty of room to
stand up? You weren't confined to any kneeling position or
anything of that kind?
Cpl. Daniels. No, sir. At night we would go to bed about
the same as the others, but during the day we just worked all
day long.
Senator Potter. They worked you all day?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And you were supposed to be in confinement
there in your cell for three days and they kept you how long?
Cpl. Daniels. Fourteen days.
Senator Potter. While you were in Camp 1 did they then try
to have any indoctrination courses?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir. In fact, the whole company had
indoctrination. We had what they called a school, had classes,
had lectures and stuff like that, lectures and classes.
Senator Potter. Corporal, did they try to work with you to
propagandize you on racial problems?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Was this at Camp 1?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. I don't mean to be embarrassing at all, but
if you don't mind I would be interested in hearing what the
type of indoctrination was that they gave you along that line.
Cpl. Daniels. Well, they would tell the Negro men that
there was no use being depressed all your life, and ``We also
have been depressed. We want to help you out,'' and a whole lot
of stuff, a whole lot of junk. I consider it a whole lot of
junk. Some of them they would give them cigarettes sometimes.
Some of them they would treat pretty nice and some others they
don't. It just depends on how the others talk to them, I
imagine, whether they treat them all right or not.
Senator Potter. I would like to say this, that from all the
information that I have had, I am mighty proud, I will say it
again, of all the American troops, and certainly mighty proud
of all of them and that includes the Negro troops that were
fighting in Korea. I do know that that was part of the program
to put special emphasis on our Negro troops.
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. We can proudly say that they handled
themselves in an excellent manner. I think it is remarkable the
very few that their propaganda had any effect on. The Negroes
are certainly a credit to the army, a credit as Americans.
Cpl. Daniels. Well, at Camp 1 we moved out of Camp 1 August
15, 1952, to Camp 5. At Camp 5 we had a big dinner waiting on
us, and they segregated us there and put all the Negroes in the
same company together with no Filipinos or British. When we got
there I think we had eleven donuts, a big pot of beans, pork
and lamb all mixed together, and they had some greens, some
kind of greens, kenschu, some kind of picked greens, in fact
they fix them up some kind of way and bury them for I don't
know how long. They smell bad and taste about as bad as they
smell. After what we had had, it was a good dinner, though.
Some of the Negroes on the 19th of June, they had taken a
group of them, about twenty I think it was, and marched them
off, taken them off and gave them a big dinner. They told me
they gave them some wine, some candy, apples and auto, and
saki, or whatever you call it, made them drunk, filled then up
and made them drunk. They didn't do the whites that way.
Senator Potter. This dinner was just for the Negro PW's,
the Negro troops?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. They didn't have the white troops with
them?
Cpl. Daniels. No, sir; because the Chinese will say the
Negroes are freed on the 19th of June, so they celebrate the
day. They pick a bunch of Negroes, not all of them, about
twenty of them, and take them out and march them down by
headquarters and give them some wine, apples and candy, and
feed them up like that.
Senator Potter. Were there any speeches or anything at
these dinners?
Cpl. Daniels. I don't know, sir. I never was on one of
them. I never was there.
Senator Potter. The report that you got on this dinner, did
they mention why they had it, why they gave it to them?
Cpl. Daniels. They said they was celebrating the 19th of
June. That is all. That is why I suppose it was. You know,
sometimes Negroes have birthdays over there, and some
cooperated with the Chinese a little bit, and they would have
birthdays, and they would give them a cup of wine, cigarettes
and stuff like that.
Senator Potter. How long were you in Camp 1?
Cpl. Daniels. I was in Camp 1 from May 17, 1951 to August
15, 1952.
Senator Potter. And you were exchanged on Little Switch, is
that right?
Cpl. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. How did that take place? Would you mind
telling us about that?
Cpl. Daniels. Well, sir, about two weeks before I was
released or taken out of the company, the Chinese called me up
and asked me--well, he talked a long time about different
things, how do I like the Chinese people, what do I think about
the Korean War and so forth, and he talked around. Well, I
cussed them out because I didn't know what they was after, or
what they was after. They finally come to point and asked me
why I was so skinny around there, and I told them they hadn't
given me anything to eat to keep me fat. I also told them that
I was in the hospital during 1944, in World War II, in England.
I was in the TB ward for about three weeks, I think it was, and
I told them that. They taken me down and examined my heart or
something. I don't know what they found. About three days later
they called me up again and asked me how would I like to go
home. I told them I have been wanting to go home since I have
been over here, and I would like it very much, to go home.
So two or three days later I heard over a loud speaker that
all sick and wounded was being repatriated, and I figured then
they must have been trying to pick me out to go home. I was the
last one out of the company, the last one. There was three of
us to choose between, and some of the progressive guys said,
``You don't have anything to worry about. I think maybe they
will send you home.''
But anyway we were on pins and needles, wondering who they
were going to pick. One of the guys, he had a light duty slip
ever since he had been a PW, and this other guy and I we were
both skinny. So he told me I didn't have anything to worry
about. So the morning that they released me from the company,
they sent a runner down there or mail orderly, they came down
and told me that the Chinese wanted to see me. I went up there
and they told me he had orders from the battalion or regiment
headquarters that would release me, and I had twenty minutes to
get ready. I told him I could get ready pretty fast, I don't
have but a blanket, and let's go. That is the way it come
about.
Senator Potter. Then how did they transport you down, by
train?
Cpl. Daniels. No, sir. About a mile, I guess, from the
company to where all the PW's coming from different camps would
meet. We walked down there, and we left there to go to Kaesong.
We went in trucks.
Senator Potter. While you waited to be released, did they
talk to you about what you should say when you got back or
anything of that kind?
Cpl. Daniels. They said I should work for peace, and try to
get the rest of the PW's back home, and try to get the people
to cease fire in Korea, to stop the war in Korea.
Senator Potter. Corporal, you have seen communism working
and have experienced it as few men have, outside of those of
you that have been through the war. Do you have anything you
would like to say about communism as a way of life?
Cpl. Daniels. Well, I don't like it. As far as I am
concerned, there is no way of life there. It is a mighty poor
life. The way they run things, and what the other men say, and
each family over there, from what I have learned, each family
owns a chicken or maybe a cow. If he lives in the house it
belongs to the government, anything else he has belongs to the
government, and when they plant their crops it belongs to the
government, too. I would go on wood detail some time and see a
patch down there and see the government down there measuring
off whose was what, or something like that. I don't think
anything should live like that.
If you don't have God on your side, if you don't believe in
the Bible--that is one thing. In fact, everything is wrong with
it. I don't like it no kind of way.
Senator Potter. And when you have people in our country who
adopt, as you say, a philosophy, an atheistic philosophy, where
the human being, where you as an individual, loses identity to
the so-called great cause of the state, which is the
government, that doesn't make it very pleasant for a life for
the individual?
Cpl. Daniels. No, sir, it doesn't.
Senator Potter. I wish to thank you kindly, Corporal. You
will be on deck in the next couple of three days.
Sergeant Watters?
STATEMENT OF SGT. JOHN L. WATTERS, JR.
Sgt. Watters. Sergeant John L. Watters, Jr., sir; RA
6894755; Unit 701 ASU, Detachment at Fort Myers, Virginia;
resident of Washington, D.C., sir.
Senator Potter. There are a few of you native
Washingtonians left. I am glad to see you.
Sergeant, you have been here and have heard some of the
experiences of the other men. I am sure you are familiar with
the purpose of the hearing.
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Feel free to discuss or bring in any factor
which you think would be material to the hearing. First,
Sergeant, would you tell us when you went to Korea and the unit
that you were attached to?
Sgt. Watters. Well, I hit Korea August 16, 1950. I went to
front-line duty about five days later, sir.
Senator Potter. Who were you with?
Sgt. Watters. When I first went over, with Headquarters,
First Battalion, 38th Infantry, Second Division, and later I
was transferred to Able Company.
Senator Potter. What was your assignment then?
Sgt. Watters. I was communications, sir, I was
communications while I was in Headquarters. I went into Able
Company as a communications man because the communications men
had all gotten bumped off, sir.
Senator Potter. Sergeant, would you briefly tell us the
circumstances under which you were captured?
Sgt. Watters. Well, we had been fighting a day, all day
long, and that night we pushed on toward our objective, and we
had had a little sniper fire that day, and pushed to the
objective that night.
Senator Potter. What area was this, Sergeant?
Sgt. Watters. This was, I would say, approximately eighty
miles northwest of Konarae.
There we were putting out our forward OP, and so on, and
drew fire from the enemy. From there on the rest of the night
we had pretty much of a fight. That morning we had orders to
withdraw. We had already made two withdrawals. We finally got
orders to make the final withdrawal back to our rendezvous
area.
From there we started getting off the mountains, forming
groups and platoons and getting off. We got off of the
mountains about 4:30 that morning, just about thirty minutes
before daybreak, and that is when I got wounded.
Senator Potter. You were wounded by small arms fire?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. I was ambushed by sniper fire with
a burp gun.
Senator Potter. What was the nature of your wounds?
Sgt. Watters. I was hit three times right there, once
through the leg, once through the hip, and one through the
belly.
Senator Potter. And you were captured at that time?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir.
Senator Potter. What happened after you were wounded?
Sgt. Watters. I was left there for being dead. About an
hour later another Chinese came along and shot me again.
Another one right through the hip. So I just laid like I was
dead. I wasn't able to move very much at that time.
At this time the valley was pretty heavily laden with enemy
troops, and I couldn't hardly make a move. Our airplanes were
strafing and bombing all this area through here. So I managed,
after about three hours of laying there, with troops sort of
scattered out, I managed to crawl off about seventy-five yards
into a corn fodder shock.
I crawled into a corn fodder shock and stayed there for
about two days and nights, making attempts to get away. I had
been through this same area a couple of days before, and we had
seen enemy troops in the neighborhood, and they didn't fire on
us. We figured they were waiting for the body of troops and the
body of troops didn't show up.
We were just a small detachment at that time.
It was only about two and a half miles back to the
battalion aid station. I figured I could make it back. When
things quieted down, I went seventy-five or eighty yards and
then blacked out. I tried that for two or three times, and then
got back in the corn fodder shock and stayed another night, and
about half a day.
Along about two o'clock in the afternoon I crawled back in
the shock and thought I might as well give up and let them
finish me off because I was going to die anyway.
My water in my canteen was frozen up, and I had such a
fever and everything, that I was going to give up. I laid there
for about an hour and a half or two hours, I suppose, until a
couple of Chinese came along. One of then stuck a bayonet
against my stomach and I said to myself, ``Here I go.''
While I was doing that, I got my coat and opened it up and
showed him the blood on my stomach. He reached down and sort of
covered me back up. They had then taken off. They said
something or other to each other and had taken off. About two
hours later they came back. They had a bunch of warm rice soup
in an old half a gourd and gave it to me. Then they took off
and came back about dark with an old straw mat on a couple of
sticks and picked me up and carried me to a village about half
a mile from there.
There is where I met quite a few of my old buddies that
were taken within the next three days from the time I was
wounded.
Senator Potter. How long were you in this village?
Sgt. Watters. We stayed in that village one day and night.
Senator Potter. And then did they move you by vehicle?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir. We stayed there. I don't know. Our
planes must have known that we were holding a bunch of us
prisoners there because they hit all around them buildings.
There was only one particular building there, and there were a
lot of Chinese troops in and around there, but they didn't
bother about flying in and around this building.
So the next night, just about dark, they pulled us out of
there. There must have been about seventy-five of us, and about
ten of us wounded, and others who couldn't walk. Our own boys
carried us on stretchers, and they slung out guards along, and
they carried us up the road. They carried us all that night and
put us in shacks, all the wounded guys.
The rest of the guys I found out later had been taken on
and had been kept on marching further north.
Senator Potter. How long were you in the shacks?
Sgt. Watters. We were in the shacks for two days and
nights. A big heavy snowfall came, and there was an old Korean
guy, a couple of Chinese and a couple of Koreans that came in
and picked us up and put us on bobsleds with corn fodder shocks
on them, and they tied us on to the sleds, four of us.
They took us for maybe forty or forty-five miles north, and
there they put us in an old shack that had been bombed out, and
everything, and didn't have any doors on it.
In a matter of a week's time there was around twenty of us
all together that they brought in from all over the
neighborhood, all wounded guys.
Senator Potter. During this time had they treated your
wounds at all?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir.
Senator Potter. Was your food about the same type of food
as the others have mentioned?
Sgt. Watters. Well, no, sir. The only thing we had was
cracked corn and barley, I would say, up to next June. That was
all we had. And at this point, where I stayed, I stayed at this
one area from December--I got there about the 5th or the 7th of
December, and I stayed there until about March 5 or March 8.
Senator Potter. From the 5th of December to March 8th?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Was your shack heated?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir.
Senator Potter. That was during the winter?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did you have all your clothes or had they
taken some of your clothes?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir. They had taken my snow packs from me
and had taken my M-3 overcoat.
Senator Potter. Your snow packs were the overshoes, snow
shoes?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir, real heavy shoes. We had only had
those about three days. They had taken those off from me the
first night. But I was fortunate, I had a pair of OD pants and
OD shirt underneath, and a pair of fatigues on top of that, and
then an overcoat and field jacket. They had taken my gloves, my
overcoat and snow packs.
Senator Potter. During this time, did they try to
indoctrinate you at all or try to get you to sign any
statements?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. At first they asked me what company
I was from. They knew what company I was from, but they asked
me what my job was. I told them I was a rifleman. And then they
kept on and kept on, and I told them that I was a telephone
operator. They wanted to know what kind of telephone. I told
them I didn't know anything about it, but that they had told me
to operate it, and that is what I was doing.
In the meantime, they thought I was commissioned because I
had on a fatigue blouse that had been a lieutenant's fatigue
blouse. It had holes in the collar, and they thought I was an
officer. They grilled me quite a bit for about five or six
months, trying to get information out of me.
Senator Potter. They thought you were an officer that had
thrown away his bars?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. While you were at this one point, did
anything happen? Did they beat you or anything?
Sgt. Watters. Well, at this one village every once in a
while there would be somebody that would come in and take the
thing away from us, and things like that, and they would kick
us around if we didn't move out of the way fast enough for
them.
For instance, one of the Chinese guards took a bayonet and
run it through a guy's arm, who later died from it.
Senator Potter. Did you say he later died from it?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. He died one night in his sleep.
Every once in a while the wound would start bleeding, and we
would put a tourniquet on it.
He was already wounded in the feet and hand from hand
grenades. He lost part of the heel on one of his feet and part
of the muscle from the right calf of his leg.
The guard came in the door and asked him to move over. At
the same time, he didn't move fast enough, and the guard took
the bayonet and slashed him with it. When he did, he just
keeled over, and he sort of kicked him on the rump. He came on
inside and sort of kicked two or three others so he could get
through. We were packed in this small place like sardines.
Senator Potter. After you left there, where did you go?
Sgt. Watters. I left there in March, on March 4, and this
was a pretty heavily concentrated area, right on top of an MSR,
and our planes were strafing and bombing in through this area
all the time. A couple of our boys were killed there, right in
the same shack.
On March 4 I was hit. I had only been on my feet a week. I
had been down all winter. I was too weak to try to get out and
try to get away or anything. I still had intentions of getting
up and trying to leave. All the rest had died off, and there
were only three of us.
I got up and took off, and I managed to get about two miles
away, and they picked me up. They asked me where I was from,
and I didn't tell them. I finally told them I had been a
prisoner for about two weeks. They took me to another prison
camp with about thirty-some days' travel.
Senator Potter. Was that Prison Camp No. 5?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did you get there by marches?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir. I wasn't able to walk. They had two
more American boys from one of the other divisions, and they
were along. There was about four Chinese, and two of these
Chinese were supposed to be officers, I think, and they were
supposed to be going back to China on leave, or something or
other. They were supposed to be escorting these prisoners back
to camp.
I couldn't keep up pace with them, and so they managed to
get an ox cart, or an old ox, or any way they could keep me
along, and sometimes they would leave me as high as two and
three days behind, and finally I would catch up with them.
Senator Potter. Would they leave you alone or with the
guard?
Sgt. Watters. Every once in a while they would leave me
because I wouldn't walk faster, and things like that.
Senator Potter. And you would be back there all alone?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. Sometimes I would be back behind
maybe a half mile all by myself. The guards would get mad and
leave me all alone. I wasn't in any shape to go anywhere at the
time.
Senator Potter. What happened when you got to Camp No. 5?
Sgt. Watters. I got to Camp No. 5, and I was only there for
a few days until we started our training at the university, as
they called it.
Senator Potter. That was called the university?
Sgt. Watters. The University Piktong.
Senator Potter. What did your training consist of?
Sgt. Watters. The reading of literature and speeches, and
so on, on communism.
Senator Potter. Did they interview you at the university
first, or what?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What would they try to find out in the
interview?
Sgt. Watters. Well, about my government and what I knew
about communism, and different things like that, and about the
unit, and about the weapons, and so on and so forth, what was
being used, what tactics to use for this and that.
Senator Potter. Did they try to get you to sign statements?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What were some of the statements that they
wanted you to sign?
Sgt. Watters. Well, about different types of equipment, and
such as that. They asked me if I knew anything about the
equipment, and I told them no. But they still figured that I
did, and I got hit over the head several times, and I got
slapped up against the wall.
Senator Potter. That was during the interrogations?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Were the interrogations carried on by
military personnel or non-military personnel?
Sgt. Watters. Military personnel, sir, CBV; yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Chinese?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. You said they slapped you around?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. If you did not answer the questions the way
they wanted them answered, they slapped you around?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What were some of the indoctrination
courses or the lectures? What were they on? Were they much the
same as those in Camp No. 1?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir, I imagine they were along the same
line. It was about some of their Communist writers, and
everything of Russia, and Czechoslovakia, and different
countries, telling us about the different countries with
communism and the benefits of it; how the countries benefitted
by it, and so on and so forth, how much better it was than our
government.
Then, of course, along at the same time, I believe we had
some of the biggest arguments that we ever had. Did we like
Chiang Kai-shek, and did Formosa belong to the Chinese or to
who.
Senator Potter. They questioned you about that, too?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. In fact, that went along, I
imagine, for about three or four months. Every once in a while
they would bring the same question up.
Senator Potter. Did they have the Daily Worker there for
reading material?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Were the lectures conducted by military
personnel or by non-military personnel?
Sgt. Watters. We had military personnel, sir. In fact, I
believe we did have some non-military personnel at Camp 5 in
the beginning as well as I remember, sir.
Senator Potter. Did you ever see any Russian troops there?
Sgt. Watters. Well, I saw other troops, different from the
Chinese and Korean forces. But I wouldn't know what race they
were. Of course, we would ask the question, and they would tell
us it was none of our business, and sometimes they would say
they were Manchurian, inspecting camps or something of that
type.
Senator Potter. What was your food ration?
Sgt. Watters. Well, there wasn't much of a ration to it. I
would say we would get an ordinary coffee cupful of cracked
corn or barley twice a day.
Senator Potter. Did they have a special confinement place
for prisoners who broke some of the rules of the camp or small
infractions of the rules?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What did that consist of?
Sgt. Watters. Well, if you didn't go along with them on
different things, argue it with them or something of that type,
there would be the place we would call the hole or the dungeon,
which was, I would say, maybe six feet deep and damp, with no
blankets, no straw or anything in the bottom of it. They kept
you there for two or three days at a time.
They also had rooms where they would lock them up, tie
their hands behind them, tie their feet together, handcuff
them, and so on.
Senator Potter. Were you ever thrown in the hole?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir.
Senator Potter. How long would they normally keep a man in
the hole?
Sgt. Watters. Well, if he started going along with them,
they would let him outside in a week. But if he didn't, they
would keep him there for thirty or forty days.
Senator Potter. Thirty or forty days?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. While you were in the prison camp, was
there quite a bit of beating of the prisoners?
Sgt. Watters. Well, I only saw three or four incidents at
Camp 5, and I only saw a couple at Camp 3, and a couple at Camp
4.
Senator Potter. You were at Camp 5 first, is that correct?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. How long were you there?
Sgt. Watters. I was there for May, June, July, and I
believe it was August that I left there.
Senator Potter. I assume that was the camp where they sent
them for the special training, and after they had received
their training they sent them to another camp, is that true?
Sgt. Watters. What I understood later on, and they told us
after we went to Camp 3, they were classified as reactionaries,
we were classified as reactionaries, because we didn't go along
with their literature.
Senator Potter. In other words, you did not graduate from
the university?
Sgt. Watters. We graduated without a diploma. In fact, they
told us that. We asked them why we were sent up there, and why
we had to build this and that, and carry wood, and everything
else.
Senator Potter. That was at Camp 3?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir, after we went to Camp 3. Then they
told us, they said, ``Well, when you learn the truth and go
along, things will be much better.''
Senator Potter. I assume, then, that the treatment was much
better at Camp 5 than at Camp 3?
Sgt. Watters. Well, it was after a little while, yes, sir.
Senator Potter. How many men were at Camp 5 when you were
there?
Sgt. Watters. Well, there was, I would say, around twenty-
two or twenty-three hundred. That is when I went there, sir.
Senator Potter. Were most of them Americans?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Most of them were Americans?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. How many died while at that camp, do you
have any idea?
Sgt. Watters. Well, I would say there was around six or
eight hundred, sir.
Senator Potter. Six or eight hundred?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did most of them die from malnutrition?
Sgt. Watters. Malnutrition and froze to death.
Senator Potter. Did they have medical facilities there?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir.
Senator Potter. Were there any Red Cross representatives
there?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir. They didn't have nothing whatsoever
there at that time. The only medical care we got there was we
had one American doctor, a captain, who went around and
gathered up bones and things like that and burned them and made
potash out of them and gave it to us, the ones that had
dysentery. A lot of boys died of dysentery and fever,
pneumonia, and everything else.
Senator Potter. The only medication he received was from
the American doctor PW?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. Well, they finally stopped him from
coming around and giving treatment to the men on account that
somebody said something or other that he had said. Anyhow, he
was a rumormonger or spreader, and he was no good, so they
chased him away from the compound, and we didn't see him any
more after that.
Senator Potter. Did they question while there concerning
your home life, about your parents?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir, quite a bit.
Senator Potter. Did they inquire about whether you owned an
automobile, or anything of that kind?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. If you told them that your parents had an
automobile, would they believe you?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir, they probably would believe you,
but it would be best to tell them that you had nothing, that
you were a peasant that lived off the lay of the land, and in
that way they seemed to like the working person better.
Senator Potter. If you owned an automobile, then you were a
capitalist so far as they were concerned?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir, you were a capitalist.
Senator Potter. All right. You were then transferred to
Camp 3?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And how long were you there?
Sgt. Watters. I was there for about one year, sir.
Senator Potter. And where is Camp 3 located?
Sgt. Watters. That is a little out of Changsong,
approximately, eighteen to twenty miles, sir, Changsong,
proper.
Senator Potter. How far is that from Camp 5?
Sgt. Watters. Well, it had taken us all night and a part of
a day to go in a boat. I don't remember, but I think there were
around 160 or 175 of us, and we were on two little boats.
Senator Potter. You went up the river?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And was Camp 3 under Chinese jurisdiction
or Korean jurisdiction?
Sgt. Watters. It was under Chinese jurisdiction.
Senator Potter. How did that differ from Camp 5? I
understand you had more physical duties to perform there. Is
that true?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. They made us get out and build rock
walls, and walks, and we had to build shacks, carry mud, carry
logs, go to the mountains and carry logs in and such as that,
sir.
Senator Potter. Did the indoctrination courses still
continue?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. After we got there and got the camp
built up, after three or four months, then they started back on
their literature and everything.
Senator Potter. Started giving you the works again?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Did that differ from the other
indoctrination courses that you had?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir. It was practically the same thing.
It was more or less of a review.
Senator Potter. Did they give you assignments and books to
read?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. We had the classes broken down. We
had them broken down like platoons and squads. The rooms were
just about big enough for a squad. They would select one man to
read the book to us and then we were supposed to make written
copies, more or less a report on what we were talking about and
everything.
After he reads it off, we would discuss it, and then we
were supposed to make a report and turn it in.
Senator Potter. Would there be guards there while he was
reading it?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir. There were guards all around. We
were pretty well covered. But every once in a while our Chinese
platoon leaders, as we called them, or one of the Honshus,
would come by and if he caught us with a book on the floor,
sitting around batting the breeze, he would sneak up behind the
door and he would come up and raise a lot of Cain, and would
place the ringleaders into the hole and make them stand at
attention.
Senator Potter. Do you want to explain what you mean about
standing at attention?
Sgt. Watters. They stand there and ask questions until they
get the right answers out of them. Some of the guys would pass
out.
Senator Potter. How long have you seen some of them stand
at attention?
Sgt. Watters. I have seen some of them stand at attention
as high as four and five hours, after working all day, or
something like that.
Senator Potter. Did they have you write an autobiography of
yourself?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And did they ask you to change it
afterwards or make any changes, or anything?
Sgt. Watters. No. I more or less used my own head in
writing it up, sir.
Senator Potter. Then you say you were in Camp 3 for about a
year?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. And you were transferred then to Camp 4?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Where is Camp 4?
Sgt. Watters. Camp 4 was further north to Waewon.
Senator Potter. How long were you there?
Sgt. Watters. I stayed there until April 16, 1953.
Senator Potter. That would be about how long all together?
Sgt. Watters. We left Camp 3 in August. Wait a minute. We
didn't go directly there. We went to another place where we
stayed for eighteen days, which we called an eighteen-day camp.
We figured everything was blowing over and the peace talks and
everything were being settled, so they were shipping us all
down because they were being pretty nice to us at that time.
They loaded us into some trucks.
At this time we ran across quite a few of the 24th Division
guys, which had been under the jurisdiction of the Koreans, and
they segregated us.
Senator Potter. They would not let you talk to the others?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir. They kept us segregated.
Senator Potter. And they treated you pretty well at the
eighteen-day camp, as you called it?
Sgt. Watters. For a few days, until some of the boys broke
camp and went up to see some of the boys in the 24th Division.
Then they tightened down on us and started beating up several
of the guys and throwing them in holes, and so on. There were
several of the guys left there when we left. I don't know
whatever happened to them.
Senator Potter. Were conditions in Camp 4 much the same as
in Camp 5 and 3?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir. When we went to Camp 4 we had to
move into a couple of old school houses that didn't have
windows or anything else. One of the places had concrete floors
and we had to sleep on the concrete floors for about four
months. A lot of guys got rheumatism very badly out there from
it, and they managed to get another wooden building for us to
move into.
Then we started to shape it up, and they more or less made
a recreation room out of the one with the concrete floor.
Senator Potter. Was the food about the same in each camp?
Sgt. Watters. The food began to improve all along, sir.
Senator Potter. Getting better?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. What about the treatment by the guards and
the prison personnel?
Sgt. Watters. Well, the prison guards themselves, that is
more or less to say the privates and so on, they never did have
very much to say to us. You would have to do something out of
the way before they would jump you. But it was always the
senior instructors, the officers.
Senator Potter. These instructors, were they the ones that
would give you the speeches?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. In Camp 4, did you witness any meetings?
Sgt. Watters. Only two, sir. And that was while we were out
on wood details, out in the mountains, about four miles out. We
would do a little ``Changey'' with an old Korean, and if they
would catch you they would knock you in the head with a rifle
butt, or push you around, or something like that.
Senator Potter. You were at Camp 4 when Little Switch took
place, is that true?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Can you relate to us briefly what
transpired? Did you know how you happened to be selected?
Sgt. Watters. Well, about five or six mouths before, when
news started coming in and everything, they called me to
headquarters interrogating a couple of times. I had a hunch,
and I started playing that hunch. In other words, using a
little psychology on them.
Then, about four mouths later, things kept growing and
looking better and everything. And the food was improving. So I
just kept on playing along with them. They finally called me up
and asked me about different things, how the Chinese treated
me, and all this and that, and asked me if they had taken any
property off of me, and this and that, and I told them no, they
had been awful nice, and all of this and that. They said,
``Well, that is good.'' In a few days they invited me up to the
house, and I had a couple of drinks with them, with cigarettes
and candy, and then, bang, they said, ``Well, pack up. You are
going home.''
Senator Potter. Were most of the men from Camp 4 that were
selected for Little Switch, selected on that basis of the
fellows getting smart?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir. Some of the fellows were in pretty
bad shape.
Senator Potter. Do you know whether they left any badly
wounded prisoners there in Little Switch? Did they take all the
wounded prisoners?
Sgt. Watters. No, sir, they did not, sir. There was a lot
of the fellows back there that were worse than I was.
Mr. O'Donnell. Sergeant, I notice you had a chance to
glance through that propaganda pamphlet.
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you know if any of those photographs were
taken at Camp 5?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. They were?
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell. Bob, I wonder if you can give that to the
Sgt. so he could go into that. [Document handed witness.]
Briefly, of course, this pamphlet was put out by the
Communists to attempt by various photographs to indicate that
American PW's were receiving excellent treatment and were
enjoying themselves. Sergeant, we would appreciate any comments
you have on it and anything specific that you can bring to our
attention.
Sgt. Watters. Yes, sir. Before I came up here, the major
asked me if I would look through this. I just more or less
glanced through it like that, and I had seen quite a bit of it.
Of course, I will make the statement I made a while ago, that I
could tell where it came from. 90 percent isn't what it is
cracked up to be.
Senator Potter. Most of those pictured are posed pictures?
Sgt. Watters. Well, like the picture itself of Camp 5--I
don't know, that was taken probably in the spring of the year
when it was most beautiful around there.
Senator Potter. Like some of our tourist ads?
Sgt. Watters. Yes. Somebody would look at that and say that
would be a nice place for a home, a mansion, and anything else.
Of course, the houses, as it looks in the picture, are nicely
constructed and everything else. But they are nothing but mud
shacks.
Senator Potter. They are noting but mud shacks?
Sgt. Watters. That is all they are sir. Of course, they had
a couple of modern shacks which I haven't been able to locate
here, which were blown right down to the ground by our own
aircraft in January, I think of 1951. They had a candy factory
and something else sitting back up on the hill.
Mr. O'Donnell. Do you have any first-hand knowledge of any
of those specific pictures in there, Sergeant?
Sgt. Watters. Well, yes, sir. You take the one on page six,
of the colored fellow shaking hands with the Chinese as he
finished up his journey on his way to the PW camp, and so on.
Mr. O'Donnell. How would that come about?
Sgt. Watters. Maybe the guards treated him pretty nice on
the way up, maybe giving him a cigarette or two, or something
like that, every ten or twelve miles.
Mr. O'Donnell. Would you say that each and every picture in
there was to some extent planted by the Communists, setting it
up?
Sgt. Watters. It has been planted for a reason, yes, sir.
Of course, I have not studied all the pictures. But I can just
pick out maybe a half dozen of them, and I can judge the rest
to be the same way.
Senator Potter. Before you are asked to testify in public
session, we will give you an opportunity to go over some of
those. You might mark some that you can comment on ahead of
time. We will give you an opportunity to look that over prior
to the time that you testify.
Sgt. Watters. Very well, sir.
Senator Potter. Thank you, Sergeant. Do you have anything
you would like to add on your own?
Sgt. Watters. No. sir, I don't think I have anything else
to say.
Senator Potter. All right. You will be notified as to the
day you will appear.
Sergeant Mullins?
STATEMENT OF SGT. ORVILLE R. MULLINS
Sgt. Mullins. Orville R. Mullins, 20-21 ASU, Army and Air
Force Recruiting Station and Induction Station, Cincinnati,
Ohio.
Senator Potter. Will you give us your home address?
Sgt. Mullins. My home address in 4419 DeCorcey Avenue,
Covington, Kentucky.
Senator Potter. You are pretty close to home.
Sgt. Mullins. Yes, sir. I am in Covington on duty.
Senator Potter. That is what we call good duty. Sergeant,
can you tell us when you went to Korea and with what unit you
were with at the time?
Sgt. Mullins. I went to Korea, I left the States January 5,
1951, and joined the Second Infantry Division, the 38th
Infantry Regiment of H Company, some time in the same month of
January. I don't remember the exact date. I stayed with that
until August 27, 1951, when I was captured. My army serial
number is RA 43013189.
Senator Potter. Do you care to briefly tell us how you were
captured?
Sgt. Mullins. We were behind the lines in a blocking
position, over two companies of us. We were a good way back. We
had been back there or we were only supposed to be back there
for three days, and we had been back there ten days. We ran out
of ammunition, and they cut us off. The ROK's were trying to
take a hill, and they took it, and got run off, and pushed way
back.
We were cut off, and they got us in a valley, they got on
both sides of the valley, and behind us, and as we tried to get
out they cut us down. Some made it and some didn't. I was hit
with machine gun fire in the legs.
Senator Potter. You were wounded at the time?
Sgt. Mullins. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Can you briefly tell us what transpired
after you were captured and where they took you?
Sgt. Mullins. Well, at first I played dead. They overrun us
then. They started moving in on us, and they overrun us, and I
took blood from my leg--I was bleeding badly--and run it on my
face. When the first wave went through I had a bunch of
equipment on me--I had been carrying a machine gun and had
destroyed it, and I had a bunch of binoculars, and things like
that on me--and I took and broke it all and threw everything I
had in the river.
About that time they moved up just across the river with
some more prisoners and stopped over there. I played dead for I
don't know how long, maybe an hour. They moved on, and then I
couldn't hardly walk. I crawled down and got across the little
river and was going up to the road over there. I thought they
had pulled out.
We were only about five hundred yards from our line, and I
could see our tanks and machine guns firing into the area.
There was a heavy artillery and mortar fire coming in. I had
gotten to a house and was still bleeding badly. I had saved my
first aid bandage kit, and I took it and got in the house,
which had been bombed out, and I bandaged my leg.
I got a big stick, and I got up in the road, couldn't see
anybody or hear anything, and it was raining pretty badly, and
I started walking up the road on the stick, I couldn't walk
fast, but I thought the boys up there saw me, or could see me
through field glasses, and could tell I was an American. I
don't guess they did.
I started around the bend, and about that time another GI
was coming around the bend, and I stopped. About that time two
guards captured him, and then they saw me. They took me and
searched me, and saw I was pretty badly shot up, and I couldn't
walk very good.
Artillery was coming in on top of us, so they got him to
help me. We started back down the road, and they got scared of
artillery, and they told him to run on and told me to follow
him. Well, I got me another stick, and I went back toward our
lines instead of following them.
I went up there to within about two hundred yards, and I
had to go around into a cut. They had a road block up there,
and there was a whole company of them, and I walked right into
them before I noticed.
Senator Potter. A company of Communists?
Sgt. Mullins. North Koreans. The Sixth North Korean
Division. I don't know what regiment. I stopped there then, and
they made me lay down on the side of the road. My platoon
leader and a bunch of them were there. I wasn't right where
they were at the time. Artillery came in and hit right among a
bunch of them and killed a bunch of them, where they had some
wounded. They made us stay there until dark that night.
They moved the rest of them from around that little hill to
where I was, and there was a bunch of them, and they stayed
around there. I heard them over there firing into that gully.
There was a lot of wounded over there. They started to move us
out at dark. I thought I could play like I couldn't walk, and
then I thought about them shooting, and I didn't know whether
they were shooting the guys or not.
So I got up and started walking with them. There were
twenty-six of us at the time, and all but eight were wounded.
Senator Potter. All but eight were wounded?
Sgt. Mullins. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. They took the wounded.
Sgt. Mullins. They took one or two and gave them their
heavy weapons and made them carry them up the hill, and took
the rest of us and made them carry their wounded. They had some
wounded there, and then they took off down the road with us. We
went for about a mile and they had a hole dug on the hill, and
they made us sit outside, and they sat inside and watched us,
and artillery came in until the next morning, and we sat there
like that.
Then we moved the next morning two or three more miles to
headquarters, and we stayed there for two days, two days and
one night, and move out the next night, going north in a group.
We marched for four more days.
Senator Potter. Had they taken any of your clothes or
anything?
Sgt. Mullins. They had taken most of the clothes from the
rest of the guys. Mine was so bloody they didn't.
Senator Potter. Yours were not attractive to them.
Sgt. Mullins. They didn't want them. We got over to this
other headquarters, and they kept us there. When we got there
they gave us, all twenty-six of us, and a South Korean, I
understand--no, two South Koreans joined us then--they gave all
of us about half of a government liner full of rice to eat. We
ate that, and then they took all the first three graders, six
sergeants, over to interrogate us. They told us that they were
going to turn us loose.
We stayed there for two or three days, and moved on out
again one night.
Senator Potter. In their interrogation, was that just on
military interrogation or was it that they would interrogate
you about your home?
Sgt. Mullins. It was all upon my military information, such
as strength.
We moved on over and went into this artillery outfit. We
stayed there one night. That day they moved us up on the hill.
We were wounded badly and they were letting us rest and they
fed us again. They gave us some more. They gave us some horse
meat cooked in some rice. The artillery killed one of their
horses and we got some of that. The, artillery, our artillery
got zeroed in on their artillery and knocked most of it out.
They got scared and they started us out that night up the road,
and we walked--I don't remember--eight, nine or ten days and
nights. We got over to this place and they said we were not
supposed to go there, so they bring us all the way back to the
front.
Senator Potter. They took you back again?
Sgt. Mullins. Yes, sir. They stopped there and then they
started back with us again. We went to Wonsan, and in every
little town they had us march through them in the daytime.
Senator Potter. Did they do that so the civilians would see
a spectacle?
Sgt. Mullins. They used to make fun of us. They would get
us in a town in the evening. They would give us a big bowl of
maize or something like that, and we sat down, and we didn't
have any spoons or anything to wash with, and they would sit
down around you, and you had to eat with your hands. Then the
civilians would stand up around and watch you and make fun of
you because you were hungry.
They took us to Wonsan and from Wonsan we marched back to
Pyongyang to Hodong. That is about fourteen miles northwest, I
think, of Pyongyang. That is an interrogation center.
By that time beriberi had set in, and my leg had swollen up
to twice its size and I could hardly walk. They let us stay
there for a day and a half, and they interrogated us some
there. The next day we were going to move north again, and I
couldn't walk. I couldn't step. So they put me in an ox cart
and started moving me.
Well, we went that way for fifteen or twenty days, and some
days I would have to walk, and some days I would be so bad I
couldn't walk and they would put me on an ox cart.
Up to that time I only had had my leg washed off and a
bandage put around it one time.
We got to what was a Korean prison camp in a big hollow, a
big mining camp. By the time we got there we were all pretty
sick and pretty weak, without anything to eat, and they said we
were going to rest up there. Well, just before that they had
pulled the 26th out.
We left Pyongyang with 162 men. And just before we got to
this Korean prison camp they took the twenty-six that were with
me out and took us to a school house and kept us four days. But
they took the others on to this prison camp. They took us over
there and they kept us, and the first two days they fed us two
times a day and fed us good, and they were trying to get us to
write articles, and questioned us about home and what we owned
and everything.
Senator Potter. That was their propaganda spot?
Sgt. Mullins. They had a general there. He was wanting to
pick out somebody to take to a peace camp that they had at that
time. They had approximately seventy UN prisoners in there that
did nothing but write articles and make radio broadcasts,
propaganda broadcasts.
Senator Potter. How many prisoners did you say?
Sgt. Mullins. Approximately seventy. It was close to the
Pyongyang prison camp where I went to, because we had went to
it. We thought that was where we were supposed to go, and we
got to talk to one that was an artillery officer, a captain who
was in good shape. We talked to two or three of them.
They wouldn't let us talk anymore, and they moved us off.
They moved us down the river and kept us that night. Then we
started to move over to Pyongyang.
After we got to this one place where they interrogated us,
then they kept twenty-six of us there, and took two of the boys
from my group back to this peace camp.
Senator Potter. They did take two of them?
Sgt. Mullins. Two of them wrote a couple of articles and a
couple of letters, so they took them back.
We went on, and we got over to this prison, and there was,
I think they said, six hundred South Koreans there.
By the time we had started dying off, about four or five
had died off from us. While we were there we lost about twenty
men, just from malnutrition and too much walking and no medical
care. They were going to move us out of there, and they had
eight men in this one little room, and they wouldn't let us go
in there. The men were too sick to even eat, and they had
dysentery bad, and it stunk, and it was dirty in there. They
wouldn't let anybody go in there, wouldn't let anybody go near
there. They wouldn't feed them. One morning, the morning we
left, they got them and carried all of them out, and they were
all dead.
Senator Potter. They were all dead?
Sgt. Mullins. Yes. That evening, late that evening, about
four or five o'clock, they got us all together, and we started
north again. Everybody was sick then, and one or two would die
every day or every night.
The first real bad thing that happened is when we were
moving up this valley and we had a long way to go and had
marched a long way that day. We got into this place and I was
in this one room. There was this one tall, slim colored boy who
was with us who did not have any shoes. A bunch of them had no
shoes. His feet turned sore and he couldn't walk. They swelled
up and he was sick.
Well, he had died, and so they dragged him on the ground
for a mile and a-half or two miles, and they dragged him and
pitched him into the room with us.
Senator Potter. Was he dead then?
Sgt. Mullins. He was still just barely breathing when they
brought him in.
Senator Potter. And they dragged him in?
Sgt. Mullins. Just got him by the hands and dragged him in.
We told them afterwards, when we found out he was dead, to let
us put him on the outside so we could have more room, to let us
do something with him. They said no, he stayed there.
We got him and put him up on a thing they had in this room,
laid him up there, and offered a prayer for him that night. The
next morning they moved us out and they said the Koreans would
bury him. I don't know what happened.
We went on up for a ways. We kept on this march until a day
or two before we got to Camp No. 3. I was on an ox cart this
time since I was pretty weak. This day we had stopped and we
had eaten about twelve o'clock. We had not eaten since the day
before, and they fed us about twelve o'clock. I had had a
cigarette. The Korean had given me a cigarette.
These other two boys on the ox cart didn't have any
clothes.
They were pretty bad off. They were alive then because I
had given them part of this cigarette.
They put us on the ox cart and moved us out, and they were
trying to stop us just before dark that night, but our ox cart
broke down and we had stopped and got behind. There were four
or five of us down there, and they had these two boys laying on
them. We moved up and they had them stopped. This Korean
officer, who was some kind of a lieutenant, he spoke a little
English; he told us the boys were dead, that both of them had
died.
Four Korean civilians came down and they went up on the
hill and started digging a grave. They came down and started
taking them off the cart. By the time we pulled around them I
looked at those two boys, and one of them looked at me. He
wasn't dead. I don't know whether the other one was or not. But
he was almost dead.
So we went on around up there, and in about five minutes
this officer and these four civilians, two or four, I have
forgotten for sure, they came on up and I stayed in one of
their houses that night. We stayed there that night, and I was
with a sick group by that time.
The next day we started on out and we moved on out to a
dam. We left about three o'clock by boat, and we got to Camp 3
about ten o'clock that night.
Senator Potter. You went by boat?
Sgt. Mullins. Yes, sir. They put us up by this dam. We went
by boat because we couldn't hardly walk. This one, he was from
one of the English satellite countries, he was the one, and we
were waiting by this boat by the side of the dam. They never
came and we couldn't go. They had a sack of rice there and they
started everybody out to go back up around to some houses to
stay, and they told this one guy, a Scotchman, to carry the
rice and he couldn't carry it. He was too weak and it was too
heavy.
They started beating him, trying to make him carry it. We
went on by and they still had him back there, a bunch of the
guards. Finally they came around with the rice and when they
brought him in they were still beating him, knocking him down,
and then he would get up. Finally he couldn't get up anymore,
and they dragged him on around from where I was, and left him
beside the road there.
I went over to check him, and he was dead then.
They put us in this house down there, and we stayed there
all that night and the next day, and the next night and up
until three o'clock that evening, and then we went to Camp 3.
We got there about ten o'clock that night and were turned over
to the Chinese.
Senator Potter. All this march was by Koreans, North
Koreans.
Sgt. Mullins. North Koreans.
Senator Potter. And then you were turned over to the
Chinese at Camp No. 3?
Sgt. Mullins. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. You heard the statement, I think, of
Daniels and Matta, I believe, on Camp 3. How long were you at
Camp No. 3?
Sgt. Mullins. I got there sometime the first of December,
and I was pretty sick, and my eyes swelled up and I couldn't
see. My whole head was swelled up and my leg.
They took me to the hospital at Camp No. 3. While I was
there they made an operation on my leg.
Senator Potter. They did operate on your leg?
Sgt. Mullins. About nine inches all the way to the bone. I
found out later, they told me, the blood vein that comes down--
they took one and put it on the other side of my leg.
Senator Potter. Did they give you an anesthesia?
Sgt. Mullins. No, nothing. I went out of my head after
about three hours. It started early in the morning and I came
to that night, and I don't remember. It got bad.
They sent me to Camp No. 5, to what we called the general
hospital, the big hospital, and they cleaned it out and sewed
it up.
Senator Potter. They did fix it up at Camp No. 5?
Sgt. Mullins. At the time they took me to Camp No. 5 I
weighed about sixty-five pounds. I couldn't move and couldn't
walk.
Senator Potter. How long were you in Camp No. 3 before they
sent you to 5?
Sgt. Mullins. Maybe a month at that time. But I stayed in
Camp No. 5 until January, and I returned to Camp No. 3.
Senator Potter. Then you came back to 3?
Sgt. Mullins. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Apparently medical treatment was pretty
good in Camp No. 5. They fixed up your leg, did they?
Sgt. Mullins. Just sewed it up, sir. But some of the boys
got out, a couple of guys I know pretty well got out and stole
some stuff and I got to eat, and they got me back on my feet.
They gave me some clothes there. Those are the first clothes I
had. They gave me my clothes there. I had none at that time.
They had taken them all away from me. They gave me some clothes
and I got in pretty good shape there. I got back up to about a
hundred. But then they sent me back to Camp No. 3.
Senator Potter. When you got back to Camp No. 3 you were
still too sick to work, were you not?
Sgt. Mullins. I couldn't walk. I never could walk all the
time. My leg was drawed up.
Senator Potter. What did they do with you in Camp No. 3
after you got back?
Sgt. Mullins. They throwed me in the hole there and wanted
me to tell some things and I wouldn't tell them. They kept me
from January 15 until March 28.
Senator Potter. In the hole?
Sgt. Mullins. Yes.
Senator Potter. What did they want you to tell them?
Sgt. Mullins. They wanted me to draw some maps and things
of bases and everything, to tell them where I lived and
everything. And then they came in one morning and I still
couldn't stand up even, my leg was drawed up. The doctor came
down and saw me and asked me would I like to go to the company.
I wouldn't sign anything. He said if I would sign that I would
be a good boy and not get into trouble I could go to my
company. I said I want to go but I can't walk. Somebody would
have to come down and help me get up.
He went and took two poles and split them and made a pair
of crutches out of them. They took me to the company, and I
stayed back there nine days and was really doing good, getting
in pretty good shape, and my leg was all swelled up with
beriberi, and it busted again.
So they took me back to the hospital. I was in bad shape.
It was rotten. They took scissors and hot water and cleaned all
of that out of there, and stuffed it full of rags and left it
like that. Every week they would come and take the rags out and
put more in, and then they would take and wash the others and
have them ready for the next time. My leg never did get well
but I got so I could walk a little.
They sent me back to the company and I stayed there until
August. In July we left for this other camp.
Senator Potter. Camp No. 5?
Sgt. Mullins. Camp No. 4. I made the move with Sgt.
Watters.
Senator Potter. And your stay at Camp No. 4 was the same as
Sgt. Watters?
Sgt. Mullins. I left there, and my leg got bad again, and
they came and got me and they took me back to Pektong on March
24 of 1953. March 28 is when they really gave me some good
medical attention; they gave me a spinal, washed it out all,
and operated on me again.
Senator Potter. That was during truce negotiations?
Sgt. Mullins. Yes, sir. March 24 of this year. My leg never
got well until after I was released.
In April, April 13, they came and read a letter where they
had accepted, talked about peace, I mean about exchanging the
sick and wounded. The next day they said they had not agreed on
anything. On the 14th they read off where they had agreed, and
when they got through reading he called off four names from the
hospital. I was not with them.
Senator Potter. You were not?
Sgt. Mullins. And they told them, ``Pack up. You are
going.'' And they took them off then.
The next day they came up and called another bunch in the
morning, three or four more, and they took them. That evening
they came up and called me and another guy and took us, and we
went down to where they were collecting for this. From there we
came home.
Senator Potter. Did they leave other wounded prisoners in
Camp 5 in Little Switch?
Sgt. Mullins. Very much so. They had one room with four
guys that weighed less than one hundred pounds. They couldn't
even talk, set up or eat. They were sick with TB.
Senator Potter. Well, Sergeant, since you have gone through
this experience, do you think that communism is a form of
government that would appeal to anybody?
Sgt. Mullins. I don't see and never will see why anybody
would talk for such a form of government. It is not a form of
government; it is a form of dictatorship to me.
Senator Potter. Thank you, Sergeant. We will let you know
when you will appear in the public hearing. It will be
Wednesday, Thursday or Friday.
Don Brown?
Will you identify yourself for the record, and give your
name and address?
STATEMENT OF DONALD R. BROWN
Mr. Brown. Donald R. Brown, 231 North Front Street,
Reading, Pennsylvania.
Senator Potter. What outfit were you with during the Korean
conflict?
Mr. Brown. I was with George Company, 23rd Regiment, 2nd
Division.
Senator Potter. Did you go into Korea with the 2nd
Division?
Mr. Brown. No, sir.
Senator Potter. When did you go to Korea?
Mr. Brown. I went to Korea at the end of December of 1950.
Senator Potter. And when were you captured, Don?
Mr. Brown. The 14th of February, 1951.
Senator Potter. The 14th of February, 1951?
Mr. Brown. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Can you tell us the circumstances under
which they broke your arm?
Mr. Brown. Do you want me to start at the beginning when I
first got hit?
Senator Potter. Yes, sir. Give us briefly how you were
captured.
Mr. Brown. We were overrun, our position was overrun, and
there were about thirty men who took a machine gun, threw a
hand grenade in our hole, another fellow and myself, and we
laid there and pretended we were dead because they were looking
around for the ones that were alive and hitting them.
So I laid still and the other fellow laid still, we both
laid still until the Chinese sat on his leg and he hollered
because he had been hit in the leg. Then we both stood up.
They took us to the base of the hill, and there was a man
there that spoke perfect English, and he told me that I was a
prisoner of war and I would be treated as such. He told me to
see the captain.
The captain put out his hand as though he wanted to shake
hands with me.
Mr. O'Donnell. Were you wounded at the time, Don?
Mr. Brown. Yes, sir, I was. I had been wounded with a hand
grenade.
Senator Potter. Then they kept sending you back? What
prison camp did you go to?
Mr. Brown. I wasn't sent to a prison camp. I was told to go
up a hill, and I started up this hill and some Chinese came
down the other way. I pointed back and told them there was a
captain there. I don't know if they understood me or not, but
they started going down one way and I turned and went the other
way. Instead of going over the hill I went down the other side
and I stayed in a hole there. They found me.
I was hit in the leg and left arm with shrapnel. Those are
the parts they started hitting me on, on the leg and the arm,
with a rifle butt.
Senator Potter. When they found you again, they beat you?
Is that right?
Mr. Brown. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Is that when they broke your arm?
Mr. Brown. They put me in a fox hole. Yes, sir. There was
snow then. In February we had snow then, about twelve inches I
suppose.
Senator Potter. How did they beat you? Did they beat you
with a rifle?
Mr. Brown. With a rifle butt. Yes, sir.
Senator Potter. Were you on the ground at the time?
Mr. Brown. I was in a hole then. I put my hand up to
protect my face. I got hit in the eye with shrapnel, and my eye
started to shut. Then they hit me with a rifle butt and it shut
more, it shut entirely. Then I put my arm up again and they hit
it and broke it. I couldn't do anything then. I was standing
there holding it, holding my arm, and after a while I had to
urinate and I asked one if he would help me. He told me no. So
I had to go, and I did, and it went into my boots. As a result,
my feet froze.
After a while the American jets came in and started
strafing. There was a mortar not too far from us. When the jets
started strafing I got up and left.
The day before we had seen those colored parachutes that
Flying Boxcars drop supplies in, so I figured that is where the
Americans were.
I waited until that night. I stayed there, and the next
morning when it started to get light I left and ran down the
road and I came to the French troops.
Senator Potter. You got back to the French troops?
Mr. Brown. Yes, sir,
Senator Potter. Thank you, Don.
We have a pretty full schedule. We will be holding hearings
for three days now. I do not know whether we are going to be
able to use all the men for the hearing or not. We did not know
whether you were one we would be able to get to or not. I think
probably we will not be using you in this set of hearings. We
have your testimony here, and we may continue the hearings
after the first of the year. If we do we will contact you.
Mr. Brown. Compared to the other stories I heard, nothing
happened to me.
Senator Potter. Thank you very much.
We will now recess until 10:30 a.m. tomorrow morning, in
room 318, Senate Office Building, at which time we will convene
in open session.
[Whereupon, at 5:35 p.m., the hearing was recessed, to
reconvene in public session, December 2, 1953, at 10:30 a.m. in
the Caucus Room of the Senate Office Building.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--During the years following World War II,
the FBI and military security had periodically investigated
allegations of espionage at the Army Signal Corps laboratories
at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey. On October 6, 1953, the army
announced the suspension of several employees at the facility
for security reasons. That number eventually grew to forty-two,
including fifteen section chiefs. In its annual report for
1953, the subcommittee elaborated that ``on the basis of
reliable information received concerning the general subject of
Communist infiltration and specific information relating to
certain individuals, it became apparent that Communist attempts
to infiltrate our Armed Forces and the defense effort, with a
view to limiting their effectiveness, had not been completely
checked. . . . A large portion of the staff was immediately
assigned to this case. Realizing that through the use of their
worldwide apparatus the Communists had already gained many of
our atomic secrets, the staff's attention focused upon what
might well be considered their next field of concentration--our
defenses against attack. Since it was reported that Communists
and their sympathizers and supporters were employed by the Army
at the time of commencement of the investigation, this received
immediate attention. Since radar is such an obvious and
important part of our defense, particular emphasis was placed
upon defense establishments charged with responsibility for
research, development, and manufacture of radar.''
With Senator McCarthy away on his honeymoon, and Democrats
still boycotting the subcommittee, no senators participated in
this ``staff interrogatory,'' whose format resembled a hearing.
Following this session, Roy Cohn apprized the chairman of new
developments in the investigation. Senator McCarthy then cut
short his honeymoon and returned to New York to conduct formal
hearings. He told reporters that Julius Rosenberg (who with his
wife Ethel had been executed for espionage four months earlier)
had organized a spy ring that stole radar secrets from the Army
Signal Corps laboratories at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, that
the case had ``all the earmarks of extremely dangerous
espionage,'' and that the spy ring at Fort Monmouth ``may still
be in operation.''
Of the forty-two civilian employees suspended, the army
later reinstated all but two, although most chose not to return
to their former jobs. None of the witnesses on October 8, Paul
Siegel (1919-1995); Jerome Corwin (1919-1976); Allen J.
Lovenstein (1922-1963); Edward J. Fister (1908-1995); William
P. Goldberg; and Jerome Rothstein (1920-1998), testified in
public session.]
----------
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, N.Y.
The staff interrogatory was convened at 11 a.m., pursuant
to call, in room 1401 of the Federal Building, Mr. G. David
Schine, chief consultant, presiding.
Present: G. David Schine, chief consultant; Roy M. Cohn,
chief counsel; Francis Carr, staff director; Karl Baarslag,
research director; Harold Rainville, administrative assistant
to Senator Dirksen; Robert Jones, administrative assistant to
Senator Potter; John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
army; and Julius N. Cahn, counsel to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee.
Mr. Schine. Will you state your name?
STATEMENT OF PAUL SIEGEL
Mr. Siegel. Paul Siegel, S-i-e-g-e-l.
Mr. Schine. And your address?
Mr. Siegel. 46 Pinckney Road, Red Bank, New Jersey. That is
spelled P-i-n-c-k-n-e-y.
Mr. Schine. You are currently employed at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Siegel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. What is your position there?
Mr. Siegel. I am a technical writer at the Signal Corps
Publications Agency.
Mr. Schine. Would you speak a little louder, please?
Mr. Siegel. I am a technical writer at the Signal Corps
Publications Agency.
Mr. Schine. And what is your function as a technical
writer?
Mr. Siegel. Well, I work on these technical manuals that
the government puts out.
Mr. Schine. What do these manuals contain?
Mr. Siegel. Well, they contain information on insulation
and the theory of repair and maintenance and so on, of
electronic equipment.
Mr. Schine. Is this classified material?
Mr. Siegel. Well, some of it is; some of it isn't.
Mr. Schine. And this includes radar installations?
Mr. Siegel. Well, radar equipment. We don't have much to do
with installations.
Mr. Schine. Radar equipment.
Mr. Siegel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. How long have you been doing this work for Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Siegel. I have been there since the end of 1950.
Mr. Schine. The end of 1950. And you have always been doing
this particular job at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Siegel. Yes. That was my position.
Mr. Schine. That was your position when you came to Fort
Monmouth. And it hasn't changed?
Mr. Siegel. No.
Mr. Schine. How did you happen to go to Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Siegel. Well, they were advertising. At the time they
were advertising for men. I had been to Japan. I was working as
an instructor, a radar instructor, and I came back in the
summer of 1950. I heard that there were openings at Fort
Monmouth. I went over, and I got the job.
Mr. Schine. Who recommended you for the Fort Monmouth
position when you applied?
Mr. Siegel. Recommended? Nobody recommended.
Mr. Schine. You didn't fill out any form where you had to
state references?
Mr. Siegel. Oh, when you fill out a form, you put down the
names of three people.
Mr. Schine. What were the names of these people?
Mr. Siegel. Let me think. I think I wrote down Joe
Weinberg.
Mr. Schine. Would you spell the name, please?
Mr. Siegel. W-e-i-n-b-e-r-g. And Harry Rieback. That is R-
i-e-b-a-c-k. I was trying to figure out who else I wrote down.
I think the other one was Moses Plotkin. I think it was.
Mr. Schine. Would you spell his name, please?
Mr. Siegel. P-l-o-t-k-i-n.
Mr. Schine. Were any of these individuals employed at
Monmouth at the time?
Mr. Siegel. No.
Mr. Schine. They were not. They are friends of yours?
Mr. Siegel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. You say you were a radar instructor in Japan.
When did you go to Japan?
Mr. Siegel. In 1946.
Mr. Schine. In 1946. And for whom were you a radar
instructor?
Mr. Siegel. For the air force.
Mr. Schine. For the air force? What was your position in
the air force?
Mr. Siegel. Well, I was a radar instructor.
Mr. Schine. With what group were you?
Mr. Siegel. FEAF, I guess you call it. Far Eastern Air
Forces.
Mr. Schine. And you went into the air force when?
Mr. Siegel. I went as a civilian.
Mr. Schine. Oh, you were a civilian radar instructor for
the air force in Japan?
Mr. Siegel. Right.
Mr. Schine. How long?
Mr. Siegel. About four years, from 1946 until 1950.
Mr. Schine. And what did you do prior to 1946?
Mr. Siegel. Prior to 1946, I was at Western Electric.
Mr. Schine. What was your job with Western Electric?
Mr. Siegel. No, first I had another one. I hope you don't
hold me to everything I say, because, you know, you forget
things, especially dates.
Mr. Cohn. Just do your best.
Mr. Siegel. I was thinking I was working with Kenyon
Transformer Company.
Mr. Schine. Will you state the years you were employed with
them, and your function?
Mr. Siegel. Let's see. It was 1946 I left. So it was '45
and '46. From the end of '45 until some time in '46 I was with
Kenyon Transformer Company, and I was testing transformers,
chokes, and stuff like that.
Mr. Schine. And prior to that where were you employed?
Mr. Siegel. Prior to that I think I was at Western
Electric.
Mr. Schine. For how long? Will you state the years you were
with Western Electric?
Mr. Siegel. With Western Electric, '44 and '45. I was a
radar trouble shooter. I tested the radar equipment that came
off the line.
Mr. Schine. And what did you do before that?
Mr. Siegel. Before that I was working at Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. Will you state the years you worked at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Siegel. That was '42-'43.
Mr. Schine. When you worked at Fort Monmouth in 1942 and
1943, what was your job at that time?
Mr. Siegel. I was a meteorologist.
Mr. Schine. And you were a civilian employee at that time
also?
Mr. Siegel. A civilian.
Mr. Schine. And what did you do prior to that? What was
your job prior to being a meteorologist at Fort Monmouth in
those years?
Mr. Siegel. I was a typist. I was with the Supervisory
Corps Inspector's Office.
Mr. Schine. Would you repeat that, please? I didn't get it.
Mr. Siegel. I was a typist, with the Supervisory Corps
Inspector's Office. I think they had a little office in the
Marine Basin Company in Brooklyn.
Mr. Schine. You worked for the navy at that time?
Mr. Siegel. That was the navy.
Mr. Schine. Yes. Will you state the years you worked for
the navy, and the address of the office you worked for?
Mr. Siegel. Well, it was probably just before that. You
see, all this I put on my application form. But I think it was
two years before. That would make it '40, 1940 or '41, I
suppose.
Mr. Schine. What college did you go to?
Mr. Siegel. City College.
Mr. Schine. City College. And what years did you attend
City College?
Mr. Siegel. 1937, I guess, I started. 1937 until 1945. I
went evening sessions mostly.
Mr. Schine. Were you employed during the years you were at
City College?
Mr. Siegel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Would you name the companies you were employed
with, to the best of your ability?
Mr. Siegel. Well, I can't remember the names of the
companies. At that time it was pretty difficult to get a job. I
had a job as errand boy, messenger, stuff like that. I don't
think I remember.
Mr. Schine. What courses did you take while you were at
City College?
Mr. Siegel. Well, scientific courses. I went for a Bachelor
of Science.
Mr. Schine. Yes. Would you name some of the courses that
you took?
Mr. Siegel. Well, I had physics, chemistry, mathematics,
electronics; psychology, I suppose; English.
Mr. Cohn. There are several things I wanted to go over,
here. Have you ever worked at Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Siegel. I think when I worked at Monmouth they called
it ``Laboratory.'' They called it something else.
Mr. Cohn. But it was at Evans?
Mr. Siegel. It was located with what is called Watson now,
and then they moved to Evans.
Mr. Cohn. But in other words you were working at a
laboratory which does the work that is now being done at Evans?
Mr. Siegel. That is right, but I was never at Evans's.
Mr. Cohn. How long has Evans Laboratory been there?
Mr. Siegel. I really don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Approximately?
Mr. Siegel. I really don't know when they were transferred.
It was after I left, and before I came back.
Mr. Cohn. What year would that be?
Mr. Siegel. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Two years ago?
Mr. Siegel. It would just be a guess, because I really
don't know. It couldn't be two years ago, because I am at my
present job since 1950. It probably was done before that.
Mr. Cohn. Prior to 1950?
Mr. Siegel. I would think so.
Mr. Cohn. Now, let me ask you this, Mr. Siegel. Have any
loyalty charges ever been preferred against you?
Mr. Siegel. Well, no loyalty charges have been preferred.
Mr. Cohn. Or security?
Mr. Siegel. It all depends on what you mean. Some time ago,
last year I suppose, I received an interrogatory, and they
asked me to explain some items.
Mr. Cohn. What items were they? Give us your best
recollection.
Mr. Siegel. They asked me--I think there were three
important ones. One was about the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. They
said that I once contributed.
Mr. Cohn. What else?
Mr. Siegel. The other charge was--I had lived in Vail
Homes. I believe the government had subsidized it. At the time
that I was working there, I lived at Vail Homes. And it seemed
that some girl, Stein, I believe her name was, had circulated a
petition asking that the homes shouldn't be made into quarters
for families. So I had signed that petition. And they informed
me that she was a Communist, and they asked me about her.
Mr. Cohn. What else?
Mr. Siegel. The other item was that at Western Electric I
was active in the CIO.
Mr. Cohn. Well, they just didn't ask about the CIO. What
union were you a member of?
Mr. Siegel. The United Electrical Workers.
Mr. Cohn. Yes. You were a member of the United Electrical
Workers Union. Is that right?
Mr. Siegel. That is right. And that later was thrown out
because it was Communist.
Mr. Cohn. The heads of the United Electrical Workers were
James Matles and Julius Emspak and Fitzgerald; is that correct?
Mr. Siegel. I guess so.
Mr. Cohn. What else?
Mr. Siegel. They asked me to explain that. I think those
were the three major ones.
Mr. Cohn. What else? Weren't there a couple of other things
mentioned? Let me ask you this: Had you ever lived in New
Jersey, prior to your going with Monmouth in '50?
Mr. Siegel. That was in New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever sign a petition or any kind of a
document extending greetings to the Communist party?
Mr. Siegel. No, all I remember signing when I received that
interrogatory--a lot I just can't give from memory, but I seem
to remember there was a petition circulated asking the
government not to make dormitories----
Mr. Cohn. Was this petition about which you were asked a
petition in the course of which support was pledged to the
Communist party?
Mr. Siegel. I am pretty sure there was nothing there about
the Communist party.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Siegel. If I had seen anything about the Communist
party there, I wouldn't have signed it.
Mr. Cohn. Now, let me ask you this. Did you ever contribute
to the Abraham Lincoln Brigade?
Mr. Siegel. Well, as I said before, that was one of those
things I just couldn't remember.
I remember--I was a young kid at the time--I used to get
literature. And I don't recall the name was the Abraham Lincoln
Bridge. All I remember was somebody asking for money for some
cause. They claimed it was for democracy. They claimed they
were fighting for democracy. And at that time I didn't know any
better. So I must have sent them a dollar or so.
Mr. Cohn. How much did you send them?
Mr. Siegel. I really don't remember, but it was probably
about a dollar.
Mr. Cohn. Now, were you ever a member of the United
Electrical Workers?
Mr. Siegel. Yes, I was a member.
Mr. Cohn. You were a member of that. Did you know when you
were a member of the United Electrical Workers that it was a
Communist-dominated union? Hadn't you heard that?
Mr. Siegel. No. At that time I didn't think it was
Communist-dominated. I knew there were Communists in there. I
mean, Communists managed to get into all the unions.
Mr. Schine. Will you name the Communists you knew were in
the union?
Mr. Siegel. Well, it is pretty hard to say who was a
Communist and who wasn't. You know that is a very difficult
question.
Mr. Schine. You just said you knew there were Communist in
there.
Mr. Siegel. I knew there were Communists in there, just
like you know that there are Communists in all the unions. That
is the point I was trying to make.
Mr. Schine. Will you name some of them that you knew were
Communists?
Mr. Siegel. Well, I really couldn't say if I knew any were
Communists. Perhaps there might be some I thought were
Communists. But I wouldn't accuse anybody, because I have no
way of knowing. I mean, you have no way of knowing. And at that
time, I wasn't aware of the danger of communism. Most people
weren't. Isn't that right?
Mr. Cohn. When was the last time you had any connection
with the United Electrical Workers Union?
Mr. Siegel. Well, when I left Western Electric.
Mr. Cohn. When was that? In what year?
Mr. Siegel. I said it just a minute ago. Let's see. '44-
'45; it would be '45.
Mr. Cohn. When you were in Western Electric, did you have
access to any classified information?
Mr. Siegel. Well, I was working on radar equipment.
Mr. Cohn. That was classified?
Mr. Siegel. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How about this petition you signed for this woman
named Stein? Did you know her?
Mr. Schine. Steiner.
Mr. Cohn. Steiner. Do you know her first name?
Mr. Siegel. Only from this interrogatory. It hit me when I
saw it, because it just didn't strike any note. Ever since then
I have been trying to think who Vera Stein was, and I can't
place it.
Mr. Cohn. Do you remember the name of the woman who asked
you to sign the petition?
Mr. Siegel. No.
Mr. Cohn. Do you remember signing the petition?
Mr. Siegel. I think I signed the petition.
Mr. Cohn. And you did not know the person who asked you to
sign was a functionary of the Communist party?
Mr. Siegel. No, I had no idea.
Mr. Cohn. Now, while you were at City College, did you know
Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Siegel. No.
Mr. Cohn. Morton Sobell?
Mr. Siegel. No.
I would like to make it clear that I have a bad memory. I
don't remember names. Maybe I could remember a picture.
Mr. Cohn. You have seen Morton Sobell's picture in the last
three years, haven't you?
Mr. Siegel. Where?
Mr. Cohn. One of the three people convicted of espionage in
the trial of Julius Rosenberg.
Mr. Siegel. I don't think I would know Sobell.
Mr. Cohn. How about William Muterperl, M-u-t-e-r-p-e-r-l?
Mr. Siegel. No.
Mr. Cohn. Vivian Glassman?
Mr. Siegel. No.
Mr. Cohn. Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Siegel. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever meet Aaron Coleman out at Monmouth?
Mr. Siegel. No.
Mr. Cohn. You know who Aaron Coleman is, don't you?
Mr. Siegel. I don't think so. I don't know these people.
Mr. Schine. Some of your classmates at City College are
currently employed at Fort Monmouth; is not that true?
Mr. Siegel. Well I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know anybody at Monmouth you saw at City
College? Have you see any familiar faces around there?
Mr. Siegel. Well, yes. Occasionally I see a familiar face,
and it turns out he was at City College, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Who did some of those familiar faces belong to?
Mr. Siegel. These are difficult questions.
Mr. Cohn. Well, while you are thinking about that, let me
ask you this: Why did you leave the United Electrical Workers
Union, when you left your employment at Western Electric?
Mr. Siegel. Because I was no longer working.
Mr. Cohn. At Western Electric; is that right? What did you
do? Just let your membership lapse in UE?
Mr. Siegel. Yes. Well, I had no purpose in remaining there.
Mr. Schine. Would you answer that other question, who the
faces belonged to?
Mr. Siegel. I can't think.
Mr. Schine. Which classmates of yours that you knew at City
College you now know are at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Siegel. Questions like that are very difficult for me.
I just can't remember names.
Mr. Cohn. Well, Mr, Siegel, what is the difficulty about
it?
Mr. Siegel. Well, now that you asked me the question, if I
bumped into somebody there, I would remember it.
Mr. Cohn. I mean, I would know if you asked me if anybody
in this building went to school with me. I could give you the
names of some people.
Mr. Siegel. I guess you have a better memory. I mean, I
really don't have any point in not telling you that, because I
don't see any point to it.
Mr. Cohn. But you don't recall any. Do you know Harold
Ducore?
Mr. Siegel. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were you disturbed at the allegations of
Communist control of the United Electrical Workers when you
heard them?
Mr. Siegel. Yes. I was disturbed because I had belonged
there. I didn't think it was that bad, that it was Communist-
dominated. And I actually thought they took advantage of me,
you might say, that I was taken in by them.
Mr. Cohn. Through whom did you contribute to the Abraham
Lincoln Brigade? Do you recall that?
Mr. Siegel. I don't recall; it probably was a letter.
Mr. Cohn. In response to a letter, probably?
Mr. Siegel. Yes, in those days we used to get letters all
the time, for all kinds of causes. And, as I say, I don't even
recall if that was the name of the organization. Of course, I
know now it is on the subversive list. Now I wouldn't
contribute to anything unless I knew definitely what it was.
But at that time I wasn't even conscious of the danger.
Mr. Cohn. You say you have no recollection of signing a
petition extending greetings to the Communist party?
Mr. Siegel. Greetings? No. Because I know I wouldn't sign
anything like that.
Mr. Cohn. You say you would not sign anything like that.
Mr. Schine. When you were a member of the United Electrical
Workers, you said you knew there were Communists there, and you
were about to name some of the Communists you knew there.
Mr. Siegel. I said I thought there might have been
Communists. Because I wouldn't accuse anybody. I don't want
anybody to accuse me, either.
Mr. Schine. You discussed communism at that time with some
of the members?
Mr. Siegel. There again, I know there was one man who was
very active----
Mr. Schine. Would you give us his name?
Mr. Siegel [continuing]. In this union. I am not even sure
of his name. I think his name was Rubin.
Mr. Schine. Would you spell that please?
Mr. Siegel. R-u-b-i-n.
Mr. Schine. What was his first name?
Mr. Siegel. I just can't think of his first name.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us of his activities?
Mr. Siegel. I thought you would ask me. I was trying to
think of his name, but I just can't think of his first name. I
know there were two brothers. I can't recall either of the
first names.
Mr. Schine. Would you describe their activity?
Mr. Siegel. Well, they were just very active in this union
and tried to get everybody to join. This fellow, I think, took
care of all the complaints, you might say.
Mr. Schine. You think he was a Communist?
Mr. Siegel. I think so.
Mr. Schine. He talked about communism frequently?
Mr. Siegel. Not frequently. Well, the thing that makes me
believe that he was: He once tried to get me to subscribe to
the Daily Worker. That is the one thing that made me think so.
He said: ``Well, I will put you on the subscription list.'' I
said, ``I don't want to be on the subscription list.'' I
remember I was afraid that he would put me on the list and I
would receive it, and gee whiz, people would think all kind of
things about me.
Mr. Schine. Why didn't you want to be on the subscription
list?
Mr. Siegel. Well, I had an idea that Communists weren't up
to any good, that they wanted the overthrow of the government.
But it was all sort of hazy. I didn't know exactly what it was
all about.
Mr. Schine. He talked to you about the Communist movement,
didn't he?
Mr. Siegel. The movement?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Siegel. No, he didn't talk too much. He just tried to
get me interested, just a couple of times. And I guess I didn't
respond, so he probably dropped me.
Mr. Jones. How long were you a member of the Electrical
Workers Union?
Mr. Siegel. Well, it was during this period.
Mr. Jones. Approximately three years? Four years?
Mr. Siegel. No, a year or two.
Mr. Jones. How often would you attend their meetings? Once
a month?
Mr. Siegel. I don't remember how often they had meetings.
Mr. Jones. Once a month?
Mr. Siegel. I used to attend most of the meetings.
Mr. Jones. Who presided over most of the meetings? You say
it was a Communist-dominated meeting. You just said so a little
while ago.
Mr. Siegel. I didn't say that. It is known now.
Mr. Jones. Who presided over the meetings that you
attended?
Mr. Siegel. There was a fellow there. I think he was a
professional organizer.
If you showed me a picture----
Mr. Schine. You can't think of his name?
Mr. Siegel. I think it was an Italian name. I think he wore
glasses.
Mr. Jones. Did you get the impression that Communists were
in this union by attending these meetings?
Mr. Siegel. Oh, yes. I had the impression there were
Communists in the union.
Mr. Jones. As a result of the meetings; is that it?
Mr. Siegel. I really don't know. Well, let me put it this
way: At that time I had the impression there were some
Communists in all unions, you see. But I didn't think that the
union was run by the Communists. There is a big distinction
there. Right? You know there are some Communists there, but
there is a big difference between that and a union run by
Communists. If there are some Communists there, I mean, that
doesn't mean the union is bad.
Mr. Cohn. Well, what do you think about that union today?
There is a difference between having some Communists there and
having the heads of the union members of the National Committee
of the Communist party.
Mr. Siegel. What was that?
Mr. Cohn. I said there is a difference between having a few
Communists in the union and having a union like UE, where the
heads of it were members of the National Committee of the
Communist party.
Mr. Siegel. That is right. That means that the union is run
by the Communists, and you didn't have a chance to do anything.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Siegel, you knew they held Communist
meetings in the union, didn't you?
Mr. Siegel. Who held meetings?
Mr. Schine. The Communists. You knew they held Communist
meetings in the union?
Mr. Siegel. In the union? I didn't know that. I mean, I
didn't know the conclusion there.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Siegel, what year were you approached, to
the best of your knowledge? What year was it that you were
asked to become a member of the party?
Mr. Siegel. It was either '44 or '45, I guess.
Mr. Jones. Why didn't you join? Or did you join?
Mr. Siegel. I didn't approve of the aims. I didn't know
much about the Communist party, but I know they wanted to
overthrow the government. That was one thing I didn't like.
Mr. Jones. When did they see you the second time? Was it
the following year? To join the party?
Mr. Siegel. What do you mean by ``the second time''?
Mr. Jones. You were approached one time and asked to join
the party. You refused that time. When was the second time that
they asked you?
Mr. Siegel. I think you are putting words into my mouth. I
didn't say I was asked to join the party. This man came over to
me, and he said he wanted to give me subscriptions to the Daily
Worker. And I said, ``No, I don't want any part of it.'' And
then he tried to talk to me. But he never asked me to join the
party. I guess that comes later. I don't know.
Mr. Baarslag. I just wanted to ask one question.
In the time that you were in UE, did you ever meet an
international organizer of that organization by the name of
Willard Bliss, B-l-i-s-s, to the best of your recollection?
Mr. Siegel. No. There was actually only one organizer I
knew, and that is the one that was chairman of these meetings.
And, as I said, I can't remember his name. All I know is that
he was an Italian. I am pretty sure he was an Italian.
Mr. Rainville. I have just one question I wanted to ask.
This radar work is very intricate? It requires a great deal of
detail and accuracy?
Mr. Siegel. I guess so.
Mr. Rainville. That is the thing that confuses me, because
you ``guess''' it does, and yet you are an instructor in it.
You should know whether it does--require technical proficiency
and considerable concentration to make sure that the job is
done properly or not.
Mr. Siegel. Oh, yes, it does.
Mr. Rainville. I mean, I can understand that you use that
as an expression, ``I guess so,'' but I would like specifics
now. It does require great ability to do that particular job?
Mr. Siegel. Well, it requires ability of a certain kind.
Every job requires a certain amount of ability.
Mr. Rainville. You have to remember where this wire goes
and where that wire goes and make sure that you tie them all up
right. Yet you seemed to have an awful lot of difficulty
remembering where you worked for the last couple of years and
the names of men you worked with.
Mr. Siegel. I understand that looks very suspicious.
Mr. Rainville. I am not saying ``suspicious.''
Mr. Siegel. Well, yes. I am saying that. I feel you must be
suspicious. But I have a very bad memory for names. Sometimes I
can remember a picture better. I wish more than you that I
could remember more names, I assure you.
Mr. Rainville. But that doesn't affect you in any way when
it comes to sitting down at a rather complicated mechanism and
handling it with skill, enough skill so that you can instruct
others in the construction and repair and operation of it?
Mr. Siegel. Well, I usually find that when I have to teach,
I review the material first, before I go into class.
Mr. Rainville. And you knew you were coming here today, and
you were thinking about this, and you were trying to remember
Mr. Rubin's name?
Mr. Siegel. That is the one name I managed to remember.
Mr. Rainville. I noticed that.
I don't think I have anything else, Mr. Schine.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Cohn?
Mr. Cohn. No, sir.
Would you step outside for a few minutes, Mr. Siegel, and
would you ask Mr. Corwin to come in for a minute?
Mr. Siegel. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Sit down, Mr. Corwin, please.
Mr. Schine. Would you state your full name, please?
STATEMENT OF JEROME CORWIN
Mr. Corwin. Jerome Corwin.
Mr. Cohn. C-o-r-w-i-n?
Mr. Corwin. That is right. Although I changed my name, I
think back in '47. The name was originally Zorwitz, Z-o-r-w-i-
t-z.
Mr. Schine. And your occupation?
Mr. Corwin. I am an engineer, a mechanical engineer.
Mr. Schine. Where are you currently employed?
Mr. Corwin. I am at Evans Signal Corps Laboratory.
Mr. Schine. What is your function as an engineer at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. I am chief of the Mechanical Engineering
Section of the Spec and Drafting Branch of Evans Signal Corps
Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. You work at Evans right now?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Schine. And as chief, what are your duties?
Mr. Corwin. Our group is responsible for all of the
mechanical work at the laboratory in general. We do some
internal work, and also we act as mechanical consultants to the
other groups. We don't have any particular field that we are
responsible for in that sense.
Mr. Schine. And would you describe some of the projects
that the laboratory carries on?
Mr. Cohn. Just in general.
Mr. Corwin. Well, I think you know it covers radar,
meteorology, actually all the stuff that the Signal Corps is
responsible for with the exception of communications, which is
at another laboratory, and component parts, which is at another
laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. Does this Evans Laboratory have a responsibility
in connection with development of devices to protect us against
atomic attack and provide for detection of it, and radar?
Mr. Corwin. They do radar work. There is one group there
that does the radar work, the work on the rest of the
equipment.
Mr. Schine. Guided missiles, too?
Mr. Corwin. I don't know too well the details of it, I
really couldn't say.
Mr. Cohn. The radar work in part would be directed at
detection of atomic attack. Is that right?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I don't know how much I can say. I can
say it is radar work of the Signal Corps type.
Mr. Schine. How long have you been doing this work?
Mr. Corwin. I was first employed in October of 1940. I came
in as a draftsman at that time.
Mr. Schine. And how long have you been chief of the
laboratory?
Mr. Corwin. This is a section. I would say something that
like eight years, something like that in round figures.
Mr. Schine. Where did you go to school, Mr. Corwin?
Mr. Corwin. I graduated from City College back in '37. Then
I just recently got my master's at Rutgers. Rutgers has an
extension college at Fort Monmouth, and they encourage
additional academic background.
Mr. Schine. We meant to ask you: You have access to
classified material?
Mr. Corwin. I am cleared up to secret, as far as I know.
Mr. Schine. And you deal with classified material in the
everyday course of your work?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. Well, it is rather limited, because our
work, as I said, deals with the mechanical field, and most of
the equipment we deal with usually is of an unclassified or
restricted nature. We are not involved with radar in any form.
Mr. Cohn. Have you always had access to classified material
since you have been at Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. So far as I know.
Mr. Schine. When did you enter City College?
Mr. Corwin. I entered in '32. I attended one day session,
and changed to the evening session. That is why it took me five
years.
Mr. Schine. Some of your classmates at City College are
working now at Fort Monmouth, I take it?
Mr. Corwin. Well, if you say ``classmates,'' I don't really
know, because I got out in '37.
Mr. Schine. Well, some City College graduates. Would you
name some of those that you know?
Mr. Corwin. Oh, yes. Well, I know Aaron Coleman, Harold
Ducore, Sam Pomerantz. Actually I would say there are quite a
list of City College graduates there.
Mr. Schine. Would you name as many as you can?
Mr. Corwin. I will try. It is a little difficult.
Mr. Schine. Just take your time and spell the names as you
go on.
Mr. Corwin. Samuel Levine.
Mr. Schine. L-e-v-i-n-e?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Schine. Just continue.
Mr. Corwin. Offhand, I can't think of any others. I am sure
there are more.
Mr. Cohn. Rudolph R-i-e-h-s?
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Cohn. A man named Loonie, Bill Loonie?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Was he at City College?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I think he is a graduate of City College.
Let's see. Is his name Lonnie? I think he changed his name.
Mr. Cohn. Did he? I noticed in the City College directory
it was spelled L-o-o-n-i-e, and now it seems to be spelled L-o-
n-n-i-e, and that sort of threw me.
Is that the same fellow?
Mr. Corwin. I think he changed it because it was a very
uncomfortable name, I think he was a lieutenant in the Marine
Corps, and it was uncomfortable to be called a ``Loonie
Lieutenant.''
Mr. Cohn. That is apparently the same fellow, isn't it? How
about Henry Burkhard?
Mr. Corwin. Burkhard? I can't place him.
Mr. Schine. Would you name some of the courses you took
while you were at City College?
Mr. Corwin. Oh, God.
Mr. Cohn. What degree did you get?
Mr. Corwin. Mechanical engineering.
Mr. Cohn. You took the courses leading up to that?
Mr. Corwin. That is right, prescribed courses.
Mr. Cohn. Physics?
Mr. Corwin. Physics.
Mr. Schine. You took mathematics?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Schine. Was Mr. Coleman in your class at City College?
Mr. Corwin. No, he was not.
Mr. Cohn. When he says ``in your class,'' interpret that as
being in any class with you, any section.
Did you take any classes with him?
Mr. Corwin. Not that I know of.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know him at City College?
Mr. Corwin. No, I didn't.
Mr. Schine. Did you take any classes with Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Ducore at City College?
Mr. Corwin. No, I didn't.
Mr. Schine. When did you first meet Mr. Coleman and Mr.
Ducore?
Mr. Corwin. I met them both at the laboratory, and actually
I met Mr. Ducore first, in chronological order, I think some
time in '41, roughly.
Mr. Schine. You had more than an occupational acquaintance
with him?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I first met him through the laboratory,
and it started purely on a business association but later
become social.
Mr. Schine. It became social, and you became good friends?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Schine. You have known them both, and you have seen
them frequently?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Through the forties and since that time?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Schine. Socially?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Schine. When you first applied for a position at Fort
Monmouth, you had to state references for your job. Would you
state the names of the references you gave at that time, if you
can?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I lived in New Rochelle, New York, and I
am sure that the references that I chose were local people. I
can't remember all the names. I can only remember one. I think
it was Henry Wissecker.
Mr. Schine. Would you spell that, please?
Mr. Corwin. W-i-s-s-e-c-k-e-r--who has died recently. I
used to work for him in New Rochelle. He had a stationery
store. And I am afraid I can't remember the other names. But I
am sure that they were all residents of New Rochelle.
Mr. Schine. When you were at City College, you knew about
the Communist movement?
Mr. Corwin. Well, to tell you the truth, I lived at New
Rochelle when I attended City College, and I didn't have much
social contact there at all. I went to school and left at night
to come back and work, and I didn't spend much time around the
college area. I didn't really get to know too many people at
that time.
Mr. Schine. You knew some people?
Mr. Corwin. The people in my mechanical group that went
through the four years with me. And, actually, today, I can't
remember a single name. I probably can recognize some, if you
have them.
Mr. Schine. Julius Rosenberg was in your mathematics class
at City College?
Mr. Corwin. Was he? That is news to me.
Mr. Schine. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Corwin. No, I never met him.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever know he was at college at the same
time you were?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, not until, I would say, later on.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever meet him at Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. No, I didn't. To the best of my knowledge I
didn't.
Mr. Cohn. You say you only met Coleman and Ducore at City
College; is that right?
Mr. Corwin. No, at the laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. I am sorry. At Monmouth Laboratories. You didn't
know them before?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Then you obviously couldn't have been a reference
for employment for either Coleman or Ducore, if you didn't know
them?
Mr. Corwin. Not then, no, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And neither one of them could have been a
reference for you?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a woman named Vivian Glassman?
Mr. Corwin. Not that I can remember.
Mr. Cohn. And you never met Rosenberg at Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. I didn't even know he was there.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever participate in any way in any
Communist activities?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. At City College, were you ever asked to attend
any meetings of the Young Communist League?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever asked to participate in any
Communist activities?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. I wasn't asked to participate in
anything there, to the best of my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever belonged to any organization which
is a Communist organization or Communist-dominated?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, how frequently were you with Mr. Coleman out
at Monmouth after you met him?
Mr. Corwin. Well, actually, I first met him--I am afraid I
can't remember the exact years, but roughly about '41. And it
was a very meager contact. I think I was still a draftsman at
that time, and he was a project engineer, a relatively high
position. Then I think that up until the time he left for the
Marine Corps, I didn't know him very well at all. But on his
return he took over some work, which required a lot of our
work, on the mechanical aspect of it, and then our business
acquaintanceship sort of grew into a social acquaintanceship.
And socially, I would say I know him very, very well.
Mr. Cohn. You know him very well?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not Mr. Coleman is a
Communist?
Mr. Corwin. I can say that I believe he is absolutely not.
Mr. Cohn. Has he ever expressed any pro-Communist views
that you have heard?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know he was a good friend of Julius
Rosenberg?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, I don't believe he is or was.
Mr. Cohn. Has he ever told you that?
Mr. Corwin. After this Rosenberg case, he has indicated
that he had either met him at school or something like that,
but that he had no other contact with him whatsoever.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever tell you he went to Young Communist
League meetings with Rosenberg?
Mr. Corwin. He told me that recently.
Mr. Cohn. When did he tell you that?
Mr. Corwin. I would say within the past week or so.
Mr. Cohn. He must have been fairly friendly with Rosenberg
then; isn't that right?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, I don't believe so. That is the way he
expressed it to us.
Mr. Cohn. He was on Young Communist League terms with him.
Mr. Corwin. My opinion is that Coleman must have been a
young person at that time, not mature, and with some curiosity
involved in it.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think he was mature in 1946?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, I imagine he would be.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether he walked off with any secret
documents in 1946?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I know that he had some trouble about
secret documents.
Mr. Cohn. What was the trouble he had?
Mr. Corwin. As I understand it--and, of course, I have
gotten some information from him--but putting it all together,
he had had some documents at home of a classified nature. I
don't know the classification, but they were classified.
Mr. Cohn. Was he suspended after that?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, he was penalized.
Mr. Cohn. Then he was reinstated?
Mr. Corwin. Well, the suspension actually was a loss of pay
for a period of time. I think it is just automatic. You are
still working. I think it is just a penalty, rather than what
we would call a suspension.
Mr. Cohn. Did Coleman tell you he knew Morton Sobell pretty
well?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. He had met Morton Sobell; through
business contacts he met him, at school, I don't know how well.
Mr. Cohn. Was he on Young Communist League terms with
Morton Sobell, do you know?
Mr. Corwin. Not that I know. I don't believe so.
Mr. Cohn. Did he tell you Morton Sobell ever stayed at his
home out in New Jersey?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did he tell you Morton Sobell visited him eight
times out at Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. He never told me. I wouldn't know about it.
Mr. Cohn. What did he tell you about his association with
Sobell?
Mr. Corwin. Well, in the first place, he had some work with
which I was also connected that I think dealt with the company
named Reeves, Reeves Instrument.
Mr. Cohn. Up on 92nd Street, New York?
Mr. Corwin. That is right. And I think that Sobell was
working for Reeves at that time and was either responsible or
had some connection with the actual work that was being done
for Fort Monmouth, and Coleman was responsible for the entire
program, or something like that.
Mr. Cohn. Then he had dealings with Sobell. Is that right?
Mr. Corwin. So I understand. I don't know how much, or what
the amount of contact was, but he did have dealings with
Sobell, I know.
Mr. Cohn. But you, yourself, never had any dealings with
Sobell?
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Cohn. When did he tell you he went to Young Communist
League meetings with Rosenberg?
Mr. Corwin. Just about a week ago.
Mr. Cohn. He had never disclosed that to you before?
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, after the Rosenberg case broke,
you were discussing Rosenberg and the Rosenberg case, but at
that time he didn't mention it to you?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. He mentioned it to you for the first time within
the past week?
Mr. Corwin. To the best of my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Was this before he was suspended, or after he was
suspended?
Mr. Corwin. Actually it was after, because it was listed as
one of the charges, and that is what started the discussion.
Mr. Cohn. Did he tell you what the other charges were?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What were the other charges?
Mr. Corwin. I can't remember them all, but roughly I think
that it was that he knew Rosenberg and this YPL or whatever it
is.
Mr. Cohn. The Young Communist League.
Mr. Corwin. And that he knew Sobell. I can't remember the
details, but there is something there. Oh, this classified
document entered into it.
Mr. Cohn. What else?
Mr. Corwin. I think he said that members of his family were
members of or had registered at APL or something like that.
Mr. Cohn. ALP?
Mr. Corwin. ALP.
Mr. Cohn. Did he tell you which members of his family?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, it was his mother and sister. And that is
about all I can remember, offhand.
Mr. Cohn. Did he show you the letter of charges, by the
way?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. He did. That went into some detail, did it not,
as to his associations with Morton Sobell?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir. It was a short paragraph. I don't
remember the exact content of that, but it said that he had
relationships with him. I don't remember the exact details.
Mr. Cohn. Now, let me ask you this, Mr. Corwin. Did you
ever take secret documents to your home?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You never did. Is that right?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. It was made very clear to you up at Monmouth that
that was a grave violation of security regulations. Is that
right?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. That was something that was not to be done under
any circumstances without permission. Is that right?
Mr. Corwin. Without permission,
Mr. Cohn. Do you know of any other instances where people
were suspended for taking secret documents home, classified
documents home?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, I don't. There has been loss of pay.
Mr. Cohn. Let's say ``penalties.''
Mr. Corwin. Penalties for leaving them out or leaving
unlocked safes, the usual thing. That has happened there. But I
don't know of any other incident where someone has taken a
document home. The reason I sort of hesitated is that in the
past and some time ago under certain conditions you were
allowed to take classified documents to attend meetings,
conferences, and the like.
Mr. Cohn. That was for a specific purpose and with specific
permission?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Did Coleman tell you when he last saw Sobell?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. He didn't. Not the exact date or
anything like that. I could guess.
No, even a guess wouldn't be good, because I know he was
working around a certain time on some equipment that would
bring him to Reeves.
Mr. Cohn. We can agree it wasn't within the last two years.
He hasn't visited him in jail, has he?
Mr. Corwin. I would say absolutely not. He probably would
have told me.
Mr. Cohn. Were you surprised when he told you he had gone
to Young Communist League meetings with Rosenberg?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, I was, because I didn't see the point of
going even. He told me he had attended just one meeting and saw
what it was all about and was, in his own words, pretty
disgusted with the whole set-up and left.
Mr. Cohn. Did he tell you Rosenberg was the man he had
taken to that meeting?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Carr. That is what he told you in 1953?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. That is what he told you last week.
Mr. Corwin. With respect to this meeting, yes,
Mr. Cohn. Were you pretty friendly with Harold Ducore?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. He and Coleman were pretty friendly, too. Is that
right?
Mr. Corwin. I could say yes. Lately they had some
misunderstandings.
Mr. Cohn. When was the misunderstanding?
Mr. Corwin. Well, they bought a house together.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Corwin. Oh, gosh. I guess in '41 or '42.
Mr. Cohn. Where was that house?
Mr. Corwin. Wait a minute. It was about four years ago.
Mr. Cohn. In the late '40's. Isn't that right?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where was that house located?
Mr. Corwin. It is on Branch Avenue and Long Branch.
Mr. Cohn. Then they had some misunderstanding over that;
isn't that right?
Mr. Corwin. That is true.
Mr. Cohn. They made up after that, didn't they?
Mr. Corwin. As far as I know, their social relationship
never got back to the original closeness they had.
Mr. Cohn. Now, did you continue your friendship with Ducore
nevertheless?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, although my friendship tapered off, too,
and, actually, I guess people get married and they have other
interests and start to drift apart. We drifted as far as the
Ducores were concerned, but we didn't drift as far as the
Colemans were concerned.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Have you talked to Mr. Ducore lately?
Mr. Corwin. Only over the phone. He is part of my car pool,
and he called me one night to say he couldn't come in.
Mr. Cohn. Did he give you any of the details of his
suspension?
Mr. Corwin. He gave me a little bit. I think he indicated
that he had been a member of some union out there, I don't
remember the exact name of it. Is it the United Public Workers,
or something like that? And also that his wife was a member.
That is all.
Mr. Cohn. Did he tell you he was a friend of Rosenberg and
Sobell?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. So far as I know he didn't know them.
So far as I know.
Mr. Cohn. I don't think I have anything else.
Mr. Carr. You say Ducore was a member of your car pool up
until he phoned you and said he would not be going in to work?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Carr. So you have been seeing him every day for the
last several years?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Carr. To get back to the documents, do you consider it
a serious matter to have classified documents in your home?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Well, was it in only one instance, to your
knowledge, that Coleman was reprimanded for this?
Mr. Corwin. So far as I know, just once.
Mr. Carr. Was he ever reprimanded for leaving documents in
unsecure places in the office?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Were you ever reprimanded for that?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. What did that situation involve?
Mr. Corwin. I think I left out a classified document, and I
was penalized a day's pay, or maybe it was two days' pay for
that.
Mr. Carr. Do you recall what the classified document was?
I don't mean what it was, but what it was classified as.
Mr. Corwin. I believe it was secret.
Mr. Carr. When you say you left it out, does that mean you
were working with it during the day and you forgot to carry it
back to its repository?
Mr. Corwin. That is correct. Actually, I didn't return to
my office that night, and unfortunately the person that was
supposed to clean up missed it. I took the penalty, because I
didn't tell them in detail that it was there, so it was really
my responsibility. But I did not get back to the office at the
closing time.
Mr. Carr. When you say you took the penalty, does that mean
you ``covered'' for the person who actually left it out?
Mr. Corwin. Not actually. I felt I was responsible for not
having made sure to tell him to pick it up. I didn't cover up.
Mr. Carr. If you left such a document out at your desk, or
at the place where you work, would anyone in the building have
access to it?
Mr. Corwin, Well, I guess they would. It is on the desk.
Although people coming in, in an office, usually, unless we
know who they are, would be watched carefully, or would be
asked what they are doing there, and so on. I have an office
where the two of us, two engineers, myself and an assistant and
some girls, keep all our classified documents, although we
don't keep very many because we don't have much access to it.
Mr. Carr. What was the date of this?
Mr. Corwin. This was quite some time ago. I would guess in
'49 or something like that.
Mr. Carr. In '49. Could you give us a little bit of
information concerning what you would do with a classified
document? You, in the course of your work, have need for a
classified document?
Mr. Corwin. Occasionally.
Mr. Carr. Occasionally. Where do you obtain that document?
Mr. Corwin. When we work on a request for some group, they
supply the necessary background information that we may need to
do the job. They may supply this particular document. They hand
it to us, and we have to sign a receipt for it, and my girl
takes it and sets it in the file and puts the receipt on it.
Anybody that takes it out of the file sign for it and returns
it every night, and so on.
Mr. Carr. Is there a central repository for the classified
documents?
Mr. Corwin. Well, there is a central----
Mr. Carr. I mean within your office, your building.
Mr. Corwin. Yes. Within my office we take care of all the
documents for our particular people that are associated with
us, and they are all in at night and locked in the safe and so
on.
Mr. Carr. Who has the primary responsibility for that?
Mr. Corwin. My secretary takes care of the details and
keeps the route sheets, to indicate who has it, and so on.
Mr. Carr. So, in effect, it is your responsibility?
Mr. Corwin. Oh, yes, definitely.
Mr. Carr. I am not talking about merely a document that
obtained, but a document obtained for your office.
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Carr. It becomes your responsibility. You become a
security officer concerning that document?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir. I don't know if the exact term is
right, but I am responsible for all documents.
Mr. Carr. For anyone in your office.
Mr. Corwin. That is right, I am responsible for the whole
section, all the people involved.
Mr. Carr. As for that document, as long as you need it, you
are responsible for it; as long as it is needed in your
particular office, your section, you are to keep it under
secure conditions. Is that a locked safe?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, combination lock.
Mr. Carr. When do you return that document to either the
agency that gave it to you in the first place or the security
officer? When does that happen?
Mr. Corwin. Well, when we no longer have need for it.
We return it immediately, because there is no point in
keeping it.
Mr. Carr. All right. Do you return it immediately to any
central place, or to a security officer in the building?
Mr. Corwin. There has been a recent change in the handling
of secret documents and the like.
Mr. Carr. How recent?
Mr. Corwin. Oh, I would say about a month or more. But
actually we have very seldom had secret documents. Most of our
stuff was of a confidential or restricted nature. With this new
stuff, the secret stuff is only handled from a central
laboratory repository, delivered and transmitted in that
manner. The reason I say this is because I haven't had any
secret material for quite a while.
Mr. Carr. Since the new arrangement on the documents. Now,
this new arrangement was only set up in the past month, or
month and a half?
Mr. Corwin. Well, let's say two or three months, roughly.
Not too long ago.
Mr. Carr. What was the old system?
Mr. Corwin. The old system was to get receipts from people.
But it could be sent through a special messenger from one group
to another without having to go through the top security lab
set-up.
Mr. Carr. But now it works how?
Mr. Corwin. The secret stuff must go only to the top
security officer, and then can be transmitted to anyone.
Mr. Carr. So now the same situation is true. The security
officer then would deliver the document to you for use in your
section, and then you become the security officer for the
document?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Carr. And when you are finished with it, it is returned
to the security officer?
Mr. Corwin. I think that is correct.
Now, the reason I am a little puzzled by it is because I
read the regulations, but I haven't had any secret documents in
quite some length of time. And truthfully, my girl keeps a
check on it, and I get together with her before we do anything
of that type.
Mr. Carr. When you return such a document to the security
officer, is your receipt given back to you, and is it entered
in the log?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. I understand they have both the log and
the receipt. You sign for this, and your receipt is returned to
you when you bring back the document.
Mr. Carr. Is the new set-up that has been put into effect
more secure, do you think?
Mr. Corwin. Oh, yes, very much so.
Mr. Carr. Prior to that, the document would flow through
many hands before it got to you?
Mr. Corwin. Well, with all classified material of a secret
nature, there were always receipts. The restricted didn't have
that check. There were always receipts, but it didn't have to
go through any security office before it got any place, and I
don't think logs were kept in its transit too well. That is,
there were logs in each office saying when they had it and----
Mr. Carr. Was there an incident that led to this new
change?
Mr. Corwin. I would guess that the number of violations of
all natures were increasing slightly, or they felt the
percentage was too high and some drastic steps had to be taken.
But that is a guess on my part.
Mr. Carr. In other words, there were too many of these
instances like your case and Coleman's case, where documents
were left out, or they were taken home?
Mr. Corwin. I would say as far as documents being taken
home, I don't recall any other incident.
Mr. Cohn. This Coleman incident: there is a big difference
between something lying around and something being taken home.
Mr. Corwin. It is a secured area. It is well protected.
Mr. Cohn. We can agree there is a big difference between
having a couple of documents out and taking documents to your
house.
Mr. Corwin. I think if you would check all the people at
the laboratory they probably have had some violation of that
nature, I am not trying to look it down----
Mr. Carr. Is this considered a serious offense at Monmouth,
leaving documents out insecure?
Mr. Corwin. Oh, yes.
Mr. Carr. Now, the penalties are stricter than they were
prior?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I think they are slightly stricter. It
all depends on the circumstances which surround the particular
incidents.
Mr. Carr. What is the usual suspension? One day, such as
you received in '49?
Mr. Corwin. No, I think the secret category starts with
two, or maybe it is a week now. I don't remember. And then, of
course, if it happens more than once you would be fired.
Mr. Carr. Of course, if the document was really of a highly
confidential nature, or such as to be classified secret or even
top secret, it would only have to be left out for ten minutes
to cause harm.
Mr. Corwin. Yes. Although there are some other
circumstances that surrounded my incident and a lot of others.
We have been a little delayed in reducing the classification of
a lot of our documents.
Mr. Cohn. You mean down-grading?
Mr. Corwin. Down-grading. It is because it is a physical
problem, and we never have had enough people to do the work
that we are responsible for. So it has created a problem.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Corwin, what are Mr. Coleman's functions at
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. His functions were----
Mr. Schine. Or ``were''?
Mr. Corwin. He was chief of the System Section of Radar
Branch.
Mr. Cohn. Chief of the System Section of Radar Branch?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Schine. And as such, what did he do?
Mr. Corwin. He was responsible for certain radar
equipments. They are of a classified nature.
Mr. Schine. He had access to classified material and plans?
Mr. Corwin. Yes; the details of which I really don't know.
Mr. Cohn. He had an awfully sensitive job, didn't he?
Mr. Corwin. I would say it is rather sensitive, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. He had that up until last week?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, I think he was--shall we say his
clearance was taken away for quite a period of time.
Mr. Cohn. What did he do after his clearance was taken
away?
Mr. Corwin. I think they put him in a so-called non-
sensitive area where no classified material is around. And he
told me this: that he was writing instructions for books, or
something. The army has a correspondence school for soldiers,
and he was preparing lessons and questions.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time was he chief of
this radar section?
Mr. Corwin. For quite a period of time. It is hard to
remember the exact dates. Eight years or some considerable
amount of time.
Mr. Schine. Approximately when did he take this secret
document home with him?
Mr. Corwin. I will have to guess. I don't remember.
Mr. Schine. Was it 1946?
Mr. Corwin. That would probably be right.
Mr. Schine. If a document of this nature got into the hands
of Soviet Russia, could it be of value to them?
Mr. Corwin. I really couldn't say. I don't know what he
had. I don't even know what the classification was. All I know
was that they were classified.
Mr. Cohn. Let's put it this way. Mr. Coleman was head of
the section of radar, dealing with highly classified material.
If he had turned over papers which came into his possession to
the Soviet Union, would they have been of any benefit to the
Soviet Union, do you think?
Mr. Corwin. I would guess they would be. It is hard for
me----
Mr. Cohn. There is no doubt about that, is there?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I guess so. I don't know how much they
know or we know.
Mr. Cohn. Don't let's assume that other people have given
them stuff before. Let's assume that we think they don't know
anything.
Mr. Corwin. These were classified documents. They certainly
shouldn't have gotten into the hands of any other country.
Mr. Cohn. And radar was certainly an awfully sensitive
thing. That is one thing we are relying on in the way of
defense to atomic attack. Isn't that right?
Mr. Corwin. I imagine so. I don't really know enough about
it.
Mr. Schine. He didn't discuss with you just what the
document was that he had taken home with him?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether he took documents home on any
other occasions?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, I really don't know.
Mr. Schine. What was Mr. Coleman's attitude about taking
the document home with him, being reprimanded for it.
Mr. Corwin. Well, he felt he deserved a reprimand.
Actually, he is a very conscientious and very able engineer. I
think he has done a tremendous job at the place.
Mr. Schine. He is a good first class engineer?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Schine. He isn't in your car pool, is he?
Mr. Corwin. He was before his clearance was taken away.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Ducore was in your car pool at that time,
too?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir. They lived together.
Mr. Cohn. As I understand it, you did not know either
Coleman or Ducore before going to Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. You met them first at Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Schine. In your car pool; who else was in the car pool,
by the way?
Mr. Corwin. Sam Levine.
Mr. Cohn. He was at City College with you, of course?
Mr. Corwin. He went to City College, too.
Mr. Cohn. He was in the class with Coleman?
Mr. Corwin. I believe so.
Mr. Schine. And who else was in the car pool?
Mr. Corwin. Louis Volp, V-o-l-p.
Mr. Cohn. And he is another City College man?
Mr. Corwin. He is another City College man.
Mr. Carr. In the same class?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. I don't know what year he got out.
Mr. Schine. Who else was in the same car pool?
Mr. Corwin. I think that is all, because there were five of
us, and there wasn't room for anybody else.
Mr. Schine. Levine, Ducore, Coleman
Mr. Corwin. Volp.
Mr. Schine. How do you spell that?
Mr. Corwin. V-o-l-p.
Mr. Schine. And being in the car pool means you drove to
work together each day and drove home each night?
Mr. Corwin. There are some variations. This had gone on for
a number of years. We dropped somebody and picked somebody else
up. But there was a period of time during which these five
people including myself rode together.
Mr. Schine. During what years did this car pool take place?
Mr. Corwin. From 1950 on. Perhaps earlier than that.
No, about 1950. I got married, and then I started going
back into the pool. I and my wife both worked at the laboratory
for a short period of time. We drove every day.
Mr. Schine. Now, being in this car pool, you would have
very good knowledge of just how careful your associates were
and what they took home and what they didn't take home?
Mr. Corwin. Well, to tell you the truth, we never spoke of
any classified stuff even in the car; just general chit-chat
and engineering discussions of general nature.
Mr. Schine. But they all took home materials with them,
didn't they, in their briefcases?
Mr. Corwin. Occasionally, but I never knew what it was. I
never knew what was involved.
Mr. Schine. What was Mr. Ducore's attitude about taking
material home with him? He had a briefcase or something of that
sort?
Mr. Corwin. To tell you the truth, I remember Ducore
carrying nothing home. I mean, that is the impression I am left
with.
Mr. Schine. He never carried stuff home?
Mr. Corwin. That is as I remember it.
Mr. Cohn. Who would carry stuff home?
Mr. Corwin. I think Coleman. That is about all I can
remember.
Mr. Schine. And in the car he sometimes would pull things
out of the briefcase and refer to them?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. I don't know how often he took it, but
that is the only picture I have.
Mr. Schine. He just didn't keep the briefcase shut up all
the time. You were aware of the contents of the briefcase from
time to time?
Mr. Corwin. I can't remember ever seeing it open.
Mr. Schine. He never opened the briefcase in the car?
Mr. Corwin. To my knowledge. Let me put it this way: I can
picture a briefcase and Coleman carrying it, and that is about
as far as I can picture.
Mr. Schine. But he never wanted you to see what was inside
of it?
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Rainville. He never referred to it?
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Cohn. He never referred to anything in connection with
``What happened today?''
Mr. Corwin. No, the fellows were pretty security conscious.
He also went to school, and he might have been bringing home
his books and lessons, I went to school, too, and I might have
been bring home books in myself. We got a pass for the books
and that is the way it operated.
Mr. Schine. He was very careful never to let you see what
was in the briefcase?
Mr. Corwin. I never saw the briefcase open, to my
knowledge.
Mr. Rainville. But if they were school books, he might have
discussed his class work with you?
Mr. Corwin. We were interested in what was happening in the
field, and that is enough to keep you interested.
Mr. Rainville. You get stuck by a problem in class, and
somebody else might have the answer. Did that never occur in
the car?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Corwin, obviously, on your way home at
least on a number of occasions you must have stopped somewhere.
Did you lock up the car when the briefcase was in the car, or
did he always carry his briefcase with him?
What I am trying to ascertain is just how cautious he was
about the briefcase.
Mr. Corwin. I have no impression of caution or anything
else, to be honest with you. We never stopped for anything
except to drop off members of the pool. We had no need to stop
for any other purpose.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever ride home with him in 1946 or
1947?
Mr. Corwin. Let's see if I can remember. I may have. Yes.
You see, I lived with him for a while. I am trying to
remember when that was.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever have a regular system of riding
home with him in those years?
Mr. Corwin. The earlier years?
Mr. Schine. With Mr. Coleman.
Mr. Corwin. At that time I think he was going to school,
and he used to go in after work, something like that. So there
was no pool. I think I rode in with a couple of other fellows.
We didn't have a very well organized pool. This was a five-day
pool. It was really something to get into, because it meant you
used the car but one day a week.
Mr. Schine. Can you imagine the circumstances under which
Mr. Coleman might have brought himself to bring secret
documents home and break security regulations?
Mr. Corwin. Well, this particular incident that we were
discussing before--I know he was doing it in order to try and
get work done, things that he thought were needed in a hurry,
and he didn't have enough time during the day to do it. He felt
they could accomplish the work at home.
Mr. Schine. Isn't it true he brought a number of documents
home with him, though?
Mr. Corwin. That is my understanding. I know they were
classified. I don't know exactly what the classification is.
Mr. Schine. Would he possibly need a number of bulky
documents at home to catch up on some work he might have had in
one specific job that he was doing?
Mr. Corwin. I can imagine it is possible. I didn't know
enough of the details of his job to really answer. But I can
imagine so. Because some of the documents are called technical
manuals, that describe other pieces of equipment, and they may
just come in bulk. You don't need the whole thing, but you
can't excerpt any part of it, so you use the whole thing.
Mr. Schine. Would you try to give us the names of two or
three individuals with whom Mr. Coleman is friendliest besides
yourself at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. Well, outside of his business associates, I
would say he probably knows Sam Levine very well.
Let's see. There are other people who are not employed at
Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. Would you name their names, please?
Mr. Corwin. I have it on the tip of my tongue, and I just
can't think of it.
Mr. Schine. Go to the next one, and then come back to that.
Mr. Corwin. I know these people rather well. I don't know
them socially as he does.
Mr. Schine. Try to give us some of their names.
Mr. Corwin. Benjamin Bookbinder.
Mr. Schine. Who else?
Mr. Corwin. Jack Okum.
Mr. Schine. Would you spell it?
Mr. Corwin. I think it is O-k-u-m. I am not sure.
Mr. Schine. Those are his closest friends?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I don't know if you could say that. Okum
is a very close friend of his.
Mr. Schine. Is Mr. Coleman very friendly with somebody else
socially that he also works with at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. Additional people?
Mr. Schine. Yes. Does he have other close friends socially
who also work at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. Offhand, I can't remember any more than the
names I have given you.
Mr. Schine. Bookbinder?
Mr. Corwin. Bookbinder. Okum doesn't work at the
laboratory.
Mr. Schine. But Bookbinder does?
Mr. Corwin. Bookbinder does, and Sam Levine.
Mr. Schine. What is Bookbinder's job at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. He is employed in the same section.
Mr. Schine. He is employed in the same section.
Does he work for Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Corwin. He did.
Mr. Schine. What about Mr. Ducore? Do you know the names of
some of his close friends, some of Mr. Ducore's close friends
who work at Fort Monmouth, and who are also close to him
socially?
Mr. Corwin. To tell you the truth, I don't know. Our social
contacts with the Ducores have dropped off in the last couple
of years. We don't get together with them.
Mr. Schine. Do you know of any close associates he has with
whom he is friendly socially?
Mr. Corwin. I can honestly tell you I don't know. Of
course, there is one man we all know. When I say ``all,'' I
mean Coleman and Ducore and myself. That is Bob Martin, Bernard
Martin.
Mr. Schine. Who is Bernard Martin?
Mr. Corwin. Who is he?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Corwin. Well, he was employed at Fort Monmouth, and his
clearance was taken away. He has recently been suspended, too.
Mr. Schine. Why was his clearance taken away?
Mr. Corwin. You see, he went through a loyalty hearing. I
guess it has been a year ago.
Mr. Schine. He discussed this with you?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, I attended the hearing. I came as a
character witness.
Mr. Schine. What is his last name?
Mr. Corwin. Martin, M-a-r-t-i-n.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us briefly what the charges
against him were?
Mr. Corwin. As I remember--I wouldn't be able to give it to
you word for word--he was a member of the AVC. That is the
American Veterans Committee, I believe. And there was something
about that he I think had a job in the air force at Watson
Laboratory before they moved, and he was the security officer,
something like that, not an official of the army but a civilian
counterpart, and had a lot of documents under his control.
Mr. Schine. Classified documents?
Mr. Corwin. Classified; although I don't know about the
document in question. And that he had given some information or
given a document to a man who later was, so the statement said,
found to be a Communist.
Mr. Schine. What was the name of the man?
Mr. Corwin. I think it was Ullmann.
Mr. Schine. How do you spell that?
Mr. Corwin. U-l-l-m-a-n, or something like that.
Mr. Cohn. That is William Ludwig Ullmann. Is that correct?
Mr. Corwin. Gee, that doesn't sound right, I don't know.
Mr. Schine. What were the other charges?
Mr. Corwin. Those were the only two charges.
Mr. Schine. What did Bernard Martin tell you about his
giving these classified papers to William Ludwig Ullmann?
Mr. Corwin. Well, whatever his name is, that man was
cleared for secret at the time he requested the documents,
because everybody in the installation had been cleared. To
Martin's knowledge, and I think he checked on it, this man was
cleared at that time. Whatever happened about this man happened
at some later date.
Mr. Schine. Where was Ullmann working?
Mr. Corwin. I guess he was out there with him.
Mr. Schine. At Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. This isn't Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. Where was this?
Mr. Corwin. The air force had taken over Watson Laboratory.
They released that to go to Rome or something like that. It was
when they were employed by the air force.
Mr. Schine. And did you know Ullmann?
Mr. Corwin. I met him, but I didn't know him.
Mr. Schine. What is Martin's address, now?
Mr. Corwin. He lives at 855 Woodgate Avenue in Elberon, New
Jersey. I know that, because I lived there with him before I
got married.
Mr. Schine. And have you seen Martin lately?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, I think within the past week I have seen
him. Yes.
Mr. Schine. And have you discussed all of these loyalty
cases and suspensions with him?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. You see, I know these people very well. I
have lived with him.
Mr. Schine. What does Bernard Martin have to say about all
of this?
Mr. Corwin. Well, as I explained in the second charge at
the time that he gave the document, the classification nature
of which I don't know, at the time he gave it this man was
cleared by the air force people, and to his knowledge he had
access to this equipment.
Mr. Schine. Did Bernard Martin say that Ullmann was a
Communist party member?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. Not at that time.
Mr. Schine. He knows now that he is a Communist?
Mr. Corwin. He read the charge, and he is assuming the
charge is correct. I don't know, as far as so-and-so being a
Communist is concerned.
Mr. Schine. Martin is a friend of Ducore's, too?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Are they close friends?
Mr. Corwin. I don't know. His friendship is closer than
mine, let's say, but I don't think they are intimate friends.
Mr. Schine. They are not intimate?
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the names of the intimate friends
of Ducore?
Mr. Corwin. No. You see, we are not close enough with them
to know.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the names of some of the friends he
had when you were close to him?
Mr. Corwin. We were all part of his friends at that time.
Mr. Schine. Are there any other names you haven't given us?
Mr. Corwin. No. To tell you the truth, I don't know.
Mr. Carr. Do you know Herman Schoenwetter?
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Carr. You don't know him at all?
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Jones?
Mr. Jones. Just a few questions. Prior to the enactment of
this new security system there, you said that you had in your
safe at several times secret documents?
Mr. Corwin. I guess so. They are classified documents.
Mr. Jones. How many would you have? How many of these
documents would you have there at one time?
Mr. Corwin. Well, let's say quite a number of the
classified confidential type. But just to give you a little
background, our group does not deal directly in a lot of this
equipment. We are people who do the mechanical aspects of the
job, and the information given to us is all that we need in
order to do our job.
Mr. Jones. And under the old system your secretary was
responsible for those papers? In other words, she assigned them
out and all that?
Mr. Corwin. She knew where they were, could lay her hands
on them, had a signature from any person who borrowed the
document or was using it.
Mr. Jones. How many people were in your office under your
immediate supervision?
Mr. Corwin. Let's say my section consists of roughly forty
or forty-two people.
Mr. Jones. Forty-two people, each of whom had access, if
they wished to, for their particular project, to this secret
information?
Mr. Corwin. If they were working on a particular project.
Mr. Jones. All they had to do was go up and sign with your
secretary?
Mr. Corwin. She knew what they were working on, and she
would release the information to them. They are all cleared, of
course. Everyone in the area is.
Mr. Jones. Approximately, then, forty persons under your
immediate supervision?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. But not all of them read the classified
documents, since a number of the people are, shall we say,
mechanics, people who don't normally have any need for
classified information. But our engineers would.
Mr. Jones. But may I ask you this? It would be possible for
anyone, we will say, skilled in the use of a small camera to
actually photograph any of these documents?
Mr. Corwin. Well, in the first place, they had to get in
with it.
Mr. Jones. Get in with what?
Mr. Corwin. The camera, or whatever you are talking about.
Mr. Jones. A small camera?
Mr. Corwin. Well, if he got through our guards, who I
understand are pretty efficient, it would be rather difficult
unless he stood over somebody's shoulder. And what would he be
doing in our place if we don't know him? We would look at
anybody that came in, to find out if he was a member, if he had
a badge and so on.
Mr. Jones. I mean it would be possible for any of the
employees to do that, would it not?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I guess so, if they knew the person well
enough.
Mr. Jones. Say I took out this document from your safe and
brought it over to my desk. It would be possible for me, I am
sure, without anybody even seeing me, to take a picture of that
document.
Mr. Corwin. I guess it would.
Mr. Jones. Has there ever been an incident, to your
knowledge, that occurred where a camera was used in the plant.
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, not that I know of. As a matter of
fact, in the beginning we were cautioned never to bring in
cameras.
Mr. Rainville. You said: If he could look over his
shoulder. But I think Mr. Jones is referring to one of these
forty-two people that you have under you. They, themselves,
could take pictures?
Mr. Corwin. As far as we are concerned, we check with
security to find out what these people are cleared for, and if
they are not cleared they can't come into our area.
Mr. Rainville. But any one of those forty-two people could,
in the normal course of the day, come into your office with
something which you were to sign, or to leave it on your desk?
Mr. Corwin. You see, the classified documents now are
brought to the girl in transit even between our own people.
Mr. Rainville. That is the new system. I mean prior to
this, at any time. These people worked for you, and they are in
this department, and they have problems that you sometimes have
to answer. Any one of these forty-two people on any given day
at any given time might walk in and say, ``Mr. Corwin, may I
sign this?'' or ``May I have permission to do this?'' or any
one of a number of routine things. And they all have security
clearance.
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rainville. All top security clearance?
Mr. Corwin. Well, there is another level called top secret.
We don't have it, because we don't need it.
Mr. Jones. How many in your section have this secret
clearance?
Mr. Corwin. Everybody.
Mr. Jones. The entire forty? Even the mechanics?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rainville. So that when you left this classified
document on your desk, it would be perfectly all right for
anyone in there to see it and read it?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. But I must explain that we are careful in
the way we handle our documents. If someone comes that doesn't
need the information, the tendency is to put it to one side and
turn it over. We are careful. Because there have been
violations. It is enough to make anybody----
Mr. Rainville. But you said one other thing. You said it
was unusual even in these days.
Now, you haven't had any secret documents, but in these
days it was unusual to handle top secret documents?
Mr. Corwin. We never handled top secret documents at all.
Mr. Rainville. But even to handle secret documents was
unusual?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, because we don't need the knowledge.
Mr. Rainville. But the fact that it was an unusual thing--
wouldn't that make you realize that you had left that document
out?
Mr. Corwin. As I said before, I think the document had been
officially downgraded, but I had never gotten around to doing
anything about it.
Mr. Rainville. But despite that you were penalized for
leaving it out?
Mr. Corwin. The story is that you are going to be penalized
for what it says on it, because if you didn't take care of it
you should be penalized for not doing it. How should I put it?
It is not exactly your fault you didn't do it, but it should
have been done. It could have been really secret, too. So,
therefore, you are penalized.
Mr. Jones. In this car pool, then, Mr. Corwin, you say that
only Coleman carried the briefcase, and only once in a while?
Mr. Corwin. I will say that is all I can remember.
Mr. Jones. He would take that briefcase inside the plant
and take it out again. Is that it?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. During a period of time there, some of our
people were cleared to take in and out classified documents,
and they had a special pass signed by the commanding officer.
Mr. Jones. Coleman was one of these?
Mr. Corwin. I am sure he must have been, according to the
work that he did. I am pretty sure.
Mr. Jones. In other words, then, he could walk into the
plant and leave the plant without having his briefcase
inspected?
Mr. Corwin. I believe that they did some inspection. To me
it was always a little confusing, because I guess the guards
are cleared for secret, too, so I suppose they did look to see
what the classification was on these sheets. And they examined
this pass, which stated exactly what they were allowed to take
out.
Mr. Jones. Now, does that still hold true today?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. That stopped a number of years ago.
Mr. Jones. A number of years ago?
Mr. Corwin. So far as I know.
Mr. Rainville. There is one other thing I would like to ask
about Mr. Coleman. You said only once had he taken classified
documents home that you knew of, and that was when he got this
reprimand.
Mr. Corwin. Let me put it this way: I knew about the
reprimand and knew that he took out documents. I don't know how
many.
Mr. Rainville. You assumed that that was the only occasion
when he took out something when he was not supposed to?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. When I say ``occasion''--he may have taken
them out over a period of time or something. I don't really
know.
Mr. Rainville. The point I was getting to is that you
stressed the fact that he was a very conscientious, hardworking
fellow, that he was a good engineer, and didn't like to see his
work pile up, and he took it home with him when he felt he had
to. Of course, those are all things you wouldn't know unless he
discussed it in the car with you that he was taking them home,
that it was actually work that was in that briefcase?
Mr. Corwin. When he got the penalty, of course, we knew he
was suspended, since we didn't take him in.
Mr. Rainville. But you say you didn't know what was in the
briefcase, it was never opened, in your memory, there was never
a discussion of what was in it, no reference, and yet you say
he took work home because he was a conscientious, hardworking
engineer that wanted to finish up the details left on his desk
at night, and that he processed them even to the point of
taking them home to work on them. Well, presumably, if you
didn't know what was in the briefcase, and he didn't discuss it
in the car with you, you are a little bit psychic to know what
he was doing?
Mr. Corwin. Well, maybe I am not giving you these things in
any chronological order. That is to say, when he got the
penalty, he discussed what had happened to him.
Mr. Rainville. And then he told you he was conscientious
and that he took his work home to process?
Mr. Corwin. We said to him, to be frank with you: ``You are
pretty much of a damn fool to do anything like that.''
We knew, though, that his work had been falling behind, and
he told us.
Mr. Rainville. That he had been doing that?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. I may not have been giving these
statements in any kind of an order.
Mr. Rainville. I was merely going to say, then: This could
have been the one time that he was caught. Like the guy that is
caught speeding, and the one time he is caught is when he just
barely broke the speed limit, instead of when he was going a
hundred miles an hour.
Mr. Schine. It could have been.
As well as you know him, it is entirely possible he could
have taken secret documents home on other occasions?
Mr. Corwin. I think that is possible. With the pass and
everything else. I don't even know why the pass existed at that
time. Because it didn't make sense to me. Now it certainly
doesn't make sense.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever seen a miniature camera?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. How miniature?
Mr. Jones. Oh, about this size [indicating].
Mr. Corwin. Only in the movies.
Mr. Jones. You have never actually seen one, then?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, not physically.
Mr. Jones. At any time in traveling back and forth, has any
one of then men in the car had a camera with him of any nature
at all that you recall?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. Because, as I say, we certainly
wouldn't bring a camera to work. There is no point. You can't
bring it in.
Mr. Jones. Not a large camera, obviously.
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. Because they are not camera bugs. None of
the fellows you know make a hobby of taking pictures and
photography?
Mr. Corwin. As far as Sobell is concerned, he is the fellow
I know least. I have no social contact with him.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know this fellow, Dr. Yamins?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir. I don't believe he has gotten his
Ph.D.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Yamins. He has been chief of the radiation
laboratory?
Mr. Corwin. I don't think so. I think his position is
liaison engineer for our people.
Mr. Cohn. Liaison between your place and MIT. Is that
right?
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. And your installation up at MIT. Now, have you
spoke to Mr. Yamins lately?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. I haven't seen him in quite a while,
actually since he went to Boston.
Mr. Cohn. Have you been told about any of the charges
against him?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, I haven't.
Mr. Cohn. Was he pretty friendly with Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Corwin. Well, I would say they were friendly. I don't
think they had much social contact.
Mr. Jones. Friendly in what respect, then?
Mr. Corwin. Well, they worked together, and it was a
companionship.
Mr. Jones. Scientific companionship more than a social
companionship?
Mr. Corwin. I would say so, yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Corwin, you lived with Mr. Coleman, didn't
you?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us the years you lived with him?
Mr. Corwin. I will try, I think it was in '46 or '47, I am
not too sure. We lived in a place called Port-au-Peck.
Mr. Schine. The address, please?
Mr. Corwin. I think it was Vreeland Place, and that was
Port-au-Peck, New Jersey.
Mr. Schine. Was anybody else living with you at that time?
Mr. Corwin. Martin. The three of us.
Mr. Schine. Incidentally, what is Mr. Martin doing now?
Mr. Corwin. Up until the time he was suspended, he was with
Coleman.
Mr. Schine. What is his present job? Do you know what he is
doing?
Mr. Corwin. I don't quite understand. You mean at the
moment what is he doing? Probably nothing.
Mr. Schine. You and Mr. Coleman and Mr. Martin all lived
together in 1946 and '47?
Mr. Corwin. Somewhere around then. It was for a very short
period at the time, but I was sort of moving around from group
of fellows to group of fellows until I ultimately got married.
Every time a fellow got married, there would be a breaking
apart of the household, and we would keep on re-forming.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever see classified documents around at
that time?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir, I don't remember seeing any.
Mr. Cohn. Did Martin tell you this man, Ullmann turned out
to be a member of a spy ring?
Mr. Corwin. I read it in his charges. The charge was that
he was found to be a Communist, words to that effect. I don't
think Martin knew the fellow very well.
Mr. Cohn. Was Ullmann's name ``William Ludwig Ullmann''?
Mr. Corwin. That doesn't strike a responsive chord.
Mr. Cohn. Where was Ullmann working?
Mr. Corwin. That was at Watson Laboratory, which was part
of the air force at that time.
Mr. Cohn. Part of the air force; not at Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. No, they had nothing to do with Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. Where is it located?
Mr. Corwin. It is close to Monmouth. It is right outside of
Red Bank.
Mr. Schine. When you lived with Martin and Coleman, did
they ever discuss anything about the Communist movement at that
time?
Mr. Corwin. Not very much, I am afraid. I think our only
conversation was of a social nature. I guess we wanted to get
married, and our primary interest at that time was meeting
girls and keeping our social contacts up. We certainly weren't
very politically-conscious, or I would have remember some
discussions.
Mr. Schine. How do you spell Okum's name?
Mr. Corwin. I don't know, I think I said it. Was it O-a-k-
u-m? Something like that.
Mr. Schine. Did he ever work at Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir, he worked for Coleman.
Mr. Schine. He worked for Coleman.
Mr. Corwin. That was quite a number of years ago,
Mr. Schine. Do you know the year specifically?
Mr. Corwin. No, I don't. I think it was up until the time
that Coleman enlisted in the marine corps.
Mr. Schine. Was it around '45 of '46?
Mr. Corwin. No, I guess it was earlier.
Mr. Schine. Earlier?
Mr. Corwin. Maybe '42, somewhere in there.
Mr. Schine. '42. What was Okum's job?
Mr. Corwin. I think he was some kind of a clerk, that he
did a clerical job.
Mr. Schine. Do you know what he is doing now?
Mr. Corwin. Yes, sir. I don't know in detail, but I think
he is working for a local electronics outfit somewhere around
our area.
Mr. Schine. When was the last time he was employed by the
government?
Mr. Corwin. Well, when Watson Laboratory, which was part of
the air force moved to Rome, at lot of people who were employed
there did not want to go up with them, because there were a lot
of physical hardships, so they quit.
Mr. Schine. That is Rome, New York?
Mr. Corwin. No, they quit here at Watson.
I think he left at that time and found himself a job.
Mr. Schine. And he had access to classified material at the
time?
Mr. Corwin. At the time he was----
Mr. Schine [continuing]. Working for Coleman?
Mr. Corwin. Yes. And I suppose when he worked for the air
force he also had clearance. Now, he also went through a little
problem, too.
Mr. Schine. Yes, he discussed that with you, didn't he?
Mr. Corwin. No, I didn't know him very well. Coleman told
me about it.
Mr. Schine. What did Coleman tell you?
Mr. Corwin. Well, he told me that his clearance had been
taken away, and I think Coleman came up as a witness on his
behalf.
Mr. Schine. Why was his clearance taken away?
Mr. Corwin. That I don't know.
Mr. Schine. Did you know some of the charges that were
against him?
Mr. Corwin. I think it had to do with the local federal
union, the Union of Public Workers, or something like that;
that he was a member.
Mr. Schine. He was a member. And what were some of the
other charges?
Mr. Corwin. I don't know. That is the only thing we heard.
Because it seemed so odd to just be a member of the union, or
whatever it was.
Mr. Schine. There must have been some other charges against
Okum.
Mr. Corwin. I suppose so.
Mr. Schine. Where did you say Okum is now?
Mr. Corwin. Well, he is out in that area.
Mr. Schine. He is working for some small electronic outfit.
What was his first name?
Mr. Corwin. Jack Okum. Jack, as far as I know.
Mr. Schine. How do you spell that?
Mr. Corwin. That makes the third try. I will not swear to
it. Maybe it is O-k-u-m.
Mr. Schine. How long has he been out of Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. Well, the last place he left was the air force,
to my knowledge.
Mr. Schine. That was Watson Laboratories?
Mr. Corwin. Watson Laboratories.
Mr. Schine. And you don't think he has been employed by the
government since that time?
Mr. Corwin. I don't believe so.
Mr. Schine. When did he leave Watson Laboratories?
Mr. Corwin. I don't know. I would say '49 or '50, maybe
'51. Somewhere in that time.
Mr. Schine. And has he been employed at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Corwin. He was, way back.
Mr. Schine. Besides that early time when he worked for
Coleman?
Mr. Corwin. Not that I know of. No, he wasn't.
Mr. Schine. What was Coleman's reaction to the fact that
Okum had his clearance taken away? When he discussed it with
you, what did he say?
Mr. Corwin. Well, he felt that there was no reason for it.
Okum, of course, was cleared.
Mr. Schine. Oh, he was cleared.
Mr. Corwin. Oh, yes, definitely.
Mr. Schine. But he didn't go back to work?
Mr. Corwin. No, sir. He went back to the air force and
stayed with them up until this move. Yes, he was cleared, went
back to work with them, stayed until this move started, and
left.
Mr. Rainville. The only question that ran through my mind:
As I recall it now, Coleman, Martin, and Okum are the three
people that were very friendly with you.
Mr. Corwin. No.
Mr. Rainville. Not Okum so much as Coleman and Martin, with
whom you lived?
Mr. Corwin. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. And Okum, you said, was very friendly with
Coleman, worked for him, and you said was probably one of his
best friends not now working at the plant.
Were there any others besides those three that were
suspended?
Mr. Corwin. That were friends?
Mr. Rainville. Yes, I mean that were in that group. I am
trying to go through my notes and pull them together. I thought
maybe you could simplify it for me.
Mr. Corwin. I don't know what you mean, sir.
Mr. Rainville. The only point that kept recurring to me is
that almost every time you came up with the name of somebody
who was very friendly, or in the car pool, you came up with the
fact that he was suspended. I thought maybe I was exaggerating
it, so I wanted to pull them all together.
Mr. Corwin. No, to my knowledge Harold Ducore, who was in
the car pool, and Aaron Coleman, in the car pool, have been
suspended.
Mr. Rainville. And Martin, who lived with you, was
suspended.
Mr. Corwin. That is right.
Mr. Rainville. And Okum, whom you knew, even though he was
a close friend of Coleman rather than your own?
Mr. Corwin. He was never suspended. His clearance was taken
away, and then he was cleared. That is not suspension. There is
a big difference. There is a monetary difference, too.
Mr. Rainville. But it is the same all picture, a
questioning of their security.
Mr. Corwin. Well, clearing up----
Mr. Rainville. A questioning of their security.
Mr. Corwin. If you want to call it that.
Mr. Carr. I guess that is all, Mr. Corwin.
Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 1:00 p.m., a recess was taken until 2:00
p.m.]
afternoon session
Mr. Cohn. May we get your full name for the record, please?
STATEMENT OF ALLEN J. LOVENSTEIN
Mr. Lovenstein. Allen J. Lovenstein, L-o-v-e-n-s-t-e-i-n.
Mr. Schine. Your occupation?
Mr. Lovenstein. Electrical engineer, sir.
Mr. Schine. And where are you currently employed?
Mr. Lovenstein. At Evans Signal Laboratory, Fort Monmouth,
New Jersey.
Mr. Schine. That is the army laboratory?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And what are your duties there?
Mr. Lovenstein. I am a project engineer and in charge a
subsection of the Radar Equipment Section of the Radar Branch
at Evans.
Mr. Schine. And, as a project engineer, what do you do?
Mr. Lovenstein. I am responsible for development work on
classified and unclassified ground radar equipment.
Mr. Schine. What is this ground radar equipment for?
Mr. Lovenstein. It is for use by the different services of
the army.
Mr. Schine. It involves--?
Mr. Lovenstein. It involves classified information.
Mr. Cohn. Some of it, in general terms, involves
antiaircraft defense?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, it doesn't.
Mr. Cohn. Does any radar work done at Evans involve that?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. But your section doesn't?
Mr. Lovenstein. In one way it does. I can't give you the
connection.
Mr. Cohn. I don't want the detail. I just want to speak in
general terms when referring to classified information.
Mr. Lovenstein. Could you repeat the question?
Mr. Cohn. You say in one way it does relate to
antiaircraft.
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. That is enough.
Mr. Lovenstein. I can be more explicit than that.
Mr. Cohn. I don't think it is necessary. It is highly
classified work?
Mr. Lovenstein. Some of it is secret, yes.
Mr. Schine. Radar, of course, can cover anything from ships
to airplanes to many other projects about which the general
public doesn't know; is that not true?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir, that is true.
Mr. Schine. How long have you been doing this work?
Mr. Lovenstein. I first became employed at Evans on the
17th of November, 1947.
Mr. Schine. And were you employed as a project engineer at
that time?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I wasn't. I attained successfully
higher positions of responsibility.
Mr. Schine. What did you do prior to 1947?
Mr. Lovenstein. Upon graduation from college----
Mr. Schine. Which college?
Mr. Lovenstein. The College of the City of New York. City
College.
Mr. Schine. What year was that?
Mr. Lovenstein. Actually, I received my degree as of August
of 1943. I was registered for summer courses during that year,
to finish my credits for the degree. I didn't quite finish.
However, they gave me the credits. They were non-essential
courses. And I wanted to go in the army.
Mr. Schine. What did you do? Just describe your occupation
since you left college.
Mr. Lovenstein. Following those months of army experience,
I went to work for the Hammarlund H-a-m-m-a-r-l-u-n-d-
Manufacturing Company. I believe the address was 460 West 34th
Street. I am not sure of the address. It was on West 34th
Street almost at Tenth Avenue. Working for them, I did bench
testing on that Hammerlund ``Super-Pro.''
Mr. Schine. How long did you work for them?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe I started working for them some
time during the summer of 1946. I had been discharged in
February, February 11, I believe it was, of 1946. And I worked
for them until a lay-off I believe shortly after the first of
the year, sometime around the first of the year 1947.
Mr. Schine. Yes. Roughly a year?
Mr. Lovenstein. It was short of a year, yes,
Mr. Schine. And when you worked for them, did you handle
government projects?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I didn't.
Mr. Schine. Did they handle work for the government?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir, they did.
Mr. Schine. But you had no connection with the work they
handled for the government?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I didn't.
Mr. Schine. What were your functions in the army?
Mr. Lovenstein. I was an enlisted man. I was sent to Camp
Crowder, Missouri, and received my basic training there. I was
there, I think, something like five weeks, and I was sent to
Fort Monmouth, to the Signal School at Fort Monmouth. I went
through the elements of radio, the elements of electricity, and
then I was sent, on the 18th of February, 1944--I believe that
is the correct date--to a camp in Pennsylvania. The name
escapes me. It was a staging camp. It was outside of Sharon,
Ohio. I remember that town. And from there I went to a camp at
that time--I don't know whether the information is classified
now or not. I wasn't supposed to give the name of the camp at
that time, and I haven't been told otherwise.
Mr. Cohn. In connection with the atomic project?
Mr. Lovenstein. Oh, no, sir. This was a port of
embarkation.
Mr. Schine. And what were your duties in the army?
Mr. Lovenstein. I was trained as a radio repair man. I was
sent over along with seventeen other enlisted personnel, two
captains, and one lieutenant colonel. His name was Lieutenant
Colonel Edwards. We were sent as a special detachment, and we
had been led to believe that we were to be sent to the CBI. We
landed in North Africa in May of 1947. We left the United
States--I am sorry. I said '47. It was '44. We landed sometime
late in April or early in May in North Africa, and from there
we proceeded to Bombay, and then across India to Calcutta, and
I was on temporary duty at an installation at Kancharapara in
India--K-a-n-c-h-a-r-a-p-a-r-a--I think it is, which was
nothing more than a staging area.
At that point, the eighteen in the group and the two
officers were broken up, and six of us--if it is important I
can make sure of that number; I am not sure whether it was six
or eight-six or eight of us were sent to a tank unit, the First
Provisional Tank Group. One battalion was operating in Burma.
One battalion was in reserve at Sedyia, S-e-d-y-i-a, in India.
I was sent with the second battalion.
Shortly thereafter, we moved into the combat zone in Burma.
We were kept in reserve.
After the war in Burma was concluded, I was sent back to
the signal outfit I had been attached to, the Ninety-sixth
Signal Battalion, and then after that the 988th Signal Service
company. We went over the Lido and Burma Roads by truck, and I
was assigned to the Northern Chinese combat area command,
something like that, in Kunming, China, where I worked as a
transmitter maintenance man at a radio station, servicing the
Kunming command station.
I was there until, I believe, early in December 1945, when
we were thrown back across the hutch to Calcutta, to
Kancharapara, the staging area.
We boarded ships in Calcutta. I remember that very well. I
finally came down with malaria. I had been taking atabrine.
When I came off it, I got it. I came across the Pacific, landed
at Portland, came across the country, and was discharged at
Fort Dix, on, I believe, the 11th of February 1946.
Mr. Schine. What was the name of the company you went to
afterward?
Mr. Lovenstein. The Hammarlund Manufacturing Company.
Mr. Schine. And you were there until the first part of
1947?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes. Then I went to work for the Pilotless
Planes Division of the Fairchild Aviation Corporation.
Mr. Schine. What were your duties there?
Mr. Lovenstein. My duties were as a technician, or it might
have been called a junior engineer, in the development of test
equipment for their product.
Mr. Schine. They did work for the army?
Mr. Lovenstein. For the navy.
Mr. Schine. And some of it was classified work?
Mr. Lovenstein. That is why I said, ``product,'' yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. How long were you at this job?
Mr. Lovenstein. I was there until some time late in the
summer. I don't remember the exact date. A strike was called.
Mr. Schine. Yes?
Mr. Lovenstein. I had very mistakenly joined the union at
the time the strike was called. I, along with what I thought
was a majority of the people working in the department, went
out. I don't recall exactly how long I was out. It was
something over two weeks, I believe. I became disillusioned.
Mr. Schine. What was the name of the union?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know. I believe it was associated
with the CIO. I will give you a little information later on.
I became disillusioned, as I say. Things weren't happening
as we were led to believe they would happen. I was embarrassed.
I didn't want to go back in, because it just is an embarrassing
situation.
I wasn't quite satisfied with the work I had been doing. I
wasn't learning anything. I didn't feel my capacities were
being utilized.
Mr. Schine. So what was your next position?
Mr. Lovenstein. The next position I had was with the
Automatic Machine Winding Company, in East Newark, New Jersey.
Mr. Schine. What were the dates, roughly, that you worked
there?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe this is pretty specific. It was
the first two complete weeks in November of 1947.
During the course of the strike, after I stopped going out
to Long Island, I put applications in to various companies. One
was to the Automatic Machine Winding Company in East Newark.
Mr. Schine. Then you left there. And where did you go from
there?
Mr. Lovenstein. I accepted a position at the Fort Monmouth
Laboratories. I had previously put the application in.
Mr. Schine. And when did your work begin at the Fort
Monmouth laboratories?
Mr. Lovenstein. The 17th of November, 1947.
Mr. Schine. I see. When you took work with Fort Monmouth,
would you give the committee the names of the references you
used?
Mr. Lovenstein. I can't be sure. This was several years
ago.
Mr. Schine. State the names that you might have used.
Mr. Lovenstein. I might have used the names of people near
the family. I believe I used the name of a very close friend,
Professor Louis Rosenthal. I might have used one of my previous
employers' names, Mr. B. J. Garfunkel, who I had worked for
during the summer. I might have used the name of Mr. Samuel
Bloomfield, who I had worked for part time, while I was still
in college. I might have used the name of a cousin, Mr. Moses--
we call him ``Bub''--Solomon. I might even have used someone's
name I knew at that time in the army. I don't know.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever work at Aberdeen Proving Grounds?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, I did, sir.
Mr. Schine. Where is this located?
Mr. Lovenstein. This is at Aberdeen, Maryland.
Mr. Schine. When did you work there?
Mr. Lovenstein. I worked there on two separate occasions,
actually. There were some classified tests which we were
involved with.
Mr. Schine. When you say ``we,'' whom do you mean?
Mr. Lovenstein. This is a group of actually, I didn't work
for the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. I worked for the Signal
Corps, and part of the work was at Aberdeen. I had people down
there from my subsection.
Mr. Schine. When was this?
Mr. Lovenstein. The first time I believe was a visit, a
one-day visit, with Mr. Ducore and Mr. Edward Storck.
Mr. Schine. Would you spell the second name?
Mr. Lovenstein. S-t-o-r-c-k, Edward.
Mr. Schine. When was this?
Mr. Lovenstein. This was, I believe, either in late October
or November of 1950. I might be a year off.
Mr. Schine. You visited Mr. Storck and Mr. Ducore in the
Aberdeen Proving Ground.
Mr. Lovenstein. There might have been someone else with me.
I am not sure.
Mr. Schine. To do some work there? How long were you there?
Mr. Lovenstein. Just that one day. There had been a
conference in Washington which Mr. Ducore had attended, and he
came back with certain information, and a directive or an
authorization to work directly with the people at Aberdeen. The
people's names----
Mr. Schine. Where was the conference in Washington?
Mr. Lovenstein. I assume the Pentagon. I don't know.
Mr. Schine. Do you know with whom the conference was?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I don't.
Mr. Schine. Was Colonel Stoner head of the Signal Corps at
that time? Or General Stoner; I am sorry.
Mr. Lovenstein. I have never heard the name, sir.
Mr. Schine. Proceed.
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know who was the head at that time.
Mr. Schine. So you say Ducore came back from Washington
with an authorization to go down to----
Mr. Lovenstein. An authorization to work directly with the
people at Aberdeen, I am trying to think of the civilian's name
at Aberdeen and the colonel's name. It was a Lieutenant Colonel
Hiester.
Mr. Schine. What was Ducore's job at that time?
Mr. Lovenstein. At that time, I believe Mr. Edwards was
still section chief and Mr. Ducore was deputy section chief in
the radar section.
Mr. Schine. And it was routine for him to be in Washington
and come back with an authorization to go down to Aberdeen
Proving Grounds?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And what was the second occasion you went to
the Aberdeen Proving Grounds?
Mr. Lovenstein. The second occasion was the day we brought
equipment down to the Proving Grounds in order to take part in
these classified tests.
Mr. Schine. And what was the timing?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe it was sometime in December of
1950.
Mr. Schine. This was shortly thereafter, or in the matter
of weeks?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir. The first meeting was merely to
make introductions and get the thing started.
Mr. Schine. And Mr. Ducore went with you again?
Mr. Lovenstein. I am not sure whether he was with us the
first day or the first week or the first month, but I know he
did go down. He did visit.
Mr. Schine. Who else was with you there?
Mr. Lovenstein. I had several people, Mr. Edward Storck was
detailed as the man responsible at the place. Mr. Ralph Dunn
participated, and Mr. Brendan--I believe that is right--B-r-e-
n-d-a-n T-h-i-n-k-h-a-u-s. The ``h'' I am not sure of. Mr.
Michael Meszaros, M-e-s-z-a-r-o-s, went down as a technician
and returned very quickly. He just went down to make an
installation. There were several photograph people who went
down; Duke--I don't know his first name other than that--
Southard, S-o-u-t-h-a-r-d, and Charles Ferris, F-e-r-r-i-s.
They were there a very short time. And then I had a number of
enlisted personnel from the Signal Corps Development Detachment
who were assigned to the job.
Do you want the names?
Mr. Schine. I imagine the first visit you made to Aberdeen
was to line up some work you were going to do, and the second
time you went down you brought the equipment with you to carry
out this work?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. How long were you at Aberdeen when you went
there?
Mr. Lovenstein. I personally was there several days. I
don't know whether it extended over a weekend or not. It was
several days. If you wish, I can look my records up and give
you the information.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever take or order taken a picture of
an atomic cannon at Aberdeen?
Mr. Lovenstein. I had a photographer requested to take
pictures of our equipment there.
Mr. Schine. Who was the photographer?
Mr. Lovenstein. Leo Fary, F-a-r-y.
Mr. Schine. Yes?
Mr. Lovenstein. I did not give any specific instructions to
take any pictures of any equipment other than ours.
Mr. Schine. The pictures were taken?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, they were.
Mr. Cohn. Well, did you ask anyone to take a picture of an
atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. I did not ask for any pictures other than
our own, no, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know the instance to which I am referring?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe I do.
Mr. Cohn. Tell us about it.
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe Mr. Fary took some pictures of
over-all equipment suits, which involved a picture in the
background of the cannon, and specifically a 16-millimeter--I
am not sure of that; I don't know whether it was 35 or 16; I
saw 16-millimeter prints--but I know a picture was taken of the
atomic weapon being fired. There were various scenes,
background scenes, of other equipment, showing the shells, the
loading facilities, the towers.
Mr. Cohn. Had you asked that that film be delivered to you?
Mr. Lovenstein. I asked that a film be delivered. I didn't
know what was in the film when I asked to have it delivered.
Mr. Schine. You didn't know what was in the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. Not when I asked to have it delivered. I
asked for the film Mr. Fary was asked to take, yes.
Mr. Schine. Why did you ask for the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. It was our film that we sent a photographer
down for, to take pictures of our equipment.
Mr. Cohn. Was that picture supposed to include the workings
of this atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. That was a highly-classified thing, wasn't it?
Mr. Lovenstein. It was secret, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Now, did you know that the atomic cannon was down
there?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir, I did.
Mr. Cohn. You had no idea that the pictures had been taken
of it?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't there when the pictures were
taken.
Mr. Cohn. Oh, I know you weren't there. Didn't you know
that they were taking the pictures of this atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. I didn't know until after I had seen the
film.
Mr. Cohn. What happened after you had seen the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. After we had seen the film----
Mr. Schine. Who is ``we''?
Mr. Lovenstein. The people in the section who were working
on the project. By the way, these films were sent through the
clearance people at Aberdeen.
Mr. Cohn. What finally happened to the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. These films were used in secret tours.
Mr. Cohn. With the atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, the picture of the cannon was shown.
Mr. Cohn. Was there ever any objection made by G-2 to the
use of the film with this picture of the cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. There was one objection, which was voiced
to me, and we thereupon withdrew this film from the tours. We
did not show it for some time, and then we got permission again
to show the film.
Mr. Schine. You had several copies of the film both times?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I only know of one copy of the
film. I am sorry. There was an original, which is really a
negative, and a print.
Mr. Schine. And you were asked to turn over one copy to G-
2. Is that not true?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't asked personally. We did give this
film--I was asked to give this film to the branch. I don't know
what happened to the film.
Mr. Schine. You took charge of this film once it had been
taken? Who was responsible for it?
Mr. Lovenstein. This film was regarded as secret material.
Mr. Jones. Who is Harold Fary?
Mr. Lovenstein. Leo Fary?
Mr. Jones. Who is Leo Fary?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is a photographer who works in the
Photographic Section of the Reproduction Branch.
Mr. Cohn. Who gave him instructions as to what to take?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wrote a work order out requesting him to
take pictures of the scope and our equipment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you discuss it with him personally before he
went, in addition to this written order?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe I did, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where is Mr. Fary now?
Mr. Lovenstein. To the best of my knowledge, he is still at
Evans.
Mr. Schine. Now, who took charge of this film, once you had
it? Who showed it? Who showed the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. I was responsible for showing the film.
Mr. Schine. You had the film for how long a period?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe we still have it.
Mr. Schine. You still have access?----
Mr. Lovenstein. I have it in the section.
Mr. Schine. You still have access to it if you need it?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't any longer.
Mr. Schine. This film was shown where?
Mr. Lovenstein. This was shown in demonstrations and tours
to people visiting the laboratory who had secret clearance.
Mr. Schine. Was it shown very often? When was the last time
it was shown?
Mr. Lovenstein. I would say about two months ago.
Mr. Schine. Two months ago?
Mr. Lovenstein. I can't be sure of that. If you want that
date, I believe I have records that will show that.
Mr. Schine. Now, did you do anything else while you were
down at Aberdeen? I don't believe you told us how long you
stayed on there.
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't sure how long I stayed there. I
wasn't sure the first time whether I was there more than a week
or not.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lovenstein, who gave you the orders to take
pictures of this atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. No one. I didn't give orders to take
pictures of the atomic cannon.
Mr. Jones. You just gave orders to have pictures taken.
Mr. Lovenstein. Of our equipment.
Mr. Jones. Of your equipment.
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. And evidently among your equipment, then, was
this atomic cannon.
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir.
Mr. Jones. How did they take the pictures of the atomic
cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't the photographer.
Mr. Jones. I am actually amazed that they are showing some
of our latest military equipment to tour groups.
Mr Lovenstein. This film was not shown, to my knowledge,
prior to the disclosure of pictures of the atomic weapon.
Mr. Jones. Now, who would attend these showings? Who would
attend them? You said people who had clearance.
Mr. Lovenstein. Secret clearance, yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. For example, who would that be?
Mr. Lovenstein. These would be people from Washington,
VIP's or officers, field grade officers, technical working
groups, panel members. I was instructed, in disposition form,
to show material, not specifically but up to and including
secret. It was then up to my discretion to make the tour
interesting, to make it informative, and to make it publicize
the work of the laboratories and present the work of the
laboratories.
Mr. Jones. Now, you say Leo Fary is still out there, to the
best of your knowledge?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir, he is.
Mr. Jones. Does he do all the official photography?
Mr. Lovenstein. Not all.
Mr. Jones. How long has he been there?
Mr. Lovenstein. He has been there as long as I remember. I
couldn't say.
Mr. Jones. How long would that be?
Mr. Lovenstein. I would say for sure two, three, or four
years.
Mr. Cohn. When did you see him last?
Mr. Lovenstein. I can't be sure. A couple of months ago.
Mr. Jones. A couple of months ago. His developing place is
right on the plant, the premises out there?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I don't believe they develop out
there. I believe they send the material to Astoria.
Mr. Jones. To Astoria?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Where in Astoria?
Mr. Lovenstein. That is to my knowledge. I don't know for
sure.
Mr. Cohn. It is the Signal Corps Traffic Center.
Mr. Jones. And then the film was returned to you?
Mr. Lovenstein. Not to me, no, sir.
Mr. Jones. You asked for the film to be returned to you,
though?
Mr. Lovenstein. It was returned from Astoria to the
Reproduction Branch. And then I signed for it.
Mr. Jones. You signed for the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir. I did at one time.
Mr. Jones. What was the purpose of signing for it? To
acknowledge receipt for it?
Mr. Lovenstein. To acknowledge receipt for it and have it
transmitted to our section, the Radar Equipment Section.
Mr. Jones. And then did you have a showing made of that
film for your own use?
Mr. Lovenstein. I didn't have another copy made. We showed
that copy. This film was returned--here is some more
information--it was returned to the Reproduction Section for
editing. Various portions were taken out which did not pertain
to the gun--to the radar; I am sorry. To our equipment. And we
do have a copy now, which has been cut quite a bit in order to
improve the showing quality.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lovenstein, how do you explain the fact that
a picture of an atomic cannon is taken in the course of taking
pictures of your own equipment? I can't seem to piece that
together logically in my own mind.
Mr. Lovenstein. Because of the connection with our
equipment, with the weapon.
Mr. Cohn. It certainly shouldn't have been on the film.
Isn't that right?
Mr. Jones. You instructed Leo Fary, as I understood it, to
go out and take these pictures?
Mr. Lovenstein. Pictures of our equipment. And by ``our'' I
mean Signal Corps equipment.
Mr. Jones. It turns out that after the film has been
completed, amongst your equipment we find an atomic cannon or
at least a picture of it, being taken on that same roll of
film.
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes.
Mr. Jones. How do you explain that?
Mr. Lovenstein. The pictures were taken. I wasn't there to
point the camera.
Mr. Jones. I can't understand that.
Mr. Schine. You must have discussed this with Fary.
Mr. Lovenstein. When the pictures came back, they were good
viewing. They were good shots.
Mr. Schine. Regardless of the quality of the shots for a
minute----
Mr. Lovenstein. I am trying to say something of the value
of the over-all program. Pictures of our equipment alone did
not put over the idea of the project.
Mr. Jones. What was your equipment? What equipment, in
particular, was photographed?
Mr. Lovenstein. I can tell you generally. It was radar
equipment.
Mr. Jones. Radar equipment in general?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes. I can tell you more specifically.
Mr. Jones. May I ask you, Mr. Lovenstein: Is it possible
that someone else may have given Fary orders to take pictures
of this atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. If they did, I don't know it. It is
possible.
Mr. Jones. Then how do you explain that he took the picture
of that cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. How do I explain he took the picture?
Mr. Jones. Yes.
Mr. Lovenstein. I can't explain it.
Mr. Jones. Why did he take it, then?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't there when he took the picture.
Mr. Cohn. What was his explanation to you?
Mr. Lovenstein. He didn't explain it.
Mr. Jones. Did you ask him to?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Well, that is almost incredible. Here is a man
who goes down to take pictures of your equipment. He comes
back, and the film not only includes pictures of your
equipment, but what at least has been denominated in official
reports as one of the most sensitive and highest classified
weapons, atomic weapons. G-2 gets excited about this. And you
say you didn't even ask your photographer how he happened to
take those pictures?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't the first one to see those films.
Mr. Cohn. Well, that you gave your man instructions to take
pictures is one thing.
Mr. Lovenstein. I did.
Mr. Cohn. He comes back and, having gotten his original
orders from you, he takes pictures not only of this highly
secret atomic weapon, but of it in actual operation, as I
understand.
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe there were shots of it close up.
I didn't see those shots.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't even ask him, ``Why in God's name do
you have this on the film? That isn't supposed to be there.''
Wasn't that a perfectly logical topic of discussion between
you?
Mr. Lovenstein. It should have been, yes, sir.
These films--I don't pass on the clearance of these films
or on their security. These films did not come directly from
Aberdeen by Mr. Fary to me. They passed through the clearance
people at Aberdeen. If the Aberdeen people saw fit to give
these films to the Signal Corps engineering laboratories and
have a secret classification assigned to them, I wasn't to
question their clearance. I wasn't to question their work.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Lovenstein, quite a bit of trouble
developed over this incident, didn't it?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know. I know that the film was
withdrawn from the tours.
Mr. Jones. The question is how it ever got out there in the
first place.
Mr. Lovenstein. As I say, I wasn't the one responsible for
releasing these films to the Signal Corps.
Mr. Schine. You know that certain individuals got into
trouble on account of this incident, don't you?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I don't.
Mr. Rainville. Getting back to Mr. Cohn's question as to
whether or not you questioned him or did not question him about
taking the pictures, weren't you at all concerned that you
might catch hell from somebody for having the picture taken,
since he was operating under your orders that day?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, because my superior saw those
pictures.
Mr. Cohn. Who were your superiors?
Mr. Lovenstein. I have many superiors.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Lovenstein. He was my immediate superior, yes.
Mr. Cohn. And he thought it was all right?
Mr. Schine. You don't remember the officer in Washington of
the Signal Corps who authorized Mr. Ducore to go to Aberdeen
and make this project?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I don't.
Mr. Schine. Is it true that the project basically was to
take photographs and show how we might intercept enemy aircraft
or enemy attack by use of radar and guided missiles?
Mr. Lovenstein. Is this going to be one of a series of
questions eliminating all but one? If so, I can't answer it.
Mr. Schine. This was going to be a demonstration film,
wasn't it?
Mr. Lovenstein. This was to be a record of our activity on
the project and was to contain film strips of the data
recorded. Mr. Fary was instructed to take pictures of the scope
presentation. In radar work, you have a presentation on an
oscilloscope, and he was to take pictures of that scope. And
the pictures we took--I will give credit to Mr. Fary--were
excellent. They were an excellent reproduction of our data.
Mr. Schine. Now, the thing I am concerned about is the
method by which Mr. Ducore was sent to Washington and came back
with the authorization to go to Aberdeen. You say that was a
routine procedure, even though he was an assistant in one of
the departments. Wasn't he responsible to somebody at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Who would normally get the orders from
Washington?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. How does it happen that an assistant chief goes
to Washington and comes back with an authorization in his hand
to go out on something like this?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know if he went alone. I believe I
stated that before, Mr. Ducore, however, is a very capable
person, and in many cases he has led the section. He hasn't
been supervised technically.
Mr. Cohn. Who is supposed to supervise it?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Evers at the time.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. James T. Evers?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Was Mr. Coleman in that section, too?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, because of Mr. Ducore's great capabilities
would he have more authority than someone ordinarily holding
the position of assistant?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir. May I clarify that?
Mr. Cohn. Sure.
Mr. Lovenstein. He was held in high esteem by all the
people he worked with, who worked for him, who he worked for I
believe his opinion technically was well valued.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Ducore personally, by the way?
Mr. Lovenstein. I first became acquainted with Mr. Ducore
early in 1948. I was assigned to the Radar Equipment Section
late in 1947.
Mr. Cohn. Have you known him socially since that time?
Mr. Lovenstein. I have been to his house once. We played
cards one evening.
Mr. Cohn. And when did you last see Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Lovenstein. Last night.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Lovenstein. Last night.
Mr. Cohn. I see. That was socially?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. I was at a lawyer's office, and
Mr. Ducore came into the same office.
Mr. Cohn. Where was that?
Mr. Jones. What lawyer was it?
Mr. Lovenstein. This was Mr. Ira Katchen.
Mr. Rainville. Discussing this appearance here?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir,
Mr. Rainville. You thought you needed the advice of
counsel?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I was asked if I would like to
appear at Mr. Katchen's office.
Mr. Rainville. Mr. Katchen is your private attorney, not
connected with the Signal Corps?
Mr. Cohn. Let me see if I understand. By whom were you
asked that?
Mr. Lovenstein. By Mr. Alan Gross, A-l-a-n S-t-e-r-l-i-n-g
G-r-o-s-s.
Mr. Cohn. He asked you if you would like to go to this
lawyer's office?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Gross indicated yesterday that Mr.
Katchen had called him or gotten in touch with him in some way
and said that there would be a meeting of those people who have
been suspended or uncleared in his office at 3:30 yesterday
afternoon, and asked if I would like to attend.
Mr. Cohn. Now, I don't understand that. You mean this
lawyer is just organizing the----
Mr. Rainville. Volunteers?
Mr. Cohn. Is that the substance? Who was present at this
meeting? You were there, and Mr. Ducore was there, and Mr.
Gross, I assume?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Who else?
Mr. Jones. Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. I don't see anything wrong with
telling who they were. I am not violating any confidence, I am
sure. Mr. William Goldberg.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. William P. Goldberg?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know his middle initial. Mr. Alfred
Lapedo, L-a-p-e-d-o. I am not sure of the spelling of the last
name. A gentleman whom I had seen before but I didn't know, Mr.
Jerry, I believe, Rothstein.
Mr. Cohn. Jerome Rothstein. Right?
Mr. Lovenstein. I heard the name ``Jerry.''
Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir?
Mr. Lovenstein. I am going around in a circle, I sat next.
And then Willie Goldberg; Harold Ducore; it is either Brodie or
Brophy, and I believe the first name is Ed. I am not sure. And
Mr. Bob Martin.
Mr. Jones. That is Bernard Martin, isn't it?
Mr. Lovenstein. Bob.
Mr. Cohn. Bernard Martin?
Mr. Lovenstein. I really don't know.
Mr. Jones. That is all that were there?
Mr. Lovenstein. That is all I recollect, yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. What is that lawyer's name, again?
Mr. Lovenstein. I have his card, if you would like to see
it. He gave it to me last night. Ira J. Katchen, K-a-t-c-h-e-n.
Mr. Schine. Whose lawyer is he of this group?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. Now, how did this organization, this meeting
come about?
Mr. Lovenstein. As I say, Mr. Gross was informed that Mr.
Katchen was going to have the meeting.
Mr. Jones. And what was the purpose of Mr. Katchen's
holding the meeting? Who enlisted his services?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. What did they say at the meeting?
Mr. Lovenstein. He reviewed whatever we knew about the
situation. To me it was a great help, very frankly, because all
of the problems were discussed. And when you have a chance to
talk to somebody, when you don't know what is going on--if you
have a chance to talk to anybody, it helps, believe me.
Mr. Cohn. Let me make it very clear in the record at this
point. Obviously, you or anybody else called before the
committee has an absolute right to counsel. As a matter of
fact, when you are called, in executive session or in public
session--when I say ``you,'' I mean anybody; I don't know that
you will be called--you have a right to have counsel with you
to obtain his advice at any time. We are not concerned with any
confidential communications between counsel and client in any
way.
It does seem rather unusual, I mean, if a sort of mass
meeting is being called.
Mr. Lovenstein. The sound of ``mass meeting'' doesn't sound
good. It was a meeting, however.
Mr. Jones. There was no mention of any fee?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, there wasn't.
Mr. Jones. In other words, Mr. Katchen just called you all
together because you had one thing to discuss and you wished to
discuss it in common at that time?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. What other matters were discussed, in terms of
future procedure?
Mr. Lovenstein. He told me if I had any problems I should
get in touch with him. There was another lawyer who appeared, a
Mr.--I believe it was Harry Green.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Harry Green?
Mr. Lovenstein. I am not sure of the first name.
There were two Greens mentioned. He was one of them.
Actually he was Mr. Ducore's lawyer.
Mr. Jones. And an associate of Katchen's?
Mr. Lovenstein. They were on speaking terms. They knew one
another.
Mr. Jones. I mean, in the same law firm?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't think so.
Mr. Jones. So, you were saying about discussing the
problems, and so forth----
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes. After the meeting broke up--well, the
rest of the meeting had to do with what problems each of us
had, what our experiences had been in the past, what we thought
this hearing was going to consist of, what might have brought
it about, a general airing of all the complaints and all the
feelings of the people concerned.
At the conclusion of the meeting, Mr. Green asked me to
stay, since I was the only one who was in the group yesterday
who was going to appear today. Mr. Green asked me to give my
background to him, any questions I had. I told him I think
exactly what I have told you, except for the classified
material. I never thought that this Aberdeen question would
come up. I discussed my background, my family connections, the
people I knew, anything that I thought might come up today.
Mr. Cohn. What did you say you thought might come up today?
Mr. Lovenstein. The strike at Fairchild. This is something
I am ashamed of. I am sorry it ever happened. The fact that I
once had a subscription to Consumer Reports.
Mr. Cohn. How about that?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't have it. I didn't have it as soon
as the subscription ran out, when I found it was on the
subversive list or on a list published by the attorney general.
Mr. Cohn. You had that subscription for more than a year
didn't you?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe I renewed it once. I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. What were the years?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know. '46 or '47, probably. It was
way back.
Mr. Cohn. Who asked you to subscribe to Consumer Reports?
Mr. Lovenstein. I am not sure whether I had a subscription
to it before I came with the laboratories or not. You probably
have the records on that. I believe I did. I am not sure.
Mr. Jones. Who asked you to subscribe to it?
Mr. Lovenstein. While I was at the laboratory a group
subscription was taken up. I remember two people. I am not sure
which one I actually gave my subscriptions to. There was Mr. Ed
Storck, the man I mentioned before, S-t-o-r-c-k. I don't know
if he got the subscription up. It was a group plan. There was a
cheaper rate.
Mr. Jones. Who is Ed Storck?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is a very capable person, who works for
me.
Mr. Jones. You say he works for you?
Mr. Lovenstein. He worked for me.
Mr. Cohn. You say he worked for you?
Mr. Lovenstein. He worked for me.
Mr. Cohn. Where were the other persons?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Arthur T. Hood, H-o-o-d, who at that
time I had practically nothing to do with. He was in another
section at the time. But I remember he did come around.
Mr. Jones. What does he do today?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is in the Mechanical Engineering
Section. I have had many contacts with him recently.
Mr. Jones. What have been your relations?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is the mechanical engineer assigned to
the projects I am responsible for.
Mr. Cohn. Now, are there any other matters which you want
to call to our attention?
Mr. Lovenstein. You mean things that I feel are against me?
Mr. Rainville. Well, we are not trying you, here, you know.
Mr. Lovenstein. Well, I had a guilty conscience. I do have
a curious conscience, and it keeps me awake at nights. I don't
know why my clearance was removed. I wish, indeed I do, that I
were suspended and I were given a statement of charges. At
least then I would know what I am supposed to be accused of.
But this way I don't know what the charge are. So all these
possibilities keep going through my mind.
Mr. Jones. What are these other possibilities?
Mr. Lovenstein. Consumer Reports, the strike----
Mr. Jones. That is the strike at Fairchild?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir--my association with Ducore, the
fact that an FBI agent came around maybe six months ago and
asked me if I knew Aaron Coleman. He asked me if I knew Mr.
Yamins. He asked me if I knew that the strike at the Fairchild
Corporation was sponsored by a Communist organization. I told
him that I didn't, and that was the first knowledge I had of
it. And believe me, that made me very much ashamed that I had
been a part of it.
Mr. Jones. And those are all the possibilities?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, there are two others.
Mr. Schine. Will you state them, please?
Mr. Lovenstein. As a project engineer in the Radar
Equipment Section, I was responsible for getting work out. I
was a little too conscientious, and I reprimanded someone one
day--as a matter of fact, a group of people--for extending
their coffee break. A complaint was made, and an investigation
was carried on, as far as I knew, within the section. People
came to me saying that I was being investigated, and they told
me why I was being investigated.
As soon as I found out, I went into Mr. Evers' office, and
I told him I thought I believed there was dissension in the
section, and if he believed it necessary or if he believed it
was for the benefit of the section I would ask to be
transferred from the section, or I requested that the person I
thought was responsible for the dissension should be removed
from my supervision. This happened. The man was removed.
Mr. Cohn. Who was that man?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Albert Strom, S-t-r-o-m.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what else?
Mr. Jones. The last possibility?
Mr. Lovenstein. The last possibility was Mr. Marion
Woodruff, W-o-o-d-r-u-f-f.
Mr. Jones. First name?
Mr. Lovenstein. Marion, M-a-r-i-o-n. Marion W. Woodruff, I
will have to give a history here. Sometime around 1949--I am
not sure of the dates; I am not even sure of the year, but this
can be verified--one of the men in the section, Mr. Daniel
Goldenberg, a mathematician, was about to get married. A
bachelor dinner was planned for him as a surprise at the Tides,
T-i-d-e-s, Restaurant in Belmar, New Jersey. Many of the men in
the section went to this dinner. It was a cooperative affair.
Each one chipped in.
When I arrived at the Tides, a group of people were already
there. Among the group were several colored people. And someone
told me that they had been refused service at the bar, and as I
got the story the bartender said that they wouldn't serve these
colored people at the bar but they would serve them in the
dining room.
Oh, prior to this, Mr. Norwood had said that if the colored
people weren't served, then none of us would be served.
Well, we were all served in the restaurant. The next day,
Mr. Norwood came around to me and asked me if I would like to
sign a letter which he had written. This letter was, I believe,
to one of the senators or congressmen--I believe it was Mr.
Auchincloss--relating the events at the restaurant, and in
essence saying that the management of the Tides had showed
discrimination, and so on.
The event, as written by Mr. Norwood, was true, I signed
the letter.
Everyone at the meeting signed the letter except Mr.
Woodruff. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Evers called me into his
office and asked me if I had signed the letter. I said I had.
He reprimanded me, not for signing the letter, but for signing
the letter on government property. I acknowledged the fact that
this was an error. I shouldn't have done that. The facts of the
letter were true.
Very shortly after that, I became convinced that Mr.
Woodruff was the instigator of an investigation which led to
this reprimand. Nothing happened.
Mr. Rainville. Were you the only one reprimanded?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. I don't have evidence that
everyone was. I know I was.
Mr. Rainville. You know some of the others were, and you
assume they all were?
Mr. Lovenstein. That is a fair statement, yes.
Mr. Jones. How well do you know Bob Martin?
Mr. Lovenstein. I saw Mr. Bob Martin last night, and to the
best of my recollection on three previous occasions. I was
sitting outside this morning, realizing that I would be asked
this, and I thought back, when I met him and where I saw him.
The first occasion I saw him, and I believe I was introduced,
was at Evelyn's, an eating place in Belmont. I didn't sit at
the same table with him. I don't know if I even shook his hand.
It was just an acknowledgment that I was introduced. The next
time I saw him, I was at Watson Laboratories visiting someone
else, and I was walking down the hall, and I saw him, and I
nodded an acquaintance. I recognized his face, as having seen
him before.
Another time was at another restaurant. I was eating with
someone else, and he was at another table. I said, ``Hello,''
just a nodding ``hello,'' and that was all. Except at that time
I remember both parties went out to the street at the same
time, and he had just bought either a Kieser or a Frazer, and
there were some comments as to the quality of the car. I know
that Mr. Martin has been suspended. I learned this in the last
few days, when everybody has been talking about these things. I
know nothing else about him, other than that he was suspended.
He was in isolation with Mr. Coleman.
Mr. Jones. Who introduced you to him?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know who actually made the
introduction. I was eating at that time, I believe, with Mr.
Howard Moss, M-o-s-s, who had changed his name, I believe it
was Moshensky, M-o-s-h-e-n-s-k-y, and he worked at Monmouth.
Mr. Jones. He is in the agency?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, he is now up at Procurement
Maintenance Engineering at Watson.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man named Ullmann?
Mr. Lovenstein. Who?
Mr. Cohn. Ullmann.
Mr. Lovenstein. What was the first name?
Mr. Cohn. I am not giving you one.
Mr. Lovenstein. My AP teacher in elementary school was
Ullmann.
Mr. Cohn. No, did you ever meet a man named Ullmann in the
company of Martin, that you recall?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, I don't.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Lovenstein, you know Ducore fairly well?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is my boss.
Mr. Schine. You know him socially, too?
Mr. Lovenstein. To the extent of going to his home once and
being at the same beach party.
Mr. Schine. Now, who was at his home when you visited his
home?
Mr. Lovenstein. He was alone, and his two children at that
time--now he has three. He was alone, and I believe Mr. Harold
Tate and I were there, and the fourth at bridge I am not sure
of. It could have been Mr. Arthur Randals. It might have been
Mr. Robert Acker, A-c-k-e-r. These are people I have played
bridge with.
Mr. Schine. These are close friends of his?
Mr. Lovenstein. From work. I don't know how close they are
outside of work. They are close associates at work, yes.
Mr. Jones. I don't know whether you answered this question
or not. Did you say you know Harold Coleman?
Mr. Lovenstein. I know an Aaron Coleman.
Mr. Jones. Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. Did you ask him about that, Roy?
Mr. Cohn. Not in any detail. How well do you know him?
Mr. Lovenstein. I know he was the assistant chief of the
systems section of the Radar Branch. I know that he has been
suspended. I didn't know exactly when or what for.
Mr. Cohn. Was he at this meeting last night?
Mr. Lovenstein. Last night? No, sir. I believe--I know--
that someone said he was in New York avoiding newspaper people.
But after reading the newspapers, I don't know if he avoided
them.
How well did I know him? I can elaborate a little more. If
I passed him in the hall, I would recognize him, and I don't
think he would recognize me. I know he shared a house with Mr.
Ducore.
Mr. Schine. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. If this is that Julius Rosenberg I
think it is, no, sir.
Mr. Schine. Did you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Lovenstein. No. sir; I knew a Sobel, S-o-b-e-l. I
believe I played football with him. But not a Sobell.
Mr. Rainville. In attending this meeting last night, and
having been invited by an attorney, and there being two or
three attorneys there----
Mr. Lovenstein. Two, sir. Excuse me. There were three. I
didn't get the third man's name. But he was associated with Mr.
Katchen.
Mr. Rainville. I thought you said there was a Harry Green.
Mr. Lovenstein. And Katchen. I am not sure it was Harry
Green. One Green was mentioned.
Mr. Rainville. Wasn't Gross the attorney?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. Alan Sterling Gross.
Mr. Rainville. Then a couple of attorneys were there. Don't
you wonder who is paying the bill?
Mr. Lovenstein. I know who is paying the bill.
Mr. Rainville. Oh, I thought you said you didn't know about
that.
Mr. Lovenstein. I know who is.
Mr. Cohn. Who is?
Mr. Lovenstein. The B'nai B'rith Society, I know. This has
been indicated.
Mr. Jones. The B'nai B'rith?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. The Anti-Defamation Society, you think?
Mr. Lovenstein. I heard the society mentioned. I don't
think they have been called in.
Mr. Cohn. Has any specific name been mentioned in
connection with B'nai B'rith?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir. If you mention them, maybe I can
give a recollection. I remember hearing names.
Mr. Rainville. So you knew that before you went? Or did you
find that out when you got to the meeting?
Mr. Lovenstein. I heard it mentioned before.
Mr. Cohn. Through whom was this arranged? Which one of the
people there?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Gross, as far as I know. He was the one
who asked me, if I would like to go to this meeting.
Mr. Cohn. Did the B'nai B'rith make the arrangements
through him?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. The thought that runs through my mind is
that maybe some of these people are more guilty than others.
Mr. Lovenstein. In my mind, too.
Mr. Rainville. Wouldn't you have some reluctance to
associate yourself as a group with them? Would it have been
better for you to see the attorney alone and go over all this?
Mr. Lovenstein. I didn't discuss my personal case. I
discussed nothing of my background, nothing of anyone else's
background, in the presence of anyone but the two lawyers.
Mr. Schine. One thing that interests me, which you may be
able to help us on: In listening to the discussions carried on
by the others as to what problems they were going to face
before this committee, what appeared to you to be the most
outstanding?
Mr. Lovenstein. I was going to volunteer that if you didn't
ask me: A dissatisfaction with the method of investigation and
the efficiency of the investigation. May I elaborate?
Mr. Schine. Sure.
Mr. Lovenstein. I am the wrong person to get information on
this from. All I can do is relate what I have heard in the last
six or seven days, since last Tuesday. Prior to last Tuesday,
believe it or not, I was as naive----
Mr. Jones. Who would be a good person to get this
information from?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Alan Gross.
Mr. Cohn. We have a date with him tomorrow morning.
Mr. Lovenstein. By the way, when he wasn't invited among
the first ones, he was going to volunteer, or the suggestion
had come out that he was going to volunteer, to appear.
There are cases I have learned about in the last few days,
of suspensions lasting two to two and a half years, without any
action. I don't know how long my case is going to go. You
probably know that I have been un-cleared. I don't know for
what reason. I don't know for how long it is going to be. It is
not a nice situation, and I assure you the rest of the people,
as far as the outward appearances are concerned, don't like it
at all. They realize this is an important investigation. They
realize a lot of good can come of it. They realize a lot of
good should come of it. But they are afraid, too.
Mr. Rainville. May I interrupt right there to say: By that
you mean there are a lot of people who feel that there are
things that need to be looked into and cleared up?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. For example?
Mr. Lovenstein. The security system at Monmouth.
Mr. Jones. In particular?
Mr. Lovenstein. The method of investigation, the method of
carrying on investigations, the method of taking action, and
the method of clearing people.
Mr. Jones. Who would be the best man to talk to?
Mr. Lovenstein. I think Mr. Gross can give you excellent
leads. I assure you if I can take up some of your time and
introduce you to some other people, I don't know the facts, but
if I can give you the rest of the people's names, I am sure you
are going to find that they are cooperative and they want to
clear this up.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lovenstein, I don't know whether you know
this, but nothing you say here will go outside this room. It is
all in executive session.
Mr. Lovenstein. I have nothing to be ashamed of.
Mr. Jones. It is just to unload your heart, more or less
and it will help us immensely in proceeding.
Mr. Rainville. Maybe there is one thing that can be
cleared. The FBI man did not represent this committee.
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know who he represented.
Mr. Rainville. Your being suspended or removed from the
clearance list is not an action of this committee. As far as we
are concerned, all of that is from another source. And what we
are looking into is the over-all problem of both historical
things that have been discussed and some things that have come
before the committee, and we, too, would like to know just what
it is that they are acting under. Maybe they have information
we don't have.
Mr. Lovenstein. I am sure they do.
Mr. Cohn. I want to ask you this: What is the point of
B'nai B'rith having anything to do with this?
Mr. Lovenstein. There is an assumption that there is an
anti-Semitic movement.
Mr. Cohn. Well, that is an outrageous assumption. I am a
member and an officer of B'nai B'rith.
Mr. Lovenstein. I was under the same naive impression until
I became aware of some facts. Excuse me for saying that.
Mr. Cohn. Sure. Who made the suggestion that there is an
anti-Semitic movement?
Mr. Lovenstein. The rest of the people who have been
suspended or un-cleared. I didn't originate it. I have heard it
in the group.
Mr. Jones. This was brought out at the meeting last night?
Mr. Lovenstein. This was verified at the meeting.
Mr. Jones. Who discussed, who labored on, that point last
night?
Mr. Lovenstein. Nobody labored on it. They discussed it.
Mr. Katchen brought up some facts. In the current
investigation, to the best of our knowledge--I say ``our'';
this is the meeting--there were fifteen people on the carpet,
either suspended or uncleared. Of the fifteen, fourteen are
Jewish. The fifteenth married a Jewess.
Mr. Jones. Who is the fifteenth?
Mr. Lovenstein. Dr. Daniels. You have an appointment with
him, I am sure.
Mr. Cohn. This is all news to me. I don't know the religion
of these people, and I don't care. It doesn't matter whether
out of 530 people there are 530 Jews or Catholics or
Protestants.
Mr. Jones. Will you proceed now with what you were about to
discuss?
Mr. Lovenstein. These were the facts I got last night. I
didn't investigate them. These are quotes.
Two years ago, there was supposed to be an investigation. I
didn't know of the extent of it. I knew about a Mr. Barry
Bernstein. I knew about a Mr. Bill Jones. I didn't realize
eighteen people at the time had been involved. Eighteen were
suspended. Two did not appeal at all and were just assumed to
be either Communists or subversives.
Mr. Jones. Who were they?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know. Of the remaining sixteen,
fourteen were Jewish, and two were colored.
I don't know the facts. I am telling you exactly what I
heard last night.
Mr. Jones. That is amazing.
Mr. Lovenstein. This was from Mr. Katchen. I don't think I
am violating a confidence there, either.
Mr. Rainville. That is another investigation this committee
had nothing to do with.
Mr. Lovenstein. I realize that. This is an opportunity to
clear up a lot of this. If these thoughts are in people's
minds--they weren't in mine until last night, but believe me,
they stayed with me--if they are in people's minds at the fort,
and they are disturbing people, clear them up. Either prove it,
or get them off the hook, or get the people out who are causing
this dissension.
I don't know what your investigating committee is after. I
have an idea. I have an idea that it is to find loose security
in the government. I am not going to say whether there is loose
security or whether there is too much security. Many times
there is too much in the wrong places and not enough in the
right places. But there is an opportunity to make an
investigation and to find out where the trouble is, not to make
trouble but to clear up the trouble. And believe me, you have
got plenty of opportunity to do it.
Mr. Cohn. Now, where is this anti-Semitic plot supposed to
stem from? The suspensions--what is the reasoning behind that?
I don't understand that.
Mr. Lovenstein. Who the actual people are who are
responsible?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Lovenstein. The only people responsible for suspensions
at Fort Monmouth are the people in security.
Now, who they get their directives from, or how they act or
react to recommendations, or what actions they initiate or what
stories they believe, what credence they give to rumors, I
don't know.
Mr. Jones. Who is the chairman of the security board at
Monmouth?
Mr. Lovenstein. It isn't the chairman. There is a civilian
and his military counterpart. The civilian is Mr. Andrew Reid,
R-e-i-d. I would rather not give the background. I know you
people can investigate that. I would rather not, because it
came from one side, and it came from a biased side. I didn't
make the investigation.
Mr. Jones. Had that something to do with anti-Semitism?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rainville. Just offhand, do you know what the
percentage of employees at Evans, the percentage of Jewish
employees, would be? Is it predominantly Jewish?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. I won't give you figures. That is
classified. But I can give you a percentage. I would say 25
percent of the engineers. I don't know about the rest, but of
the engineers 25 percent. And it is a large percentage that are
Jewish.
Mr. Jones. Frankly, I am more interested in your ideas on
the security aspects that you are critical of rather than the
anti-Semitism.
Mr. Lovenstein. I am not highly critical.
Mr. Jones. Or ``critical''?
Mr. Lovenstein. ``Afraid of.''
Mr. Jones. I wish you would elaborate on that a little bit,
any specific examples you have.
Mr. Lovenstein. People are now afraid to read secret
information.
Mr. Jones. Since the new security order went into effect
three months ago. Is that correct?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir. I was still in the laboratory up
until last Tuesday at 4:30. After that time I don't know. But
approaching that time, people were reluctant--project engineers
were reluctant--I was reluctant--to withdraw secret information
and withdraw confidential information; not because we wouldn't
gain information from it that we could use in our projects,
because of the mess and the trouble of getting this
information, the rigmarole, the forms you had to sign, the
cautions.
Mr. Jones. The red tape?
Mr. Lovenstein. The red tape. It became so unbearable that
people just didn't want to do their jobs at 100 percent
efficiency because of the red tape. And this isn't necessary.
It isn't. For an engineer to work effectively, he must be able
to get a background in the subject, and to get a background in
classified subjects, he must feel free to consult any
information on the subject. Otherwise, the whole purpose of the
laboratory is defeated.
Mr. Schine. And where did you feel the security was too
lax?
Mr. Lovenstein. Visitors.
Mr. Schine. What is the procedure for visitors?
Mr. Lovenstein. Well, when a visitor comes to the
laboratory, his clearance is checked. This procedure involved
either calling Fort Monmouth or consulting the record files at
Evans. If a man is cleared, he gets a badge, which says--I am
not sure of the new badges; I haven't seen too many of them,
but it usually says either ``Escort required'' or
``unclassified''--I am not sure of this.
No, this I am sure of. The badges do not state the security
clearance. It just says ``Visitor escort required.'' Or
``Visitor escort not required.''
We were told when we get one of these visitors in the
section the only way of making sure of what his classification
clearance is is to call the security office. This I have done,
and the girl over the phone will give the clearance out. The
clearance she gives out does not include the projects he has
been cleared for. It gives a blanket clearance. Assumedly, the
man is directed to appear for only one project, and you are to
speak to him on only one project.
Mr. Schine. In other words, the clearance, first of all, is
not specific enough; secondly, even at the outset, it may be
done haphazardly, because they have limited files by which they
can check the individual?
Mr. Lovenstein. That is right, sir.
Mr. Schine. Thank you very much, sir.
Incidentally, on the question of anti-Semitism, if somebody
there is anti-Semitic, according to your percentage figures, I
would say he was fighting a losing battle. That 25 percent
Jewish is rather a high percentage.
Mr. Lovenstein. Not at the current rate, because the
current rate of suspensions is practically 99 percent Jewish.
If you keep going at 99 percent, ultimately you get almost that
whole 25 percent.
Mr. Schine. Of course, religion doesn't exclude the
possibility of being involved in criminal activity or provide a
shield which he can hide behind.
Mr. Lovenstein. Right, sir.
Mr. Jones. Where do you believe the fountainhead of this
anti-Semitism stems from out there at Monmouth?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wouldn't say.
Mr. Jones. You know, but you won't say?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I don't know. I can guess.
Mr. Jones. You have reason, however, to believe that it may
center in the security and loyalty board. Is that correct?
Mr. Lovenstein. This has affected a number of people.
Mr. Jones. Have you any ideas that you would want to put in
the record?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. This is only a guess. Why should a
guess become a matter of record. I have no proof. The other
statements I gave you were statements other people made.
Mr. Carr. You said that there were persons you could give
us who would be able to clear this up. I don't think you gave
us their names.
Mr. Lovenstein. I gave one. Mr. Gross. He should surely
give you many more. I believe Dr. Daniels knows of other cases.
Mr. Carr. Gross and Daniels?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes. I may give you my connection with
Gross. You will probably be interested in that. He was my first
boss, when I first came to the laboratories. I worked for him
maybe a matter of months, but I have known him ever since in
the laboratories.
Mr. Schine. Thank you very much, sir.
Mr. Jones. I think you have been very helpful, Mr.
Lovenstein.
Mr. Cohn. Will you give us your full name, please, Mr.
Fister?
STATEMENT OF EDWARD J. FISTER
Mr. Fister. Edward J. Fister.
Mr. Cohn. And where are you employed?
Mr. Fister. At Fort Monmouth, Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. How long has Evans been in existence?
Mr. Fister. Since around '41 or '42.
Mr. Cohn. Under the name of Evans?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What do you do there?
Mr. Fister. Right now, chief of the Meteorological Branch.
Mr. Cohn. And do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Harold Ducore?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Now, were you a reference for either one of
these, a reference for employment for either Coleman or Ducore?
Mr. Fister. With the government?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Fister. Not before they got their job. I didn't know
them before they started to work for the government. If they
have filed any applications for examinations since they came
there, my name may have been used.
Mr. Cohn. But you feel you would not be on the original
applications, since you didn't know them?
Mr. Fister. I didn't know them prior to my working for the
government.
Mr. Cohn. How about Bernard Martin?
Mr. Jones. Bob Martin?
Mr. Fister. Bob Martin. I didn't know his name was Bernard.
Mr. Cohn. Could you have been given as a reference for him?
Mr. Fister. I don't think so. I didn't know him very well.
Mr. Cohn. You knew none of these persons before?
Mr. Fister. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. How well do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Fister. I would say very well.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know him socially?
Mr. Fister. I perhaps know him most socially from spending
about six weeks in England with him, when we both were sent
over to a conference.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Fister. I think it was in 1950.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been to his home?
Mr. Fister. Yes, I was to his home once.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Who else was present at his home when you
were there?
Mr. Fister. My wife and his wife.
Mr. Cohn. Nobody else?
Mr. Fister. No. His wife went with him, and my wife went
with me, when we went to England. So when we come back we
visited him.
Mr. Cohn. How about Mr. Ducore? What is the extent of your
acquaintance with him?
Mr. Fister. I have only known him through working with him.
I have been at a couple of lab parties that he attended and I
attended, branch parties. But I didn't spend any other time
with him. I never visited in his home.
Mr. Cohn. How about Mr. Martin?
Mr. Fister. Martin I only know casually. I know him to see
him. I have seen them several times, but I never had any
relations with them at all.
Mr. Cohn. The reason we asked you to come down is that you
were given as a reference at some step along the line by
Coleman, and we are checking out everybody who was given as a
reference by him.
Mr. Fister. That could be.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever discussed politics with Mr.
Coleman?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What about his political views?
Mr. Fister. I think that Coleman believes in our system of
government.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Has he ever said anything to you to
indicate that he didn't?
Mr. Fister. No. We used to have quite a lot of discussions
on political matters, such as socialized medicine, social
security, things of that nature. He believed very strongly in
socialized medicine and social security. But from all the
conversations I have ever had with him, I would think he would
be loyal to the government.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss Russia with him?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How about that?
Mr. Fister. He was against her way of doing things.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Fister. Oh, ever since I have known him. He hasn't
changed any since I have known him. He has always been the
same.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not he knew Julius
Rosenberg?
Mr. Fister. Only from what he told me.
Mr. Cohn. And what did he tell you?
Mr. Fister. He told me that he went to one class with
Rosenberg; that Rosenberg sat next to him--I think it was a
mechanical engineering class--and insisted that he go to a
Communist youth meeting with him; that Coleman was not
interested in going, but, however, to silence him, he went, and
he found out that rather than a place where people could
express their own views, they weren't allowed to say anything,
and they were just sort of given a line to follow. This
disgusted him, and he never attended another meeting, nor
bothered with Rosenberg, other than seeing him in class.
Mr. Cohn. When did he tell you this?
Mr. Fister. About a week ago.
Mr. Cohn. He told you about a week ago?
Mr. Fister. Yes. I will tell you how it happened. After he
got a copy of his charge, he came to me and asked me if I would
give him a letter of character reference. I told him that I
would write a letter explaining my contacts with him and what I
thought of him, that I would do this. He said he wanted me to
see the charges against him. So one of the charges in there was
that he was friendly with Julius Rosenberg, and I asked him how
about that, and he told me that this was what it amounted to.
Mr. Cohn. How about Morton Sobell?
Mr. Fister. He went to school with Sobell, knew him in
class, never bothered with him socially, hadn't seen Sobell
until one day he went to the General Electric Company, with
whom he had a government contract, that is, he had charge of it
through his section. He met Sobell there, talked to him, and
that was about all the contact they had had.
Sometime later he said he went to the Reeves Instrument
Company and found Sobell working in the Reeves Instrument
Company. And again he talked to him. He talked to him there.
And later on, some of the equipment that Sobell was working on
for Reeves was procured by the radar branch, so he came in
closer contact with Sobell at that time. But it was all
strictly on a business basis.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Fister, do you know Alan Sterling Gross?
Mr. Fister. I know of him. I know him to see him and know
him to say ``hello.''
Mr. Jones. What do you know about him?
Mr. Fister. Nothing, I have met him at work, and I just
know him to say, ``Hello, Al,'' and that is about the only
contact I have ever had with him.
Mr. Jones. What is his position?
Mr. Fister. He was working in the Applied Physics Branch.
Exactly what he was doing, I don't know. I don't know whether
he was working in the project they call Diana, which made
contact with the moon by radar, or not. He may have been. I
don't know.
Mr. Jones. When did you see Mr. Gross last?
Mr. Fister. Gee, I don't think I have seen Gross in a
couple of years, not even to say ``'hello'' to. It must be that
long anyway. Maybe longer.
Mr. Jones. Did you know that there was a meeting held last
night at which all of those who were suspended out there
attended?
Mr. Fister. No, I did not.
Mr. Jones. In a lawyer's office here in New York?
Mr. Fister. No, I did not. I haven't had any contact with
the people who have been suspended except Coleman, who visited
at my house Saturday morning, and Ducore, who called me up
Friday night and asked if I would give him a character letter.
That is the only contact I have had with any of the people.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What do you know about Mr. Corwin?
Mr. Fister. I consider Corwin a very loyal American, a very
hard worker, who has done a lot of good for the government in a
development sort of way, a very steady worker. I know nothing
but good about him.
Mr. Jones. You say you know Bob Martin. How did you meet
Mr. Martin?
Mr. Fister. I don't exactly remember, but I think that I
met him in a restaurant, where a number of the fellows who
worked at the lab used to eat, and he was introduced to me by--
it could have been Corwin or Coleman. I don't recall.
Mr. Jones. It could have been Aaron Coleman, you say?
Mr. Fister. It could have been Corwin, could have been
Coleman, could have been one of the other people who ate there.
I don't recall. It didn't impress me that much that I would
remember how I knew him.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Fister. Ullmann? The name sounds familiar, but I don't
place the individual.
Mr. Jones. Would the name William Ludwig Ullmann mean any
more to you?
Mr. Fister. No. I can't connect the thing with him.
Mr. Jones. Tell me, Mr. Fister: What is your personal
evaluation of the security system out there at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Fister. I think that they have tried to make as safe a
security system as they possibly can, and that if anything the
effort that has gone into trying to maintain it secure is
overdone rather than underdone.
Mr. Jones. Have they recently changed the security system
out there?
Mr. Fister. There has been a slight modification.
Mr. Jones. How long ago was that modified?
Mr. Fister. About three or four months ago.
Mr. Jones. In what areas were the modifications made?
Mr. Fister. All areas.
Mr. Jones. All areas?
Mr. Fister. Yes. A new supplement to AR-380-5 which is the
security army regulation, came out, which stipulated a
different way of handling material than the way it had been
handled in the past. They had a system which lived up to 380-5
prior to this new one coming out, but it had to be modified
somewhat to fit Supplement No. 1, which came out in June, I
believe. That was in June it came out, and they applied it
somewhere around July, so it was about four months ago.
Mr. Jones. You are saying, then, in effect, that the
security system now is a fairly good system, a fairly effective
system.
Mr. Fister. I can't see that they could do anything more
without not getting any work done at all. The security system
now interferes with getting work done.
Mr. Jones. You have access to top secret, secret, and
classified. You have clearance; is that right?
Mr. Fister. That is right.
Mr. Jones. How long have you had that top secret clearance?
Mr. Fister. I really don't know, but it must be in the
nature of four years or five years. Somewhere around there. I
don't just know exactly.
Mr. Jones. Do you have any films made of your work?
Mr. Fister. We have had a film made, showing the Raywin, R-
a-y-w-i-n, system.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever had films made of top secret
materials?
Mr. Fister. Not film, no. We have had reproductions made,
photostats.
Mr. Jones. Photostats?
Mill. Fister. Yes. We don't take the film ourselves. We go
to a reproduction center.
Mr. Jones. Out here at Long Island?
Mr. Fister. No. We have our own reproduction center at the
labs.
Mr. Rainville. That is for stills; not for motion pictures?
Mr. Fister. They do some motion picture work, too, but not
as they do in Astoria.
Mr. Jones. Who is the official photographer out there?
Mr. Fister. I guess Jack Catelli is chief of the
Reproduction Branch right now.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Leo Fary?
Mr. Fister. Slightly. I know Leo to see him. I don't know
him real well.
Mr. Jones. Has he ever done work for you?
Mr. Fister. I don't know for sure, but he must have. He is
a photographer there, and he may have been involved in one or
two of the projects. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. Now, I asked you just a moment ago, sir: Do you
have or have you ever had stills or pictures made of any top
secret or secret material in action?
Mr. Fister. You are not talking about in my present
position. You mean: Did I ever have? I was assistant chief of
Radar Branch up until two years ago.
Mr. Jones. Did you ever have?
Mr. Fister. Oh, yes.
Mr. Jones. When was the last time that you had them made?
Mr. Fister. I wouldn't remember.
Mr. Jones. Within the last three months or so?
Mr. Fister. Not that I recall.
Mr. Jones. Now, did Leo Fary ever do any of that work for
you?
Mr. Fister. He may have been the photographer that was
called in to take pictures of equipment.
Mr. Jones. What would happen to these pictures after they
were made and developed?
Mr. Fister. They were filed in reproduction. They are
stamped with their classification. And they are treated the way
they should be treated for that type of document. A certain
number of copies are sent to Washington, to the chief signal
officer. A certain number of copies might go to the field
forces if it is a piece of equipment that they are interested
in.
Mr. Jones. You are talking about still pictures, a copy of
still pictures?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What about moving pictures?
Mr. Fister. The moving pictures are usually kept in a
laboratory and are used as phases of research, either to
demonstrate to other people something that has been
accomplished, or to be used for your own people, and sometimes
they are taken around to other laboratories, and shown to them,
the same as we get pictures from other laboratories at our
place, for interchange of information in fields where we have a
common interest.
Mr. Jones. Have you any reason to believe there may have
been any subversive activity at Monmouth within the past three
or four years?
Mr. Fister. None at all.
Mr. Jones. You have no knowledge whatsoever of any
subversion?
Mr. Fister. None whatsoever.
Mr. Rainville. And do you think your security system is
adequate to check any such subversion if they tried it?
Mr. Fister. I would say it is as adequate as it can be, and
I don't think there is a security system that can guard 100
percent against such things. Because I think it is as nearly
impossible as you can make it to get any classified information
out of our place. However, an individual could remember things
and take it out in his head, and there is no way of stopping
that. As far as taking a physical document out, you don't stand
much chance of getting away with that.
Mr. Rainville. You don't think it could be done?
Mr. Fister. I wouldn't say it couldn't be done, but I say
they have tried to take every precaution that can be taken so
you can't do that. You have a guard system at every gate. There
is a barbed wire fence around the place which is ten feet high
or something on that nature. They have guards stationed all
along, so that if anybody comes up to the fence they have a
view of the fence and can see what is happening. At night time,
it is adequately lighted around the periphery of the fence.
People have to be cleared in order to get documents. The
clearance of secret, for instance, will not allow you to see
every secret document. It only allows you to see those secret
documents that pertain to your immediate work.
Mr. Rainville. How do you know that is the clearance they
have?
Mr. Fister. We are notified by the security officer.
Mr. Rainville. Somebody calls you in advance?
Mr. Fister. We get a paper.
Mr. Rainville. You get a paper.
Mr. Fister. Which is sent to us signed by the security
officer, giving the clearance of each individual in our branch.
As that security changes, and it does from time to time, mostly
up--in other words, when a person starts, they are given an
interim clearance of maybe restricted, or maybe no clearance at
all, and we are so notified; that these people must be kept
away from any classified work. As the clearance changes, you
get a notification from the security officer immediately.
People can't draw any information out of the library, or out of
the mail and records files unless there is a card in there
signed by the branch chief and the security officer. The
security officer signifies what their clearance is. The branch
officer signifies what type of material they can draw out.
Unless the type of material that they want is approved by the
branch chief, they can't get it out. In other words, if one of
my persons wanted to get----
Mr. Rainville. That would be from people who are actually
employed. What about people who just came in?
Mr. Fister. Nobody can get anything, if they just come in.
Mr. Rainville. You mean they can walk in and get a
clearance as they come in, and that clearance precedes them? Or
how do you handle that?
Mr. Fister. When a visitor comes, he has been cleared by
his own organization to discuss whatever the correct
classification is. Let's assume that somebody is going to come
from the General Electric Company. In advance, this company
will inform their laboratories that he is coming, that he is
cleared for secret, or confidential, or whatever it is. When he
comes, the receptionist checks his credentials to make sure who
he is. They now have a system that when a man comes he is
photographed, and his photograph goes on a file, which the
receptionist keeps. When he comes back and he says that he is
John Smith, she goes through the file and sees that it is John
Smith by his photograph.
Then after she has made sure that he is the right person,
the person whom he is visiting is called and is told that Mr.
So-and-So of General Electric is there; to send an escort up to
get them. So an escort goes up and takes him back to wherever
the meeting is supposed to take place. At no time is this
individual to be left unescorted, and he is supposed to be
brought back to the reception desk, and if he wants to go and
see someone else in the laboratory, he is supposed to start out
from the reception desk again. In other words they have taken
precautions to stop people from just roaming around the
laboratories.
Mr. Rainville. But I understood that there were some people
who would come in without an escort.
Mr. Fister. There had been some people who had a clearance
that did not require an escort. I don't know whether this is
true under the new system or not. I am not a security expert.
Mr. Rainville. You made a statement a few moments ago
saying you thought security was overdone, and then you say that
you don't think that we can ever obtain 100 percent security;
that even if people do nothing more than walk out and remember
things they can take it with them.
I don't quite follow. How could it be overdone, as long as
there is still a chance?
Mr. Fister. Well, unless you can make a person forget, you
can't stop that phase of his taking information out.
Mr. Rainville. And when you say you can't have perfect
security: The only way that they could get material out of the
laboratory now would be to have a photographic memory and to
memorize it and to walk out. You don't think that they could
carry a small camera and do the same thing?
Mr. Fister. Well, to say that a person couldn't would be
making a broad statement. I don't think they have much of a
chance of doing that. I don't know how small a camera you have
in mind. I am not familiar with cameras.
Mr. Rainville. Well, have you seen cameras that are about
an inch wide and about three inches long?
Mr. Fister. Yes, I have seen that size. The guards inspect
the briefcases, and so forth, that they come in with. They have
tried to discourage bringing briefcases in. However, if a
person has to bring one in, sometimes they do. They check the
contents on the way in, give them a briefcase pass listing what
is in it, not in great detail, but the classification of the
highest thing in there, and then when he goes out they again
check to make sure he hasn't acquired anything while he was
there. Visitors are not left alone, so they shouldn't be able
to get at any documents, if the escort system works, and I
think everybody is paying attention to it.
Also, nobody leaves their office and leaves any classified
information in there unattended.
Mr. Rainville. You will pardon my smiling, but we have one
gentleman who confessed that he was suspended a little while
ago for doing just what you said they don't do.
Mr. Fister. There are always slip-ups in everything.
Mr. Rainville. We have another gentleman who said that
there are two classes of visitors, those who can wander around
without an escort and those who can't.
Mr. Fister. At one time this was true. I don't know whether
this is still true or not under the new system. However these
people who were allowed to sort of wander around, as you say,
were very thoroughly checked, and their being allowed to wander
around didn't really give them access to any classified
information. But in general, I think I am right in saying that
people do not leave and have not left any classified
information in a room which is not attended. This is something
that has been ingrained into people ever since we have been
working there, and they live up to it.
They live up to it, because there is a penalty. You never
know when a guard is liable to come around or one of the
supervisors, or an officer, and if he would see material on a
desk, he would just pick it up and walk up to the front and let
you sweat for a while before you asked where the thing was, and
then call you to task for not watching it. That has happened,
and it is very embarrassing, and I think people try to live up
to security regulations.
What I meant when I said it was being overdone, that if
anything, it is being overdone, was that it is so difficult now
to get and to read a classified document that you spend a good
percentage of your time that you would like to spend in
working, so that you can read it. So a lot of information that
should be passed around among the people working in the field
is not being passed around, just because it is so difficult to
get it.
Mr. Rainville. Two quick questions.
One: What, then, is your explanation for the fifteen people
that have been suspended?
Mr. Fister. Well, I don't know. I don't know what charges
you have against these people.
Mr. Rainville. You don't believe it would be from
infractions of that kind. It must be something more serious, or
something less serious?
Mr. Fister. It must be something more serious.
Mr. Rainville. It couldn't be leaving papers out on the
desk, because that has been trained out of them and they don't
do it any more?
Mr. Fister. Oh, no. This happens.
Mr. Rainville. But it doesn't happen to all fifteen at
once?
Mr. Fister. No. It happens. We have penalties for this
thing. If you leave a paper out, leave the safe open, or
whatever it is, and classified material is in it, you get a
two-day suspension, the first time.
The second time, I think it is a week,
The third time they are fired.
In other words, you are a careless person that can't work
with classified material.
Mr. Rainville. And the last question is: Do you have any
feeling that there is in this mass action any anti-Semitism?
Mr. Fister. No.
Mr. Rainville. I think that is all.
Mr. Cohn. Will you give us your full name?
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM P. GOLDBERG
Mr. Goldberg. William P. Goldberg.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you employed?
Mr. Goldberg. At Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. And how long have you been employed there?
Mr. Goldberg. Thirteen years, I think.
Mr. Cohn. And what is your position?
Mr. Goldberg. I am an electronics engineer.
Mr. Cohn. In what section?
Mr. Goldberg. At the moment I am in a section called the
Wave Propagation Section.
Mr. Cohn. In the thirteen years you have been there, have
you had access to any classified material?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Up to what classification?
Mr. Goldberg. Secret.
Mr. Cohn. Is there some very sensitive work going on at
Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Involving radar and other things?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Are you acquainted with Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How long have you known him?
Mr. Goldberg. Oh, it is a number of years. I don't remember
exactly how many.
Mr. Cohn. Have you known him socially at all?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Just known him from around Evans; is that right?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this, Mr. Goldberg. Where do you
reside?
Mr. Goldberg. 1609 South Wanamassa Drive in Wanamassa.
Mr. Cohn. Are you married?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What was your wife's maiden name?
Mr. Goldberg. Rose Oberman.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have any brothers or sisters?
Mr. Goldberg. I have a sister.
Mr. Cohn. What is her name?
Mr. Goldberg. Ada Steinfeld.
Mr. Cohn. Is that her married name?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Her maiden name was Goldberg; is that correct?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where does she reside?
Mr. Goldberg. 940 Fox Street, Bronx, New York.
Mr. Cohn. You said she resides where?
Mr. Goldberg. 940 Fox Street, Bronx, New York.
Mr. Cohn. And what is her husband's name?
Mr. Goldberg. They call him Teddy. I think it is Theodore.
Mr. Cohn. For how long has she been married to him?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know exactly. Eight or ten years.
Mr. Cohn. Eight or ten years?
Mr. Goldberg. Something like that. Possibly not that long.
I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. Now, have you been out of the country recently?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you?
Mr. Goldberg. England.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you there?
Mr. Goldberg. I just got back a month ago, three weeks or a
month ago.
Mr. Cohn. When did you last see your sister?
Mr. Goldberg. Just after I got back.
Mr. Cohn. Did you stay at her house at all?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time?
Mr. Goldberg. About a week, I should say.
Mr. Cohn. Was her husband home at that time?
Mr. Goldberg. Part of the time.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what does he do for a living?
Mr. Goldberg. Drives a cab.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not he is a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Goldberg. No, I don't.
Mr. Cohn. You don't know that?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever heard it said he was?
Mr. Goldberg. No, I haven't.
Mr. Cohn. Is this the first time you hear about anything
like that?
Mr. Goldberg. No. It is not the first time, but I don't
know that he is a member of the Communist party.
Mr. Cohn. What is the first you did hear about it?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know, just a general impression.
Mr. Cohn. On whose part?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't remember any definite information.
Mr. Cohn. I don't quite know what you mean. Where did you
get the impression? The things he said?
Mr. Goldberg. That and just general impression.
Mr. Cohn. Does he have the Daily Worker around his house?
Mr. Goldberg. I believe I did see it.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see it there last month?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't remember that, I was too busy.
Mr. Cohn. Doesn't he have any other Communist literature
around the house?
Mr. Goldberg. I didn't look. I was hunting for a place to
live. I wasn't staying there, actually.
Mr. Cohn. Is your sister a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Having seen the Daily Worker around there and
gotten this impression about your brother-in-law, didn't you
ever ask?
Mr. Goldberg. Not that question, no.
Mr. Cohn. What did you ask?
Mr. Goldberg. I didn't ask him anything, actually.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss any of your work down at
Monmouth in his presence?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Does he know you work at the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Don't you know for a fact that your brother-in-
law is secretary-treasurer of the Communist party----
Mr. Goldberg. I don't.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever met any people through your
brother-in-law, your sister or brother-in-law?
Mr. Goldberg. That is hard to answer. There have been
people around sometimes in the house.
Mr. Cohn. Can you name any?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. How about the last month when you were staying at
the house?
Mr. Goldberg. I wasn't staying. I left my family there
while I hunted a place to live.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever sleep there?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. During the last month?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You were staying there, then?
Mr. Goldberg. Not during the whole time.
Mr. Cohn. Well, during part of the time you were?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Now did they have any visitors? Did you meet
anybody there?
Mr. Goldberg. My mother, of course, who lives with them.
Other friends of theirs.
Mr. Cohn. I would like to get the names of some of those
friends.
Mr. Goldberg. Of theirs? Abramowitz is one.
Mr. Cohn. Abramowitz?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Is that a man or a woman?
Mr. Goldberg. A man.
Mr. Cohn. Is that the only one you can think of now?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Did anyone in his house ever ask about your work
at Monmouth?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did your brother-in-law ever mention it?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Isn't that a natural topic of discussion?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. It isn't?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Are you on speaking terms with your brother-in-
law?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You say he knows you are working in Evans
Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What did you say this Steinfeld address in the
Bronx was?
Mr. Goldberg. 940 Fox Street in the Bronx.
Mr. Cohn. What other evidences of Communist party activity
have you seen other than the Daily Worker and Communist
literature?
Mr. Goldberg. That is all.
Mr. Cohn. What other facts did you have that created in you
the impression that he was a Communist?
Mr. Goldberg. Just those.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever heard him discuss Russia?
Mr. Goldberg. I suppose. I don't recall.
Mr. Cohn. Haven't you ever heard him make plainly pro-
Communist statements?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Has he made anti-Communist statements?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. You said before you referred to things he said.
What did you mean by that?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. I don't remember any specific
things, but it is an impression you get.
Mr. Cohn. Of what college are you a graduate?
Mr. Goldberg. City College.
Mr. Cohn. In what year did you graduate?
Mr. Goldberg. '35.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever met him?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever had any dealings with the Reeves
Instrument Company?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Just what dealings?
Mr. Goldberg. I am afraid I can't reveal the nature of the
work, but it was in connection with a proposed contract.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Goldberg. I forget the exact date. It was several years
ago.
Mr. Cohn. Seven years ago?
Mr. Goldberg. No, several.
Mr. Cohn. Who did you deal with at Reeves Instrument?
Mr. Goldberg. Mr. Belloc.
Mr. Cohn. Is that Harry Belloc?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. And you did not know Sobell at that time?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Was he working at Reeves at that time?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Aaron Coleman there?
Mr. Goldberg. At college? No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you, yourself, ever engaged in any Communist
activity?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever asked to join the party?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever asked to go to a Communist meeting
or a meeting which turned out to be a Communist meeting?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss communism with your brother-
in-law at any time?
Mr. Goldberg. I have tried to dissuade him on various
occasions.
Mr. Cohn. Well, you clearly knew he was a Communist, then?
Mr. Goldberg. Well, I suspected. I still don't know.
Mr. Cohn. You wouldn't try to dissuade him if you didn't
know he was a Communist, would you?
Mr. Goldberg. Well----
Mr. Cohn. Did you try to dissuade him when you were up
there last month?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. You have sort of given up on him?
Mr. Goldberg. I was too busy, frankly.
Mr. Cohn. Did you think it was a good idea for someone
working at the laboratory to stay at the home of a Communist?
Mr. Goldberg. I couldn't help it.
Mr. Cohn. Well, what is your salary at the Evans
Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Eighty-five-something. I forget exactly.
Something over $8500.
Mr. Cohn. Why do you say you couldn't help it?
Mr. Goldberg. Well, I just came in, with two children.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think it is a particularly good thing from
the security standpoint to have someone working in one of the
most sensitive operations in the country staying at the home of
a Communist?
Mr. Goldberg. No, I suppose not.
Mr. Cohn. You say that was a matter of circumstantial
necessity.
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Have your sister or brother-in-law ever visited
you out in New Jersey?
Mr. Goldberg. I believe so.
Mr. Cohn. About how often?
Mr. Goldberg. Oh, very infrequently.
Mr. Cohn. Just when they happen to be driving out there?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. Possibly once or twice in all
the time I have been down there.
Mr. Cohn. When was the last time?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't remember. It was a very long time
ago.
Mr. Cohn. Does your brother-in-law know any of your
colleagues down at Monmouth?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. He knows nobody else who works there other than
you?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Goldberg, one of the witnesses in here today
said he personally was not very satisfied with the security
system out there at Monmouth. What is your own evaluation of
it?
Mr. Goldberg. I really don't know what to say. In what way?
Mr. Jones. That is what I am asking you. Has there been a
change in the security system out there recently?
Mr. Goldberg. Don't forget I have only been back for a
matter of a couple of weeks.
Mr. Jones. I am sorry, Mr. Goldberg. I wasn't up on the
earlier part of your testimony. I understand you were in
England.
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. How long were you there?
Mr. Goldberg. Two years.
Mr. Jones. Two years. I am sorry. Possibly you may not be
aware of it, then.
What were you doing in England?
Mr. Goldberg. I was working in the British Laboratories as
an exchange engineer.
Mr. Jones. Prior to your trip to England, you were with the
Evans people out there for a matter of ten or twelve years? Is
that right?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. And what is your evaluation of the security
system as it existed during that period?
Mr. Goldberg. It seemed entirely adequate to me then.
Mr. Jones. It appeared entirely adequate in every sense of
the word.
To the best of your knowledge, you never had any idea of
any subversion or subversive activities of any nature?
Mr. Goldberg. No, sir.
Mr. Jones. None whatsoever? Is that correct?
Mr. Goldberg. That is right.
Mr. Rainville. I get the feeling, Mr. Goldberg, that you
are restrained in your answers. Is there any reason for your
feeling that you will not get a fair hearing before this group?
Mr. Goldberg. No, I don't think so.
Mr. Rainville. We had one gentleman in here who discussed
the possibility that there was some anti-Semitism in the
investigation. Do you have any feeling that that is true?
Mr. Goldberg. I have a feeling?
Mr. Rainville. He didn't associate that anti-Semitism with
this committee as much as he did with the matter of suspension.
I just wanted to clear that for the record, Mr. Goldberg.
You were at that meeting last night, though, weren't you, at
which this whole problem was discussed?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. That is why I bring up the question. You are
aware that whatever has happened with these suspensions has not
been anything that this committee has done. This committee's
investigation of these things is only now proceeding. Whatever
has been done out there has no connection with this committee.
I just wanted to reassure you and point out that perhaps this
committee, if there is any anti-Semitism, can either reveal it
or clear it up. And on that basis, we would welcome any
cooperation you would want to give. I can understand, of
course, where you have a brother-in-law that is at least
suspect in your own mind, even if you don't have definite proof
of it, as a Communist, you might have hesitation to speak too
frankly, not only not to get him into trouble, but not to
further associate yourself with the situation.
Mr. Goldberg. Yes, exactly.
Mr. Rainville. On the other hand, you are not to blame for
whom your sister marries. Relatives and sons and daughters
frequently marry people we think are outlandish, not because
they are Communists but for other reasons.
Do you feel that there was a need for such a meeting as the
one last night, for a sort of a briefing?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes, I think there was.
Mr. Rainville. As I understand it, the discussion was all
about the testimony here today. It was not about anything that
had happened.
Mr. Goldberg. No, it was about the situation you mentioned,
the possibility of anti-Semitism.
Mr. Rainville. Who is paying the attorneys for advising
you?
Mr. Goldberg. I think Mr. Katchen stated that he would be
willing to take the job on without cost.
Mr. Jones. He made that statement to you, Mr. Goldberg?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't think he made it to me specifically.
Mr. Jones. Then how did you get that idea?
Mr. Goldberg. I heard it.
Mr. Jones. You heard that statement made?
Mr. Rainville. He said he would volunteer his services,
that he would not be paid?
Mr. Goldberg. Another thing, I am not quite sure what he
was referring to at the time, whether it was this, or in
connection with the anti-Semitism, or in connection with the
suspension.
Mr. Cohn. What anti-Semitism?
Mr. Goldberg. The gentleman brought up the point that
mentioned that there was a possibility of anti-Semitism.
Mr. Cohn. What do you think about that?
Mr. Goldberg. I think there is a distinct possibility.
Mr. Cohn. You think so?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think it is improper for us to question
you, for instance?
Mr. Goldberg. I am not saying it is in this committee. I am
saying it is down at the laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. Has your clearance been lifted?
Mr. Goldberg. The clearance, yes.
Mr. Cohn. When was your clearance lifted?
Mr. Goldberg. Thursday.
Mr. Cohn. Are you still working at the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes. Not inside the fence, not in the
restricted area.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think it is improper for the army to go
over your record with extreme caution, in view of the fact that
you have a brother-in-law who the records show is a high
Communist party official in New York, and that you stayed at
his home as late as last month, and you are working at one of
the most sensitive agencies in the country?
Mr. Goldberg. Certainly not. I don't disagree with that at
all.
Mr. Cohn. That is all.
Mr. Jones. May I ask, now, getting back to this meeting,
Mr. Goldberg, who informed you of this meeting?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't think it was any specially arranged
meeting. I think it just happened.
Mr. Jones. Sure. But who informed you of the meeting?
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Gross?
[The witness hesitated.]
Mr. Jones. It was just last night.
Mr. Goldberg. Here is what happened. We went up to Fort
Monmouth, a group of us, to ask the security officer some
questions about what was classified material and what wasn't.
Mr. Cohn. Who is the security officer?
Mr. Goldberg. Colonel Sullivan. And then we went in to see
Mr. Katchen. He wasn't there. And we left our names, and we
said we would call back. Then we went back down. And I don't
know whether he called back or somebody called him back, but he
said to come up to his office at three-thirty.
Mr. Jones. Why did you go back to Mr. Katchen? I mean, how
did you happen to go to Mr. Katchen in the first place? Why Mr.
Katchen?
Mr. Cohn. There must have been somebody who suggested going
to him.
Mr. Jones. Who do you mean by ``we'' who suggested going to
see the security officer?
Mr. Goldberg. Gross.
No, he was called up to see the security officer at the
same time. I and Mr. Lovenstein, who were originally slated to
come here today, went up to see him, and he was called up at
the same time.
Mr. Jones. And Mr. Gross?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
So we all went up together.
Mr. Rainville. That was to see the attorney?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Rainville. To see the security officer?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. So you saw the security officer, and then Mr.
Gross suggested that, ``We should go back to Mr. Katchen''?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't think there is anything wrong with
Mr. Katchen, but still I don't know that it was Mr. Gross that
suggested it.
Mr. Jones. We are not implying there is anything wrong with
it. But how did you happen to go to him?
Mr. Goldberg. I think he has been known to fight in cases
of anti-Semitism before.
Mr. Jones. I see. In other words, he has a reputation for
that kind of work?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes. I think so.
Mr. Jones. From what you say.
Mr. Goldberg. I am not sure.
Mr. Rainville. At this second meeting, you invited others
to come?
Mr. Goldberg. The second meeting?
Mr. Rainville. Surely there were more than three of you at
this meeting?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes. People came. I don't know where they
came from.
Mr. Rainville. But they all, strangely enough, seemed to
have their clearance lifted or something? It wasn't a regular
meeting to talk this over?
Mr. Goldberg. Oh, no.
Mr. Jones. Who was there?
Mr. Goldberg. Myself, Mr. Lovenstein, Mr. Gross, Harold
Ducore, Bob Martin, Mr. Lapato.
Mr. Cohn. Who is Mr. Lapato?
Mr. Goldberg. He is a mechanic down there, I think, who has
also had his security lifted.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell it?
Mr. Goldberg. L-a-p-a-t-o. And he is Jewish, by the way in
spite of the name.
Mr. Cohn. So do I, but I don't see it has anything to do
with this.
Mr. Goldberg. Not as far as this committee is concerned.
Mr. Cohn. I don't think it has anything to do as far as
anybody is concerned.
Mr. Goldberg. Just look at the statistics.
Mr. Cohn. I don't care if there were 530 out of 530. I
don't see what earthly difference that makes. I don't think
religion or religious persuasion is any cloak for activities
against the United States.
Mr. Goldberg. I didn't say they were.
Mr. Cohn. And I think it is an outrageous thing to even
mention religion in connection with anything like that. I think
it is possible you can have 100 percent Jews or 100 percent
Catholics or 100 percent Protestant is absolutely no
significance at all. Take you, for instance. Your name is
Goldberg. In the last month, you were working at a sensitive
spot in Evans Laboratory, where they were working among other
things on our defense against enemy attack. You are staying at
the home of a notorious Communist, a man who is dedicated
twenty-four hours a day to the destruction of this country.
Now, I think the army would be guilty of gross negligence
if they didn't go into this thing with the utmost thoroughness,
and, until they had gone into it with the utmost thoroughness,
lift your clearance, for your sake as well as anyone else. And
you have agreed with me before that that is certainly a
situation which they have to go into with great care, and which
you would if you had the responsibility for these things. Isn't
that so?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. And how that could involve anti-Semitism or anti-
anything, I don't know.
Mr. Goldberg. Not in my case. I said, ``Look at the
statistics.'' That is the only evidence I have to offer.
Mr. Cohn. I think that is very meager evidence.
Mr. Goldberg. Yes, it is, I agree.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Goldberg, what percentage, in your best
judgment, employed at Evans Laboratory, are Jewish?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. 25 percent, maybe, or less.
Mr. Jones. Getting back to this meeting again, Mr.
Goldberg, what was discussed there?
Mr. Goldberg. This whole question.
Mr. Jones. You mean this whole question of anti-Semitism?
Mr. Goldberg. Anti-Semitism.
Mr. Jones. That was the basis of the meeting. Nothing else
was discussed, nothing about today's meeting?
Mr. Goldberg. Except that they cautioned us again not to
disclose classified material. We were to be very careful about
that.
Mr. Jones. Those were the only instructions given as far as
appearance here today was concerned?
Mr. Goldberg. In general, yes.
Mr. Jones. What do you mean by that?
Mr. Goldberg. There were other things said, I don't
remember exactly the entire conversation. It went on for a long
time. But that was the gist of it.
Mr. Rainville. Weren't there others there last night?
Mr. Goldberg. How many have we got? I don't remember.
Mr. Jones. You went down as far as Mr. Lapato.
Mr. Rainville. You gave Gross, Lovenstein, Goldenberg,
Ducore, Martin, and Lapato.
Mr. Goldberg. There was Brody.
Mr. Jones. What is his first name?
Mr. Goldberg. Ed, I think.
Mr. Jones. Edward Brody?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. They call him Ed.
Mr. Jones. Anyone else, Mr. Goldberg?
Mr. Goldberg. There was another attorney there, Mr.
Ducore's attorney. He came in very late.
Mr. Jones. What was his name?
Mr. Goldberg. Green, I think.
Mr. Jones. Do you know his first name?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. And anyone else?
Mr. Goldberg. I can't think of any.
Mr. Jones. Now, Mr. Goldberg, have you anything that you
would want to tell the committee here that you think would be
helpful to us in pursuance of our inquires up here, anything
that comes to your mind at all that you feel would be helpful
to us in our work? We are primarily concerned with the security
program out there at Monmouth.
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. As I say, I have only been back
a couple of weeks, and I don't know what the situation is.
Mr. Rainville. Are you doing the same kind of work you did
before you left?
Mr. Goldberg. Not anymore.
Mr. Rainville. Well, prior to your clearance being lifted
you were?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Mr. Ullmann, Mr. Goldberg, U-l-l-
m-a-n?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Morton Sobell?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. How about Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. You know Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. While we are waiting for Mr. Cohn, I would
like to ask you one question. If the Communists were to try to
organize in the Negro districts, their tendency, of course,
would be to organize a whole group of Negroes into a unit,
wouldn't it, into a Communist cell so to speak? Obviously, if
they are going to try to get Negroes, they would get as many
Negroes as they could. That they might later infiltrate, white
people into that group would also be an advantage, but when
they started out it would have to start out from a Negro
organization. And if such a cell were discovered and steps
taken to prosecute them, you would then have a hundred per cent
colored people. That then would be, as you speak of anti-
Semitism here, racial discrimination there. But actually you
would have no choice. You can't say, ``We can't indict a
Protestant,'' or ``We can't indict a Catholic. We have to leave
them alone.'' Someone could come back and say, ``Here we have
an all-Baptist unit, and you can't prosecute them; because that
would be discrimination.''
Mr. Jones. Do you know Leo Fary?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. You don't know him?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. In your work out there at the Evans Laboratory
have you ever had the occasion to have any photography done of
your materials or equipment?
Mr. Goldberg. Occasionally.
Mr. Jones. Was it still photography, still pictures, or
moving pictures, or both?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't recall any moving pictures. I had an
occasional still photography done.
Mr. Jones. Who would take these pictures for you?
Mr. Goldberg. One of the photographers. I don't know who it
was.
Mr. Jones. You would issue the order to have these pictures
taken?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Who would you give the order to?
Mr. Goldberg. It was through normal channels, I suppose. I
would give it to the girl, and she submits it to the
reproduction section.
Mr. Jones. And then they would send up a photographer, and
he would take the picture that you would want taken, and then
the picture would be returned to you upon development? Is that
correct?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Then what would you do with the pictures?
Mr. Goldberg. It depends on what they are for. Maybe just
look at them sometimes.
Mr. Jones. So if you just look at them, what do you do
then? You throw them away?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. Where do you put them, then?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't remember. It always depends on what
they are for. If they are for a report, they are included in
the report.
Mr. Jones. That is what we want to know.
Mr. Goldberg. If they are for a brochure, they are included
in the brochure. If I am supposed to mark names of items on
them, I put the names of items on them and send them back. I
mean, it all depends.
Mr. Jones. That is right. That is what we want to know. So
some are put in files, and they are used in various ways.
Tell me this: Does anyone have access to all of these
pictures that you would have ordered yourself? Would anyone
else have access to these pictures while they are in your
possession?
Mr. Goldberg. The people who are supposed to have access to
them will.
Mr. Jones. Were most of these pictures classified as secret
and top secret?
Mr. Goldberg. I have never had anything to do with top
secret.
Mr. Jones. Not top secret, but secret, and classified?
Mr. Goldberg. They are all classified, or most of them.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever been told or had any knowledge of
any of these pictures being moved from the premises at any
time?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. None whatsoever?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. To the best of your knowledge, as far as you
know, no materials of that nature were taken from the premises?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. You said ``no''?
Mr. Goldberg. I said ``no.''
Mr. Jones. Roy, do you have any more questions?
Mr. Cohn. Nothing more.
Mr. Jones. That is all Mr. Goldberg.
Mr. Cohn. Will you state your name?
STATEMENT OF JEROME ROTHSTEIN
Mr. Rothstein. Jerome Rothstein, R-o-t-h-s-t-e-i-n.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Rothstein, your security clearance was
lifted?
Mr. Rothstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When was this?
Mr. Rothstein. A week ago Tuesday.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have any idea why it was lifted?
Mr. Rothstein. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever engage in any Communist activity or
do you have any close associates or relatives who have?
Mr. Rothstein. No.
Mr. Cohn. And have you ever been careless security-wise?
Have you ever been found with papers?
Mr. Rothstein. Once my secretary left the safe open. On
investigation, she was found responsible. And another time I
had given her a confidential document to be returned to the
classified reports library. It was misplaced, and she was held
responsible, but I was reprimanded for not having supervised
her more adequately.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Rothstein. Oh, I don't remember exactly. It was a
matter of maybe six months ago.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Rothstein. I have met him once or twice.
Mr. Cohn. How about Harold Ducore?
Mr. Rothstein. I have met him a few times also.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you working right now?
Mr. Rothstein. Right now I am assigned to Watson
Laboratory, a non-sensitive area.
Mr. Cohn. That is since when?
Mr. Rothstein. Today was my first day there, actually.
Mr. Cohn. I don't have anything more to ask Mr. Rothstein.
Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 4:40 p.m., a recess was taken until 11:00 a.
m., Friday, October 9, 1953.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--None of those interrogated on October 9,
1953, Alan Sterling Gross; Dr. Fred B. Daniels (1901-1987);
Bernard Lipel; James Evers (1912-1996); Sol Bremmer; Murray
Miller; Sherwood Leeds (1918-1986); and Paul M. Leeds (1915-
1987), testified in public session.]
----------
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The staff interrogatory was convened at 11 a.m., pursuant
to call, in room 1402 of the Federal Building, Mr. G. David
Schine, chief consultant, presiding.
Present: G. David Schine, chief consultant; Roy M. Cohn,
chief counsel; Francis Carr, staff director; Karl Baarslag,
research director; Harold Rainville, administrative assistant
to Senator Dirksen; Robert Jones, administrative assistant to
Senator Potter; John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
army; and Julius N. Cahn, counsel to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee.
Mr. Schine. Will you state your name for the record,
please?
STATEMENT OF ALAN STERLING GROSS
Mr. Gross. My name is Alan Sterling Gross.
Mr. Schine. Will you spell that?
Mr. Gross. A-l-a-n S-t-e-r-l-i-n-g G-r-o-s-s.
Mr. Schine. And your present occupation, Mr. Gross?
Mr. Gross. I am an engineer employed as assistant chief of
the Electro Magnetic Wave Propagation Section at Evans Signal
Laboratory.
Mr. Schine. And your duties as an engineer in this section?
Mr. Gross. Well, right now I am working on unclassified
projects.
Mr. Schine. Yes.
How long have you been working solely on unclassified
projects?
Mr. Gross. Since December 19, 1952.
Mr. Schine. And until that time you had complete access to
classified material?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Schine. How long were you employed in this position?
Mr. Gross. I have been at the laboratory since 1941 about
September 15, I think. But for a little over three years, from
'43 to '46, I was in the United States Navy as a radar officer.
Mr. Schine. And when you first went to Fort Monmouth, you
were still in the radar work?
Mr. Gross. No, actually I have never been in what is known
as the radar branch except for a period of two or three months
in 1946.
Mr. Schine. In other words, from 1941 to '43, you worked at
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. That is right.
Mr. Schine. What were your duties at that time?
Mr. Gross. Well, at that time I was an engineer in the
sound and light section.
Mr. Schine. Then you went to the United States Navy, and
from 1943 to 1946 you served as a radar technician?
Mr. Gross. Yes. I was technical officer and then assistant
officer in charge of ground control approach blind landing. It
is instrument landing systems.
Mr. Schine. And then you returned, immediately upon your
discharge from the navy, to Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. There was a period of maybe thirty days between
the time I got out of the navy and the time I returned.
Mr. Schine. And at that time you took the present----
Mr. Gross. No, at that time I came back to work for Mr.
Stodola, in--I can't think of the name of the section.
It was at that time I think known as the General
Engineering Branch.
And that section, due to the consolidation after the war,
was broken up, and several groups went to different parts of
the agency. For a period of about maybe two or three months, as
I remember, I went to radar branch, and then from that back
into this other branch, back to general engineering, which
ultimately got its name changed to applied physics.
And I have been in the applied physics branch ever since
but not always in the same section.
Mr. Schine. Now, Mr. Gross, would you tell us where you got
your education, and when?
Mr. Gross. I was educated at Townsend Harris High School in
New York City, and went from there to City College. I was in
City College from January 1937 to June of 1941, taking an
electrical engineering course.
I graduated with a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering
Degree.
Mr. Schine. Then, of course, you immediately went to Fort
Monmouth.
Mr. Gross. At the end of that summer, I did.
Mr. Schine. When you took a position with Fort Monmouth,
did you give certain references in conjunction with your
application for the position?
Mr. Gross. Yes, I did.
Mr. Schine. Can you remember the names of those references?
Mr. Gross. I don't think so. I am sure I gave an old friend
of the family that knew me for years. I think his name was Ben
Rader. That was one. He worked somewhere near New York City. I
saw him last summer once.
But I don't think I could remember the others. I think I
gave the family doctor. I think he is since dead.
Mr. Schine. Now, would you tell us why on December 19 you
shifted from classified to nonclassified work?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. Nobody ever told me. On a
Wednesday, or I think about two days before, I was quizzed by
the FBI for an hour and a half, which was not normal, but
nothing that I would get annoyed about.
The FBI's questions on that day seemed to indicate--it was
a matter of what enemies I had and because of my relatively
young age had I supplanted anybody in the line of command that
would have any hard feelings against me?
I happened to graduate from college at the age of nineteen,
and I was pretty young to hold the position I am holding. I am
thirty-two now.
And he spent most of the time quizzing me on that phase and
intimated that there was some question about some equipment
which I had never known, never heard of and never worked on.
Mr. Schine. Some equipment?
Mr. Gross. Right.
The questions took a line that--I can't tell you what
equipment. I think that would come under security. But he asked
me whether I had done anything with the plans for this
equipment.
I said I had never seen the equipment; never worked with
it; never had access to it. And he went back to his line did I
know who could have hard feelings against me because there were
probably three-quarters of the section that were older than I
am in years.
Mr. Schine. Had you ever been reprimanded prior to this for
any activities on the part of your superior officers?
Mr. Gross. No, I never had a security violation, never had
any reprimand of any type.
Mr. Schine. Can you think of any organization to which you
might have belonged, about which there would be a question in
the minds of the intelligence agencies?
Mr. Gross. I am a member of the Naval Reserve now. I
belonged at one time to the American Legion and the VFW. I
don't join things. That is just about that.
Mr. Carr. You are a member of the American Legion now,
aren't you?
Mr. Gross. Well, they haven't collected my dues just
recently.
I was with the Balmar Post, and since I moved to Lakewood,
it is hard to get back up there with a wife and family, so I am
building a house and what not, and just haven't kept up with
it.
Mr. Schine. You have never belonged to any organization
termed as subversive by the proper authorities?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I never have.
Mr. Schine. Do you, or have you ever known Julius or Ethel
Rosenberg?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I haven't. The FBI asked me those same
questions.
Mr. Schine. Morton Sobol?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think so. He was, as I have told or
have read, an engineer at City College. But I never remember
knowing him.
And as far as I can see, I mean from the years that he went
and I went, a freshman would not associate with the junior or
senior classes.
Mr. Schine. David Greenglass?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; that I am sure of.
Mr. Schine. Clarence Hiskey?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; definitely not.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever been arrested for any criminal
violation?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I never have.
Mr. Schine. What is your reaction to this whole situation?
Mr. Gross. You mean my present state?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Gross. I was very much amazed, and I think everybody
who knew me was. I am still amazed, because I have a letter
this summer from the Research and Development Board, of which I
was a deputy member, inviting me to a classified symposium on
the West Coast, and stating therein that my clearance was
verified by the Department of Defense.
I took that letter, and I mailed it with a letter of my own
to Representative Auchincloss, and he inquired as far as he
could, and he did not get any logical answer, and he was very
much put out about it.
Mr. Schine. Do you know Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Gross. Yes. And those two or three months I was in the
radar branch, he was in the same section.
Mr. Schine. And you know Mr. Bernard Martin, known as Bob
Martin, I think?
Mr. Gross. Well, I know him. I never worked with him, or
anything. I just know people who know him, and I would
recognize him around when I saw him.
Mr. Schine. What does Bob Martin do?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I don't think in the last four
years I have run into him except once. I don't know where he
works, or what.
Mr. Schine. What does Mr. Ducore do?
Mr. Gross. I think he is either assistant section chief or
section chief in the radar branch.
Mr. Schine. Does he handle classified material?
Mr. Gross. I assumed he did. I did not know any
differently.
Mr. Schine. Are you very closely associated with him?
Mr. Gross. No contacts outside at all.
Mr. Schine. What about Mr. Coleman? Do you know him?
Mr. Gross. Just by name. I never met him outside, and
possibly maybe a meeting in the laboratory. Nothing else.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever know a Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think so, but I think he lived in
the same rooming house I did when I was a bachelor.
Mr. Schine. What was his first name?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. But I used to live in Red Bank in
a rooming house which maybe held, oh, thirty or forty single
people, of which there were schoolteachers of the local high
school or engineers at the fort.
Mr. Carr. What is the address of that?
Mr. Gross. It is the Hudson House, about 130 Hudson Avenue,
Red Bank.
Mr. Carr. When did you live there?
Mr. Gross. I lived there before I went in service, and I
think from 1942, and then I lived there in '46, when I came
back from the navy, oh, until a couple of months before I got
married, in '49.
Mr. Schine. Did you know that his name was William Ullmann?
Mr. Gross. I don't think so. We would come in and we would
find the mail downstairs, everybody's.
Mr. Carr. Was his name Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Carr. Do you know a Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Gross. No, not by that name.
Mr. Carr. What name do you know?
Mr. Gross. I just remember the last name. If you asked me
the first name, I couldn't tell you at all.
Mr. Carr. He lived at this bachelor's rooming place.
Mr. Gross. I think he did. I know an Ullmann lived on one
of the floors of that apartment building.
Mr. Schine. Did anyone else who was associated with you or
works at Fort Monmouth live at that house?
Mr. Gross. Oh, yes.
Mr. Schine. Would you name the names, please?
Mr. Gross. There is a man who works there right now, Joseph
Sharney, S-h-a-r-n-e-y. He works in my same section right now.
There was a Don Goodman. He left before the war. I can see
some people's faces, and can't remember their names.
Mr. Carr. This is when you were a bachelor?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Carr. And this was a bachelor home where several
bachelors lived?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Didn't Jerome Corwin live there?
Mr. Gross. No, not there, no.
Mr. Carr. Not at this place?
Mr. Gross. No, he did not.
Mr. Carr. How about a fellow named Okum? Do you recall him?
Jack Okum?
Mr. Gross. The name strikes a familiar chord, but I don't
remember.
Mr. Carr. How about Bernard Martin, known as Bob Martin?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely he did not live there. I can
think of another name. Saul Groll.
Mr. Carr. Did Jerome Corwin live there at that time?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely not.
Mr. Carr. When did you get married? What year?
Mr. Gross. In June of 1949.
Mr. Carr. And what was your wife's name?
Mr. Gross. Selma Lerner. That is L-e-r-n-e-r. She was a
secretary in the propagation section.
Mr. Carr. At Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. At Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Carr. Where was her home originally? New York?
Mr. Gross. She had lived about ten or twelve years in
Lakewood, and originally was born in Brooklyn.
Mr. Carr. Now, you say that you have never been a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Gross. No, I never have.
Mr. Carr. Or of any organization----
Mr. Gross. I have never belonged to any organization
connected with them in any way.
Mr. Carr. How about your wife?
Mr. Gross. No, she has not. She held top secret clearance
for a long time, and she would not have gotten that if they
could find anything.
Mr. Carr. With the Evans Lab?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Carr. How about any other member of your family?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely not. I am positive of that.
Mr. Carr. Have you ever affiliated yourself with the
American Labor party?
Mr. Gross. Never.
Mr. Carr. How about your wife?
Mr. Gross. Never.
Mr. Carr. Were you members of the United Federal Workers?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Carr. You never were?
Mr. Gross. Never were.
Mr. Carr. Was your clearance for secret lifted, or does it
still remain in effect?
Mr. Gross. It still remains in effect. It was lifted in
December 1952.
Mr. Carr. Now were you notified at that time why it was
lifted?
Mr. Gross. No, I was not.
Mr. Carr. And you are still trying to find out why it was
lifted?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Gross. By name. I never worked with him or had any
social contacts with him.
Mr. Carr. How about Harold Ducore?
Mr. Gross. I know him. I think I was in his section. I
think he was in the same section in 1946, when I came back from
service, maybe for a period of two or three months. Either '46
or '47.
But I did not stay there long.
Mr. Carr. You had no social contact with him?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't have any outside contact with him at
all.
Mr. Carr. Have you ever had social contact or contact at
work with Bernard Martin?
Mr. Gross. No, I have not.
Mr. Carr. Do you know him at all?
Mr. Gross. I know him by name. I know he works at the
laboratory. I may have seen him once or twice around. But I
don't even know where he works or what section.
Mr. Carr. Do you know Mr. Schenwetter?
Mr. Gross. No, the name is not at all familiar.
Mr. Carr. Have you had any contact with Hymn Yamins?
Mr. Gross. Well, in some of the work we have had contacts
with MIT, and he is the liaison. We have worked through him.
But only on a purely business basis.
Mr. Carr. Your only contacts have been in connection with
your work?
Mr. Gross. That is right.
Mr. Carr. And at your work?
Mr. Gross. At my work. I never met him outside.
Mr. Carr. And you say you don't know this Jack Okum at all?
Mr. Gross. I don't think so.
Mr. Carr. You can't recall the name?
Mr. Gross. I can't recall the name.
Mr. Carr. Do you know a man named Irving Kaplan?
Mr. Gross. No. There is no Kaplan that I know of.
Mr. Carr. Are any of your relatives connected in any way
with the Communist party, or any of its alleged fronts?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely not.
Mr. Carr. How about your wife's relatives?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely not. My wife's brother also works
at the laboratories, and I have met practically all the family
and I am positive that none of them have any connection.
Mr. Schine. Do you know any members of the Communist party?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think so.
Mr. Schine. Have you known any?
Mr. Gross. I could amplify one statement, I think. At this
same rooming house, there lived a Morris Klein.
Mr. Schine. Will you spell his name?
Mr. Gross. I think it is K-l-e-i-n. I am not sure. His
first name was Morris. I knew he lived there, and I spoke to
him, and since I left it I understand he has been removed and
discharged for some Communist connection. But I did not know--
--
Mr. Schine. Where was he working at the time?
Mr. Gross. He was working at Coles Laboratory, not any
connection with us at all. He just lived at the same floor
there.
Mr. Schine. When was he suspended, approximately?
Mr. Gross. I don't know, 1950, I would guess at.
Mr. Schine. Have you heard the reasons why he was
suspended?
Mr. Gross. No, just the grapevine said he was suspended for
some Communist connection, and he didn't fight it, so they
assumed he was guilty.
Mr. Schine. He was in a sensitive position at the time?
Mr. Gross. He worked at Coles. I don't know what section he
was in.
Mr. Schine. Was he friendly with some of these other
individuals that we have mentioned?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I don't know how to answer that,
actually.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Jones?
Mr. Jones. Mr. Gross, I wish that you would think this over
very carefully and answer to the best of your knowledge, what
reasons can you conceive that could logically or in any other
way explain your suspension?
Mr. Gross. I would say that I have reprimanded several
people in my group. I have removed them and had them
transferred out, because they were not, let's put it, willing
workers.
It is very difficult to give a man an unsatisfactory
efficiency rating. If you do, you have got--well, the
substantiation is not too difficult, but you are going to run
into a lot of trouble.
My section chief had that trouble, and he was unclear just
because allegations were made by the person he gave an
unsatisfactory rating to.
That person I referred to, my section chief, is Dr.
Daniels. He asked for me under him as section chief. I am a
physicist, and he is an engineer. I have more of the
administrative work. I handle the equipments and field tests
and a lot of other things and actually the administration of
the section.
So in some cases I actually transferred people out. It is
not too difficult. I mean, you can swap people, swap
secretaries, and what not.
And I am positive it is either that or one or two of the
people who I jumped, not in seniority, but in age and what not.
Somebody just passed rumors, and they just accepted it. Any
rumor you give about anybody is accepted first and investigated
later.
Mr. Jones. In other words, you are saying, in effect, that
these rumors here evidently were of greater effect or weight on
your suspension than your record there.
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think so. I am going to make a
statement which is to the best of my knowledge, and I am not
sure. People who have anything said about them that are Jewish
or of Jewish descent or of Jewish connections, are immediately
suspended or uncleared.
People are not Jewish and have no Jewish connections that
have any charge made against them, are kept in and are still
working while investigation goes on. That is the only
difference between the two setups.
Mr. Schine. Can you give us the names of the individuals
who have been kept on?
Mr. Gross. I know of a Dr. Craig Crenshaw who is being
investigated by the FBI. That is C-r-a-i-g C-r-e-n-s-h-a-w. He
is being investigated by the FBI. He is still handling secret
and top secret equipment and programs in connection with it.
Mr. Schine. Do you know why he is being investigated?
Mr. Gross. No, they did not query me on it.
Mr. Jones. How long has this investigation been underway,
sir?
Mr. Gross. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. How did you know he was being investigated?
Mr. Gross. Other people that were cleared by the FBI
happened to mention it.
Mr. Jones. Who?
Mr. Gross. Dr. Daniels, for one.
Mr. Schine. Can you give us the names of some of the others
you mentioned who remain on regardless of the fact that they
are under investigation?
Mr. Gross. As definite, I can't. By grapevine and such,
possibly yes.
Mr. Carr. What is Crenshaw's position?
Mr. Gross. He is sectional chief of the Compressional Wave
Section.
Mr. Schine. In other words, you know the name of one non-
Jew who is under investigation, but is being kept on?
Mr. Gross. No, I would say I know more, but not as
definite. I know that when the FBI queried me, they asked me if
I knew Alex Beichek, B-e-i-c-h-e-k. He works in my section. And
the questions seemed to indicate that there was some connection
between what I was accused of and him. He is still working in
there and has never lost his clearance.
Mr. Schine. In other words, you know the names of two?
Mr. Gross. Well, let's see. I don't think I can think of
any other names where I have enough concrete evidence. It is
just a feeling, and a feeling in connection with a fact, that
all the people that have been suspended now, and two years
ago--over 95 percent of them are Jewish.
Mr. Schine. Do you know that you were under investigation
prior to December 19, 1952?
Mr. Gross. I assume I was. The FBI implied that they had
been looking into this for a while.
Mr. Schine. And nevertheless you were kept on?
Mr. Gross. Yes, but I didn't think it was a long period of
time. I thought it was a very short period of time.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the names of some Jewish personnel
who were under investigation who are currently working?
Mr. Gross. No. I know other Jewish personnel that are
uncleared that are out in this detached area with myself, but I
don't know of anybody in there that is.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us those name, please?
Mr. Gross. There is Mr. Abraham LePato, L-e-p-a-t-o, and
Mr. Edward Brody, B-r-o-d-y.
Mr. Schine. In other words, are those all the names you can
think of at the moment in that category?
Mr. Gross. Well, can I supply some more information?
Mr. Schine. Surely.
Mr. Gross. When my wife was secretary there, she worked for
Mr. Jones, J-o-n-e-s, William Jones, a Negro, and he was the
section chief, and the assistant section chief was Mr. Barry
Bernstein.
That section also had their section chief and assistant
section chief uncleared for a long period of time, then
suspended, and then completely cleared and reinstated, the
whole thing taking maybe two years or two and a half years.
Mr. Schine. In other words, you first tell us that you feel
it is more than coincidence that individuals under
investigation who are not Jewish are kept on, and individual
under investigation who are Jewish are not kept on.
Then you tell us the names of two individuals, the only two
you know of, who are under investigation, non-Jewish, and kept
on. You tell us the names of three individuals, including
yourself, who are under investigation and have merely been
transferred to nonsensitive positions.
Mr. Gross. Well, now, then, remember, I don't have access
to the FBI files, nor to any of the security files at the
laboratory. This is a feeling, as I say. It is from all the
people in the past that have had investigation. It is just data
that has come to me.
The other people that I know of now, Mr. Leeds and his
brother, are Jewish. I know Mr. Ducore is Jewish. I don't know
what Mr. Martin is, but I think I can say I know Mr. Coleman is
Jewish. I will go as far as that.
But I would assume from what I have heard and from what the
grapevine says, which is a tremendous thing in any organization
like the laboratory, that the feeling is, and it seems to be
universal, even between Jews and non-Jews alike, that you have
two strikes against you when you start.
Mr. Schine. Is it not true that 25 percent of the employees
there are Jewish?
Mr. Gross. Not of the total employees of that laboratory:
Maybe of the engineering and the technical personnel, yes.
Mr. Schine. Wouldn't you say that is a large percentage of
Jewish personnel?
Mr. Gross. I wouldn't have guessed it at twenty-five. That
might possibly be true.
Mr. Schine. There is no discrimination, therefore, in the
hiring of these individuals?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think they can. You see, I think the
Civil Service Commission does the hiring, and then you become a
part of the military organization.
Mr. Schine. In what department do you think the
discrimination exists.
Mr. Gross. G-2, security.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the names of the individuals who
are discriminating?
Mr. Gross. It would be just my own surmise.
Mr. Schine. What is your own surmise?
Mr. Gross. That the civilian head of G-2 is anti-Semitic.
His last name is Reid, R-e-i-d. I don't know what his first
name is.
Mr. Schine. How long has he been the head of G-2 there?
Mr. Gross. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. What is the name of his military counterpart?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. They change more often than
civilians. I would say it was Colonel Sullivan, but I am not
positively sure.
Mr. Jones. I think you are right. Colonel Sullivan is the
name that was mentioned here yesterday.
Mr. Schine. So you really believe that there is
discrimination in that department?
Mr. Gross. I would say so, yes.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever done anything about this?
Mr. Gross. No, I mean every man's religion is his own
business. I don't carry any banner for my own or anybody
else's.
I served in the navy as an officer, and that is pretty
difficult. I never had any trouble. I don't expect it. In fact,
I was one of the last to believe it. It is very hard to
believe.
Mr. Schine. Who was one of the first to believe it?
Mr. Gross. I don't know.
Mr. Schine. It would help us very much if you could think
who was one of the first.
Mr. Gross. I think I heard this three or four years ago.
Mr. Schine. Whom did you hear it from at that time?
Mr. Gross. Possibly the people who were uncleared at that
time. Mr. Bernstein, Mr. Salzman was uncleared at that time.
Mr. Schine. Would you give their full names?
Mr. Gross. It is Barry Bernstein, and I don't know
Salzman's first name. I think it is S-a-l-z-m-a-n.
Mr. Schine. What were their positions?
Mr. Gross. They worked in the test equipment section, and
Mr. Salzman was the technician there and Mr. Bernstein the
section chief.
Mr. Schine. Are they reinstated now?
Mr. Gross. Mr. Bernstein was.
Mr. Schine. And Mr. Salzman wasn't?
Mr. Gross. I don't know, I think he left after he was
cleared.
Mr. Schine. Would that indicate that as discriminatory as
they were, they couldn't possibly push one out?
Mr. Gross. No, they can't, because the final decision on
the clearance at that time was made in Washington.
But I can point out that after a person is cleared, he does
not necessarily have to get his position back, because that
clearance comes back through G-2.
And I have a letter here from the screening board in
Washington, which says that you do not need to tell a person
that he is cleared after it does come back.
Mr. Schine. But in this case one of the gentlemen did get
his position back?
Mr. Gross. They did get their positions back, those two.
Mr. Jones, who is a Negro and not Jewish--when you are cleared,
you used to get your own position back. He did not.
Mr. Schine. In other words, Mr. Salzman and Mr. Bernstein,
who thought that it was discrimination that forced them into
nonsensitive categories, actually were cleared in spite of the
fact that it has to go through G-2, the very place that they
felt was discriminating against them.
Mr. Gross. Well, I am not too sure of this, but I don't
think the chain of command worked that way. The papers were all
handled by G-2, and then they went down to Washington. It was
handled there, and that is tantamount to an order to G-2 to
reinstate the personnel.
Mr. Schine. And G-2 does not have to give the men their
positions back after they have been cleared?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Schine. But in this case they did?
Mr. Gross. In this case they did.
Mr. Schine. What do you think of Mr. Bernstein's and Mr.
Salzman's feeling that they were discriminated against?
Mr. Gross. I think so. Since they were cleared, there were
no charges against them that could be substantiated.
Mr. Schine. Was the same gentleman head of G-2 at that
time?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Schine. What was his name?
Mr. Gross. Reid.
Mr. Schine. Have they ever done anything about their
feelings of discrimination?
Mr. Gross. Not that I know of.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the charges that were made against
them at that time?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Schine. They must have discussed it with you.
Mr. Gross. You see, my wife was a secretary, and I got this
second-hand. I know Barry, Barry Bernstein, that is, slightly.
Mr. Schine. What did she say was the nature of the charges?
Mr. Gross. I think Barry was a member of the AVC, and I
don't know what was the matter with Mr. Salzman at all.
Mr. Schine. Had they been reprimanded prior to that for any
matter?
Mr. Gross. Not that I know of, I wouldn't know. I mean, I
would never have that knowledge.
Mr. Jones. How long has Mr. Reid been security officer?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I would say definitely the last
five years, and most likely longer? I am not sure.
Mr. Jones. When did these alleged suspensions because of
that bias basis start?
Mr. Gross. I understand it was about two years ago, or
three years ago, when this happened. There were about sixteen
who were Jewish.
And at the present time, all the six I know of in my
group--I mean, not the other laboratories; the six that I see--
five are Jewish, and the sixth one, Dr. Daniels' wife is
Jewish.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Gross, you say you were not a member of the
United Federal Workers?
Mr. Gross. No, I wasn't.
Mr. Carr. Was your wife?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Carr. Were you a member of the United Public Workers of
America?
Mr. Gross. No. I never joined any of them.
Mr. Carr. You are sure your wife wasn't a member?
Mr. Gross. I am positive.
Mr. Schine. I asked you before what have you done about
this situation that you strongly believe exists? You started to
tell me what you had done. I don't recall what you said.
Mr. Gross. Well, I talked to my lawyer, a Mr. Katchen, in
Long Branch.
Mr. Schine. When did you talk to him?
Mr. Gross. Oh, recently, not too long ago.
Mr. Jones. How long ago?
Mr. Gross. A week or so. Because the matter had broke in
the headlines.
But I had had contacts with him through Dr. Nabel prior to
that. But he just mentioned the Anti-Defamation League of the
B'nai B'rith. And in the same breath he said, ``They won't do
anything anyway.''
So I told him then, ``If I do get suspended as a result of
any of this, I would like to have you as my lawyer,'' and left
it at that.
But outside, I mean outside the laboratories, or during
lunch, we have discussed what you can do, and there is a shrug
of the shoulders. There is nothing you can do.
Mr. Schine. You waited until recently, when the newspapers
indicated----
Mr. Gross. Well, I did.
But, though that would be surmising, I think others did go
to the B'nai B'rith beforehand. I think Mr. LePato went to the
B'nai B'rith, early last spring, and he informed me of that
fact, and he saw someone in Asbury Park, and they also told him
B'nai B'rith couldn't do anything.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever made any complaints to the
individuals in charge at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. I saw the representative of the inspector
general, and I just complained about the whole system, and I
got a letter back stating that the commanding officer could
take anybody's clearance away at any time in accordance with
some regulation. And that was the end of it.
Mr. Sabine. I understand that a group of you met two
evenings ago. Would you tell us about that?
Mr. Gross. We met at Mr. Katchen's office, mainly because
he is now apparently collecting information for the Anti-
Defamation League, or so I understand,
Mr. Jones. You say he is being retained by the Anti-
Defamation League?
Mr. Gross. I would not know whether he is getting paid for
it, or not, but it may appear, because he said he would handle
these interviews and what not, with no charge.
Mr. Schine. In other words, somebody in the Anti-Defamation
League asked him to collect the information?
Mr. Gross. I think that is the situation.
Mr. Schine. Do you know who that is?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Schine. It was in conjunction with this situation at
Fort Monmouth? Or did it have something to do with this
committee's investigation of the situation?
Mr. Gross. No, with the situation at Fort Monmouth. It had
nothing to do with this. I mean, he just told me to come up
here. I asked him point blank.
And he said, ``Answer everything that doesn't go against
security.''
Mr. Schine. He has been your lawyer for a long while?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Jones. You said Dr. Daniels referred you to Mr.
Katchen?
Mr. Gross. Yes. He is his lawyer.
Mr. Jones. And evidently Mr. Katchen had been doing
considerable work in the line, along this Anti-Defamation line.
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What council did Mr. Katchen have to offer this
meeting the last couple of nights ago?
Mr. Gross. To answer all questions to the best of my
knowledge.
And he said, ``You know your military regulations, what you
can't talk about.''
I said I did. That is 380-5.
Mr. Jones. Who was there, Mr. Gross?
Mr. Gross. Well, Mr. Lovenstein, Mr. LePato, Mr. Brody. Mr.
Martin was there. That was the first time I had seen him in
maybe three or four years.
Mr. Schine. Didn't you think it was rather unusual that he
should expect some of the individuals to tell things that were
classified?
Mr. Gross. No, he didn't question anything that was
classified.
Mr. Schine. But some of the discussion was classified?
Mr. Gross. No. We don't talk about classified equipment
outside.
Mr. Schine. Isn't it true that some of the individuals
outlined what they thought might be held against them?
Mr. Gross. Oh, their charges?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Gross. Yes, Mr. Brody read the charges. He has his.
Mr. Carr. What is Mr. Brody's first name?
Mr. Gross. Ed. I think it is Edwin.
Mr. Schine. Isn't it true that in discussing the charges,
classified information was discussed?
Mr. Gross. No. The charges are unclassified, and what was
in them is certainly unclassified. They accused Mr. Brody's
parents of belonging to the American Labor party.
Mr. Schine. Didn't you think it was rather unusual for a
lawyer to call a group of people together who are under
investigation by a branch of government and gather up all the
charges that the FBI is investigating?
Mr. Gross. It didn't strike me so. Now that I think of it,
it may be, but it didn't strike me as unusual at the time.
Mr. Schine. What do you think about it now?
Mr. Gross. Sort of unusual. The only reason I could see
behind it was the Anti-Defamation League asked him to. I can't
see anything else.
Mr. Jones. This was Dr. Daniels' suggestion anyway, wasn't
it, to meet in the lawyers office?
Mr. Gross. No he was not there that evening.
Mr. Jones. But I mean, it was at his suggestion that Mr.
Katchen became interested in this matter and called all of you,
called all the persons involved, for a brief discussion of this
question; is that right?
Mr. Gross. I don't know whether it was at his suggestion or
not. I couldn't rightly say. It may have been some one of the
other people.
Mr. Jones. Who else was at that meeting?
Mr. Gross. Mr. Goldberg, William Goldberg. Mr. Ducore came
in about half way through, or less than half way through.
Mr. Jones. Were there other lawyers there?
Mr. Gross. Yes, Mr. Harry Green showed up right near the
end.
Mr. Jones. Who is Harry Green?
Mr. Gross. I think he is Mr. Ducore's lawyer.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Ducore's lawyer?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Jones. And what was the name of the other lawyer?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. There was another man there. I
didn't know whether he was a lawyer or not. He seemed to be a
friend of Mr. Katchen's.
Mr. Jones. Did he participate in the discussion?
Mr. Gross. Yes, he did.
Mr. Jones. To what extent?
Mr. Gross. Asking questions.
Mr. Jones. Would you believe that he may be a
representative of the Anti-Defamation League.
Mr. Gross. It didn't occur to me.
Mr. Jones. On the basis of what he said?
Mr. Gross. No. I didn't think so. But he may be. I am not
sure.
Mr. Rainville. Are you a member of the B'nai B'rith?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I am not.
Mr. Rainville. Are you affiliated in any way with the Anti-
Defamation League?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I am not.
Mr. Schine. Who were the other individuals there?
Mr. Gross. I said, Mr. Lapeto, Mr. Brody, Mr. Goldberg, Mr.
Lovenstein, Bob Martin, Bernard, as you call him. I thought his
name was always Bob. I didn't know it was Bernard
And Ducore. And there seemed to be somebody sitting over
here, in that room, but I can't think of who it was.
Mr. Schine. It will come to you. If the emphasis for the
discussion, the reason for the meeting, was the situation at
Fort Monmouth, rather than this committee's current
investigation, why is it that the question of the methods of
this committee arose, and who brought it up?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I don't know whether it was
brought up as ``methods,'' or not.
It was just the matter of being investigated, and that was
all, period.
Mr. Rainville. Was it the feeling that this committee was
responsible for the changes in your classification?
Mr. Gross. No, not in mine. Let's put it that way. I think
it was suggested by someone there that the army only uncleared
these people after they knew you were going to call us, but
that was open to debate, because nobody knew when the committee
here sent a list of names down that they wanted to speak to. So
we just dropped out. That was discussed, but nobody had any
idea on it.
Mr. Rainville. Did you have another meeting discussing this
thing last night?
Mr. Gross. I did not attend it.
Mr. Rainville. Was there one?
Mr. Gross. Maybe. I don't know. I can't say at all. I only
spoke to one person last night on the phone, and he just wished
me the best of luck and said, ``Just keep calm.''
Mr. Rainville. Was he a person who had been called before
this committee?
Mr. Gross. No. Mr. LePato called me. We got to know each
other there in this area. That was the first time I knew him.
Mr. Rainville. Would you know whether or not it is
customary for the FBI to investigate people, not only for
removing classification status, but for promotions?
Mr. Gross. I would say as far as I know the FBI had nothing
to do with promotions or investigating people for clearance in
connection with promotions.
Mr. Rainville. Then you wouldn't know that an FBI
investigation ever preceded a man's promotion from one job to
another?
Mr. Gross. No. It seems sort of fantastic. Because I was
promoted about a month before I was uncleared. And I never even
knew why I was being handed the promotion. I guessed it was for
doing good work. I didn't know.
Mr. Rainville. May I ask you this question. This unrest is
occasioned by the firing or the changing of status of certain
people out there. Would those people be confined to one or two
particular types of work, or does it spread all through the
organization, into everything that is done out there?
Mr. Gross. The present setup seemed to be confined to well,
these people in the paper were connected with the radar branch.
Dr. Daniels and myself are connected with applied physics. Mr.
Brody and Mr. LePato were connected with the thermionics
branch. So there are three branches at Evans, all of which have
been hit.
Mr. Rainville. Are there more branches at Evans?
Mr. Gross. I think two more, spec and drafting,
specifications and drafting, it would be known as, and
meteorological. I think there is one other.
Mr. Rainville. Then about half of the divisions out there
have actually been touched?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. Have they been touched in such a way that
the people involved are involved in the same type of work, that
is to say; you work in your particular division but you must
work with other divisions on certain specific problems?
Mr. Gross. No, we don't. There is very little connection,
the Radar Branch works on radar, and I don't know what they are
doing. It is military radar, period. That is out. We are in a
more basic research line. We don't work with the final
equipment, except in isolated cases. You may be familiar with
the old moon radar, which hit the moon in 1946. I have that
now. It is an unclassified project. That is the only reason I
am mentioning it. But that is not radar in the sense of
military radar. This is entirely different. This is something
which you don't use for any military applications. It is a
research tool. I mean, we are doing research. They are doing
equipment. There is a distinct difference between the two.
Mr. Rainville. But if they ran into a snag with their
equipment, they might call you in for further research?
Mr. Gross. Only as we are connected on propagation. I mean,
just in that, nothing else. I mean, we are not connected with
anything they would have trouble with in designing a set. We
would only be in the use of the sets.
Mr. Rainville. There are only two other things that run
through my mind. One, in this group of people who were called
together night before last to sit down and discuss with the
attorney the various problems confronting them, you say you
never belonged to any organization that in any way was
controversial. Didn't you stop and think: What am I getting
into here? I don't know anything about these people, except
casually I met three or four of them in my work. Am I possibly
now aligning myself with some people who may have something
against them, whereas I am only involved in this thing for
perhaps clarification, or something else?
Mr. Gross. It occurred to me, and I said, ``Well, they are
all Jewish.''
He asked us at the beginning whether we would stand on the
Fifth Amendment here, or anything like that. Everybody said
they wouldn't. I put in writing to both Representative
Auchincloss and the inspector general that I am not a
Communist, never have been, and never had any connection with
them. So I figured I had nothing to lose, and this was not
doing anything except talking about it.
Mr. Rainville. Except that in the association there you
might be involving yourself with somebody who, totally unknown
to you, would be deeply involved in espionage or something
else.
Mr. Gross. But I might meet a man on the street, or rub
shoulders with him at a lunchroom, and the same thing would be
true.
Mr. Rainville. You would put that in the same category as
meeting with men who might be suspects for some reason or
other? You would assume that a man who attended a meeting on
invitation and aligned himself with that group would be in the
same category as a man who accidentally sat down to the table
and passed a fork?
Mr. Gross. No, but I know Mr. Brody, Mr. LePato, and I know
my own case.
Mr. Rainville. How well do you know those men? I mean, can
you say here, now, categorically, that there is nothing to any
charge against those people, that nothing can be substantiated?
Mr. Gross. No; obviously I can't say that.
Mr. Rainville. What do you know about Mr. Goldberg?
Mr. Gross. Nothing, except that he seems like a nice sort
of person, and a little worried.
Mr. Rainville. And yet by putting your presence there at
what amounts to a committee, you were perfectly willing to say
that by coming in and sitting down and counseling with these
people, ``I accept them as being cleared''?
Mr. Gross. No, if they had given me any statement that it
was Communist, I would have walked out.
Mr. Rainville. Yes, but you see, your mere presence there
built up a committee.
Mr. Gross. Well, if I went to a lawyer, I wouldn't
investigate the lawyer first.
Mr. Rainville. Let's take it out of this field entirely.
Let's talk about the Red Cross.
In your community when they want to raise funds, whom do
they go to, to put on the committee? People who are known and
recognized and give substance to the drive by the fact that
they are leading citizens?
Mr. Gross. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rainville. All right. You were part of a committee that
is going to fight this anti-Semitism, or whatever it is, these
unfair charges, even if it is not concerned with that. You were
part of a committee, and you were putting yourself on that
letterhead.
Mr. Gross. No, they are not forming any committee that I
know of.
Mr. Rainville. But the mere fact that they had a meeting is
a committee. I mean, everybody that comes into this room now
and talks about that meeting you would ask ``Well, who was
there,'' and they would say ``Gross was there.''
Mr. Gross. Well, that is true.
Mr. Rainville. I mean, I don't say it was a mistake, but I
am wondering if you are aware of what you have done in that
connection, and if you really mean to say that you are standing
up as a witness for them against any of these charges?
Mr. Gross. No. I mean, nobody asked for an affidavit
attesting that I know that this person is not a Communist, and
I wouldn't have given it to him unless I knew it.
Mr. Rainville. He didn't ask you to go to the committee
meeting either, and I don't know whether G-2 asked you to go to
the committee meeting.
Mr. Gross. No; they didn't, of course.
Mr. Rainville. You see, it was a voluntary move on your
part.
Mr. Gross. But I was going originally to see a lawyer,
because I knew the lawyer had handled other people's cases.
Mr. Rainville. But he was to be your lawyer, by agreement?
Mr. Carr. No, I had made no agreement with Mr. Katchen
until after that meeting. And then, well, I said, ``I don't
have a lawyer,'' and he asked us if any of us had counsel and
he would get in touch with them. Some of the people did have
counsel.
Mr. Rainville. I was under the impression that you said you
had talked with him before this meeting.
Mr. Carr. Who were some of the counsel at this meeting?
Mr. Gross. I remember Mr. Green. I don't remember the other
persons' names. They were mentioned and forgotten.
Let me go back a little in history. Most of the people that
are being hauled out here to your committee meeting were
notified a day before I was. They were notified at Squire
Laboratory, and I was called the next day. I guess this was
Wednesday, and I was told at 10:30 in the morning at the G-2
building. That was an entirely different building, and
everybody thought, ``Boy, here is an entirely different case.''
I went up, and it was Colonel Sullivan again, and he told
me the same story. Now, Mr. Goldberg and Mr. Lovenstein wanted
to ask him questions about what they could or could not say
here. So I went in first to see the colonel, and he said, ``I
am just a messenger boy, and you have been asked to testify to
the committee, and would you want to go?''
I said, ``Of course. I have nothing to hide.'' I said, ``I
know Mr. Goldberg and Mr. Lovenstein want to ask you some
questions about what they can or cannot say, so may I sit here
and listen also?''
So Mr. Reid went out and got the other two people waiting
outside, and came in, and he just reiterated that 380-5 covered
everything. We knew that anyway.
They asked one or two questions, which meant nothing to
him, I think, about whether they could name other people that
were uncleared. And he said, ``That is not classified
information, so of course you can.''
From that office there, we went for the first time--it was
about lunchtime, to Mr. Katchen. I heard his name, and no doubt
Nagel spoke to him about me, but it was the first time I had
met Mr. Katchen personally. I would have met him if he had been
in. Let's put it that way--his secretary was in, and we just
left a message that I had called. And we came back and saw him
at 3:30 that afternoon. I took two hours annual leave from work
to accomplish that.
Mr. Rainville. Who suggested that you go at that time?
Mr. Gross. We thought as we were going up there we might
possibly need counsel. I had been at technical meetings and
quizzed technically on subjects, but I have never been at
anything like this before, and I am not a lawyer, have no
connection with that, and I am an engineer, and you get sort of
specialized, and I just thought a lawyer may help. He didn't
help. I would have done the same thing whether I went or didn't
go.
Mr. Rainville. What I am getting at: The three of you were
sitting there, and apparently the idea crystalized at that
meeting that you were going to go up and see the attorney. It
must have been, because normally you wouldn't have gone to see
him without an attorney.
Mr. Gross. That is right. We would have called.
Mr. Rainville. Who crystalized that opinion?
Mr. Gross. Well, I had been told--let's see. Who told me,
exactly? Somebody told me that Mr. Katchen had my name as one
of the cases, and if I could possibly get to see him some time
it may be helpful. I think ``I'' in a way, would have been
``the three of us,'' since we were up there anyway, and right
near it, to go over at lunchtime.
Mr. Rainville. Then you suggested that the three of you go
over and see him?
Mr. Gross. By the way, there were four, Mr. LePato went
over at that time.
Mr. Rainville. But he was not in with Colonel Sullivan. He
met you on the way over and joined you and went on over?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. There was one word you used in referring to
your coming down to this meeting, and I just wondered whether
it was just accidental or reflected an attitude. You say you
were going to be ``hauled down'' to this meeting.
Mr. Gross. I didn't say ``hauled,'' I said ``called.'' I am
sorry.
Mr. Rainville. I wrote it down at the moment. Maybe you
meant ``called.''
Mr . Gross. I was perfectly willing to come. I consider
myself not guilty of anything, and certainly not violating any
of the government's regulations in connection with security,
and I figure that everything I can do to help or to clear it
up, I will, but I consider the fact that I am not cleared as
very detrimental to the government. I mean, I am not an
egotist, there are a lot better engineers than I am, but I have
a lot of knowledge, and they have to have it for certain
problems, and if I am not cleared, they do not have it, period.
And that goes for Dr. Daniels and quite a few other people. You
get to be a specialist, and you can't replace a specialist in
six months or a year. It takes a long time to do it.
Mr. Rainville. Maybe you can answer, then, a question that
came up in my mind yesterday.
We had a gentleman testifying here who seemed to be quite
an expert in certain work. Yet every time you asked him a
question about last year, or when did he go to work here, or
what was the firm's name, or who did he work for, or anything
like that, he was very unclear. He couldn't remember even two
years ago. And if you talked to him about his past, you would
assume that the man was a graduate of the fifth grade--day
laborer, and that that is as far as he could go. And yet he
turns out to be skilled technician, a very skilled technician.
In your experience over there in the laboratory, would you
say that there was anything contrary in that?
Mr. Gross. I would say that would be an exception, an
``absent-minded professor.'' You know that type.
Mr. Rainville. This wasn't absent-minded.
Mr. Gross. I don't know the person you are referring to.
Mr. Rainville. He couldn't remember family names, and
things of that kind, and there was no impression of being
absent-minded. He just said he couldn't remember. Not
categorically, ``I don't remember that,'' but ``It could have
been here,'' or ``was about that,'' and so forth and so on.
There was no definitive answer to any single question.
Mr. Gross. I would assume a person with a memory for
technical subjects should be able to remember most of
everything else. I don't think your brain is selective as to
what you can or cannot remember.
Mr. Rainville. I would assume so from your answers, which
are very specific and to the point. You may not remember an
exact day in a given month, but you remember it was either
September 15th or about September 15th, and the year. He had
difficulty remembering the year. He couldn't even get close to
the month, and the day was beyond him.
Mr. Gross. I have got a good memory.
Mr. Rainville. But this would not be normal in your contact
with the people over there?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Rainville. I have nothing further to add.
Mr. Schine. This Communist party member who lived in the
house where you were a bachelor, would you repeat his name,
please.
Mr. Gross. Morris Klein. Let me say I don't say he is a
Communist party member. I just say I understand that afterwards
he was removed or suspended or fired, but he is no longer
working there. And the grapevine told me then--I did not know
at the time I knew him--that for some reason he or his family
had Communist connections.
Mr. Schine. Did you know the year he was suspended?
Mr. Gross. I think it was after I left there, and maybe the
first year after I was married. 1950 would be a good guess, but
it could be '49.
Mr. Schine. Who else was suspended along with him at that
time?
Mr. Gross. I don't think anybody was. I think that was just
an isolated case.
Mr. Schine. Have you seen him since?
Mr. Gross. No. I mean, all the bachelors lived there, and
there was only one or two good restaurants in town to eat at,
and I would see him there, and I think I even double dated with
him once, but that is as far as it went.
Mr. Schine. There are a certain group of individuals who
came from City College over to Fort Monmouth who were in school
at the time you were there. Could you give us their names?
Mr. Gross. Well, let's see. Not in connection with this. I
know a Mr. Harold Stein very well. I went to high school with
him. And in college he was a physicist and I was an engineer,
so we didn't see each other too much. But I went to college
with him, and I came to work, and he came to the same place two
weeks later. He lives in Long Branch now, or somewhere right
near Long Branch.
Mr. Schine. Is that S-t-e-i-n?
Mr. Gross. Yes. I mean, I would say Harold was a close
friend. Let's put it that way. I have met his wife and his
children, and my wife has met his wife and children. But the
other people that went to college at the same time--right off I
can't think of any of the names--Oh, Paul Leeds. His name was
not Leeds at the time. He was an electrical engineer.
Mr. Schine. What was his name at the time?
Mr. Gross. I think it was Leibowitz. Let's see. He was
either half a year ahead of me--you know, at City, you can
start in the middle, and I think he overlapped a year or two
one way or the other. I don't know whether he graduated at the
exact same time or not.
Mr. Schine. Did he tell you of the charges that had been
brought against him?
Mr. Gross. No, Paul and I are very peculiar. We went to
college. Then I met him maybe once after that. Then somewhere
in Penn Station I said, ``Where are you working, Paul?'' He
said ``Oh, I am down at Fort Monmouth.'' I said, ``That is odd.
So am I.'' Then I didn't see him, oddly enough, until Okinawa.
It was just after the war was over, and this man walked over to
me and says ``You are Gross, aren't you?'' and we talked. I
didn't see him then until two years later, back in Red Bank.
And then I just saw him again maybe a couple of months ago. And
I came up here in the car with him today.
Mr. Schine. Did he tell you why he was being called before
this committee?
Mr. Gross. No. He said he didn't know what the charges
were.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Gross, how well do you know Paul Goldberg?
Mr. Gross. Paul Goldberg? Never heard of him.
Mr. Jones. Is that his first name?
Mr. Gross. William?
Mr. Jones. William.
Mr. Gross. No, I just knew he worked at the laboratory, and
I knew he spent two years in England as a liaison for them. I
never met him outside, never worked under him or anything, in
the laboratory.
Mr. Jones. Do you know that his brother-in-law was a
Communist?
Mr. Gross. No, I never did.
Mr. Jones. He had never mentioned that, as a result of your
acquaintance with him, especially during the past few days.
Mr. Gross. No, he didn't. In fact, that strikes me as very
odd, because the lawyer asked us definitely if any of us knew
any Communist connections, and most of us said outright that we
didn't.
And, as I remember, Mr. Goldberg didn't say anything at the
time.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Goldberg made no reference at that time to
his brother-in-law?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Rainville. Who were the others who made no reference?
You said ``most of us said this.''
Mr. Gross. You see, the seating arrangement happened to be
with Mr. Goldberg sitting there and I sitting in back of him,
and I noticed that. But I didn't notice the others. I know Mr.
LePato I heard definitely say ``No, I have no possible
Communist relationships.'' In fact, he also told Mr. Katchen
what the charges seemed to be against him, that he lived in
Washington Village at the time somebody lived next door to him
that was a Communist.
Mr. Jones. Goldberg strikes me as being quite a worried
man. What seems to be bothering him? You mentioned it earlier
here today, too.
Mr. Gross, I don't know. I went out at noon yesterday to
get my car inspected. At that time there was a phone call to
ask Mr. Goldberg to come up here yesterday afternoon instead of
today. He was due to come up here today, and I found out that
Dr. Daniel had said he looked so worried that he called up the
nurse to get him two pills. So he must have been really
worried.
Mr. Jones. What do you believe is bothering him?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I don't know him well enough to
even think of that.
Mr. Jones. He never gave you any indication or gave Dr.
Daniels any indication at that time, when he offered to get him
some pills?
Mr. Gross. I never talked more than two words to him until
he moved down to the uncleared area. I can't even remember the
date. It has been two or three weeks ago, maybe. And that is
the only time I got to know him. It is a question of ``Are you
going out for lunch?'' Or something like that, because
everybody is sitting around.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Gross, have you ever had any knowledge
brought to your attention, either directly or indirectly, as to
any subversive activities at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. No. The army has very good security regulations
there. We don't have any trouble.
Mr. Jones. When you say ``security regulations'' are you
referring to the present system or the old system?
Mr. Gross. I am referring to 380-5. They have amplified
that with the Blue Book. But I have been uncleared for nine
months, so I don't know all the details. There are a lot of
other ones that have cropped up since then. I would go so far
as to say, though, that security is too strict for a research
organization. You can't do research, and you can't contact
people in naval laboratories, the air force laboratories, if
the regulations are so strict that it is impossible to transmit
information which they need or to get from them information
which you need, without a terrific amount of paper work.
380-5 says you have a law of diminishing returns. If you do
too much, you can't do any other work. If it takes me four
hours to get papers out and everything ready to work, and four
hours to put them away, according to the checkout system, I
can't work any more than day. I think the regulations were
adequate under the old system.
I think the biggest trouble they ever had there was just
absentminded people leaving safes open; and after you got a
double-check system on safes, you have security licked. Because
if you take papers out of an area, or anything like that, you
either have a whiz pass or, I think, the card number is 558, a
little card which says ``The bearer is authorized to carry up
to a certain classification outside'' which means that if I go
to Washington, I don't need to go through all the formality of
getting a whiz pass. If I have a card, I can just take the
papers and go. That has some drawbacks, especially if you run
into absent-minded people. So a while back, instead of anybody
having up to secret, I think only branch chiefs were up to
secret, and section chiefs up to confidential, and other people
up to restricted.
There is the other problem you may have to take equipment
out, not classified. You may work in an outside area and have
to make a field test. On the basis of that card you can take
out equipment. And if the supervisory personnel, in my case Dr.
Daniels, is on the ball, everything is checked in and out of
the safes, and you have a good security control, and you do not
interfere too much. After all, if I want to sell a system to
people there, I have to see the army's point of view, and the
civilian's point of view, and the civilian's point of view is
always that ``You are interfering with me.'' Not in my case, so
much. I have been an officer, and I know both sides. But you
find other people who will always say ``It is too strict.'' I
think it is adequate. ``Adequate'' of course, isn't a good
word.
Mr. Jones. So you think it is virtually impossible under
the present setup there, to remove any top secret or secret
information from Fort Monmouth; is that correct?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Jones. In other words, in all the years that you been
out there, you have never had any knowledge either directly or
indirectly of any subversive activities in any way whatsoever?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Jones. Never heard anything about it?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Jones. Nothing on the grapevine at all--that you
referred to a few moments ago?
Mr. Gross. Well, like Mr. Klein was removed for something
in connection with Communists.
There was another case way back, when I first came back
from the navy. And Mr. Sobell was removed from Mr. Stodola's
section.
And they took a man--I think his name was Albert Socol, I
think S-o-c-o-l, but it may be S-o-k-e-l; I don't know. But he
was in the section one day and gone the next. They just had
people come in, who took him out, up to security, bingo, went
through his desk, and that was the last I ever saw of him.
Mr. Schine. Has anybody ever been reprimanded for taking
classified material home, or anything of that sort?
Mr. Gross. No, not in my group, or not among the
connections I had. A reprimand wouldn't be publicized other
than that.
Mr. Schine. Is there any regulation regarding a breach of
that particular security--taking home classified documents?
Mr. Gross. I understand that Mr. Coleman, I think it was--
the grapevine informed me--had taken some stuff home, but I
don't know what happened.
Mr. Schine. Would you say that a situation of that sort
could be of danger?
Mr. Gross. No, not if you know what you are doing. Well,
let me give you an example.
The military still sends you courses as a reserve officer,
and all they want to know is whether you have adequate
facilities there for storing it. You have to have a locked
desk, a locked room, or something adequate to store courses
connected with it. Therefore I would assume that anybody who
took anything home would have the same adequate facilities for
storing it, until it was brought back. I mean, I have never
taken stuff home other than when I was at work and had papers,
and was going to Washington that night on a train, leaving from
Jersey City, I guess, at 12:30. So I would go home and have
supper, and I would have this exact briefcase [indicating],
with something in it, and either permission by whiz pass or
permission by the card which I carried, to get it out of the
gate, show it to the guard, take it out, go down to Washington,
and sit at the meeting. It slept with me in the Pullman. I'd
come back that next night, checked back into our own system in
the office, and that was that.
But I think it is sort of silly to take it home to study at
home. If you can't study, what the heck are you going to do?
There are too many distractions at home, and it is, of course,
not as adequately protected.
Mr. Jones. Have either you or your wife been approached to
become members of the Communist party?
Mr. Gross. No, we were never approached.
Mr. Jones. Never asked in any way to attend meetings, or
join the party?
Mr. Gross. No, never.
Mr. Jones. I have no more questions.
Mr. Schine. Thank you very much.
Will you state your name for the record, please?
STATEMENT OF DR. FRED B. DANIELS
Dr. Daniels. Fred B. Daniels.
Mr. Schine. Will you spell it, please?
Dr. Daniels. Fred B. D-a-n-i-e-l-s.
Mr. Schine. And your current occupation?
Dr. Daniels. Physicist.
Mr. Schine. You are working at Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. What is your classification there?
Dr. Daniels. GS-14.
Mr. Schine. And your duties?
Dr. Daniels. I am the chief of the Electromagnetic Wave
Section.
Mr. Schine. And how long have you been doing this work?
Dr. Daniels. Since about the early part of 1951. I can't
tell you any exact date on that, because it was sort of a
gradual overlapping of duties when I took over, from my
previous one.
Mr. Schine. Where did you get your training, Dr. Daniels?
Dr. Daniels. I got my bachelor's and master's degrees at
the University of Nebraska, and my doctor's at Texas.
Mr. Schine. And after leaving college, would you tell us
briefly of your career?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I got my degree rather late in life, in
1938. I was thirty-seven at the time. And first I couldn't get
a job. They were rather scarce then. I worked as a salesman in
a photographic store for a while. It must have been about eight
or nine months.
Then I got a job in what was then called AGFA in
Binghampton. It is now the ANSCO Corporation. I was doing
photographic research. That was in February of 1940.
I worked there until July 1940 when I was offered the job
at Fort Monmouth, and it was a better paying job, and so I took
that, and I have been at Fort Monmouth ever since.
Mr. Schine. And what was your position when you worked at
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Daniels. I started in as a P-2.
Mr. Schine. Which is what?
Dr. Daniels. Well, let's see. That would be a GS-7, under
the GS rating.
Mr. Schine. What were your duties at that time?
Dr. Daniels. I was doing work in the field of optical
telephony.
Mr. Schine. And how long did you stay in that work?
Dr. Daniels. That was probably about a year that I was
working on that.
Mr. Schine. And then in 1941, what did you do?
Dr. Daniels. I think my next work was in the field of
submarine detection, after optical telephony.
Mr. Schine. And how long did you continue on in that job?
Dr. Daniels. Well, maybe roughly six months to a year. I
can't tell you exactly.
Mr. Schine. And when did you take over the position you now
have?
Dr. Daniels. That wasn't until 1951. In the meantime I
spent quite a long time, from the time I finished my work on
submarine detection, which was taken over by the navy, that is
the reason I dropped that. Then I worked in sound ranging,
until--it must have been somewhere around 1946 or 1947.
Mr. Schine. Would you continue the description of your
work?
Dr. Daniels. Then, after I finished my work in sound
ranging, I was associated with a very highly classified
project. I can't even tell you what it is.
Mr. Schine. This started in what year?
Dr. Daniels. I believe it started around 1947.
Mr. Schine. And you continued on in that position until----
Dr. Daniels. Until some time in 1950.
Mr. Schine. And then you came into your current position
there?
Dr. Daniels. My current position.
Mr. Schine. And you say your duties in your current
position are what?
Dr. Daniels. Research in the field of electromagnetic wave
propagation, and some in compressional wave, too. There are
certain things I am interested in in that field.
Mr. Schine. Are you head of a department?
Dr. Daniels. Yes; head of a section.
Mr. Schine. Head of the propagation section?
Dr. Daniels. The Electromagnetic Wave Propagation Section.
There are other wave propagation sections, too.
Mr. Schine. And you are cleared for security in every way?
Classified material?
Dr. Daniels. Beg pardon?
Mr. Schine. You are cleared for classified material?
Dr. Daniels. Not now.
Mr. Schine. Oh, you are not?
Dr. Daniels. I was suspended--or, I wasn't suspended, but
my security clearance was suspended, about a week ago.
Mr. Jones. Why?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know. I can guess.
Mr. Schine. Why do you think it was?
Dr. Daniels. I think it is just a rehash of a situation
that started years ago, when I gave an incompetent individual
there an unsatisfactory efficiency rating, who worked for me.
Mr. Jones. Who was that man, sir?
Dr. Daniels. Harry Brandt was his name.
Mr. Jones. Harry Brandt?
Dr. Daniels. Harry Brandt. I am not too sure whether his
name was B-r-a-n-d or B-r-a-n-t or B-r-a-n-d-t.
Mr. Schine. Is it true that you have at one time or other
belonged to organizations listed as subversive by the attorney
general's office?
Dr. Daniels. You say have I belonged to any of those
groups?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Dr. Daniels. No, never have.
Mr. Schine. You have never belonged to any union or any
other front organization?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I have been a member of two unions since
I have been there. I was first a member of the National
Federation of Federal Employees, and at the time I sized them
up as more of a drinking society than a union, that spent more
of their time at the bar than at the meeting hall, and when the
United Public Workers was organized, I joined that. I actually
never attended a single meeting. I paid my dues for two or
three years.
Mr. Schine. What was the name of the other union?
Dr. Daniel. The United Public workers of America. It
changed its name once or twice.
Mr. Carr. Were you ever a member of the United Federal
Workers?
Dr. Daniels. United Federal Workers? No.
Mr. Carr. What year was it you joined this United Public
Workers?
Dr. Daniels. Maybe it was '42 or '43, somewhere along in
there.
Mr. Carr. How did you happen to join this? You had been in
the other group?
Dr. Daniels. I had been in the other union, and I believe I
had already dropped out of the other one for some time. They
organized this union, and because the other one was quite
ineffective, I thought it might be a good idea if they had a
little competition, so I joined the new one.
Mr. Carr. Had you ever heard any information concerning the
United Public Workers of America before you joined them?
Dr. Daniels. No. It was a new union at that time, as far as
I knew.
Mr. Carr. Have you since learned that some of the members
of that union and some of the officers were Communists, or
Communist-affiliated?
Dr. Daniels. I know it has been claimed that there were a
number of Communist members. I don't know to what extent that
applied to the local there, because, as I say, the only contact
I ever had with the union actually was with a man who came
around once a month to collect dues. I gave him the money, and
I understand that he was expelled for Communist activities.
Mr. Carr. The man who collected your dues: what was his
name?
Dr. Daniels. Socol, S-o-c-o-l.
Mr. Carr. Do you recall his first name?
Dr. Daniels. I have no idea.
Mr. Carr. Your only connection with the union was through a
man who has been suspended for alleged Communist activity?
Dr. Daniels. Yes. My only connection with them, or with
him, was that he collected the dues. He would come around once
a month, and I would give him the two dollars. I never had any
other connection.
Mr. Carr. If you weren't active in this union, what was
your connection with them?
Dr. Daniels. My connection was that I gave them two dollars
a month.
Mr. Carr. Why?
Dr. Daniels. Beg pardon?
Mr. Carr. Why? Did you derive any benefits from it?
Dr. Daniels. Well, no more than the fact that once I got
started, I just kept on paying.
Mr. Carr. Were these payments continued after you had heard
that the United Public Workers, at least certain of the
national and some of the local officers, were affiliated with
the Communists?
Dr. Daniels. As soon as I heard about Socol, I stopped
paying my dues then.
Mr. Carr. How many years did you pay dues?
Dr. Daniels. I paid dues for two or three years, probably.
Mr. Carr. Two or three years beginning in what year?
Dr. Daniels. It could have been from '43 to '47. The first
year could have been '43 and the last year '47.
Mr. Carr. What was the name of the local?
Dr. Daniels. I don't recall.
Mr. Carr. You don't even recall the number?
Dr. Daniels. I don't recall that.
Mr. Carr. Do you recall any of the officers of it besides
this man Socol?
Dr. Daniels. I never knew any of the officers except that
someone in the past few days told me Bill Jones was the
president, or whatever you call the local head, at one time.
Mr. Carr. And you received literature from the union?
Dr. Daniels. Very little. I remember once receiving
statements and correspondence from them in connection with this
oath that they had to sign regarding the right to strike and
they said that they agreed with the government that federal
employees had no right to strike, and so the union was taking a
stand.
Mr. Carr. The only one you remember in which they agreed
with the government's stand. You don't recall any other
literature you received from them?
Dr. Daniels. No, I don't. I do remember that at the time
the union started up, there was some sort of a bulletin pasted
on the bulletin boards there by the fort authorities saying
that it was perfectly all right to join this union.
Mr. Carr. You never attended any meeting?
Dr. Daniels. I never attended a single meeting of it.
Mr. Carr. Was the man that solicited you to join this same
man, Socol?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't even tell you who asked me to join.
Mr. Carr. And you had no idea that there was any Communist
tinge to this or any alleged Communist tinge to this union?
Dr. Daniels. I had no idea at all.
Mr. Carr. Until Socol was suspended?
Dr. Daniels. Until Socol was suspended and I read the story
about him.
Mr. Carr. Then what did you do? You immediately dropped
your membership? Or you just failed to rejoin?
Dr. Daniels. Well, because he didn't come around to
collect, I naturally stopped paying. Of course, I would have
stopped anyway as soon as I found out it was Communist.
Mr. Carr. Didn't you take part in any of the activities of
the local?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Carr. You never distributed any of their literature
yourself?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Carr. Was your wife a member of this organization?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Carr. Does your wife work?
Dr. Daniels. Let's see. Well, I got a divorce in '43 and
immediately remarried, and my present wife worked at Western
Electric for a while after the war and then was in the
Department of Censorship here in New York.
Mr. Carr. Now, you have said that you yourself have never
been a member of the Communist party.
Dr. Daniels. I never have.
Mr. Carr. Or any alleged front organization of the
Communist party?
Dr. Daniels. Never any front organization either.
Mr. Carr. How about your wife?
Dr. Daniels. I am sure she never has.
Mr. Rainville. You mentioned two wives. Either of them?
Dr. Daniels. As for the first one, the only thing I knew
she was ever a member of was the DAR, and the second one I
don't know that she ever joined anything. She is not the joiner
type.
Mr. Schine. What was Socol doing at the time he was
collecting dues from you?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know what his duties were.
Mr. Schine. Do you know where he worked?
Dr. Daniels. Don't even know where he worked.
Mr. Rainville. Do you know what his classification was?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know.
Mr. Rainville. But he came to see you in your office?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, during lunch time.
Mr. Rainville. Was it possible for any one to just walk
around there without some kind of clearance?
Dr. Daniels. Well, he was cleared at the time, probably.
Everybody in there presumably was.
Mr. Rainville. But you don't know that he was. You never
inquired?
Mr. Daniels. Well, of course, the laboratories have always
been guarded. And, of course, some people have worked in the
past without clearance. But when a man comes into your room for
any reason whatsoever, you don't ask whether he has clearance
unless he wants to talk about classified matters. The situation
has been changed recently, of course.
Mr. Schine. Isn't it true that you were working on a highly
confidential project at that time?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. What year was that?
Dr. Daniels. Let's see. The highly classified projects
started probably in '47, that I mentioned before. I can't tell
you the exact year.
Mr. Schine. And when was Socol collecting dues from you?
Dr. Daniels. Wait a minute. I will take that back. The
classified project started earlier, but I wasn't associated
with it until possibly as late as 1950.
Mr. Schine. And when was Socol collecting dues?
Dr. Daniels. Beg pardon?
Mr. Schine. When was Socol collecting dues from you?
Dr. Daniels. I think '47 was the last year he collected
dues.
Mr. Schine. You had no connection with classified projects
at that time?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, I had connection with classified
projects. I think the highest classification was confidential
at that time.
Mr. Jones. Dr. Daniels, when was your security clearance
lifted?
Dr. Daniels. A week ago last Tuesday.
Mr. Jones. Now, you said you had reason to believe that
this was lifted because of an efficiency rating that you gave
to Harry Brandt?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Will you explain that a little for us, please?
Dr. Daniels. Well, this man Brandt worked for me on a field
trip, when we went out to Wyoming to make some observations,
when some excess munitions were detonated, in Idaho.
Mr. Jones. In what year?
Dr. Daniels. This was '46.
Mr. Jones. You were a member of the United Public Workers
at the time?
Dr. Daniels. At that time, yes. And the project was
unclassified, particularly the project that Brandt was working
on with me. It was just the determination of the temperature
and wind in the upper levels of the atmosphere by observations
on sound from the explosions that were being set off. Brandt
was a radio mechanic working under me at the time. I was in
charge of the expedition. I found him to be quite incompetent.
He had professional status, but he certainly wasn't a
professional man at all. And he did a number of things in such
an incompetent manner that I had to reprimand him right on the
spot for some of the things that he did. And, as a matter of
fact, some of the things amounted to almost deliberately
sabotaging the experiment.
Mr. Rainville. You didn't suspect deliberate sabotage?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I mean sabotage not for the benefit of
any foreign power but just out of pure meanness.
Mr. Jones. Your relations with him were perhaps a little
bit strained at that time?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, they were very much strained.
Mr. Jones. Now will you continue, Doctor?
Dr. Daniels. And when I came back to the laboratory and
reported to Dr. Anderson, the branch chief, on things that had
happened out there, he suggested that I give him an
``unsatisfactory'' efficiency rating. I gave him the rating of
``unsatisfactory,'' and also recommended that he be demoted
from professional to a subprofessional rating, because he had
no college training whatsoever. He had a high school diploma,
and that was all that I could find in his record.
So I gave him the unsatisfactory rating. He appealed it to
the local appeals board, at Fort Monmouth, and we had a hearing
before that board. Dr. Anderson testified. Dr. Crenshaw, who
had had some previous bad experience with him, testified.
Mr. Jones. Will you spell his name, please?
Dr. Daniels. C-r-e-n-s-h-a-w.
Mr. Jones. Dr. Craig Crenshaw?
Dr. Daniel. Dr. Craig Crenshaw.
Mr. Jones. He is still employed at Fort Monmouth?
Dr. Daniels. He is still at Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Jones. He was one of those who reviewed Harry Brandt's
appeal?
Dr. Daniels. He testified at the hearing in my favor.
Mr. Jones. In your favor?
Dr. Daniels. Yes. And during the hearing, Mr. Brandt came
up with some accusations against me.
Mr. Jones. Personal?
Dr. Daniels. Yes. Well, he said that I had given my wife
access to classified information and shown her classified
equipment.
Mr. Jones. Did he attempt to substantiate that accusation?
Dr. Daniels. No. It was pointed out by others at the
hearing that it wasn't true. He also tried to make some--don't
know why he had to drag it in. He had to make some comment
about my wife, which was completely irrelevant, that she asked
him to get her a card permitting her to buy ice cream, and so
on, at the Post Exchange, just because she didn't want to tell
what her age was. And that was completely irrelevant--just to
show the type of thing he would bring up.
Mr. Jones. What was the result of the appeals board
decision?
Dr. Daniels. The appeals board agreed with me and decided
that he was completely unsatisfactory.
Mr. Jones. Then continue about Harry Brandt. As a result of
the decision rendered by the appeals board, he was then
summarily dismissed?
Dr. Daniels. No, a man can't be dismissed for inefficiency.
He can just be downgraded.
Mr. Jones. He cannot be dismissed for inefficiency. He is
downgraded. So he was downgraded?
Dr. Daniels. No, he wasn't. He appealed it again. He
appealed it to the board in Washington.
Mr. Jones. Oh, yes.
Dr. Daniels. And I don't know how accurate this is. I hear
the story that the American Legion financed his appeal and
supplied a lawyer for him in Washington.
Mr. Jones. Do you know the name of that lawyer?
Dr. Daniels. I heard it at the time, but I don't remember.
He was a brigadier general, I believe, or had been.
Mr. Jones. And what was the result of this appeal?
Dr. Daniels. The result of that was that it was reversed
and I was ordered to give him a good efficiency rating.
Mr. Jones. Now, what is Mr. Brandt doing today?
Dr. Daniels. I believe he is working for the Field Test
Equipment Section, or something similar.
Mr. Jones. Do you see him frequently, or occasionally?
Dr. Daniels. I have never seen him since that incident. He
is located at Fort Monmouth, and I am located at Evans, which
are some miles apart.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever had any reason to believe that in
any way whatsoever, Mr. Brandt contributed in any way to
subversive activities while he was employed out there?
Dr. Daniels. No. I don't think he had any connection with
any subversive activities. I think what he did was just out of
pure stupidity. And I consider him mentally incompetent
Mr. Jones. Was he a member of the Communist party?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know of anyone out there who is a member
of the Communist party or was a member of the party?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Jones. You have no knowledge of any person being a
member of the party or any affiliated front organization?
Dr. Daniels. No, I don't.
Mr. Jones. Now, other than Mr. Brandt, have you anything to
which to attribute the lifting of your security clearance?
Dr. Daniels. Well, there might be other reasons. For one
thing, I am one of the few people around there who seem to have
guts enough when a person is unsatisfactory to try to get rid
of him, transfer him out of the section or do something. Most
supervisors are getting so intimidated they are afraid to do
that. And there are other people that we have gotten rid of
recently that might make accusations against me.
Mr. Jones. Well, for example?
Dr. Daniels. I am not sure exactly who they would be. Well,
one possibility is a man by the name of Lartaud, L-a-r-t-a-u-d.
Mr. Jones. What does he do?
Dr. Daniels. He was in the section already when I became
section chief, and he probably expected to be the assistant
section chief. But when I took over the section, I took it over
only under the condition that Mr. Gross would be my executive
assistant.
I told Dr. Anderson when he offered me the job that I would
take the job as chief if he would put Gross in as assistant.
And Lartaud probably felt himself pretty much put out by that,
and there is the possibility that he might have made an
accusation.
Mr. Jones. There developed thereafter, then, a sort of
rivalry and jealousy?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Now, you have considerable confidence, I take
it, in Mr. Gross?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, I do.
Mr. Jones. Now, other than those two reasons, one, the
rating that you had given Harry Brandt, and, two, the
personality conflict, more or less, in your section, you have
no other reason, to the best of your knowledge, to attribute
the lifting of your security clearance at this time to?
Dr. Daniels. No, I don't.
Mr. Jones. You have no other reason?
Dr. Daniels. No. And I have another reason to feel that
that is it. Any time any of my friends have reported to me that
the FBI has investigated me, the one question that always
popped up there was, ``What do you think of Harry Brandt's
reliability?'' It was always asked in connection with any
questions about me.
Mr. Jones. Now, we were told here by three or four
witnesses that within the last two or three days, there was
held a meeting at a lawyer's office.
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What is the name of that lawyer?
Dr. Daniels. Katchen.
Mr. Jones. What is his first name?
Dr. Daniels. Ira.
Mr. Jones. Now, how did this meeting come to be? Who
arranged for the meeting, and who invited these persons to
attend that meeting?
Dr. Daniels. I wasn't at the meeting. I don't know who
arranged it. He may have arranged it himself.
Mr. Jones. You say that Mr. Katchen may have arranged that
meeting himself?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Why?
Dr. Daniels. I understand that the Anti-Defamation League
wanted to look into the matter of whether there was anything in
the line of anti-Semitic activities behind this.
Mr. Rainville. But you your self are not Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. I am not Jewish. My wife is.
Mr. Rainville. Mr. Brandt is not Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. Mr. Brandt is Jewish.
Mr. Rainville. He is Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. Mr. Lartaud? Is he Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. No, he is not Jewish. There does seem to be a
very high correlation, of course, between the individuals who
have been suspended or had their clearance lifted----
Mr. Rainville. But in your own case, 50 percent of them are
Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. It is reversed.
Mr. Rainville. Not entirely. Of the two men you preferred
charges against or in some way demoted because of bringing Mr.
Gross in, one is Jewish and one is not.
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. So you are 50 percent anti-Semitic yourself?
Dr. Daniels. You mean in terms of what I have done to them?
Mr. Rainville. Yes.
Dr. Daniels. Okay, if you want to put it that way. But it
was not on a basis of religion, I can assure you.
Mr. Rainville. But you are jumping to the conclusion that
there is some anti-Semitism here?
Dr. Daniels. No, that is not my conclusion. In fact, I
doubt it, myself.
Mr. Rainville. Well, that is odd. Because some of the
gentlemen who were discussing it here didn't exactly quote you
but inferred that you had brought the matter up. And just a
moment ago you said, ``Now, I am not Jewish, but my wife is''--
as if that might be part of the explanation.
Dr. Daniels. I did feel originally that that might be what
was behind it. And actually I am still, to tell the truth,
somewhat undecided.
Mr. Rainville. But a moment ago, you said there was no
other reason.
Dr. Daniels. Okay, but these accusations all started within
a certain group at Fort Monmouth. And it may be that the
individuals involved there are anti-Semitic. Of course, there
may be other reasons for their activities, too, for their
accusations. I feel in many cases they are just taking
reprisals against somebody who has made some adverse comments
about their methods of investigation.
I know that shortly before my security clearance was
lifted, some time ago, quite obviously in connection with this
Brandt case, I had gone to the military head of the security
there and complained about the way the civilian security
people, Reid and his group there, were using the services of
stool pigeons like this Brandt, and so on. And shortly after
that, my security clearance was lifted for the first time. I
feel that was a reprisal.
Mr. Rainville. How does that tie in with anti-Semitism?
Dr. Daniels. Well, it ties in with what I said. In some
cases, it might be an anti-Semitic bias. In other cases, it may
be a reprisal for some action you have taken that is
unfavorable to them.
Mr. Rainville. Yes, but you are anti-Semitic, too. You
tried to get a man demoted, and a board finally said you were
wrong about his efficiency. Wouldn't that be persecution, or
something?
Dr. Daniels. Some people might look at it that way.
Mr. Rainville. But you are one of the people that are doing
the looking, and you say it looks as if the other guys are
doing it, but you yourself, because you do the same thing, are
not subject to that criticism.
Dr. Daniels. I tried to point out before--I am not being
absolutely dogmatic about it--that I am not firmly convinced
myself that it is anti-Semitism. I am not firmly convinced that
it is not. Let's look at it this way.
Mr. Jones. Then, Dr. Daniels, I wonder if we might get
back, here, to Mr. Katchen for just a moment. Time is rushing
on us, here, and we would like to make every effort to tie all
these ends together. We would appreciate every possible
assistance you could give us in coming to the objectives of
this committee just as hurriedly as possible.
First, you have just said that Mr. Katchen arranged this
meeting of those who were suspended and those whose security
clearance was lifted.
Dr. Daniels. As far as I know.
Mr. Jones. As far as you know?
Dr. Daniels. I was not there.
Mr. Jones. That is right. Now, who attended that meeting,
Dr. Daniels?
Dr. Daniels. I don't even know, for sure.
Mr. Jones. You don't know any of the persons who attended
the meeting?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't say for sure.
Mr. Jones. When was the meeting held, Doctor?
Dr. Daniels. It must have been within the past couple of
days.
Mr. Jones. Where was it held?
Dr. Daniels. In his office.
Mr. Jones. In the afternoon, or in the evening?
Dr. Daniels. I don't remember.
Mr. Jones. You don't remember whether you met in the
afternoon or in the evening?
Dr. Daniels. I didn't go. I wasn't there.
Mr. Jones. Who invited these people to attend the meeting?
Dr. Daniels. I am just assuming that it was Mr. Katchen,
but I don't know for certain, because I wasn't there.
Mr. Jones. And what interest has he in particular in this
situation?
Dr. Daniels. I think his interest comes through his
connection with the Anti-Defamation League.
Mr. Jones. Is he retained by the Anti-Defamation League?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't say that definitely.
Mr. Jones. Who brought this case to his attention? The
Anti-Defamation League?
Dr. Daniels. It is possible.
Mr. Jones. Did you arrange to have Mr. Katchen handle this
matter?
Dr. Daniels. No. I have nothing to do with the Anti-
Defamation League or B'nai B'rith.
Mr. Jones. I understand that, Doctor. But you did not
arrange with Mr. Katchen to arrange this meeting?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Jones. How well do you know Mr. Katchen?
Dr. Daniels. Well, not too well. My main association with
him was when I went to him a few weeks ago to have him draw up
a will for me. That is when I actually met him for the first
time.
Wait a minute. Excuse me. I am wrong. I had a case against
my landlord once, where I sued him for over-collection of rent.
He was my lawyer in that.
Mr. Jones. And the second time was to draw up a will?
Dr. Daniels. The second time was to draw up a will.
Mr. Jones. And who referred you to Mr. Katchen?
Dr. Daniels. In the first case, I am not certain but I
believe it was Harold Stein. I know he had had Mr. Katchen in a
similar case once.
Mr. Jones. And who is Mr. Stein?
Dr. Daniels. Another employee at the laboratory. He works
through a computing group there.
Mr. Jones. And Mr. Stein suggested that you go and see Mr.
Katchen in this suit you had against your landlord?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Following that, you went back to Mr. Katchen to
have him draw up the will?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. And then your third meeting with Mr. Katchen was
at the time that you discussed with him this matter at
Monmouth; is that correct?
Dr. Daniels. Listen, I didn't attend that meeting, I tell
you.
Mr. Jones. No, but you talked with him over the telephone.
Dr. Daniels. I talked with him at the time I went up to
take back the copy of the will and point out some corrections I
wanted in it.
Mr. Jones. And that time you discussed with him the
possible anti-Semitic problem which existed out there?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, I did discuss it with him at that time.
Mr. Jones. And that is how Mr. Katchen's interests had been
aroused in this situation?
Dr. Daniels. No, his interests had already been aroused
because he started asking me questions about it.
Mr. Jones. I see. Now, how well do you know Dr. Craig
Crenshaw?
Dr. Daniels. By the way, I would like to volunteer some
information, further information, in connection with Mr.
Katchen, if I may.
Mr. Jones. Yes, I would like to have that.
Dr. Daniels. He called me last night. It seemed that some
of the people who had been here yesterday went to his office,
and he called me last night to tell me what had happened and
gave his opinion on the thing, if that is of any interest to
you.
Mr. Rainville. His opinion is of much interest.
Dr. Daniels. His opinion was that--well, he said, ``This
seems to be a very sincere attempt on the part of the committee
to find out just how security matters are handled at the fort
there. That is all that I can see.''
Mr. Jones. I may say to you, Doctor, that we were amazed to
learn from several witnesses of this anti-Semitic problem or
alleged problem. It was shocking to hear these allegations made
here, and we want to exercise every effort to clarify this just
as much as possible. Primarily, we are interested in the
security and the loyalty program out there at Monmouth, as you
can well appreciate.
However, I think in order to perhaps arrive at an
understandable picture of that situation, it is necessary to
bring in all these related aspects or unrelated aspects and to
sift it all through and see just what we have.
Now, how well do you know Dr. Craig Crenshaw?
Dr. Daniels. I know him very well, through my connection
with him at the laboratory.
Mr. Jones. How long have you known him?
Dr. Daniels. It must have been about twelve years.
Mr. Jones. You have known him for twelve years?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. On an intimate basis?
Dr. Daniels. We don't meet socially at all but we have been
very closely associated at the laboratory.
Mr. Jones. Professionally, you are quite close?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What other relations have you had with Dr.
Crenshaw out there, in the professional sense?
Dr. Daniels. I can't give it to you exactly. I think at one
time I was his supervisor. And then we had parallel positions
on an equal level for a while. He was called the assistant
chief for administration, and I was the assistant chief for
research in the section.
Mr. Jones. Now, Dr. Crenshaw spoke in your favor during
Harry Brandt's appeal. Is that correct?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Since that time has Dr. Crenshaw ever
volunteered any other assistance in your behalf in one way or
another?
Dr. Daniels. Not that I can think of.
Mr. Jones. In no matters relating to loyalty or security or
anything else?
Dr. Daniels. Oh, he probably has been questioned by the FBI
regarding me. He never discussed it with me that I remember.
Is Dr. Crenshaw currently being investigated by the FBI?
Mr. Jones. For what reason?
Dr. Daniels. Apparently in connection with this Brandt
case. Because he first asked about Dr. Crenshaw, as to his
loyalty, what I thought of it, and so on, and then whether
there was any person who had reason to be antagonistic towards
him. First I couldn't think of anything at all, and then my
mind went back to this Brandt case, and then the man from the
FBI nodded when I said, ``Harry Brandt,'' and I made a few
allusions to certain things that had happened, and the man from
the FBI obviously understood what it was. It was regarding
highly classified information. And I could see right off that
he understood what I meant, though, and vice versa. And it was
Brandt that was accusing Crenshaw.
Mr. Schine. Dr. Daniels, in your electromagnetic
propagation work, you have had some contact with MIT, have you
not?
Dr. Daniels. MIT? Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Do you know a Mr. Yamins?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. What is your contact with Mr. Yamins?
Dr. Daniels. Well, the only contact I have ever had with
him has been either through written memoranda asking him for
information, or occasional trips up there. I might go in and
ask, ``Have you this information I wanted on the TR box?'' or
something like that, and walk out again.
Mr. Schine. What is Mr. Yamins' job at MIT?
Dr. Daniels. How long has he been there?
Mr. Schine. What is his job there?
Dr. Daniels. He is liaison officer, I believe. I am not
sure. He is a liaison man, anyway, to maintain liaison between
the Signal Corps here and work going on at MIT, to keep us
informed of anything that they are doing that might be of
interest to us and to arrange for the loan of government
property, interchange of property, and so on.
Mr. Schine. His work is not solely confined to propagation,
is it?
Dr. Daniels. Oh, no.
Mr. Schine. He is liaison for the entire relationship
between MIT and Fort Monmouth?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Schine. As well as the rest of the Signal Corps?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Schine. He has complete access to classified material?
Dr. Daniels. Mr. Yamins, you mean?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Dr. Daniels. Yes, so far as I know. Certainly. Because he
wore a secret badge. He wore the red badge that indicates
clearance for secret.
Mr. Schine. He comes to Fort Monmouth occasionally?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, I saw him there a couple of days ago
apparently when he came back to receive his suspension, and so
on. I was sitting in Colonel Moses' office waiting to be called
up here, and I saw him with his secret badge on, indicating
that he had been cleared, for secret.
Mr. Schine. He discussed the charge with you?
Dr. Daniels. No. He just nodded to some stenographer and
walked out again. We just nodded.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us briefly what the charges
were, against Mr. Yamins?
Dr. Daniels. I have no idea.
Mr. Schine. Had you heard what the charges were?
Dr. Daniels. I hadn't heard what they are in his case.
Mr. Schine. With whom does Mr. Yamins deal when he comes to
Fort Monmouth?
Dr. Daniels. He would deal directly with the people at
headquarters who are located at Fort Monmouth proper.
Mr. Schine. Yes. Would you give us their names?
Dr. Daniels. That is not at Evans where I am located.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us their names?
Dr. Daniels. Well, Squire Laboratories, the place where he
reports in.
Mr. Schine. With whom does he deal in Squire Laboratories?
Dr. Daniels. I would suspect that he reports directly to
Dr. Zahl, the director of engineering.
Mr. Schine. How do you spell that?
Dr. Daniels. Z-a-h-l.
Mr. Schine. And whenever he wants to confer with anyone
involved with a specific project, he goes to Dr. Zahl and lines
up the meeting, and then he is free to come and go, or he was
free to come and go prior to the lifting of the security?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Is it Dr. Yamins?
Dr. Daniels. No. He doesn't have a doctor's degree.
Mr. Schine. Is he a scientist?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, he is a physicist.
Mr. Schine. Do you know anything about his background?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know anything about it at all.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Dexter Masters?
Dr. Daniels. Masters? The name doesn't sound familiar at
all.
Mr. Jones. Did you know Julius Rosenberg while you were out
there?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us what you did prior to going
to college in 1932?
Dr. Daniels. I worked for a number of years as a
photographer. I started in college in 1918. I had one year of
college, and then I dropped out for about a year or so.
Mr. Schine. Where were you a photographer?
Dr. Daniels. That was at the University of Michigan.
Mr. Schine. You worked as a photographer at the University
of Michigan? Where were you a photographer?
Dr. Daniels. No, that was much later, I worked as a
photographer from about 1926 to 1930.
Mr. Schine. What did you do prior?
Dr. Daniels. Prior to 1926?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Dr. Daniels. As I started to say, I was at the University
of Michigan for one year. That took me up to 1919. And then I
spent a year at home. Part of that year I worked in Kalamazoo
with the tire factory there.
Mr. Schine. And you held odd jobs between that time and the
time you went to----
Dr. Daniels. Well, I went in 1920 to Germany. That was
during the inflation period. And because of the inflation, the
small amount of money that my mother was able to send me that
would enable me to go to school over there.
Mr. Schine. That was when you became interested in
photography?
Dr. Daniels. I had been interested in photography ever
since I was a very young child.
Mr. Schine. Your interest has continued?
Dr. Daniels. Yes. I was a member of a camera club over in
Germany.
Mr. Schine. What kind of cameras do you have?
Mr. Daniels. I have just a little 35-millimeter camera.
Mr. Schine. Do you ever use the Lane Polaroid camera?
Dr. Daniels. I have never used that type yet.
Mr. Schine. Ever use the Minox camera?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. You know what the Minox is?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, one of those small cameras that takes 6-
millimeter film or something like that.
Mr. Schine. You probably saw that camera being developed
when you were in Germany. It was developed in the twenties.
Dr. Daniels. Well, I didn't get any access to what was
being developed there.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever seen a Minox camera?
Dr. Daniels. I believe I have seen the Minox. I think one
of the men at the lab had one at one time.
Mr. Schine. What was his name?
Dr. Daniels. Kaiser.
Mr. Schine. What was his first name?
Dr. Daniels. K-a-i-s-e-r. His first name is Morris.
Mr. Schine. What is Mr. Kaiser doing now?
Dr. Daniels. He is chief of the Counter-Measures Branch.
Mr. Schine. And in that capacity, what are his duties?
Dr. Daniels. He is the chief, head of the whole branch.
Mr. Schine. And what does that work entail?
Dr. Daniels. Well, various methods, countermeasures, such
as detection of enemy radio transmissions, and so on. I don't
know too much about it. It is highly classified.
Mr. Schine. Did it ever occur to you that it was rather
strange that Mr. Kaiser would have the Minox camera in his
office? Isn't there a regulation prohibiting cameras?
Dr. Daniels. There is a regulation preventing it, yes. You
can't take in cameras or binoculars.
Mr. Schine. Did it ever occur to you that it was odd for
him to have the camera?
Dr. Daniels. I don't remember whether he showed it to me in
his office or not.
Mr. Schine. You saw it in the office, though, didn't you?
Dr. Daniels. I believe I did.
Mr. Schine. Did it occur to you that it was peculiar for
Dr. Kaiser to have a camera in his office, particularly a Minox
camera?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I thought at the time it was a little
improper to bring it in.
Mr. Schine. Did you ask him about it?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I didn't say anything about it.
Mr. Schine. Did he say anything about it?
Dr. Daniels. He was in a higher level than I was.
Mr. Schine. Yes. Did he display the camera freely, or did
he just happen to pull it out and show it to you because of
your interest in photography?
Dr. Daniels. He was interested. I think it was one of the
first ones that had ever been imported.
Mr. Schine. I see. This was what year? 1950, wasn't it?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't give you even a guess.
Mr. Schine. Wasn't it around 1950?
Dr. Daniels. That year or before.
Mr. Schine. 1949?
Dr. Daniels. I say either that or earlier.
Mr. Schine. It wasn't before 1949, was it?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't say definitely. I can't even recall
the exact office.
Mr. Schine. It was a little silver-colored camera?
Dr. Daniels. It was a very, very small camera.
Mr. Schine. That pulled out.
Dr. Daniels. I think that was the name of it. I am not 100
percent sure. It was the smallest camera I had seen.
Mr. Schine. Did he tell you the Gestapo developed this
camera during the war?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, it was a camera that had been developed
in Germany during the war.
Mr. Schine. You had seen that camera in Germany probably?
Dr. Daniels. I hadn't seen it in Germany.
Mr. Schine. Wasn't it through your interest in photography
that this subject first came up?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, it was through that.
Mr. Schine. He didn't display the camera freely, though,
did he?
Dr. Daniels. He knew that I was interested in photography,
and he showed it to me for that reason. I don't know to what
other people he showed it at the time.
Mr. Schine. He didn't display the camera freely, though did
he?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know. He might have. I wasn't in his
office regularly, so I wouldn't know to whom he showed it.
Mr. Schine. But due to the fact that he was in a superior
position to you, you didn't feel that you should discuss with
him the security angle?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. Did you feel you should report it to anyone?
Dr. Daniels. Well, under the circumstances, I didn't feel
that it was necessary. Considering he was a branch chief, or
whatever his position was at the time, I would feel that he was
certainly a reliable individual.
Mr. Schine. Was Mr. Kaiser a close friend of yours?
Dr. Daniels. Well, not too close.
Mr. Schine. He wouldn't show you the camera, though, if you
were a complete stranger.
Dr. Daniels. You see, he was my superior, mainly, and he
knew of my interest in photography.
Mr. Schine. You were more than just a laboratory
acquaintance of his. You knew him socially, didn't you?
Dr. Daniels. I am sorry. I didn't get that question.
Mr. Schine. You knew him socially, didn't you?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Schine. You had seen him from time to time socially?
Dr. Daniels. Well, not too often. Maybe five or six times
in my entire period at the laboratory.
Mr. Schine. But he didn't hesitate to confide in you the
fact that he had this camera, although he probably asked you to
not tell anybody that he had the camera with him in his office?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know that he made such a request in
the office.
Mr. Schine. But he didn't feel it was necessary to make it?
Dr. Daniels. Maybe that was it.
Mr. Schine. It is pretty well known around Fort Monmouth
that you are not supposed to take binoculars and cameras and
other such equipment on the base?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, it is pretty generally known you
shouldn't take cameras in.
Mr. Schine. Had you ever seen him take pictures there?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. He didn't demonstrate it to you?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. Didn't he pull out some pictures and show them
to you?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know whether he had any pictures at
the time.
Mr. Schine. That were done with the Minox camera? Didn't he
show you the size of the negatives?
Dr. Daniels. He might have, but I wouldn't remember.
Mr. Schine. You don't recall? Try and think back to the
incident.
Dr. Daniels. No, I can't remember.
Mr. Schine. Didn't he pull out some negatives and show you
the size of them?
Dr. Daniels. I really don't remember. It would have been
the obvious thing to do, of course, but I don't remember
whether he did or not.
Mr. Rainville. Is it your feeling that because of the
hearings of this committee you and some of these other people
were perhaps removed from security clearance?
Dr. Daniels. That is what I have been trying to figure out
for myself ever since it started.
Mr. Rainville. Do you think that it has perhaps been more
sweeping than necessary, in an effort to perhaps protect the
security officers themselves from being charged with
negligence?
Dr. Daniels. That is one theory that I have had regarding
the reason that these all happened to come exactly at this
time.
Mr. Jones. That is all. Thank you very much, Dr. Daniels.
Mr. Schine. Would you be seated, please, and state your
name for the record?
STATEMENT OF BERNARD LIPEL
Mr. Lipel. Bernard Lipel.
Mr. Schine. That is L-i-p-e-l-l?
Mr. Lipel. No, one final ``l.''
Mr. Schine. And your current occupation, Mr. Lipel?
Mr. Lipel. I am a physicist at Evans Signal Laboratory Fort
Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us where you got your training
for this work?
Mr. Lipel. Yes. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Mr. Schine. Could you speak a little louder?
Mr. Lipel. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, between 1934
and l938.
Mr. Jones. Is that at Troy, New York?
Mr. Lipel. Troy, New York, yes.
Mr. Schine. And when you left there, in 1938, where did you
go?
Mr. Lipel. I was for a time unemployed, and the first
regular employment I had was working for--I think it was
Optical Research, Incorporated, something like that. Anyhow it
was a company run by a Mr. Feinbloom, who was manufacturing
contact lenses.
Mr. Schine. What year was this?
Mr. Lipel. This was, as well as I can recall, probably in
1939. My employment there was very short. I took that
employment as a temporary job.
Mr. Schine. Would you sketch your history?
Mr. Lipel. Certainly. I was then employed as a machinist
for the Simmon, S-i-m-m-o-n, Brothers, in Long Island City for
a couple of months. I then found my first technical job, which
was for Eagle Electric Company, Eagle Electric Manufacturing
Company, who were then in Brooklyn, New York. They are now in
Long Island City. I remained there until I accepted employment
at the Signal Corps Laboratory.
Mr. Schine. Which was when?
Mr. Lipel. On September 3rd, 1940.
Mr. Schine. And how did you happen to take employment at
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Lipel. During the period of my unemployment, I believe,
I took an examination, a formal examination. During the summer
of 1940, I received an inquiry. And I was interviewed and
offered a position during the summer of 1940. I took the job
effective the 3rd of September.
Mr. Schine. Will you give us the names of the individuals
you stated as references when you filled out your application
form?
Mr. Lipel. That was thirteen years ago, and I can't be sure
about that.
Mr. Schine. So in 1940, you took a position with Fort
Monmouth.
Would you tell us the position and the duties, please?
Mr. Lipel. It was a position as a junior physicist, P-1. I
was assigned to the Sound Ranging Section.
Mr. Schine. Sound ranging?
Mr. Lipel. The Sound Ranging Section.
Mr. Schine. And would you sketch briefly the evolution of
your employment at Fort Monmouth, the various jobs you held?
Mr. Lipel. Well, the section and branch that I was then
assigned to--the laboratories underwent various changes in
names, but I remained essentially with the same group until, I
think, at the end of the year 1947, I left what was then the
General Engineering Branch at Evans Signal laboratory, the
descendant of this original job, and went to work at Cole
Signal Laboratory in the Wire Communications Branch.
Mr. Schine. And what were your duties there?
Mr. Lipel. They were concerned with data transmission
problems.
Mr. Schine. I see. And you continued on at Coles since that
time?
Mr. Lipel. No, I continued at Coles until on the 9th of
August this year. I was transferred again, back to the Applied
Physics Branch, which is actually the original group that I
once worked with, but this time with new duties, in a different
section.
Mr. Schine. Yes. What are your duties?
Mr. Lipel. I am concerned now with the development of
digital computing machinery.
Mr. Schine. Which is what?
Mr. Lipel. Well, digital computing machines are machines
which are mathematical machines.
Mr. Jones. Is that the electric brain?
Mr. Lipel. There has been a lot of publicity of that kind.
Actually, in many cases, they are simply the same thing as a
desk calculator, but required to do more of the job
automatically.
Mr. Schine. In your work at Evans prior to the time you
went to Coles Laboratories, you say you worked on transmission?
Mr. Lipel. No, at Evans Laboratory, with a few temporary
exceptions, for the seven and a half years I originally I was
at Evans Laboratory the vast majority of that time I was
working on sound ranging equipment. I also, for the record,
worked on some underwater equipment and on some heat detecting
equipment.
Mr. Schine. Was all of this work classified?
Mr. Lipel. Most of the time I had duties on classified
projects.
Mr. Schine. Now, you have been cleared for classified work?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And still are?
Mr. Lipel. I am cleared up to secret.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever had any problems with regard to
clearance?
Mr. Lipel. No, I have never had any problems with regard to
clearance.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever been reprimanded for any breach
of security?
Mr. Lipel. Oh, yes; I have been reprimanded.
Mr. Carr. For security negligence?
Mr. Lipel. Security negligence, yes. As a matter of fact, I
have never been satisfied with the case, and I believe that the
records in my file indicate that I have a grievance in the
matter.
But briefly--I won't mention the relative importance of
this material, which would be a point.
Mr. Schine. Was it very important classified material?
Mr. Lipel. No, it was unimportant classified material. But
that has nothing to do with the regulations, since unimportant
material should be safeguarded in the same way as important
material.
Mr. Schine. When did this situation take place?
Mr. Lipel. In 1945. And, briefly, what happened there is
that I had a violation and received a written reprimand, which
is in my file.
Some period later, I believe less than a year, I don't
remember how long, there was a second violation.
Mr. Schine. What was the first violation?
Mr. Lipel. A specification marked secret was found by the
guard who inspected our building. It had been left out by the
group. A note was left that this specification is to be found
in the adjutant's office.
I, as the senior member of that group, and as the one with
the longest employment and, therefore, the longest clear
record, went and got it.
The penalty at that time, the known penalty, for such a
thing, was a reprimand, and I felt that the reprimand would not
hurt me as it would anyone else in the group.
I didn't want to go into this, but the truth of the matter
was that I was in the habit of inspecting that building before
locking up every day. It was wintertime. We were in a very
remote building.
I was in the main building that whole afternoon, actually
working with the specifications people. Because of the bad
weather I said, ``Oh, well, I won't go back today.'' And I
omitted my regular inspection.
However, I felt it my moral duty to be responsible, and
therefore, I went and took the specification. I received that
reprimand.
Mr. Schine. What was the penalty?
Mr. Lipel. There was a written reprimand, which was placed
in my 201 file.
Mr. Schine. This was in 1944?
Mr. Lipel. Either '44 or '45.
Mr. Carr. In February?
Mr. Lipel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. When was the second one?
Mr. Lipel. The second one must have been in April 1945.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us about that, please?
Mr. Lipel. Yes. I was in Washington, I don't remember the
nature of this. There was some kind of a big show in
Washington, and the show was ceased because of the death of
President Roosevelt. Before the ceasing of the show, which
originally was very highly classified, General Somervell took
around a lot of newspaper reporters and showed them all this
equipment in sort of a flamboyant attitude. The newspapers were
supposed to publish articles that all this stuff had been
quickly declassified as a gesture of defiance, because we had
won the war. The articles were of that tone. The last day, when
practically everybody went in there, we were all permitted to
circulate, and I picked up a pamphlet which was marked secret,
but which everybody was permitted to take, including the
newspapermen. In any case, that was an unwise thing to do, of
course, without having it erased.
But I brought it back, and it was among my possessions. We
moved from one room to another, and all these possessions were
filed in a heap.
And, as I deserved to have happen, this secret pamphlet was
on top, and it was found.
Therefore, I again was called to task for a violation of
security. I never made any issue as to the importance of the
matter.
Mr. Schine. What was the penalty then?
Mr. Lipel. The penalty then? As stated, I was sent a
letter, an exact copy of the original reprimand, stating: ``You
are being reprimanded for this.''
I don't remember whether it said, ``It is your first,'' or
``it is your second offense.''
And the nature of that reprimand was such that the case was
closed.
However, that didn't finish the matter, because about a
month later the project officer, Major Geoffrey, the head of
the branch--Mr.----
Mr. Schine. J-e-f-f-r-e-y?
Mr. Lipel. No, Geoffrey, G-e-o-f-f-r-e-y.
He told me that, ``Apparently I have been told that you and
I have to go and see''--I don't know the name of this officer--
``in the front office.''
And having gone down there, I was told, ``Well, it is too
bad, but you had a second offense last month, and the
regulations are mandatory. You are obliged to be suspended for
one day.''
I said, ``I didn't hear about that, but if it is mandatory
I guess I will have to do it.''
There certainly wasn't any time to bring up the question of
the importance of this material or whether I needed to have had
the original reprimand, the first reprimand.
So I agreed to take a date at my own convenience for
suspension at that time. It so happened that I was very busy, I
was preparing to make a trip to California, in connection with
some classified project.
However, I was sent a new form. That is, I was notified in
writing. And the new writing apparently was a substitution for
my original letter of reprimand. It referred to some Civil
Service regulations, which I am not usually familiar with, so I
went to the personnel people and insisted on getting a copy of
the regulations.
The regulation I found had been cited as the authority for
punishing me with a day's suspension, and it merely said that
suspension could be imposed for certain kinds of disciplinary
offenses, provided it was made adequately clear to all the
personnel that such would be the penalty.
In view of the fact that it had not been made clear, for
example, that it had not been made clear in my first letter of
reprimand that the next similar offense would be cause for
suspension, and in view of the fact that I had known of no
signs to that effect around the place, no memoranda on the
matter passed around, and in fact, inasmuch as I had been sent
the second reprimand, which supposedly closed the case, I
thought that it was perhaps some injustice.
So, investigating further, I found that there was in
existence a suspension and discharge committee, I think, in the
charge of some officer. I went down and saw them and found that
that committee was very much perturbed. They felt that they had
been short circuited by the people who had spoken to me.
And they were anxious to have me make a case to fight this,
so that they could reassert their authority.
However, I didn't feel that I wanted to get involved with
anything of that kind.
I also had a long trip to California imminent. I took my
day's suspension and instead wrote up this same material and
requested that this be placed in my 201 file.
About a year later, or more, long after I had returned from
California, I found that in my absence, as a result of my
request to have this objection of mine recorded, a letter had
been written to the branch project officer asking comments on
my objection, and the comment which I found in the file is a
copy of the memorandum stating that this would henceforth be
the penalty.
And that memorandum is dated later than the date of my
offense.
So I feel, naturally, that, if anything, it just proves my
case, which only has to do as to whether I needed to have been
penalized with the day's suspension.
Of course, it has no bearing at all upon whether or not I
committed offenses.
Mr. Schine. Did you know that you have been under
investigation?
Mr. Lipel. No, I have not at any time had any information
of any kind that I am being investigated.
Mr. Schine. And can you think of any reason, other than the
two offenses that you just stated to us, that would bring about
an investigation of you?
Mr. Lipel. I see no reason why those offenses would be
cause for investigation, since everything involved there is
open and aboveboard.
I don't think my loyalty is in any way questionable.
Mr. Schine. Can you tell us if any member of your family is
connected with subversive organizations?
Mr. Lipel. To the best of my knowledge, I know of no such
instance.
Mr. Schine. Do you know if any of the individuals you gave
as references are connected with subversive organizations?
Mr. Lipel. Can you tell me the individuals whom I gave as
reference? I don't recall.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us the names of any of them that
you can remember?
Mr. Lipel. I would be guessing, I would have to give the
people whom I would give today. I don't recall.
In other words, I am sure I can give you a list of names
which would overlap the list of names I gave then. But I just
don't recall the complete list that I gave.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us the names you can give to us?
Mr. Lipel. All right. I am sure I must have given the names
of some of my college professors, probably Professor R. A.
Patterson, P-a-t-t-e-r-s-o-n, and G. H. Carragan, C-a-r-r-a-g-
a-n. They were then the head of the department.
And another senior professor, I may have given the
following people, whom I am sure I have given since.
Mr. Bernard Meltzer, whose present address is in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I could probably find his address
later.
Mr. Samuel Benjamin, who now resides in Washington, D.C.
Mr. Herbert Kaufman, who resides in Brooklyn, New York now.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Barnet Pomerantz?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, Barnet Pomerantz, who was the chief
engineer of the company I worked for at that tine, and who was
an obvious reference.
Mr. Schine. What about Dr. D. A. Wilbur?
Mr. Lipel. He was another professor.
Mr. Schine. You haven't answered the question I asked to
you previously as to whether to your knowledge any of these
references you have given are connected with any subversive
organizations.
Mr. Lipel. No, I have no knowledge of any of those people
being connected with subversive organizations, although now I
have recalled the list of references, I must say that I know
nothing at all about most of these people, except my personal
friends. Except that I know that Dr. Patterson is now at Brook
Haven National Laboratory in one of the senior positions.
Mr. Schine. When were you first approached by a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Lipel. I don't think I ever have been. Approached for
what purpose?
Mr. Schine. Let me rephrase the question. When did you
first meet a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Lipel. Oh, quite likely, when I was seven years old, I
certainly encountered Communists in school. We had a case in my
freshman year where there was a prominent, a very prominent
case, that received a lot of publicity, where one of my
instructors was ejected from the school.
That man is Granville Hicks, who nowadays is an anti-
Communist.
Mr. Schine. And can you tell us what other names you can
supply to us of your contacts with Communists?
Mr. Lipel. I don't know of any. I may have known people at
one time who I knew as Communists, but I don't remember their
names. But nobody I knew well.
Also I may still know people that are Communists, but I
don't know anything about their being Communists.
Let me say this, I know of no person in my acquaintance,
certainly, who is a Communist. I don't know about any of these
references.
Mr. Schine. I am not thinking of the references now.
Mr. Lipel. I can recall no case.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever discuss the Communist party within
the last few years?
Mr. Lipel. Not within the last few years, no. I can
remember when I went to high school we practically debated it
in high school. It was a question of my age.
Incidentally, for the record, I want to say that by the
time I had gotten out of college I was fond of objecting to the
socialist kind of economy.
Mr. Schine. When you leave the laboratory where you work,
how do you usually go home?
Mr. Lipel. You are referring to my present laboratory,
where I have been working only since about the first of August?
I usually drive to----
Mr. Schine. You go home by automobile?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, I usually go home by automobile, driving by
way of--I think it is called Greengrove Road, to Park Avenue.
Mr. Schine. Do you drive home alone?
Mr. Lipel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Nobody drives with you?
Mr. Lipel. Nobody drives with me.
Mr. Schine. What about the last place you worked, the last
laboratory?
Mr. Lipel. Coles Signal Laboratory?
Mr. Schine. Did someone ride home with you?
Mr. Lipel. No, nobody regularly rode home with me. In fact,
99 percent of the time, I rode alone. If anybody ever rode home
with me, it was because he needed a ride temporarily, just as I
might leave my car downtown to be repaired and would request
somebody else for a ride.
Mr. Schine. Do you often take work home with you to work
on?
Mr. Lipel. Not often, but there have been periods where I
have.
For example, from about last October until March, I took
home with me work, and I came into Coles Laboratory to work,
because I was working on a paper for publication.
And I couldn't, naturally, work on that entirely during
laboratory hours.
Most frequently, I would come into the laboratory to work
there because I had better working facilities.
Mr. Schine. When you take this work home with you, do you
usually carry a briefcase?
Mr. Lipel. No, no, I would usually carry it out with me.
Mr. Schine. How do you get your work from your office to
the car? Do they inspect what you are taking out?
Mr. Lipel. No, I see now that you are referring to this
period at Coles Laboratory when I practically every day went
into the laboratory, and perhaps twice a week would take some
of the material home with me.
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Lipel. One of the reasons I would take it home--at that
time I was unmarried, and sometimes after having written things
up I would want to use the period while waiting for dinner in
the restaurant to glance over the material.
Briefly, I will state that.
In connection with this unclassified paper I was writing
for publication, and which was cleared for publication, I let
the guards know that I was cleared for removal of classified
material, and therefore, there was no question about my taking
these papers out, and I utilized that advantage to have easy
access to taking out these folders.
I want to say that at all times I made a record in the book
to indicate when I entered and left, and I didn't think that
this matter was any cause for suspicion.
Mr. Schine. How did you carry these papers out? Did you
have a briefcase?
Mr. Lipel. No. I would usually use an envelope. The most
likely thing for me to use would be a paper envelope. Also, at
one time, I believe I had one of these looseleaf notebooks that
has a zipper around the side, and therefore serves as an
envelope.
Mr. Schine. And inasmuch as you were cleared for property
removal of classified information, if you wanted to take
something to refer to in connection with your writing on this
unclassified paper, even if they had inspected the material you
were taking with you, it wouldn't have made any difference?
Mr. Lipel. In order not to drag this out, I wanted to say
for the record that I have very properly removed classified
information for business purposes, in the same way. We
sometimes take classified information on a trip, and so on.
Mr. Schine. But the guards never did bother to inspect the
papers?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Schine. Once you received the removal slip, you were
able to take the material out freely?
Mr. Lipel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. How did you obtain this removal slip?
Mr. Lipel. I requested it--no, I didn't. A number of
individuals from our group, the senior individuals in the
group, received these passes.
Mr. Schine. From whom?
Mr. Lipel. I believe they were issued in the name of the
laboratory director, and I received them from the
administrative aide to the branch.
Mr. Schine. When did you receive them?
Mr. Lipel. I don't recall exactly, but I have had more than
one of those passes. When the first pass expired, in about a
year, I automatically was issued a second pass.
Mr. Schine. This was roughly right through the '40s?
Mr. Lipel. No, in general from the years about '51 to '53,
about two years. I have utilized such a pass. Without such a
pass, I would have had to get individual permission in each
case to take out material, you see. And that is what I used to
do previously.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Jones?
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lipel, do you know Dr. Craig Crenshaw?
Mr. Lipel. I know of him, as a man who has worked at Evans
Laboratory almost as long as I have. I have never worked with
him, and I have had no social contacts with him.
Mr. Jones. Is he currently being investigated as to his
security classification?
Mr. Lipel. I have no way of knowing the answer to that
question.
Mr. Jones. What form of relations have you had, if any,
with Dr. Craig Crenshaw professionally?
Mr. Lipel. I can recall no instance when I worked with him
professionally; the only connection being that at one time
during my first employment at Evans Laboratory and at Eatontown
Laboratory prior to that, he worked in this same organization.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Dexter Masters?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Harold Ducore?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know an Alex Bichek?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Morris Klein?
Mr. Lipel. No. I think I have heard the name, and I may at
one time have been able to associate it with a face. I don't
know the man.
Mr. Jones. You don't know the man. The name just rings a
bell but you can't place it?
Mr. Lipel. That is right.
Mr. Jones. Do you know an Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, I know him. That is, I have met him
professionally. And once this summer I, if you can so call it,
met him socially. I was speaking to some people at the beach,
and he was there, and I introduced him to my wife.
Mr. Jones. And your common bond at the time was your
employment at Monmouth?
Mr. Lipel. Yes. Actually, Coleman was rather embarrassed
and he didn't join the group of us.
Mr. Jones. You know Bob Martin?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Professor Yamins?
Mr. Lipel. I know him by name. If I met him in the street,
I know him well enough to say ``Hello.'' I assume he knows my
name as well as I know his.
Mr. Jones. You have had professional relationships with him
out there?
Mr. Lipel. No. I haven't.
Mr. Jones. How did you meet him in the first place?
Mr. Lipel. To the best of my knowledge, I have never had
professional dealings with him. I have never met him. It is
just that he has been there so long and I have been there so
long that, as I say, he may know my name as I certainly know
his. He at one time had a high enough position at the
laboratory to be known to everybody.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, I do.
Mr. Jones. How well do you know Mr. Corwin?
Mr. Lipel. Mr. Corwin was living in the same rooming house
where I was living in the first four or five weeks of my
employment at the laboratory. That was in 1940.
Mr. Jones. And will you give us the residence?
Mr. Lipel. It was on Fifth Avenue, North Fifth Avenue, in
Long Branch. I very shortly moved out of there, because I found
better quarters. At that time I believe somebody at that
rooming house had a car, and a few of us would go out to eat
together in the evenings. I don't think it was every day.
I know Mr. Corwin's wife fairly well, much better than I
know him, because she was employed for a long time in the Evans
Laboratory in our branch.
Mr. Jones. What is her name, Mr. Lipel?
Mr. Lipel. Mary Louise Donovan was her maiden name.
Mr. Jones. Donovan?
Mr. Lipel. Yes. And we were always friendly in a business
way. Oh, yes. And at one time I had two or three social
contacts with the two of them together about the time of their
marriage.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Lipel, have you known Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Lipel. To the best of my knowledge, no.
Mr. Schine. Did you know he was at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Schine. Never met him there?
Mr. Lipel. No. In fact, if he was at Fort Monmouth, I
didn't know where.
Mr. Rainville. What do you think of the security
regulations, in view of your own experience with them and in
view of the fact that security clearances have been lifted from
some of the men recently?
Mr. Lipel. You are asking my opinion on this. This is a
question of opinion.
Mr Rainville. Opinion.
Mr. Lipel. I believe that the security regulations that
have existed during the time of my employment have been
adequate, since I think that any attempt at more rigid
regulations would be impractical, and in the last analysis you
have to depend upon the carefulness and loyalty of the people
involved anyhow. Nobody can stop me from carrying out material
in my head. A good deal of the classified material that I have
worked with has been material which I originated. And I could
just as well have written it down in the first place outside
the laboratory as in. For long periods of time I have been in
effect the inventor of some of these classified equipments I
work with. And any attempt at more careful checking by the
guards, so to speak, would be just an unnecessary impediment,
and not only that is likely to cause somebody who wants to be
smart to see how he can circumvent it.
Mr. Rainville. Thanks very much, Mr. Lipel. We appreciate
your help.
[Whereupon, at 2:20 p.m., a recess was taken until 3:05
p.m.]
Mr. Schine. Will you give your name for the record, please?
STATEMENT OF JAMES EVERS
Mr. Evers. James Evers, E-v-e-r-s.
Mr. Schine. And your current occupation?
Mr. Evers. I am a radar engineer at Evans Signal
Laboratory. I am the assistant branch chief.
Mr. Schine. And your duties as such, Mr. Evers?
Mr. Evers. Well, I am the assistant branch chief of the
Radar Branch.
Mr. Jones. What are your duties as assistant branch chief?
Mr. Evers. Well, as assistant branch chief we have
approximately two hundred people, engineers, scientific
personnel, technicians, and the like, engaged in electronic
work, mostly classified, for the Signal Corps.
Mr. Schine. And you are supervisor of a substantial group
of people working in your department?
Mr. Evers. That is right.
Mr. Schine. How many people are working in your department?
Mr. Evers. As I say, I am assistant branch chief. The chief
of the branch is the main supervisor. I am his assistant in
line. There are two hundred people in the branch.
Mr. Schine. Have you had some problems with regard to
security?
Mr. Evers. Actually, the problems are not ours. We do not
deal in security. That is another branch of the Signal Corps.
We are advised that people are cleared or that they are not.
That is the extent that we are advised on security.
Mr. Schine. You have had a number of individuals working in
your department whose security is under question now?
Mr. Evers. That is correct.
Mr. Schine. Could you give us those names, please?
Mr. Evers. Mr. Coleman, Aaron Coleman, and Harold Ducore
are both suspended. Mr. William Goldberg, I understand, has had
his clearance taken away. He is not suspended. I guess that is
the extent of it. No, Lovenstein is also suspended.
Mr. Schine. All of these individuals are in your
department?
Mr. Evers. Yes, that is right. They work for the Radar
Branch.
Mr. Schine. And what is your feeling about all of this?
Mr. Evers. Well, I am in the position of knowing nothing in
so far as what the charges and the like are. That, as I say, is
entirely a matter for the people who handle our security, and
we are advised that this sort of thing is strictly none of our
business.
Mr. Carr. How closely are you associated with these men
under your supervision? Do you know any of the five who have
been suspended personally?
Mr. Evers. The one I know the best is Mr. Ducore. I have
known him as a business associate, and he has worked with me
most of the time, since 1941.
Mr. Schine. Are you a social acquaintance of his also?
Mr. Evers. No, I have never socialized with him.
Mr. Schine. Outside of at the plant in connection with your
job?
Mr. Evers. Yes. I mean, there have been trips, I have gone
with him to plants. There have been occasional branch picnics,
or something like that. But that is a semi-business
proposition.
Mr. Jones. Have you always found him to be a trusted and
competent employee?
Mr. Evers. That is right.
Mr. Carr. How about Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Evers. He was in charge of the systems section when I
had the Radar Equipment Section of the Radar Branch, and I know
of nothing which could be considered subversive and anti-
American that he has ever done.
Mr. Carr. Now, you yourself have had no connection with any
organization which has been labeled as subversive?
Mr. Evers. Not that I know about.
Mr. Carr. Were you associated with Mr. Yamins in any way?
Mr. Evers. Well, I have known him for a long time, too, as
a business associate, since around 1941.
Mr. Carr. Are you socially acquainted with him?
Mr. Evers. No.
Mr. Carr. You have no reason to suspect his suitability?
Mr. Evers. No.
Mr. Carr. How about Mr. Schoenwetter?
Mr. Evers. I don't know him.
Mr. Carr. How about Mr. Martin, Bob Martin?
Mr. Evers. I haven't known him except just on and off. I
haven't seen him for a long time. I have never heard of
anything, and I know of nothing, against him.
Mr. Carr. Concerning security conditions there in general,
have you noted in recent months that there has been a larger
number, say, in your own branch, in your own division itself, a
larger number of, shall we say, these negligence type cases,
leaving the documents out, leaving the building unsecure, or
anything along that line?
Mr. Evers. No. On the contrary, there has been rather a
continuous tightening up of security. Actually, I can go so far
as to say that the emphasis has been so strongly placed on
security now that it is actually hindering our development
work. There is so much time that must be spent in accounting
for documents and checking them and taking care of them that
our engineers do not have time.
Mr. Jones. It reduces the actual working time of the day
considerably; is that correct?
Mr. Evers. That is right.
Mr. Jones. In other words, there is a point of diminishing
returns that it has almost reached.
Mr. Evers. I think that is so. You would find that inasmuch
as this is a department of defense regulation--I mean, they
have increased the security regulations, as you are undoubtedly
aware of, immeasurably, and to comply with them all of the
services, I think you will find, are really in tough shape.
Mr. Jones. Don't you think there is good reason to tighten
up the security systems?
Mr. Evers. I think perhaps you do reach a point of
diminishing returns. I know it is your business to locate these
things. But if you reduce the time that we can spend on
research and development, and the time it takes to circulate
information within our organizations is increased, then you are
also approaching this curve of diminishing returns, too. There
has to be a nice balance. And I think, like any pendulum, we
have probably gone over a ways, and that it will work itself
out.
Mr. Rainville. You are thinking primarily of production?
Mr. Evers. I am thinking primarily of research and
development, which is my business.
Mr. Jones. The daily work output has been severely reduced.
That point has been brought out now two or three times.
Mr. Rainville. Of course, the question that arises in my
mind is: Isn't there another side to that same coin? You come
to a point where it would be better if you didn't take the next
step if that step was to be carried to the enemy? Wouldn't it
be better to delay things until you are sure that you don't get
them, if the other guy is going to get them simultaneously?
Mr. Evers. Obviously we don't want to give anything to the
enemy, and I don't think that anyone that I know does. But the
system of check and double check and triple check has got to
the point where----
Mr. Rainville. It is cumbersome?
Mr. Evers. Not only cumbersome. It is retarding. It is past
the cumbersome stage.
Mr. Rainville. The point I make is that we have had a
number of people come in. I think at your level you have a
right to make a criticism of it. We have had a number of people
who are not at your level who have made that same criticism.
They say, ``It is too restrictive, too much of a handicap. I
spend two hours getting papers ready, and then I have to spend
two hours putting them back.''
Mr. Evers. This is true. This is the kind of thing.
Mr. Rainville. But it seems to me that there is a point at
which you have got to consider the fact that if we are going to
do the entire experimental work and turn the results over to
them almost simultaneously with arriving at them ourselves, we
might just as well not do them.
Mr. Evers. I agree, if that were to happen.
Mr. Rainville. Now, thinking solely of security, and not of
production, don't you think it would be better to be
handicapped a little bit with too much security?
Mr. Evers. Yes, but let's say in the emphasis that is being
placed the emphasis seemed to be entirely that way, so that
instead of the scales being a little bit like this
[indicating], it has gone way up over.
Mr. Rainville. I don't know too much about physics, but in
these swings a pendulum usually swings no farther one way than
it had originally swung the other; so that if there is far too
much now, there must have been a time when there was far too
little.
Mr. Evers. I don't know whether in this case it has
followed strictly that law.
Mr. Rainville. You are the one that used the pendulum
swinging, and I am merely trying to get to the basic point of:
if there is now too much, has there ever been too little?
Mr. Evers. I can think of a time, in the time when I have
been at the Signal Corps, when I have seen many of the other
government agencies that have suffered from too little.
Mr. Rainville. What would it take to convince you that we
had had too little?
Mr. Evers. Well, as I say, this is a personal opinion, from
the way I have seen things taken care of.
Mr. Rainville. Yes, but my question wasn't about that. My
question goes to the base point. What would it take to convince
you that there is too little security?
Mr. Evers. Well, if I saw an utter disregard for classified
information, then I would be certainly convinced and would do
everything I could to get it stopped.
Mr. Rainville. I am not questioning your background or
anything else. I am merely trying to point out that people
working under you are going to take their impressions from you.
Therefore, if you say there is too much, they will reiterate:
``There is too much.''
If you say, ``There is too little,'' they will reiterate,
``There is too little.''
You have the supervision of some forty men. Is that right?
I was on the phone, but I thought you said forty.
Mr. Evers. Two hundred.
Mr. Rainville. Two hundred. But of the five people
suspended, three of them were in your department.
Mr. Evers. Let me say this. I know nothing of the charges
that these men have had placed against them.
Mr. Rainville. You can't think of any charges against them?
Mr. Evers. To the best of my knowledge, the charges do not
grow out of anything that was done within the laboratories.
Mr. Rainville. Well, but we have had some statements from
the people themselves that they have taken papers home to work
on and that they have been lax about things, that they have
been reprimanded and so forth, which would rather clearly
indicate that it has not been as tight as you feel it now is.
Mr. Evers. Let's say it this way. In most engineering work
and the like, you can never get 100 percent. To achieve 100
percent effectiveness in anything requires an effort which is
almost inevitably not worth what you have put into it. I mean
to achieve 100 percent security, we should take all classified
documents, put them in safes, and never look at them again.
Therefore, we would know they were secure. We would know they
were there.
When you have to deal with people, then you do have the
possibility.
Mr. Rainville. I am sure it isn't the documents that are at
fault in this. I am sure it is the human element. And,
therefore, maybe the best thing to do would be to put the human
beings into the safe.
Mr. Evers. It might very well be.
Mr. Jones. What if anything have time studies out there in
your department revealed in terms of efficiency standards? You
said obviously it is impossible to obtain a hundred percent
efficiency. It is, obviously. But what is the efficiency scale
out there? About 75 percent?
Mr. Evers. Well, I wouldn't be able to make a statement as
to what it was.
Mr. Jones. Have any business consultants, management
consultants, been out there to time study your operations?
Mr. Evers. One doesn't usually do this through an
engineering or research development organization. There has
been at headquarters level a contract placed with an
organization to see what can be done to improve the efficiency
of the Signal Corps engineering lab's organization.
Mr. Schine. What is the name of the company that carried
this work out?
Mr. Evers. I can't tell you. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. One last question, Mr. Evers. In your years of
employment out there, have you ever had any reason, either
directly or indirectly, to suspect subversive activities,
either within your department or within the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Evers. No, I can't remember anything.
Mr. Jones. In other words, in all the time you have been
there, so far as you can see, everything has been decent and
proper?
Mr. Evers. That is correct.
Mr. Jones. I have no more questions.
Mr. Schine. Just one more question. Do you know Mr. Kieser?
Mr. Evers. Sure. Maurice Kieser you are talking about? Yes,
sir.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us about Maurice Kieser?
Mr. Evers. Well, he is the chief of the Countermeasures
Branch. He was for a long time before that with the Applied
Physics Branch. What there is to tell about him, I don't know.
Mr. Schine. He has a very sensitive job?
Mr. Evers. Oh, exceedingly.
Mr. Schine. Did he come from Europe?
Mr. Evers. I don't know what his background is.
Mr. Schine. You don't know anything about him?
Mr. Evers. No.
Mr. Jones. How do you spell his last name?
Mr. Evers. I think it is K-i-e-s-e-r.
Mr. Rainville. In this term ``countermeasures,'' are you
referring there to a security kind of countermeasures for the
plant itself, or are there over-all countermeasures covered
under this? I am not trying to pry into----
Mr. Evers. Oh, this was in the papers.
Mr. Rainville. What I am getting at is this: We discover
that a foreign country has a certain kind of a weapon. His job
is to counter that weapon, rather than the counter-espionage
type of thing?
Mr. Evers. That is right.
Mr. Rainville. Then as such he would not normally have the
instruments or facilities or background to utilize or proceed
upon a counter-espionage type of work?
Mr. Evers. No. I think that is probably right.
Mr. Rainville. Then if he were to suddenly turn up with the
kind of equipment that would indicate he were in counter-
espionage rather than countermeasures, you would say that is
unusual, that is not in keeping?
Mr. Evers. Well, I would have to know the situation. I mean
generalities--for instance, what do you call counter-espionage?
If he had some electronic device----
Mr. Rainville. He could take a dozen things. Let's just
take one. Pull it out of the air. Speaking within this room, we
understand that our government has a rather new type means of
listening in on telephone conversations, a new type of wire-
tapping equipment. There would be no reason for his having
that, if he was not in counter-espionage, in other words, if he
was not monitoring some of the telephone conversations of
people either coming into the plant or calling out or maybe
some of these men in telephone conversations with people who
are suspect or known Communists. He would not normally have
that kind of equipment?
Mr. Evers. Well, not unless he were assigned some job to
develop.
Mr. Rainville. I mean he is not normally assigned to that.
Mr. Evers. I don't think he is.
Mr. Rainville. That isn't part of his work, and therefore,
if he had that piece of equipment, it would either have been
sent him for repairs or to develop something that would stop it
if the foreign country had it. It would not be something he
would carry in his back pocket.
Mr. Evers. Yes, he would normally have to either have some
special instructions, or verbal instructions, or something.
Mr. Rainville. I wanted to clarify in my own mind what kind
of countermeasures he was handling.
Mr. Evers. I wonder if you fellows would mind telling me
your names, now that we have been talking.
Mr. Schine. This is Mr. Harold Rainville, Senator Dirksen's
administrative assistant, and this is Mr. Robert Jones, Senator
Potter's administrative assistant. That is Mr. Frank Carr, the
executive director of the committee, and I am David Schine.
Thank you very much for coming in.
Mr. Evers. If I can help you any more, feel free to call
me.
Mr. Jones. Would you state your name and address for the
record?
Mr. Cohn. Was that picture supposed to include the workings
of this atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. That was a highly-classified thing, wasn't it?
Mr. Lovenstein. It was secret, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Now, did you know that the atomic cannon was down
there?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir, I did.
Mr. Cohn. You had no idea that the pictures had been taken
of it?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't there when the pictures were
taken.
Mr. Cohn. Oh, I know you weren't there. Didn't you know
that they were taking the pictures of this atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. I didn't know until after I had seen the
film.
Mr. Cohn. What happened after you had seen the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. After we had seen the film----
Mr. Schine. Who is ``we''?
Mr. Lovenstein. The people in the section who were working
on the project. By the way, these films were sent through the
clearance people at Aberdeen.
Mr. Cohn. What finally happened to the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. These films were used in secret tours.
Mr. Cohn. With the atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, the picture of the cannon was shown.
Mr. Cohn. Was there ever any objection made by G-2 to the
use of the film with this picture of the cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. There was one objection, which was voiced
to me, and we thereupon withdrew this film from the tours. We
did not show it for some time, and then we got permission again
to show the film.
Mr. Schine. You had several copies of the film both times?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I only know of one copy of the
film. I am sorry. There was an original, which is really a
negative, and a print.
Mr. Schine. And you were asked to turn over one copy to G-
2. Is that not true?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't asked personally. We did give this
film--I was asked to give this film to the branch. I don't know
what happened to the film.
Mr. Schine. You took charge of this film once it had been
taken? Who was responsible for it?
Mr. Lovenstein. This film was regarded as secret material.
Mr. Jones. Who is Harold Fary?
Mr. Lovenstein. Leo Fary?
Mr. Jones. Who is Leo Fary?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is a photographer who works in the
Photographic Section of the Reproduction Branch.
Mr. Cohn. Who gave him instructions as to what to take?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wrote a work order out requesting him to
take pictures of the scope and our equipment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you discuss it with him personally before he
went, in addition to this written order?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe I did, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where is Mr. Fary now?
Mr. Lovenstein. To the best of my knowledge, he is still at
Evans.
Mr. Schine. Now, who took charge of this film, once you had
it? Who showed it? Who showed the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. I was responsible for showing the film.
Mr. Schine. You had the film for how long a period?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe we still have it.
Mr. Schine. You still have access?----
Mr. Lovenstein. I have it in the section.
Mr. Schine. You still have access to it if you need it?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't any longer.
Mr. Schine. This film was shown where?
Mr. Lovenstein. This was shown in demonstrations and tours
to people visiting the laboratory who had secret clearance.
Mr. Schine. Was it shown very often? When was the last time
it was shown?
Mr. Lovenstein. I would say about two months ago.
Mr. Schine. Two months ago?
Mr. Lovenstein. I can't be sure of that. If you want that
date, I believe I have records that will show that.
Mr. Schine. Now, did you do anything else while you were
down at Aberdeen? I don't believe you told us how long you
stayed on there.
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't sure how long I stayed there. I
wasn't sure the first time whether I was there more than a week
or not.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lovenstein, who gave you the orders to take
pictures of this atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. No one. I didn't give orders to take
pictures of the atomic cannon.
Mr. Jones. You just gave orders to have pictures taken.
Mr. Lovenstein. Of our equipment.
Mr. Jones. Of your equipment.
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. And evidently among your equipment, then, was
this atomic cannon.
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir.
Mr. Jones. How did they take the pictures of the atomic
cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't the photographer.
Mr. Jones. I am actually amazed that they are showing some
of our latest military equipment to tour groups.
Mr Lovenstein. This film was not shown, to my knowledge,
prior to the disclosure of pictures of the atomic weapon.
Mr. Jones. Now, who would attend these showings? Who would
attend them? You said people who had clearance.
Mr. Lovenstein. Secret clearance, yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. For example, who would that be?
Mr. Lovenstein. These would be people from Washington,
VIP's or officers, field grade officers, technical working
groups, panel members. I was instructed, in disposition form,
to show material, not specifically but up to and including
secret. It was then up to my discretion to make the tour
interesting, to make it informative, and to make it publicize
the work of the laboratories and present the work of the
laboratories.
Mr. Jones. Now, you say Leo Fary is still out there, to the
best of your knowledge?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir, he is.
Mr. Jones. Does he do all the official photography?
Mr. Lovenstein. Not all.
Mr. Jones. How long has he been there?
Mr. Lovenstein. He has been there as long as I remember. I
couldn't say.
Mr. Jones. How long would that be?
Mr. Lovenstein. I would say for sure two, three, or four
years.
Mr. Cohn. When did you see him last?
Mr. Lovenstein. I can't be sure. A couple of months ago.
Mr. Jones. A couple of months ago. His developing place is
right on the plant, the premises out there?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I don't believe they develop out
there. I believe they send the material to Astoria.
Mr. Jones. To Astoria?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Where in Astoria?
Mr. Lovenstein. That is to my knowledge. I don't know for
sure.
Mr. Cohn. It is the Signal Corps Traffic Center.
Mr. Jones. And then the film was returned to you?
Mr. Lovenstein. Not to me, no, sir.
Mr. Jones. You asked for the film to be returned to you,
though?
Mr. Lovenstein. It was returned from Astoria to the
Reproduction Branch. And then I signed for it.
Mr. Jones. You signed for the film?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir. I did at one time.
Mr. Jones. What was the purpose of signing for it? To
acknowledge receipt for it?
Mr. Lovenstein. To acknowledge receipt for it and have it
transmitted to our section, the Radar Equipment Section.
Mr. Jones. And then did you have a showing made of that
film for your own use?
Mr. Lovenstein. I didn't have another copy made. We showed
that copy. This film was returned--here is some more
information--it was returned to the Reproduction Section for
editing. Various portions were taken out which did not pertain
to the gun--to the radar; I am sorry. To our equipment. And we
do have a copy now, which has been cut quite a bit in order to
improve the showing quality.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lovenstein, how do you explain the fact that
a picture of an atomic cannon is taken in the course of taking
pictures of your own equipment? I can't seem to piece that
together logically in my own mind.
Mr. Lovenstein. Because of the connection with our
equipment, with the weapon.
Mr. Cohn. It certainly shouldn't have been on the film.
Isn't that right?
Mr. Jones. You instructed Leo Fary, as I understood it, to
go out and take these pictures?
Mr. Lovenstein. Pictures of our equipment. And by ``our'' I
mean Signal Corps equipment.
Mr. Jones. It turns out that after the film has been
completed, amongst your equipment we find an atomic cannon or
at least a picture of it, being taken on that same roll of
film.
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes.
Mr. Jones. How do you explain that?
Mr. Lovenstein. The pictures were taken. I wasn't there to
point the camera.
Mr. Jones. I can't understand that.
Mr. Schine. You must have discussed this with Fary.
Mr. Lovenstein. When the pictures came back, they were good
viewing. They were good shots.
Mr. Schine. Regardless of the quality of the shots for a
minute----
Mr. Lovenstein. I am trying to say something of the value
of the over-all program. Pictures of our equipment alone did
not put over the idea of the project.
Mr. Jones. What was your equipment? What equipment, in
particular, was photographed?
Mr. Lovenstein. I can tell you generally. It was radar
equipment.
Mr. Jones. Radar equipment in general?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes. I can tell you more specifically.
Mr. Jones. May I ask you, Mr. Lovenstein: Is it possible
that someone else may have given Fary orders to take pictures
of this atomic cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. If they did, I don't know it. It is
possible.
Mr. Jones. Then how do you explain that he took the picture
of that cannon?
Mr. Lovenstein. How do I explain he took the picture?
Mr. Jones. Yes.
Mr. Lovenstein. I can't explain it.
Mr. Jones. Why did he take it, then?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't there when he took the picture.
Mr. Cohn. What was his explanation to you?
Mr. Lovenstein. He didn't explain it.
Mr. Jones. Did you ask him to?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Well, that is almost incredible. Here is a man
who goes down to take pictures of your equipment. He comes
back, and the film not only includes pictures of your
equipment, but what at least has been denominated in official
reports as one of the most sensitive and highest classified
weapons, atomic weapons. G-2 gets excited about this. And you
say you didn't even ask your photographer how he happened to
take those pictures?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wasn't the first one to see those films.
Mr. Cohn. Well, that you gave your man instructions to take
pictures is one thing.
Mr. Lovenstein. I did.
Mr. Cohn. He comes back and, having gotten his original
orders from you, he takes pictures not only of this highly
secret atomic weapon, but of it in actual operation, as I
understand.
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe there were shots of it close up.
I didn't see those shots.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't even ask him, ``Why in God's name do
you have this on the film? That isn't supposed to be there.''
Wasn't that a perfectly logical topic of discussion between
you?
Mr. Lovenstein. It should have been, yes, sir.
These films--I don't pass on the clearance of these films
or on their security. These films did not come directly from
Aberdeen by Mr. Fary to me. They passed through the clearance
people at Aberdeen. If the Aberdeen people saw fit to give
these films to the Signal Corps engineering laboratories and
have a secret classification assigned to them, I wasn't to
question their clearance. I wasn't to question their work.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Lovenstein, quite a bit of trouble
developed over this incident, didn't it?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know. I know that the film was
withdrawn from the tours.
Mr. Jones. The question is how it ever got out there in the
first place.
Mr. Lovenstein. As I say, I wasn't the one responsible for
releasing these films to the Signal Corps.
Mr. Schine. You know that certain individuals got into
trouble on account of this incident, don't you?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I don't.
Mr. Rainville. Getting back to Mr. Cohn's question as to
whether or not you questioned him or did not question him about
taking the pictures, weren't you at all concerned that you
might catch hell from somebody for having the picture taken,
since he was operating under your orders that day?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, because my superior saw those
pictures.
Mr. Cohn. Who were your superiors?
Mr. Lovenstein. I have many superiors.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Lovenstein. He was my immediate superior, yes.
Mr. Cohn. And he thought it was all right?
Mr. Schine. You don't remember the officer in Washington of
the Signal Corps who authorized Mr. Ducore to go to Aberdeen
and make this project?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I don't.
Mr. Schine. Is it true that the project basically was to
take photographs and show how we might intercept enemy aircraft
or enemy attack by use of radar and guided missiles?
Mr. Lovenstein. Is this going to be one of a series of
questions eliminating all but one? If so, I can't answer it.
Mr. Schine. This was going to be a demonstration film,
wasn't it?
Mr. Lovenstein. This was to be a record of our activity on
the project and was to contain film strips of the data
recorded. Mr. Fary was instructed to take pictures of the scope
presentation. In radar work, you have a presentation on an
oscilloscope, and he was to take pictures of that scope. And
the pictures we took--I will give credit to Mr. Fary--were
excellent. They were an excellent reproduction of our data.
Mr. Schine. Now, the thing I am concerned about is the
method by which Mr. Ducore was sent to Washington and came back
with the authorization to go to Aberdeen. You say that was a
routine procedure, even though he was an assistant in one of
the departments. Wasn't he responsible to somebody at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Who would normally get the orders from
Washington?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. How does it happen that an assistant chief goes
to Washington and comes back with an authorization in his hand
to go out on something like this?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know if he went alone. I believe I
stated that before, Mr. Ducore, however, is a very capable
person, and in many cases he has led the section. He hasn't
been supervised technically.
Mr. Cohn. Who is supposed to supervise it?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Evers at the time.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. James T. Evers?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Was Mr. Coleman in that section, too?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, because of Mr. Ducore's great capabilities
would he have more authority than someone ordinarily holding
the position of assistant?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir. May I clarify that?
Mr. Cohn. Sure.
Mr. Lovenstein. He was held in high esteem by all the
people he worked with, who worked for him, who he worked for I
believe his opinion technically was well valued.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Ducore personally, by the way?
Mr. Lovenstein. I first became acquainted with Mr. Ducore
early in 1948. I was assigned to the Radar Equipment Section
late in 1947.
Mr. Cohn. Have you known him socially since that time?
Mr. Lovenstein. I have been to his house once. We played
cards one evening.
Mr. Cohn. And when did you last see Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Lovenstein. Last night.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Lovenstein. Last night.
Mr. Cohn. I see. That was socially?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. I was at a lawyer's office, and
Mr. Ducore came into the same office.
Mr. Cohn. Where was that?
Mr. Jones. What lawyer was it?
Mr. Lovenstein. This was Mr. Ira Katchen.
Mr. Rainville. Discussing this appearance here?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir,
Mr. Rainville. You thought you needed the advice of
counsel?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I was asked if I would like to
appear at Mr. Katchen's office.
Mr. Rainville. Mr. Katchen is your private attorney, not
connected with the Signal Corps?
Mr. Cohn. Let me see if I understand. By whom were you
asked that?
Mr. Lovenstein. By Mr. Alan Gross, A-l-a-n S-t-e-r-l-i-n-g
G-r-o-s-s.
Mr. Cohn. He asked you if you would like to go to this
lawyer's office?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Gross indicated yesterday that Mr.
Katchen had called him or gotten in touch with him in some way
and said that there would be a meeting of those people who have
been suspended or uncleared in his office at 3:30 yesterday
afternoon, and asked if I would like to attend.
Mr. Cohn. Now, I don't understand that. You mean this
lawyer is just organizing the----
Mr. Rainville. Volunteers?
Mr. Cohn. Is that the substance? Who was present at this
meeting? You were there, and Mr. Ducore was there, and Mr.
Gross, I assume?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Who else?
Mr. Jones. Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. I don't see anything wrong with
telling who they were. I am not violating any confidence, I am
sure. Mr. William Goldberg.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. William P. Goldberg?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know his middle initial. Mr. Alfred
Lapedo, L-a-p-e-d-o. I am not sure of the spelling of the last
name. A gentleman whom I had seen before but I didn't know, Mr.
Jerry, I believe, Rothstein.
Mr. Cohn. Jerome Rothstein. Right?
Mr. Lovenstein. I heard the name ``Jerry.''
Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir?
Mr. Lovenstein. I am going around in a circle, I sat next.
And then Willie Goldberg; Harold Ducore; it is either Brodie or
Brophy, and I believe the first name is Ed. I am not sure. And
Mr. Bob Martin.
Mr. Jones. That is Bernard Martin, isn't it?
Mr. Lovenstein. Bob.
Mr. Cohn. Bernard Martin?
Mr. Lovenstein. I really don't know.
Mr. Jones. That is all that were there?
Mr. Lovenstein. That is all I recollect, yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. What is that lawyer's name, again?
Mr. Lovenstein. I have his card, if you would like to see
it. He gave it to me last night. Ira J. Katchen, K-a-t-c-h-e-n.
Mr. Schine. Whose lawyer is he of this group?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. Now, how did this organization, this meeting
come about?
Mr. Lovenstein. As I say, Mr. Gross was informed that Mr.
Katchen was going to have the meeting.
Mr. Jones. And what was the purpose of Mr. Katchen's
holding the meeting? Who enlisted his services?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. What did they say at the meeting?
Mr. Lovenstein. He reviewed whatever we knew about the
situation. To me it was a great help, very frankly, because all
of the problems were discussed. And when you have a chance to
talk to somebody, when you don't know what is going on--if you
have a chance to talk to anybody, it helps, believe me.
Mr. Cohn. Let me make it very clear in the record at this
point. Obviously, you or anybody else called before the
committee has an absolute right to counsel. As a matter of
fact, when you are called, in executive session or in public
session--when I say ``you,'' I mean anybody; I don't know that
you will be called--you have a right to have counsel with you
to obtain his advice at any time. We are not concerned with any
confidential communications between counsel and client in any
way.
It does seem rather unusual, I mean, if a sort of mass
meeting is being called.
Mr. Lovenstein. The sound of ``mass meeting'' doesn't sound
good. It was a meeting, however.
Mr. Jones. There was no mention of any fee?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, there wasn't.
Mr. Jones. In other words, Mr. Katchen just called you all
together because you had one thing to discuss and you wished to
discuss it in common at that time?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. What other matters were discussed, in terms of
future procedure?
Mr. Lovenstein. He told me if I had any problems I should
get in touch with him. There was another lawyer who appeared, a
Mr.--I believe it was Harry Green.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Harry Green?
Mr. Lovenstein. I am not sure of the first name.
There were two Greens mentioned. He was one of them.
Actually he was Mr. Ducore's lawyer.
Mr. Jones. And an associate of Katchen's?
Mr. Lovenstein. They were on speaking terms. They knew one
another.
Mr. Jones. I mean, in the same law firm?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't think so.
Mr. Jones. So, you were saying about discussing the
problems, and so forth----
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes. After the meeting broke up--well, the
rest of the meeting had to do with what problems each of us
had, what our experiences had been in the past, what we thought
this hearing was going to consist of, what might have brought
it about, a general airing of all the complaints and all the
feelings of the people concerned.
At the conclusion of the meeting, Mr. Green asked me to
stay, since I was the only one who was in the group yesterday
who was going to appear today. Mr. Green asked me to give my
background to him, any questions I had. I told him I think
exactly what I have told you, except for the classified
material. I never thought that this Aberdeen question would
come up. I discussed my background, my family connections, the
people I knew, anything that I thought might come up today.
Mr. Cohn. What did you say you thought might come up today?
Mr. Lovenstein. The strike at Fairchild. This is something
I am ashamed of. I am sorry it ever happened. The fact that I
once had a subscription to Consumer Reports.
Mr. Cohn. How about that?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't have it. I didn't have it as soon
as the subscription ran out, when I found it was on the
subversive list or on a list published by the attorney general.
Mr. Cohn. You had that subscription for more than a year
didn't you?
Mr. Lovenstein. I believe I renewed it once. I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. What were the years?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know. '46 or '47, probably. It was
way back.
Mr. Cohn. Who asked you to subscribe to Consumer Reports?
Mr. Lovenstein. I am not sure whether I had a subscription
to it before I came with the laboratories or not. You probably
have the records on that. I believe I did. I am not sure.
Mr. Jones. Who asked you to subscribe to it?
Mr. Lovenstein. While I was at the laboratory a group
subscription was taken up. I remember two people. I am not sure
which one I actually gave my subscriptions to. There was Mr. Ed
Storck, the man I mentioned before, S-t-o-r-c-k. I don't know
if he got the subscription up. It was a group plan. There was a
cheaper rate.
Mr. Jones. Who is Ed Storck?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is a very capable person, who works for
me.
Mr. Jones. You say he works for you?
Mr. Lovenstein. He worked for me.
Mr. Cohn. You say he worked for you?
Mr. Lovenstein. He worked for me.
Mr. Cohn. Where were the other persons?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Arthur T. Hood, H-o-o-d, who at that
time I had practically nothing to do with. He was in another
section at the time. But I remember he did come around.
Mr. Jones. What does he do today?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is in the Mechanical Engineering
Section. I have had many contacts with him recently.
Mr. Jones. What have been your relations?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is the mechanical engineer assigned to
the projects I am responsible for.
Mr. Cohn. Now, are there any other matters which you want
to call to our attention?
Mr. Lovenstein. You mean things that I feel are against me?
Mr. Rainville. Well, we are not trying you, here, you know.
Mr. Lovenstein. Well, I had a guilty conscience. I do have
a curious conscience, and it keeps me awake at nights. I don't
know why my clearance was removed. I wish, indeed I do, that I
were suspended and I were given a statement of charges. At
least then I would know what I am supposed to be accused of.
But this way I don't know what the charge are. So all these
possibilities keep going through my mind.
Mr. Jones. What are these other possibilities?
Mr. Lovenstein. Consumer Reports, the strike----
Mr. Jones. That is the strike at Fairchild?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir--my association with Ducore, the
fact that an FBI agent came around maybe six months ago and
asked me if I knew Aaron Coleman. He asked me if I knew Mr.
Yamins. He asked me if I knew that the strike at the Fairchild
Corporation was sponsored by a Communist organization. I told
him that I didn't, and that was the first knowledge I had of
it. And believe me, that made me very much ashamed that I had
been a part of it.
Mr. Jones. And those are all the possibilities?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, there are two others.
Mr. Schine. Will you state them, please?
Mr. Lovenstein. As a project engineer in the Radar
Equipment Section, I was responsible for getting work out. I
was a little too conscientious, and I reprimanded someone one
day--as a matter of fact, a group of people--for extending
their coffee break. A complaint was made, and an investigation
was carried on, as far as I knew, within the section. People
came to me saying that I was being investigated, and they told
me why I was being investigated.
As soon as I found out, I went into Mr. Evers' office, and
I told him I thought I believed there was dissension in the
section, and if he believed it necessary or if he believed it
was for the benefit of the section I would ask to be
transferred from the section, or I requested that the person I
thought was responsible for the dissension should be removed
from my supervision. This happened. The man was removed.
Mr. Cohn. Who was that man?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Albert Strom, S-t-r-o-m.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what else?
Mr. Jones. The last possibility?
Mr. Lovenstein. The last possibility was Mr. Marion
Woodruff, W-o-o-d-r-u-f-f.
Mr. Jones. First name?
Mr. Lovenstein. Marion, M-a-r-i-o-n. Marion W. Woodruff, I
will have to give a history here. Sometime around 1949--I am
not sure of the dates; I am not even sure of the year, but this
can be verified--one of the men in the section, Mr. Daniel
Goldenberg, a mathematician, was about to get married. A
bachelor dinner was planned for him as a surprise at the Tides,
T-i-d-e-s, Restaurant in Belmar, New Jersey. Many of the men in
the section went to this dinner. It was a cooperative affair.
Each one chipped in.
When I arrived at the Tides, a group of people were already
there. Among the group were several colored people. And someone
told me that they had been refused service at the bar, and as I
got the story the bartender said that they wouldn't serve these
colored people at the bar but they would serve them in the
dining room.
Oh, prior to this, Mr. Norwood had said that if the colored
people weren't served, then none of us would be served.
Well, we were all served in the restaurant. The next day,
Mr. Norwood came around to me and asked me if I would like to
sign a letter which he had written. This letter was, I believe,
to one of the senators or congressmen--I believe it was Mr.
Auchincloss--relating the events at the restaurant, and in
essence saying that the management of the Tides had showed
discrimination, and so on.
The event, as written by Mr. Norwood, was true, I signed
the letter.
Everyone at the meeting signed the letter except Mr.
Woodruff. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Evers called me into his
office and asked me if I had signed the letter. I said I had.
He reprimanded me, not for signing the letter, but for signing
the letter on government property. I acknowledged the fact that
this was an error. I shouldn't have done that. The facts of the
letter were true.
Very shortly after that, I became convinced that Mr.
Woodruff was the instigator of an investigation which led to
this reprimand. Nothing happened.
Mr. Rainville. Were you the only one reprimanded?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. I don't have evidence that
everyone was. I know I was.
Mr. Rainville. You know some of the others were, and you
assume they all were?
Mr. Lovenstein. That is a fair statement, yes.
Mr. Jones. How well do you know Bob Martin?
Mr. Lovenstein. I saw Mr. Bob Martin last night, and to the
best of my recollection on three previous occasions. I was
sitting outside this morning, realizing that I would be asked
this, and I thought back, when I met him and where I saw him.
The first occasion I saw him, and I believe I was introduced,
was at Evelyn's, an eating place in Belmont. I didn't sit at
the same table with him. I don't know if I even shook his hand.
It was just an acknowledgment that I was introduced. The next
time I saw him, I was at Watson Laboratories visiting someone
else, and I was walking down the hall, and I saw him, and I
nodded an acquaintance. I recognized his face, as having seen
him before.
Another time was at another restaurant. I was eating with
someone else, and he was at another table. I said, ``Hello,''
just a nodding ``hello,'' and that was all. Except at that time
I remember both parties went out to the street at the same
time, and he had just bought either a Kieser or a Frazer, and
there were some comments as to the quality of the car. I know
that Mr. Martin has been suspended. I learned this in the last
few days, when everybody has been talking about these things. I
know nothing else about him, other than that he was suspended.
He was in isolation with Mr. Coleman.
Mr. Jones. Who introduced you to him?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know who actually made the
introduction. I was eating at that time, I believe, with Mr.
Howard Moss, M-o-s-s, who had changed his name, I believe it
was Moshensky, M-o-s-h-e-n-s-k-y, and he worked at Monmouth.
Mr. Jones. He is in the agency?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, he is now up at Procurement
Maintenance Engineering at Watson.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man named Ullmann?
Mr. Lovenstein. Who?
Mr. Cohn. Ullmann.
Mr. Lovenstein. What was the first name?
Mr. Cohn. I am not giving you one.
Mr. Lovenstein. My AP teacher in elementary school was
Ullmann.
Mr. Cohn. No, did you ever meet a man named Ullmann in the
company of Martin, that you recall?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, I don't.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Lovenstein, you know Ducore fairly well?
Mr. Lovenstein. He is my boss.
Mr. Schine. You know him socially, too?
Mr. Lovenstein. To the extent of going to his home once and
being at the same beach party.
Mr. Schine. Now, who was at his home when you visited his
home?
Mr. Lovenstein. He was alone, and his two children at that
time--now he has three. He was alone, and I believe Mr. Harold
Tate and I were there, and the fourth at bridge I am not sure
of. It could have been Mr. Arthur Randals. It might have been
Mr. Robert Acker, A-c-k-e-r. These are people I have played
bridge with.
Mr. Schine. These are close friends of his?
Mr. Lovenstein. From work. I don't know how close they are
outside of work. They are close associates at work, yes.
Mr. Jones. I don't know whether you answered this question
or not. Did you say you know Harold Coleman?
Mr. Lovenstein. I know an Aaron Coleman.
Mr. Jones. Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. Did you ask him about that, Roy?
Mr. Cohn. Not in any detail. How well do you know him?
Mr. Lovenstein. I know he was the assistant chief of the
systems section of the Radar Branch. I know that he has been
suspended. I didn't know exactly when or what for.
Mr. Cohn. Was he at this meeting last night?
Mr. Lovenstein. Last night? No, sir. I believe--I know--
that someone said he was in New York avoiding newspaper people.
But after reading the newspapers, I don't know if he avoided
them.
How well did I know him? I can elaborate a little more. If
I passed him in the hall, I would recognize him, and I don't
think he would recognize me. I know he shared a house with Mr.
Ducore.
Mr. Schine. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. If this is that Julius Rosenberg I
think it is, no, sir.
Mr. Schine. Did you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Lovenstein. No. sir; I knew a Sobel, S-o-b-e-l. I
believe I played football with him. But not a Sobell.
Mr. Rainville. In attending this meeting last night, and
having been invited by an attorney, and there being two or
three attorneys there----
Mr. Lovenstein. Two, sir. Excuse me. There were three. I
didn't get the third man's name. But he was associated with Mr.
Katchen.
Mr. Rainville. I thought you said there was a Harry Green.
Mr. Lovenstein. And Katchen. I am not sure it was Harry
Green. One Green was mentioned.
Mr. Rainville. Wasn't Gross the attorney?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. Alan Sterling Gross.
Mr. Rainville. Then a couple of attorneys were there. Don't
you wonder who is paying the bill?
Mr. Lovenstein. I know who is paying the bill.
Mr. Rainville. Oh, I thought you said you didn't know about
that.
Mr. Lovenstein. I know who is.
Mr. Cohn. Who is?
Mr. Lovenstein. The B'nai B'rith Society, I know. This has
been indicated.
Mr. Jones. The B'nai B'rith?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. The Anti-Defamation Society, you think?
Mr. Lovenstein. I heard the society mentioned. I don't
think they have been called in.
Mr. Cohn. Has any specific name been mentioned in
connection with B'nai B'rith?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir. If you mention them, maybe I can
give a recollection. I remember hearing names.
Mr. Rainville. So you knew that before you went? Or did you
find that out when you got to the meeting?
Mr. Lovenstein. I heard it mentioned before.
Mr. Cohn. Through whom was this arranged? Which one of the
people there?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Gross, as far as I know. He was the one
who asked me, if I would like to go to this meeting.
Mr. Cohn. Did the B'nai B'rith make the arrangements
through him?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. The thought that runs through my mind is
that maybe some of these people are more guilty than others.
Mr. Lovenstein. In my mind, too.
Mr. Rainville. Wouldn't you have some reluctance to
associate yourself as a group with them? Would it have been
better for you to see the attorney alone and go over all this?
Mr. Lovenstein. I didn't discuss my personal case. I
discussed nothing of my background, nothing of anyone else's
background, in the presence of anyone but the two lawyers.
Mr. Schine. One thing that interests me, which you may be
able to help us on: In listening to the discussions carried on
by the others as to what problems they were going to face
before this committee, what appeared to you to be the most
outstanding?
Mr. Lovenstein. I was going to volunteer that if you didn't
ask me: A dissatisfaction with the method of investigation and
the efficiency of the investigation. May I elaborate?
Mr. Schine. Sure.
Mr. Lovenstein. I am the wrong person to get information on
this from. All I can do is relate what I have heard in the last
six or seven days, since last Tuesday. Prior to last Tuesday,
believe it or not, I was as naive----
Mr. Jones. Who would be a good person to get this
information from?
Mr. Lovenstein. Mr. Alan Gross.
Mr. Cohn. We have a date with him tomorrow morning.
Mr. Lovenstein. By the way, when he wasn't invited among
the first ones, he was going to volunteer, or the suggestion
had come out that he was going to volunteer, to appear.
There are cases I have learned about in the last few days,
of suspensions lasting two to two and a half years, without any
action. I don't know how long my case is going to go. You
probably know that I have been un-cleared. I don't know for
what reason. I don't know for how long it is going to be. It is
not a nice situation, and I assure you the rest of the people,
as far as the outward appearances are concerned, don't like it
at all. They realize this is an important investigation. They
realize a lot of good can come of it. They realize a lot of
good should come of it. But they are afraid, too.
Mr. Rainville. May I interrupt right there to say: By that
you mean there are a lot of people who feel that there are
things that need to be looked into and cleared up?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. For example?
Mr. Lovenstein. The security system at Monmouth.
Mr. Jones. In particular?
Mr. Lovenstein. The method of investigation, the method of
carrying on investigations, the method of taking action, and
the method of clearing people.
Mr. Jones. Who would be the best man to talk to?
Mr. Lovenstein. I think Mr. Gross can give you excellent
leads. I assure you if I can take up some of your time and
introduce you to some other people, I don't know the facts, but
if I can give you the rest of the people's names, I am sure you
are going to find that they are cooperative and they want to
clear this up.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lovenstein, I don't know whether you know
this, but nothing you say here will go outside this room. It is
all in executive session.
Mr. Lovenstein. I have nothing to be ashamed of.
Mr. Jones. It is just to unload your heart, more or less
and it will help us immensely in proceeding.
Mr. Rainville. Maybe there is one thing that can be
cleared. The FBI man did not represent this committee.
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know who he represented.
Mr. Rainville. Your being suspended or removed from the
clearance list is not an action of this committee. As far as we
are concerned, all of that is from another source. And what we
are looking into is the over-all problem of both historical
things that have been discussed and some things that have come
before the committee, and we, too, would like to know just what
it is that they are acting under. Maybe they have information
we don't have.
Mr. Lovenstein. I am sure they do.
Mr. Cohn. I want to ask you this: What is the point of
B'nai B'rith having anything to do with this?
Mr. Lovenstein. There is an assumption that there is an
anti-Semitic movement.
Mr. Cohn. Well, that is an outrageous assumption. I am a
member and an officer of B'nai B'rith.
Mr. Lovenstein. I was under the same naive impression until
I became aware of some facts. Excuse me for saying that.
Mr. Cohn. Sure. Who made the suggestion that there is an
anti-Semitic movement?
Mr. Lovenstein. The rest of the people who have been
suspended or un-cleared. I didn't originate it. I have heard it
in the group.
Mr. Jones. This was brought out at the meeting last night?
Mr. Lovenstein. This was verified at the meeting.
Mr. Jones. Who discussed, who labored on, that point last
night?
Mr. Lovenstein. Nobody labored on it. They discussed it.
Mr. Katchen brought up some facts. In the current
investigation, to the best of our knowledge--I say ``our'';
this is the meeting--there were fifteen people on the carpet,
either suspended or uncleared. Of the fifteen, fourteen are
Jewish. The fifteenth married a Jewess.
Mr. Jones. Who is the fifteenth?
Mr. Lovenstein. Dr. Daniels. You have an appointment with
him, I am sure.
Mr. Cohn. This is all news to me. I don't know the religion
of these people, and I don't care. It doesn't matter whether
out of 530 people there are 530 Jews or Catholics or
Protestants.
Mr. Jones. Will you proceed now with what you were about to
discuss?
Mr. Lovenstein. These were the facts I got last night. I
didn't investigate them. These are quotes.
Two years ago, there was supposed to be an investigation. I
didn't know of the extent of it. I knew about a Mr. Barry
Bernstein. I knew about a Mr. Bill Jones. I didn't realize
eighteen people at the time had been involved. Eighteen were
suspended. Two did not appeal at all and were just assumed to
be either Communists or subversives.
Mr. Jones. Who were they?
Mr. Lovenstein. I don't know. Of the remaining sixteen,
fourteen were Jewish, and two were colored.
I don't know the facts. I am telling you exactly what I
heard last night.
Mr. Jones. That is amazing.
Mr. Lovenstein. This was from Mr. Katchen. I don't think I
am violating a confidence there, either.
Mr. Rainville. That is another investigation this committee
had nothing to do with.
Mr. Lovenstein. I realize that. This is an opportunity to
clear up a lot of this. If these thoughts are in people's
minds--they weren't in mine until last night, but believe me,
they stayed with me--if they are in people's minds at the fort,
and they are disturbing people, clear them up. Either prove it,
or get them off the hook, or get the people out who are causing
this dissension.
I don't know what your investigating committee is after. I
have an idea. I have an idea that it is to find loose security
in the government. I am not going to say whether there is loose
security or whether there is too much security. Many times
there is too much in the wrong places and not enough in the
right places. But there is an opportunity to make an
investigation and to find out where the trouble is, not to make
trouble but to clear up the trouble. And believe me, you have
got plenty of opportunity to do it.
Mr. Cohn. Now, where is this anti-Semitic plot supposed to
stem from? The suspensions--what is the reasoning behind that?
I don't understand that.
Mr. Lovenstein. Who the actual people are who are
responsible?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Lovenstein. The only people responsible for suspensions
at Fort Monmouth are the people in security.
Now, who they get their directives from, or how they act or
react to recommendations, or what actions they initiate or what
stories they believe, what credence they give to rumors, I
don't know.
Mr. Jones. Who is the chairman of the security board at
Monmouth?
Mr. Lovenstein. It isn't the chairman. There is a civilian
and his military counterpart. The civilian is Mr. Andrew Reid,
R-e-i-d. I would rather not give the background. I know you
people can investigate that. I would rather not, because it
came from one side, and it came from a biased side. I didn't
make the investigation.
Mr. Jones. Had that something to do with anti-Semitism?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rainville. Just offhand, do you know what the
percentage of employees at Evans, the percentage of Jewish
employees, would be? Is it predominantly Jewish?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. I won't give you figures. That is
classified. But I can give you a percentage. I would say 25
percent of the engineers. I don't know about the rest, but of
the engineers 25 percent. And it is a large percentage that are
Jewish.
Mr. Jones. Frankly, I am more interested in your ideas on
the security aspects that you are critical of rather than the
anti-Semitism.
Mr. Lovenstein. I am not highly critical.
Mr. Jones. Or ``critical''?
Mr. Lovenstein. ``Afraid of.''
Mr. Jones. I wish you would elaborate on that a little bit,
any specific examples you have.
Mr. Lovenstein. People are now afraid to read secret
information.
Mr. Jones. Since the new security order went into effect
three months ago. Is that correct?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes, sir. I was still in the laboratory up
until last Tuesday at 4:30. After that time I don't know. But
approaching that time, people were reluctant--project engineers
were reluctant--I was reluctant--to withdraw secret information
and withdraw confidential information; not because we wouldn't
gain information from it that we could use in our projects,
because of the mess and the trouble of getting this
information, the rigmarole, the forms you had to sign, the
cautions.
Mr. Jones. The red tape?
Mr. Lovenstein. The red tape. It became so unbearable that
people just didn't want to do their jobs at 100 percent
efficiency because of the red tape. And this isn't necessary.
It isn't. For an engineer to work effectively, he must be able
to get a background in the subject, and to get a background in
classified subjects, he must feel free to consult any
information on the subject. Otherwise, the whole purpose of the
laboratory is defeated.
Mr. Schine. And where did you feel the security was too
lax?
Mr. Lovenstein. Visitors.
Mr. Schine. What is the procedure for visitors?
Mr. Lovenstein. Well, when a visitor comes to the
laboratory, his clearance is checked. This procedure involved
either calling Fort Monmouth or consulting the record files at
Evans. If a man is cleared, he gets a badge, which says--I am
not sure of the new badges; I haven't seen too many of them,
but it usually says either ``Escort required'' or
``unclassified''--I am not sure of this.
No, this I am sure of. The badges do not state the security
clearance. It just says ``Visitor escort required.'' Or
``Visitor escort not required.''
We were told when we get one of these visitors in the
section the only way of making sure of what his classification
clearance is is to call the security office. This I have done,
and the girl over the phone will give the clearance out. The
clearance she gives out does not include the projects he has
been cleared for. It gives a blanket clearance. Assumedly, the
man is directed to appear for only one project, and you are to
speak to him on only one project.
Mr. Schine. In other words, the clearance, first of all, is
not specific enough; secondly, even at the outset, it may be
done haphazardly, because they have limited files by which they
can check the individual?
Mr. Lovenstein. That is right, sir.
Mr. Schine. Thank you very much, sir.
Incidentally, on the question of anti-Semitism, if somebody
there is anti-Semitic, according to your percentage figures, I
would say he was fighting a losing battle. That 25 percent
Jewish is rather a high percentage.
Mr. Lovenstein. Not at the current rate, because the
current rate of suspensions is practically 99 percent Jewish.
If you keep going at 99 percent, ultimately you get almost that
whole 25 percent.
Mr. Schine. Of course, religion doesn't exclude the
possibility of being involved in criminal activity or provide a
shield which he can hide behind.
Mr. Lovenstein. Right, sir.
Mr. Jones. Where do you believe the fountainhead of this
anti-Semitism stems from out there at Monmouth?
Mr. Lovenstein. I wouldn't say.
Mr. Jones. You know, but you won't say?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir, I don't know. I can guess.
Mr. Jones. You have reason, however, to believe that it may
center in the security and loyalty board. Is that correct?
Mr. Lovenstein. This has affected a number of people.
Mr. Jones. Have you any ideas that you would want to put in
the record?
Mr. Lovenstein. No, sir. This is only a guess. Why should a
guess become a matter of record. I have no proof. The other
statements I gave you were statements other people made.
Mr. Carr. You said that there were persons you could give
us who would be able to clear this up. I don't think you gave
us their names.
Mr. Lovenstein. I gave one. Mr. Gross. He should surely
give you many more. I believe Dr. Daniels knows of other cases.
Mr. Carr. Gross and Daniels?
Mr. Lovenstein. Yes. I may give you my connection with
Gross. You will probably be interested in that. He was my first
boss, when I first came to the laboratories. I worked for him
maybe a matter of months, but I have known him ever since in
the laboratories.
Mr. Schine. Thank you very much, sir.
Mr. Jones. I think you have been very helpful, Mr.
Lovenstein.
Mr. Cohn. Will you give us your full name, please, Mr.
Fister?
STATEMENT OF EDWARD J. FISTER
Mr. Fister. Edward J. Fister.
Mr. Cohn. And where are you employed?
Mr. Fister. At Fort Monmouth, Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. How long has Evans been in existence?
Mr. Fister. Since around '41 or '42.
Mr. Cohn. Under the name of Evans?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What do you do there?
Mr. Fister. Right now, chief of the Meteorological Branch.
Mr. Cohn. And do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Harold Ducore?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Now, were you a reference for either one of
these, a reference for employment for either Coleman or Ducore?
Mr. Fister. With the government?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Fister. Not before they got their job. I didn't know
them before they started to work for the government. If they
have filed any applications for examinations since they came
there, my name may have been used.
Mr. Cohn. But you feel you would not be on the original
applications, since you didn't know them?
Mr. Fister. I didn't know them prior to my working for the
government.
Mr. Cohn. How about Bernard Martin?
Mr. Jones. Bob Martin?
Mr. Fister. Bob Martin. I didn't know his name was Bernard.
Mr. Cohn. Could you have been given as a reference for him?
Mr. Fister. I don't think so. I didn't know him very well.
Mr. Cohn. You knew none of these persons before?
Mr. Fister. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. How well do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Fister. I would say very well.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know him socially?
Mr. Fister. I perhaps know him most socially from spending
about six weeks in England with him, when we both were sent
over to a conference.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Fister. I think it was in 1950.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been to his home?
Mr. Fister. Yes, I was to his home once.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Who else was present at his home when you
were there?
Mr. Fister. My wife and his wife.
Mr. Cohn. Nobody else?
Mr. Fister. No. His wife went with him, and my wife went
with me, when we went to England. So when we come back we
visited him.
Mr. Cohn. How about Mr. Ducore? What is the extent of your
acquaintance with him?
Mr. Fister. I have only known him through working with him.
I have been at a couple of lab parties that he attended and I
attended, branch parties. But I didn't spend any other time
with him. I never visited in his home.
Mr. Cohn. How about Mr. Martin?
Mr. Fister. Martin I only know casually. I know him to see
him. I have seen them several times, but I never had any
relations with them at all.
Mr. Cohn. The reason we asked you to come down is that you
were given as a reference at some step along the line by
Coleman, and we are checking out everybody who was given as a
reference by him.
Mr. Fister. That could be.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever discussed politics with Mr.
Coleman?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What about his political views?
Mr. Fister. I think that Coleman believes in our system of
government.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Has he ever said anything to you to
indicate that he didn't?
Mr. Fister. No. We used to have quite a lot of discussions
on political matters, such as socialized medicine, social
security, things of that nature. He believed very strongly in
socialized medicine and social security. But from all the
conversations I have ever had with him, I would think he would
be loyal to the government.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss Russia with him?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How about that?
Mr. Fister. He was against her way of doing things.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Fister. Oh, ever since I have known him. He hasn't
changed any since I have known him. He has always been the
same.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not he knew Julius
Rosenberg?
Mr. Fister. Only from what he told me.
Mr. Cohn. And what did he tell you?
Mr. Fister. He told me that he went to one class with
Rosenberg; that Rosenberg sat next to him--I think it was a
mechanical engineering class--and insisted that he go to a
Communist youth meeting with him; that Coleman was not
interested in going, but, however, to silence him, he went, and
he found out that rather than a place where people could
express their own views, they weren't allowed to say anything,
and they were just sort of given a line to follow. This
disgusted him, and he never attended another meeting, nor
bothered with Rosenberg, other than seeing him in class.
Mr. Cohn. When did he tell you this?
Mr. Fister. About a week ago.
Mr. Cohn. He told you about a week ago?
Mr. Fister. Yes. I will tell you how it happened. After he
got a copy of his charge, he came to me and asked me if I would
give him a letter of character reference. I told him that I
would write a letter explaining my contacts with him and what I
thought of him, that I would do this. He said he wanted me to
see the charges against him. So one of the charges in there was
that he was friendly with Julius Rosenberg, and I asked him how
about that, and he told me that this was what it amounted to.
Mr. Cohn. How about Morton Sobell?
Mr. Fister. He went to school with Sobell, knew him in
class, never bothered with him socially, hadn't seen Sobell
until one day he went to the General Electric Company, with
whom he had a government contract, that is, he had charge of it
through his section. He met Sobell there, talked to him, and
that was about all the contact they had had.
Sometime later he said he went to the Reeves Instrument
Company and found Sobell working in the Reeves Instrument
Company. And again he talked to him. He talked to him there.
And later on, some of the equipment that Sobell was working on
for Reeves was procured by the radar branch, so he came in
closer contact with Sobell at that time. But it was all
strictly on a business basis.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Fister, do you know Alan Sterling Gross?
Mr. Fister. I know of him. I know him to see him and know
him to say ``hello.''
Mr. Jones. What do you know about him?
Mr. Fister. Nothing, I have met him at work, and I just
know him to say, ``Hello, Al,'' and that is about the only
contact I have ever had with him.
Mr. Jones. What is his position?
Mr. Fister. He was working in the Applied Physics Branch.
Exactly what he was doing, I don't know. I don't know whether
he was working in the project they call Diana, which made
contact with the moon by radar, or not. He may have been. I
don't know.
Mr. Jones. When did you see Mr. Gross last?
Mr. Fister. Gee, I don't think I have seen Gross in a
couple of years, not even to say ``'hello'' to. It must be that
long anyway. Maybe longer.
Mr. Jones. Did you know that there was a meeting held last
night at which all of those who were suspended out there
attended?
Mr. Fister. No, I did not.
Mr. Jones. In a lawyer's office here in New York?
Mr. Fister. No, I did not. I haven't had any contact with
the people who have been suspended except Coleman, who visited
at my house Saturday morning, and Ducore, who called me up
Friday night and asked if I would give him a character letter.
That is the only contact I have had with any of the people.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What do you know about Mr. Corwin?
Mr. Fister. I consider Corwin a very loyal American, a very
hard worker, who has done a lot of good for the government in a
development sort of way, a very steady worker. I know nothing
but good about him.
Mr. Jones. You say you know Bob Martin. How did you meet
Mr. Martin?
Mr. Fister. I don't exactly remember, but I think that I
met him in a restaurant, where a number of the fellows who
worked at the lab used to eat, and he was introduced to me by--
it could have been Corwin or Coleman. I don't recall.
Mr. Jones. It could have been Aaron Coleman, you say?
Mr. Fister. It could have been Corwin, could have been
Coleman, could have been one of the other people who ate there.
I don't recall. It didn't impress me that much that I would
remember how I knew him.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Fister. Ullmann? The name sounds familiar, but I don't
place the individual.
Mr. Jones. Would the name William Ludwig Ullmann mean any
more to you?
Mr. Fister. No. I can't connect the thing with him.
Mr. Jones. Tell me, Mr. Fister: What is your personal
evaluation of the security system out there at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Fister. I think that they have tried to make as safe a
security system as they possibly can, and that if anything the
effort that has gone into trying to maintain it secure is
overdone rather than underdone.
Mr. Jones. Have they recently changed the security system
out there?
Mr. Fister. There has been a slight modification.
Mr. Jones. How long ago was that modified?
Mr. Fister. About three or four months ago.
Mr. Jones. In what areas were the modifications made?
Mr. Fister. All areas.
Mr. Jones. All areas?
Mr. Fister. Yes. A new supplement to AR-380-5 which is the
security army regulation, came out, which stipulated a
different way of handling material than the way it had been
handled in the past. They had a system which lived up to 380-5
prior to this new one coming out, but it had to be modified
somewhat to fit Supplement No. 1, which came out in June, I
believe. That was in June it came out, and they applied it
somewhere around July, so it was about four months ago.
Mr. Jones. You are saying, then, in effect, that the
security system now is a fairly good system, a fairly effective
system.
Mr. Fister. I can't see that they could do anything more
without not getting any work done at all. The security system
now interferes with getting work done.
Mr. Jones. You have access to top secret, secret, and
classified. You have clearance; is that right?
Mr. Fister. That is right.
Mr. Jones. How long have you had that top secret clearance?
Mr. Fister. I really don't know, but it must be in the
nature of four years or five years. Somewhere around there. I
don't just know exactly.
Mr. Jones. Do you have any films made of your work?
Mr. Fister. We have had a film made, showing the Raywin, R-
a-y-w-i-n, system.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever had films made of top secret
materials?
Mr. Fister. Not film, no. We have had reproductions made,
photostats.
Mr. Jones. Photostats?
Mill. Fister. Yes. We don't take the film ourselves. We go
to a reproduction center.
Mr. Jones. Out here at Long Island?
Mr. Fister. No. We have our own reproduction center at the
labs.
Mr. Rainville. That is for stills; not for motion pictures?
Mr. Fister. They do some motion picture work, too, but not
as they do in Astoria.
Mr. Jones. Who is the official photographer out there?
Mr. Fister. I guess Jack Catelli is chief of the
Reproduction Branch right now.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Leo Fary?
Mr. Fister. Slightly. I know Leo to see him. I don't know
him real well.
Mr. Jones. Has he ever done work for you?
Mr. Fister. I don't know for sure, but he must have. He is
a photographer there, and he may have been involved in one or
two of the projects. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. Now, I asked you just a moment ago, sir: Do you
have or have you ever had stills or pictures made of any top
secret or secret material in action?
Mr. Fister. You are not talking about in my present
position. You mean: Did I ever have? I was assistant chief of
Radar Branch up until two years ago.
Mr. Jones. Did you ever have?
Mr. Fister. Oh, yes.
Mr. Jones. When was the last time that you had them made?
Mr. Fister. I wouldn't remember.
Mr. Jones. Within the last three months or so?
Mr. Fister. Not that I recall.
Mr. Jones. Now, did Leo Fary ever do any of that work for
you?
Mr. Fister. He may have been the photographer that was
called in to take pictures of equipment.
Mr. Jones. What would happen to these pictures after they
were made and developed?
Mr. Fister. They were filed in reproduction. They are
stamped with their classification. And they are treated the way
they should be treated for that type of document. A certain
number of copies are sent to Washington, to the chief signal
officer. A certain number of copies might go to the field
forces if it is a piece of equipment that they are interested
in.
Mr. Jones. You are talking about still pictures, a copy of
still pictures?
Mr. Fister. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What about moving pictures?
Mr. Fister. The moving pictures are usually kept in a
laboratory and are used as phases of research, either to
demonstrate to other people something that has been
accomplished, or to be used for your own people, and sometimes
they are taken around to other laboratories, and shown to them,
the same as we get pictures from other laboratories at our
place, for interchange of information in fields where we have a
common interest.
Mr. Jones. Have you any reason to believe there may have
been any subversive activity at Monmouth within the past three
or four years?
Mr. Fister. None at all.
Mr. Jones. You have no knowledge whatsoever of any
subversion?
Mr. Fister. None whatsoever.
Mr. Rainville. And do you think your security system is
adequate to check any such subversion if they tried it?
Mr. Fister. I would say it is as adequate as it can be, and
I don't think there is a security system that can guard 100
percent against such things. Because I think it is as nearly
impossible as you can make it to get any classified information
out of our place. However, an individual could remember things
and take it out in his head, and there is no way of stopping
that. As far as taking a physical document out, you don't stand
much chance of getting away with that.
Mr. Rainville. You don't think it could be done?
Mr. Fister. I wouldn't say it couldn't be done, but I say
they have tried to take every precaution that can be taken so
you can't do that. You have a guard system at every gate. There
is a barbed wire fence around the place which is ten feet high
or something on that nature. They have guards stationed all
along, so that if anybody comes up to the fence they have a
view of the fence and can see what is happening. At night time,
it is adequately lighted around the periphery of the fence.
People have to be cleared in order to get documents. The
clearance of secret, for instance, will not allow you to see
every secret document. It only allows you to see those secret
documents that pertain to your immediate work.
Mr. Rainville. How do you know that is the clearance they
have?
Mr. Fister. We are notified by the security officer.
Mr. Rainville. Somebody calls you in advance?
Mr. Fister. We get a paper.
Mr. Rainville. You get a paper.
Mr. Fister. Which is sent to us signed by the security
officer, giving the clearance of each individual in our branch.
As that security changes, and it does from time to time, mostly
up--in other words, when a person starts, they are given an
interim clearance of maybe restricted, or maybe no clearance at
all, and we are so notified; that these people must be kept
away from any classified work. As the clearance changes, you
get a notification from the security officer immediately.
People can't draw any information out of the library, or out of
the mail and records files unless there is a card in there
signed by the branch chief and the security officer. The
security officer signifies what their clearance is. The branch
officer signifies what type of material they can draw out.
Unless the type of material that they want is approved by the
branch chief, they can't get it out. In other words, if one of
my persons wanted to get----
Mr. Rainville. That would be from people who are actually
employed. What about people who just came in?
Mr. Fister. Nobody can get anything, if they just come in.
Mr. Rainville. You mean they can walk in and get a
clearance as they come in, and that clearance precedes them? Or
how do you handle that?
Mr. Fister. When a visitor comes, he has been cleared by
his own organization to discuss whatever the correct
classification is. Let's assume that somebody is going to come
from the General Electric Company. In advance, this company
will inform their laboratories that he is coming, that he is
cleared for secret, or confidential, or whatever it is. When he
comes, the receptionist checks his credentials to make sure who
he is. They now have a system that when a man comes he is
photographed, and his photograph goes on a file, which the
receptionist keeps. When he comes back and he says that he is
John Smith, she goes through the file and sees that it is John
Smith by his photograph.
Then after she has made sure that he is the right person,
the person whom he is visiting is called and is told that Mr.
So-and-So of General Electric is there; to send an escort up to
get them. So an escort goes up and takes him back to wherever
the meeting is supposed to take place. At no time is this
individual to be left unescorted, and he is supposed to be
brought back to the reception desk, and if he wants to go and
see someone else in the laboratory, he is supposed to start out
from the reception desk again. In other words they have taken
precautions to stop people from just roaming around the
laboratories.
Mr. Rainville. But I understood that there were some people
who would come in without an escort.
Mr. Fister. There had been some people who had a clearance
that did not require an escort. I don't know whether this is
true under the new system or not. I am not a security expert.
Mr. Rainville. You made a statement a few moments ago
saying you thought security was overdone, and then you say that
you don't think that we can ever obtain 100 percent security;
that even if people do nothing more than walk out and remember
things they can take it with them.
I don't quite follow. How could it be overdone, as long as
there is still a chance?
Mr. Fister. Well, unless you can make a person forget, you
can't stop that phase of his taking information out.
Mr. Rainville. And when you say you can't have perfect
security: The only way that they could get material out of the
laboratory now would be to have a photographic memory and to
memorize it and to walk out. You don't think that they could
carry a small camera and do the same thing?
Mr. Fister. Well, to say that a person couldn't would be
making a broad statement. I don't think they have much of a
chance of doing that. I don't know how small a camera you have
in mind. I am not familiar with cameras.
Mr. Rainville. Well, have you seen cameras that are about
an inch wide and about three inches long?
Mr. Fister. Yes, I have seen that size. The guards inspect
the briefcases, and so forth, that they come in with. They have
tried to discourage bringing briefcases in. However, if a
person has to bring one in, sometimes they do. They check the
contents on the way in, give them a briefcase pass listing what
is in it, not in great detail, but the classification of the
highest thing in there, and then when he goes out they again
check to make sure he hasn't acquired anything while he was
there. Visitors are not left alone, so they shouldn't be able
to get at any documents, if the escort system works, and I
think everybody is paying attention to it.
Also, nobody leaves their office and leaves any classified
information in there unattended.
Mr. Rainville. You will pardon my smiling, but we have one
gentleman who confessed that he was suspended a little while
ago for doing just what you said they don't do.
Mr. Fister. There are always slip-ups in everything.
Mr. Rainville. We have another gentleman who said that
there are two classes of visitors, those who can wander around
without an escort and those who can't.
Mr. Fister. At one time this was true. I don't know whether
this is still true or not under the new system. However these
people who were allowed to sort of wander around, as you say,
were very thoroughly checked, and their being allowed to wander
around didn't really give them access to any classified
information. But in general, I think I am right in saying that
people do not leave and have not left any classified
information in a room which is not attended. This is something
that has been ingrained into people ever since we have been
working there, and they live up to it.
They live up to it, because there is a penalty. You never
know when a guard is liable to come around or one of the
supervisors, or an officer, and if he would see material on a
desk, he would just pick it up and walk up to the front and let
you sweat for a while before you asked where the thing was, and
then call you to task for not watching it. That has happened,
and it is very embarrassing, and I think people try to live up
to security regulations.
What I meant when I said it was being overdone, that if
anything, it is being overdone, was that it is so difficult now
to get and to read a classified document that you spend a good
percentage of your time that you would like to spend in
working, so that you can read it. So a lot of information that
should be passed around among the people working in the field
is not being passed around, just because it is so difficult to
get it.
Mr. Rainville. Two quick questions.
One: What, then, is your explanation for the fifteen people
that have been suspended?
Mr. Fister. Well, I don't know. I don't know what charges
you have against these people.
Mr. Rainville. You don't believe it would be from
infractions of that kind. It must be something more serious, or
something less serious?
Mr. Fister. It must be something more serious.
Mr. Rainville. It couldn't be leaving papers out on the
desk, because that has been trained out of them and they don't
do it any more?
Mr. Fister. Oh, no. This happens.
Mr. Rainville. But it doesn't happen to all fifteen at
once?
Mr. Fister. No. It happens. We have penalties for this
thing. If you leave a paper out, leave the safe open, or
whatever it is, and classified material is in it, you get a
two-day suspension, the first time.
The second time, I think it is a week,
The third time they are fired.
In other words, you are a careless person that can't work
with classified material.
Mr. Rainville. And the last question is: Do you have any
feeling that there is in this mass action any anti-Semitism?
Mr. Fister. No.
Mr. Rainville. I think that is all.
Mr. Cohn. Will you give us your full name?
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM P. GOLDBERG
Mr. Goldberg. William P. Goldberg.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you employed?
Mr. Goldberg. At Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. And how long have you been employed there?
Mr. Goldberg. Thirteen years, I think.
Mr. Cohn. And what is your position?
Mr. Goldberg. I am an electronics engineer.
Mr. Cohn. In what section?
Mr. Goldberg. At the moment I am in a section called the
Wave Propagation Section.
Mr. Cohn. In the thirteen years you have been there, have
you had access to any classified material?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Up to what classification?
Mr. Goldberg. Secret.
Mr. Cohn. Is there some very sensitive work going on at
Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Involving radar and other things?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Are you acquainted with Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How long have you known him?
Mr. Goldberg. Oh, it is a number of years. I don't remember
exactly how many.
Mr. Cohn. Have you known him socially at all?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Just known him from around Evans; is that right?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this, Mr. Goldberg. Where do you
reside?
Mr. Goldberg. 1609 South Wanamassa Drive in Wanamassa.
Mr. Cohn. Are you married?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What was your wife's maiden name?
Mr. Goldberg. Rose Oberman.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have any brothers or sisters?
Mr. Goldberg. I have a sister.
Mr. Cohn. What is her name?
Mr. Goldberg. Ada Steinfeld.
Mr. Cohn. Is that her married name?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Her maiden name was Goldberg; is that correct?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where does she reside?
Mr. Goldberg. 940 Fox Street, Bronx, New York.
Mr. Cohn. You said she resides where?
Mr. Goldberg. 940 Fox Street, Bronx, New York.
Mr. Cohn. And what is her husband's name?
Mr. Goldberg. They call him Teddy. I think it is Theodore.
Mr. Cohn. For how long has she been married to him?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know exactly. Eight or ten years.
Mr. Cohn. Eight or ten years?
Mr. Goldberg. Something like that. Possibly not that long.
I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. Now, have you been out of the country recently?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you?
Mr. Goldberg. England.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you there?
Mr. Goldberg. I just got back a month ago, three weeks or a
month ago.
Mr. Cohn. When did you last see your sister?
Mr. Goldberg. Just after I got back.
Mr. Cohn. Did you stay at her house at all?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time?
Mr. Goldberg. About a week, I should say.
Mr. Cohn. Was her husband home at that time?
Mr. Goldberg. Part of the time.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what does he do for a living?
Mr. Goldberg. Drives a cab.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not he is a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Goldberg. No, I don't.
Mr. Cohn. You don't know that?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever heard it said he was?
Mr. Goldberg. No, I haven't.
Mr. Cohn. Is this the first time you hear about anything
like that?
Mr. Goldberg. No. It is not the first time, but I don't
know that he is a member of the Communist party.
Mr. Cohn. What is the first you did hear about it?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know, just a general impression.
Mr. Cohn. On whose part?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't remember any definite information.
Mr. Cohn. I don't quite know what you mean. Where did you
get the impression? The things he said?
Mr. Goldberg. That and just general impression.
Mr. Cohn. Does he have the Daily Worker around his house?
Mr. Goldberg. I believe I did see it.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see it there last month?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't remember that, I was too busy.
Mr. Cohn. Doesn't he have any other Communist literature
around the house?
Mr. Goldberg. I didn't look. I was hunting for a place to
live. I wasn't staying there, actually.
Mr. Cohn. Is your sister a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Having seen the Daily Worker around there and
gotten this impression about your brother-in-law, didn't you
ever ask?
Mr. Goldberg. Not that question, no.
Mr. Cohn. What did you ask?
Mr. Goldberg. I didn't ask him anything, actually.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss any of your work down at
Monmouth in his presence?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Does he know you work at the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Don't you know for a fact that your brother-in-
law is secretary-treasurer of the Communist party----
Mr. Goldberg. I don't.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever met any people through your
brother-in-law, your sister or brother-in-law?
Mr. Goldberg. That is hard to answer. There have been
people around sometimes in the house.
Mr. Cohn. Can you name any?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. How about the last month when you were staying at
the house?
Mr. Goldberg. I wasn't staying. I left my family there
while I hunted a place to live.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever sleep there?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. During the last month?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You were staying there, then?
Mr. Goldberg. Not during the whole time.
Mr. Cohn. Well, during part of the time you were?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Now did they have any visitors? Did you meet
anybody there?
Mr. Goldberg. My mother, of course, who lives with them.
Other friends of theirs.
Mr. Cohn. I would like to get the names of some of those
friends.
Mr. Goldberg. Of theirs? Abramowitz is one.
Mr. Cohn. Abramowitz?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Is that a man or a woman?
Mr. Goldberg. A man.
Mr. Cohn. Is that the only one you can think of now?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Did anyone in his house ever ask about your work
at Monmouth?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did your brother-in-law ever mention it?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Isn't that a natural topic of discussion?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. It isn't?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Are you on speaking terms with your brother-in-
law?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You say he knows you are working in Evans
Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What did you say this Steinfeld address in the
Bronx was?
Mr. Goldberg. 940 Fox Street in the Bronx.
Mr. Cohn. What other evidences of Communist party activity
have you seen other than the Daily Worker and Communist
literature?
Mr. Goldberg. That is all.
Mr. Cohn. What other facts did you have that created in you
the impression that he was a Communist?
Mr. Goldberg. Just those.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever heard him discuss Russia?
Mr. Goldberg. I suppose. I don't recall.
Mr. Cohn. Haven't you ever heard him make plainly pro-
Communist statements?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Has he made anti-Communist statements?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. You said before you referred to things he said.
What did you mean by that?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. I don't remember any specific
things, but it is an impression you get.
Mr. Cohn. Of what college are you a graduate?
Mr. Goldberg. City College.
Mr. Cohn. In what year did you graduate?
Mr. Goldberg. '35.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever met him?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever had any dealings with the Reeves
Instrument Company?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Just what dealings?
Mr. Goldberg. I am afraid I can't reveal the nature of the
work, but it was in connection with a proposed contract.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Goldberg. I forget the exact date. It was several years
ago.
Mr. Cohn. Seven years ago?
Mr. Goldberg. No, several.
Mr. Cohn. Who did you deal with at Reeves Instrument?
Mr. Goldberg. Mr. Belloc.
Mr. Cohn. Is that Harry Belloc?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. And you did not know Sobell at that time?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Was he working at Reeves at that time?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Aaron Coleman there?
Mr. Goldberg. At college? No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you, yourself, ever engaged in any Communist
activity?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever asked to join the party?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever asked to go to a Communist meeting
or a meeting which turned out to be a Communist meeting?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss communism with your brother-
in-law at any time?
Mr. Goldberg. I have tried to dissuade him on various
occasions.
Mr. Cohn. Well, you clearly knew he was a Communist, then?
Mr. Goldberg. Well, I suspected. I still don't know.
Mr. Cohn. You wouldn't try to dissuade him if you didn't
know he was a Communist, would you?
Mr. Goldberg. Well----
Mr. Cohn. Did you try to dissuade him when you were up
there last month?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. You have sort of given up on him?
Mr. Goldberg. I was too busy, frankly.
Mr. Cohn. Did you think it was a good idea for someone
working at the laboratory to stay at the home of a Communist?
Mr. Goldberg. I couldn't help it.
Mr. Cohn. Well, what is your salary at the Evans
Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Eighty-five-something. I forget exactly.
Something over $8500.
Mr. Cohn. Why do you say you couldn't help it?
Mr. Goldberg. Well, I just came in, with two children.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think it is a particularly good thing from
the security standpoint to have someone working in one of the
most sensitive operations in the country staying at the home of
a Communist?
Mr. Goldberg. No, I suppose not.
Mr. Cohn. You say that was a matter of circumstantial
necessity.
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Have your sister or brother-in-law ever visited
you out in New Jersey?
Mr. Goldberg. I believe so.
Mr. Cohn. About how often?
Mr. Goldberg. Oh, very infrequently.
Mr. Cohn. Just when they happen to be driving out there?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. Possibly once or twice in all
the time I have been down there.
Mr. Cohn. When was the last time?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't remember. It was a very long time
ago.
Mr. Cohn. Does your brother-in-law know any of your
colleagues down at Monmouth?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Cohn. He knows nobody else who works there other than
you?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Goldberg, one of the witnesses in here today
said he personally was not very satisfied with the security
system out there at Monmouth. What is your own evaluation of
it?
Mr. Goldberg. I really don't know what to say. In what way?
Mr. Jones. That is what I am asking you. Has there been a
change in the security system out there recently?
Mr. Goldberg. Don't forget I have only been back for a
matter of a couple of weeks.
Mr. Jones. I am sorry, Mr. Goldberg. I wasn't up on the
earlier part of your testimony. I understand you were in
England.
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. How long were you there?
Mr. Goldberg. Two years.
Mr. Jones. Two years. I am sorry. Possibly you may not be
aware of it, then.
What were you doing in England?
Mr. Goldberg. I was working in the British Laboratories as
an exchange engineer.
Mr. Jones. Prior to your trip to England, you were with the
Evans people out there for a matter of ten or twelve years? Is
that right?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. And what is your evaluation of the security
system as it existed during that period?
Mr. Goldberg. It seemed entirely adequate to me then.
Mr. Jones. It appeared entirely adequate in every sense of
the word.
To the best of your knowledge, you never had any idea of
any subversion or subversive activities of any nature?
Mr. Goldberg. No, sir.
Mr. Jones. None whatsoever? Is that correct?
Mr. Goldberg. That is right.
Mr. Rainville. I get the feeling, Mr. Goldberg, that you
are restrained in your answers. Is there any reason for your
feeling that you will not get a fair hearing before this group?
Mr. Goldberg. No, I don't think so.
Mr. Rainville. We had one gentleman in here who discussed
the possibility that there was some anti-Semitism in the
investigation. Do you have any feeling that that is true?
Mr. Goldberg. I have a feeling?
Mr. Rainville. He didn't associate that anti-Semitism with
this committee as much as he did with the matter of suspension.
I just wanted to clear that for the record, Mr. Goldberg.
You were at that meeting last night, though, weren't you, at
which this whole problem was discussed?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. That is why I bring up the question. You are
aware that whatever has happened with these suspensions has not
been anything that this committee has done. This committee's
investigation of these things is only now proceeding. Whatever
has been done out there has no connection with this committee.
I just wanted to reassure you and point out that perhaps this
committee, if there is any anti-Semitism, can either reveal it
or clear it up. And on that basis, we would welcome any
cooperation you would want to give. I can understand, of
course, where you have a brother-in-law that is at least
suspect in your own mind, even if you don't have definite proof
of it, as a Communist, you might have hesitation to speak too
frankly, not only not to get him into trouble, but not to
further associate yourself with the situation.
Mr. Goldberg. Yes, exactly.
Mr. Rainville. On the other hand, you are not to blame for
whom your sister marries. Relatives and sons and daughters
frequently marry people we think are outlandish, not because
they are Communists but for other reasons.
Do you feel that there was a need for such a meeting as the
one last night, for a sort of a briefing?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes, I think there was.
Mr. Rainville. As I understand it, the discussion was all
about the testimony here today. It was not about anything that
had happened.
Mr. Goldberg. No, it was about the situation you mentioned,
the possibility of anti-Semitism.
Mr. Rainville. Who is paying the attorneys for advising
you?
Mr. Goldberg. I think Mr. Katchen stated that he would be
willing to take the job on without cost.
Mr. Jones. He made that statement to you, Mr. Goldberg?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't think he made it to me specifically.
Mr. Jones. Then how did you get that idea?
Mr. Goldberg. I heard it.
Mr. Jones. You heard that statement made?
Mr. Rainville. He said he would volunteer his services,
that he would not be paid?
Mr. Goldberg. Another thing, I am not quite sure what he
was referring to at the time, whether it was this, or in
connection with the anti-Semitism, or in connection with the
suspension.
Mr. Cohn. What anti-Semitism?
Mr. Goldberg. The gentleman brought up the point that
mentioned that there was a possibility of anti-Semitism.
Mr. Cohn. What do you think about that?
Mr. Goldberg. I think there is a distinct possibility.
Mr. Cohn. You think so?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think it is improper for us to question
you, for instance?
Mr. Goldberg. I am not saying it is in this committee. I am
saying it is down at the laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. Has your clearance been lifted?
Mr. Goldberg. The clearance, yes.
Mr. Cohn. When was your clearance lifted?
Mr. Goldberg. Thursday.
Mr. Cohn. Are you still working at the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes. Not inside the fence, not in the
restricted area.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think it is improper for the army to go
over your record with extreme caution, in view of the fact that
you have a brother-in-law who the records show is a high
Communist party official in New York, and that you stayed at
his home as late as last month, and you are working at one of
the most sensitive agencies in the country?
Mr. Goldberg. Certainly not. I don't disagree with that at
all.
Mr. Cohn. That is all.
Mr. Jones. May I ask, now, getting back to this meeting,
Mr. Goldberg, who informed you of this meeting?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't think it was any specially arranged
meeting. I think it just happened.
Mr. Jones. Sure. But who informed you of the meeting?
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Gross?
[The witness hesitated.]
Mr. Jones. It was just last night.
Mr. Goldberg. Here is what happened. We went up to Fort
Monmouth, a group of us, to ask the security officer some
questions about what was classified material and what wasn't.
Mr. Cohn. Who is the security officer?
Mr. Goldberg. Colonel Sullivan. And then we went in to see
Mr. Katchen. He wasn't there. And we left our names, and we
said we would call back. Then we went back down. And I don't
know whether he called back or somebody called him back, but he
said to come up to his office at three-thirty.
Mr. Jones. Why did you go back to Mr. Katchen? I mean, how
did you happen to go to Mr. Katchen in the first place? Why Mr.
Katchen?
Mr. Cohn. There must have been somebody who suggested going
to him.
Mr. Jones. Who do you mean by ``we'' who suggested going to
see the security officer?
Mr. Goldberg. Gross.
No, he was called up to see the security officer at the
same time. I and Mr. Lovenstein, who were originally slated to
come here today, went up to see him, and he was called up at
the same time.
Mr. Jones. And Mr. Gross?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
So we all went up together.
Mr. Rainville. That was to see the attorney?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Rainville. To see the security officer?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. So you saw the security officer, and then Mr.
Gross suggested that, ``We should go back to Mr. Katchen''?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't think there is anything wrong with
Mr. Katchen, but still I don't know that it was Mr. Gross that
suggested it.
Mr. Jones. We are not implying there is anything wrong with
it. But how did you happen to go to him?
Mr. Goldberg. I think he has been known to fight in cases
of anti-Semitism before.
Mr. Jones. I see. In other words, he has a reputation for
that kind of work?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes. I think so.
Mr. Jones. From what you say.
Mr. Goldberg. I am not sure.
Mr. Rainville. At this second meeting, you invited others
to come?
Mr. Goldberg. The second meeting?
Mr. Rainville. Surely there were more than three of you at
this meeting?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes. People came. I don't know where they
came from.
Mr. Rainville. But they all, strangely enough, seemed to
have their clearance lifted or something? It wasn't a regular
meeting to talk this over?
Mr. Goldberg. Oh, no.
Mr. Jones. Who was there?
Mr. Goldberg. Myself, Mr. Lovenstein, Mr. Gross, Harold
Ducore, Bob Martin, Mr. Lapato.
Mr. Cohn. Who is Mr. Lapato?
Mr. Goldberg. He is a mechanic down there, I think, who has
also had his security lifted.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell it?
Mr. Goldberg. L-a-p-a-t-o. And he is Jewish, by the way in
spite of the name.
Mr. Cohn. So do I, but I don't see it has anything to do
with this.
Mr. Goldberg. Not as far as this committee is concerned.
Mr. Cohn. I don't think it has anything to do as far as
anybody is concerned.
Mr. Goldberg. Just look at the statistics.
Mr. Cohn. I don't care if there were 530 out of 530. I
don't see what earthly difference that makes. I don't think
religion or religious persuasion is any cloak for activities
against the United States.
Mr. Goldberg. I didn't say they were.
Mr. Cohn. And I think it is an outrageous thing to even
mention religion in connection with anything like that. I think
it is possible you can have 100 percent Jews or 100 percent
Catholics or 100 percent Protestant is absolutely no
significance at all. Take you, for instance. Your name is
Goldberg. In the last month, you were working at a sensitive
spot in Evans Laboratory, where they were working among other
things on our defense against enemy attack. You are staying at
the home of a notorious Communist, a man who is dedicated
twenty-four hours a day to the destruction of this country.
Now, I think the army would be guilty of gross negligence
if they didn't go into this thing with the utmost thoroughness,
and, until they had gone into it with the utmost thoroughness,
lift your clearance, for your sake as well as anyone else. And
you have agreed with me before that that is certainly a
situation which they have to go into with great care, and which
you would if you had the responsibility for these things. Isn't
that so?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. And how that could involve anti-Semitism or anti-
anything, I don't know.
Mr. Goldberg. Not in my case. I said, ``Look at the
statistics.'' That is the only evidence I have to offer.
Mr. Cohn. I think that is very meager evidence.
Mr. Goldberg. Yes, it is, I agree.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Goldberg, what percentage, in your best
judgment, employed at Evans Laboratory, are Jewish?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. 25 percent, maybe, or less.
Mr. Jones. Getting back to this meeting again, Mr.
Goldberg, what was discussed there?
Mr. Goldberg. This whole question.
Mr. Jones. You mean this whole question of anti-Semitism?
Mr. Goldberg. Anti-Semitism.
Mr. Jones. That was the basis of the meeting. Nothing else
was discussed, nothing about today's meeting?
Mr. Goldberg. Except that they cautioned us again not to
disclose classified material. We were to be very careful about
that.
Mr. Jones. Those were the only instructions given as far as
appearance here today was concerned?
Mr. Goldberg. In general, yes.
Mr. Jones. What do you mean by that?
Mr. Goldberg. There were other things said, I don't
remember exactly the entire conversation. It went on for a long
time. But that was the gist of it.
Mr. Rainville. Weren't there others there last night?
Mr. Goldberg. How many have we got? I don't remember.
Mr. Jones. You went down as far as Mr. Lapato.
Mr. Rainville. You gave Gross, Lovenstein, Goldenberg,
Ducore, Martin, and Lapato.
Mr. Goldberg. There was Brody.
Mr. Jones. What is his first name?
Mr. Goldberg. Ed, I think.
Mr. Jones. Edward Brody?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. They call him Ed.
Mr. Jones. Anyone else, Mr. Goldberg?
Mr. Goldberg. There was another attorney there, Mr.
Ducore's attorney. He came in very late.
Mr. Jones. What was his name?
Mr. Goldberg. Green, I think.
Mr. Jones. Do you know his first name?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. And anyone else?
Mr. Goldberg. I can't think of any.
Mr. Jones. Now, Mr. Goldberg, have you anything that you
would want to tell the committee here that you think would be
helpful to us in pursuance of our inquires up here, anything
that comes to your mind at all that you feel would be helpful
to us in our work? We are primarily concerned with the security
program out there at Monmouth.
Mr. Goldberg. I don't know. As I say, I have only been back
a couple of weeks, and I don't know what the situation is.
Mr. Rainville. Are you doing the same kind of work you did
before you left?
Mr. Goldberg. Not anymore.
Mr. Rainville. Well, prior to your clearance being lifted
you were?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Mr. Ullmann, Mr. Goldberg, U-l-l-
m-a-n?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Morton Sobell?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. How about Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. You know Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. While we are waiting for Mr. Cohn, I would
like to ask you one question. If the Communists were to try to
organize in the Negro districts, their tendency, of course,
would be to organize a whole group of Negroes into a unit,
wouldn't it, into a Communist cell so to speak? Obviously, if
they are going to try to get Negroes, they would get as many
Negroes as they could. That they might later infiltrate, white
people into that group would also be an advantage, but when
they started out it would have to start out from a Negro
organization. And if such a cell were discovered and steps
taken to prosecute them, you would then have a hundred per cent
colored people. That then would be, as you speak of anti-
Semitism here, racial discrimination there. But actually you
would have no choice. You can't say, ``We can't indict a
Protestant,'' or ``We can't indict a Catholic. We have to leave
them alone.'' Someone could come back and say, ``Here we have
an all-Baptist unit, and you can't prosecute them; because that
would be discrimination.''
Mr. Jones. Do you know Leo Fary?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. You don't know him?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. In your work out there at the Evans Laboratory
have you ever had the occasion to have any photography done of
your materials or equipment?
Mr. Goldberg. Occasionally.
Mr. Jones. Was it still photography, still pictures, or
moving pictures, or both?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't recall any moving pictures. I had an
occasional still photography done.
Mr. Jones. Who would take these pictures for you?
Mr. Goldberg. One of the photographers. I don't know who it
was.
Mr. Jones. You would issue the order to have these pictures
taken?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Who would you give the order to?
Mr. Goldberg. It was through normal channels, I suppose. I
would give it to the girl, and she submits it to the
reproduction section.
Mr. Jones. And then they would send up a photographer, and
he would take the picture that you would want taken, and then
the picture would be returned to you upon development? Is that
correct?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Then what would you do with the pictures?
Mr. Goldberg. It depends on what they are for. Maybe just
look at them sometimes.
Mr. Jones. So if you just look at them, what do you do
then? You throw them away?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. Where do you put them, then?
Mr. Goldberg. I don't remember. It always depends on what
they are for. If they are for a report, they are included in
the report.
Mr. Jones. That is what we want to know.
Mr. Goldberg. If they are for a brochure, they are included
in the brochure. If I am supposed to mark names of items on
them, I put the names of items on them and send them back. I
mean, it all depends.
Mr. Jones. That is right. That is what we want to know. So
some are put in files, and they are used in various ways.
Tell me this: Does anyone have access to all of these
pictures that you would have ordered yourself? Would anyone
else have access to these pictures while they are in your
possession?
Mr. Goldberg. The people who are supposed to have access to
them will.
Mr. Jones. Were most of these pictures classified as secret
and top secret?
Mr. Goldberg. I have never had anything to do with top
secret.
Mr. Jones. Not top secret, but secret, and classified?
Mr. Goldberg. They are all classified, or most of them.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever been told or had any knowledge of
any of these pictures being moved from the premises at any
time?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. None whatsoever?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. To the best of your knowledge, as far as you
know, no materials of that nature were taken from the premises?
Mr. Goldberg. No.
Mr. Jones. You said ``no''?
Mr. Goldberg. I said ``no.''
Mr. Jones. Roy, do you have any more questions?
Mr. Cohn. Nothing more.
Mr. Jones. That is all Mr. Goldberg.
Mr. Cohn. Will you state your name?
STATEMENT OF JEROME ROTHSTEIN
Mr. Rothstein. Jerome Rothstein, R-o-t-h-s-t-e-i-n.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Rothstein, your security clearance was
lifted?
Mr. Rothstein. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When was this?
Mr. Rothstein. A week ago Tuesday.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have any idea why it was lifted?
Mr. Rothstein. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever engage in any Communist activity or
do you have any close associates or relatives who have?
Mr. Rothstein. No.
Mr. Cohn. And have you ever been careless security-wise?
Have you ever been found with papers?
Mr. Rothstein. Once my secretary left the safe open. On
investigation, she was found responsible. And another time I
had given her a confidential document to be returned to the
classified reports library. It was misplaced, and she was held
responsible, but I was reprimanded for not having supervised
her more adequately.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Rothstein. Oh, I don't remember exactly. It was a
matter of maybe six months ago.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Rothstein. I have met him once or twice.
Mr. Cohn. How about Harold Ducore?
Mr. Rothstein. I have met him a few times also.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you working right now?
Mr. Rothstein. Right now I am assigned to Watson
Laboratory, a non-sensitive area.
Mr. Cohn. That is since when?
Mr. Rothstein. Today was my first day there, actually.
Mr. Cohn. I don't have anything more to ask Mr. Rothstein.
Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 4:40 p.m., a recess was taken until 11:00 a.
m., Friday, October 9, 1953.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--None of those interrogated on October 9,
1953, Alan Sterling Gross; Dr. Fred B. Daniels (1901-1987);
Bernard Lipel; James Evers (1912-1996); Sol Bremmer; Murray
Miller; Sherwood Leeds (1918-1986); and Paul M. Leeds (1915-
1987), testified in public session.]
----------
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The staff interrogatory was convened at 11 a.m., pursuant
to call, in room 1402 of the Federal Building, Mr. G. David
Schine, chief consultant, presiding.
Present: G. David Schine, chief consultant; Roy M. Cohn,
chief counsel; Francis Carr, staff director; Karl Baarslag,
research director; Harold Rainville, administrative assistant
to Senator Dirksen; Robert Jones, administrative assistant to
Senator Potter; John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
army; and Julius N. Cahn, counsel to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee.
Mr. Schine. Will you state your name for the record,
please?
STATEMENT OF ALAN STERLING GROSS
Mr. Gross. My name is Alan Sterling Gross.
Mr. Schine. Will you spell that?
Mr. Gross. A-l-a-n S-t-e-r-l-i-n-g G-r-o-s-s.
Mr. Schine. And your present occupation, Mr. Gross?
Mr. Gross. I am an engineer employed as assistant chief of
the Electro Magnetic Wave Propagation Section at Evans Signal
Laboratory.
Mr. Schine. And your duties as an engineer in this section?
Mr. Gross. Well, right now I am working on unclassified
projects.
Mr. Schine. Yes.
How long have you been working solely on unclassified
projects?
Mr. Gross. Since December 19, 1952.
Mr. Schine. And until that time you had complete access to
classified material?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Schine. How long were you employed in this position?
Mr. Gross. I have been at the laboratory since 1941 about
September 15, I think. But for a little over three years, from
'43 to '46, I was in the United States Navy as a radar officer.
Mr. Schine. And when you first went to Fort Monmouth, you
were still in the radar work?
Mr. Gross. No, actually I have never been in what is known
as the radar branch except for a period of two or three months
in 1946.
Mr. Schine. In other words, from 1941 to '43, you worked at
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. That is right.
Mr. Schine. What were your duties at that time?
Mr. Gross. Well, at that time I was an engineer in the
sound and light section.
Mr. Schine. Then you went to the United States Navy, and
from 1943 to 1946 you served as a radar technician?
Mr. Gross. Yes. I was technical officer and then assistant
officer in charge of ground control approach blind landing. It
is instrument landing systems.
Mr. Schine. And then you returned, immediately upon your
discharge from the navy, to Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. There was a period of maybe thirty days between
the time I got out of the navy and the time I returned.
Mr. Schine. And at that time you took the present----
Mr. Gross. No, at that time I came back to work for Mr.
Stodola, in--I can't think of the name of the section.
It was at that time I think known as the General
Engineering Branch.
And that section, due to the consolidation after the war,
was broken up, and several groups went to different parts of
the agency. For a period of about maybe two or three months, as
I remember, I went to radar branch, and then from that back
into this other branch, back to general engineering, which
ultimately got its name changed to applied physics.
And I have been in the applied physics branch ever since
but not always in the same section.
Mr. Schine. Now, Mr. Gross, would you tell us where you got
your education, and when?
Mr. Gross. I was educated at Townsend Harris High School in
New York City, and went from there to City College. I was in
City College from January 1937 to June of 1941, taking an
electrical engineering course.
I graduated with a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering
Degree.
Mr. Schine. Then, of course, you immediately went to Fort
Monmouth.
Mr. Gross. At the end of that summer, I did.
Mr. Schine. When you took a position with Fort Monmouth,
did you give certain references in conjunction with your
application for the position?
Mr. Gross. Yes, I did.
Mr. Schine. Can you remember the names of those references?
Mr. Gross. I don't think so. I am sure I gave an old friend
of the family that knew me for years. I think his name was Ben
Rader. That was one. He worked somewhere near New York City. I
saw him last summer once.
But I don't think I could remember the others. I think I
gave the family doctor. I think he is since dead.
Mr. Schine. Now, would you tell us why on December 19 you
shifted from classified to nonclassified work?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. Nobody ever told me. On a
Wednesday, or I think about two days before, I was quizzed by
the FBI for an hour and a half, which was not normal, but
nothing that I would get annoyed about.
The FBI's questions on that day seemed to indicate--it was
a matter of what enemies I had and because of my relatively
young age had I supplanted anybody in the line of command that
would have any hard feelings against me?
I happened to graduate from college at the age of nineteen,
and I was pretty young to hold the position I am holding. I am
thirty-two now.
And he spent most of the time quizzing me on that phase and
intimated that there was some question about some equipment
which I had never known, never heard of and never worked on.
Mr. Schine. Some equipment?
Mr. Gross. Right.
The questions took a line that--I can't tell you what
equipment. I think that would come under security. But he asked
me whether I had done anything with the plans for this
equipment.
I said I had never seen the equipment; never worked with
it; never had access to it. And he went back to his line did I
know who could have hard feelings against me because there were
probably three-quarters of the section that were older than I
am in years.
Mr. Schine. Had you ever been reprimanded prior to this for
any activities on the part of your superior officers?
Mr. Gross. No, I never had a security violation, never had
any reprimand of any type.
Mr. Schine. Can you think of any organization to which you
might have belonged, about which there would be a question in
the minds of the intelligence agencies?
Mr. Gross. I am a member of the Naval Reserve now. I
belonged at one time to the American Legion and the VFW. I
don't join things. That is just about that.
Mr. Carr. You are a member of the American Legion now,
aren't you?
Mr. Gross. Well, they haven't collected my dues just
recently.
I was with the Balmar Post, and since I moved to Lakewood,
it is hard to get back up there with a wife and family, so I am
building a house and what not, and just haven't kept up with
it.
Mr. Schine. You have never belonged to any organization
termed as subversive by the proper authorities?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I never have.
Mr. Schine. Do you, or have you ever known Julius or Ethel
Rosenberg?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I haven't. The FBI asked me those same
questions.
Mr. Schine. Morton Sobol?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think so. He was, as I have told or
have read, an engineer at City College. But I never remember
knowing him.
And as far as I can see, I mean from the years that he went
and I went, a freshman would not associate with the junior or
senior classes.
Mr. Schine. David Greenglass?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; that I am sure of.
Mr. Schine. Clarence Hiskey?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; definitely not.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever been arrested for any criminal
violation?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I never have.
Mr. Schine. What is your reaction to this whole situation?
Mr. Gross. You mean my present state?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Gross. I was very much amazed, and I think everybody
who knew me was. I am still amazed, because I have a letter
this summer from the Research and Development Board, of which I
was a deputy member, inviting me to a classified symposium on
the West Coast, and stating therein that my clearance was
verified by the Department of Defense.
I took that letter, and I mailed it with a letter of my own
to Representative Auchincloss, and he inquired as far as he
could, and he did not get any logical answer, and he was very
much put out about it.
Mr. Schine. Do you know Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Gross. Yes. And those two or three months I was in the
radar branch, he was in the same section.
Mr. Schine. And you know Mr. Bernard Martin, known as Bob
Martin, I think?
Mr. Gross. Well, I know him. I never worked with him, or
anything. I just know people who know him, and I would
recognize him around when I saw him.
Mr. Schine. What does Bob Martin do?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I don't think in the last four
years I have run into him except once. I don't know where he
works, or what.
Mr. Schine. What does Mr. Ducore do?
Mr. Gross. I think he is either assistant section chief or
section chief in the radar branch.
Mr. Schine. Does he handle classified material?
Mr. Gross. I assumed he did. I did not know any
differently.
Mr. Schine. Are you very closely associated with him?
Mr. Gross. No contacts outside at all.
Mr. Schine. What about Mr. Coleman? Do you know him?
Mr. Gross. Just by name. I never met him outside, and
possibly maybe a meeting in the laboratory. Nothing else.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever know a Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think so, but I think he lived in
the same rooming house I did when I was a bachelor.
Mr. Schine. What was his first name?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. But I used to live in Red Bank in
a rooming house which maybe held, oh, thirty or forty single
people, of which there were schoolteachers of the local high
school or engineers at the fort.
Mr. Carr. What is the address of that?
Mr. Gross. It is the Hudson House, about 130 Hudson Avenue,
Red Bank.
Mr. Carr. When did you live there?
Mr. Gross. I lived there before I went in service, and I
think from 1942, and then I lived there in '46, when I came
back from the navy, oh, until a couple of months before I got
married, in '49.
Mr. Schine. Did you know that his name was William Ullmann?
Mr. Gross. I don't think so. We would come in and we would
find the mail downstairs, everybody's.
Mr. Carr. Was his name Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Carr. Do you know a Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Gross. No, not by that name.
Mr. Carr. What name do you know?
Mr. Gross. I just remember the last name. If you asked me
the first name, I couldn't tell you at all.
Mr. Carr. He lived at this bachelor's rooming place.
Mr. Gross. I think he did. I know an Ullmann lived on one
of the floors of that apartment building.
Mr. Schine. Did anyone else who was associated with you or
works at Fort Monmouth live at that house?
Mr. Gross. Oh, yes.
Mr. Schine. Would you name the names, please?
Mr. Gross. There is a man who works there right now, Joseph
Sharney, S-h-a-r-n-e-y. He works in my same section right now.
There was a Don Goodman. He left before the war. I can see
some people's faces, and can't remember their names.
Mr. Carr. This is when you were a bachelor?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Carr. And this was a bachelor home where several
bachelors lived?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Didn't Jerome Corwin live there?
Mr. Gross. No, not there, no.
Mr. Carr. Not at this place?
Mr. Gross. No, he did not.
Mr. Carr. How about a fellow named Okum? Do you recall him?
Jack Okum?
Mr. Gross. The name strikes a familiar chord, but I don't
remember.
Mr. Carr. How about Bernard Martin, known as Bob Martin?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely he did not live there. I can
think of another name. Saul Groll.
Mr. Carr. Did Jerome Corwin live there at that time?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely not.
Mr. Carr. When did you get married? What year?
Mr. Gross. In June of 1949.
Mr. Carr. And what was your wife's name?
Mr. Gross. Selma Lerner. That is L-e-r-n-e-r. She was a
secretary in the propagation section.
Mr. Carr. At Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. At Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Carr. Where was her home originally? New York?
Mr. Gross. She had lived about ten or twelve years in
Lakewood, and originally was born in Brooklyn.
Mr. Carr. Now, you say that you have never been a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Gross. No, I never have.
Mr. Carr. Or of any organization----
Mr. Gross. I have never belonged to any organization
connected with them in any way.
Mr. Carr. How about your wife?
Mr. Gross. No, she has not. She held top secret clearance
for a long time, and she would not have gotten that if they
could find anything.
Mr. Carr. With the Evans Lab?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Carr. How about any other member of your family?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely not. I am positive of that.
Mr. Carr. Have you ever affiliated yourself with the
American Labor party?
Mr. Gross. Never.
Mr. Carr. How about your wife?
Mr. Gross. Never.
Mr. Carr. Were you members of the United Federal Workers?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Carr. You never were?
Mr. Gross. Never were.
Mr. Carr. Was your clearance for secret lifted, or does it
still remain in effect?
Mr. Gross. It still remains in effect. It was lifted in
December 1952.
Mr. Carr. Now were you notified at that time why it was
lifted?
Mr. Gross. No, I was not.
Mr. Carr. And you are still trying to find out why it was
lifted?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Gross. By name. I never worked with him or had any
social contacts with him.
Mr. Carr. How about Harold Ducore?
Mr. Gross. I know him. I think I was in his section. I
think he was in the same section in 1946, when I came back from
service, maybe for a period of two or three months. Either '46
or '47.
But I did not stay there long.
Mr. Carr. You had no social contact with him?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't have any outside contact with him at
all.
Mr. Carr. Have you ever had social contact or contact at
work with Bernard Martin?
Mr. Gross. No, I have not.
Mr. Carr. Do you know him at all?
Mr. Gross. I know him by name. I know he works at the
laboratory. I may have seen him once or twice around. But I
don't even know where he works or what section.
Mr. Carr. Do you know Mr. Schenwetter?
Mr. Gross. No, the name is not at all familiar.
Mr. Carr. Have you had any contact with Hymn Yamins?
Mr. Gross. Well, in some of the work we have had contacts
with MIT, and he is the liaison. We have worked through him.
But only on a purely business basis.
Mr. Carr. Your only contacts have been in connection with
your work?
Mr. Gross. That is right.
Mr. Carr. And at your work?
Mr. Gross. At my work. I never met him outside.
Mr. Carr. And you say you don't know this Jack Okum at all?
Mr. Gross. I don't think so.
Mr. Carr. You can't recall the name?
Mr. Gross. I can't recall the name.
Mr. Carr. Do you know a man named Irving Kaplan?
Mr. Gross. No. There is no Kaplan that I know of.
Mr. Carr. Are any of your relatives connected in any way
with the Communist party, or any of its alleged fronts?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely not.
Mr. Carr. How about your wife's relatives?
Mr. Gross. No, definitely not. My wife's brother also works
at the laboratories, and I have met practically all the family
and I am positive that none of them have any connection.
Mr. Schine. Do you know any members of the Communist party?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think so.
Mr. Schine. Have you known any?
Mr. Gross. I could amplify one statement, I think. At this
same rooming house, there lived a Morris Klein.
Mr. Schine. Will you spell his name?
Mr. Gross. I think it is K-l-e-i-n. I am not sure. His
first name was Morris. I knew he lived there, and I spoke to
him, and since I left it I understand he has been removed and
discharged for some Communist connection. But I did not know--
--
Mr. Schine. Where was he working at the time?
Mr. Gross. He was working at Coles Laboratory, not any
connection with us at all. He just lived at the same floor
there.
Mr. Schine. When was he suspended, approximately?
Mr. Gross. I don't know, 1950, I would guess at.
Mr. Schine. Have you heard the reasons why he was
suspended?
Mr. Gross. No, just the grapevine said he was suspended for
some Communist connection, and he didn't fight it, so they
assumed he was guilty.
Mr. Schine. He was in a sensitive position at the time?
Mr. Gross. He worked at Coles. I don't know what section he
was in.
Mr. Schine. Was he friendly with some of these other
individuals that we have mentioned?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I don't know how to answer that,
actually.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Jones?
Mr. Jones. Mr. Gross, I wish that you would think this over
very carefully and answer to the best of your knowledge, what
reasons can you conceive that could logically or in any other
way explain your suspension?
Mr. Gross. I would say that I have reprimanded several
people in my group. I have removed them and had them
transferred out, because they were not, let's put it, willing
workers.
It is very difficult to give a man an unsatisfactory
efficiency rating. If you do, you have got--well, the
substantiation is not too difficult, but you are going to run
into a lot of trouble.
My section chief had that trouble, and he was unclear just
because allegations were made by the person he gave an
unsatisfactory rating to.
That person I referred to, my section chief, is Dr.
Daniels. He asked for me under him as section chief. I am a
physicist, and he is an engineer. I have more of the
administrative work. I handle the equipments and field tests
and a lot of other things and actually the administration of
the section.
So in some cases I actually transferred people out. It is
not too difficult. I mean, you can swap people, swap
secretaries, and what not.
And I am positive it is either that or one or two of the
people who I jumped, not in seniority, but in age and what not.
Somebody just passed rumors, and they just accepted it. Any
rumor you give about anybody is accepted first and investigated
later.
Mr. Jones. In other words, you are saying, in effect, that
these rumors here evidently were of greater effect or weight on
your suspension than your record there.
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think so. I am going to make a
statement which is to the best of my knowledge, and I am not
sure. People who have anything said about them that are Jewish
or of Jewish descent or of Jewish connections, are immediately
suspended or uncleared.
People are not Jewish and have no Jewish connections that
have any charge made against them, are kept in and are still
working while investigation goes on. That is the only
difference between the two setups.
Mr. Schine. Can you give us the names of the individuals
who have been kept on?
Mr. Gross. I know of a Dr. Craig Crenshaw who is being
investigated by the FBI. That is C-r-a-i-g C-r-e-n-s-h-a-w. He
is being investigated by the FBI. He is still handling secret
and top secret equipment and programs in connection with it.
Mr. Schine. Do you know why he is being investigated?
Mr. Gross. No, they did not query me on it.
Mr. Jones. How long has this investigation been underway,
sir?
Mr. Gross. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. How did you know he was being investigated?
Mr. Gross. Other people that were cleared by the FBI
happened to mention it.
Mr. Jones. Who?
Mr. Gross. Dr. Daniels, for one.
Mr. Schine. Can you give us the names of some of the others
you mentioned who remain on regardless of the fact that they
are under investigation?
Mr. Gross. As definite, I can't. By grapevine and such,
possibly yes.
Mr. Carr. What is Crenshaw's position?
Mr. Gross. He is sectional chief of the Compressional Wave
Section.
Mr. Schine. In other words, you know the name of one non-
Jew who is under investigation, but is being kept on?
Mr. Gross. No, I would say I know more, but not as
definite. I know that when the FBI queried me, they asked me if
I knew Alex Beichek, B-e-i-c-h-e-k. He works in my section. And
the questions seemed to indicate that there was some connection
between what I was accused of and him. He is still working in
there and has never lost his clearance.
Mr. Schine. In other words, you know the names of two?
Mr. Gross. Well, let's see. I don't think I can think of
any other names where I have enough concrete evidence. It is
just a feeling, and a feeling in connection with a fact, that
all the people that have been suspended now, and two years
ago--over 95 percent of them are Jewish.
Mr. Schine. Do you know that you were under investigation
prior to December 19, 1952?
Mr. Gross. I assume I was. The FBI implied that they had
been looking into this for a while.
Mr. Schine. And nevertheless you were kept on?
Mr. Gross. Yes, but I didn't think it was a long period of
time. I thought it was a very short period of time.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the names of some Jewish personnel
who were under investigation who are currently working?
Mr. Gross. No. I know other Jewish personnel that are
uncleared that are out in this detached area with myself, but I
don't know of anybody in there that is.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us those name, please?
Mr. Gross. There is Mr. Abraham LePato, L-e-p-a-t-o, and
Mr. Edward Brody, B-r-o-d-y.
Mr. Schine. In other words, are those all the names you can
think of at the moment in that category?
Mr. Gross. Well, can I supply some more information?
Mr. Schine. Surely.
Mr. Gross. When my wife was secretary there, she worked for
Mr. Jones, J-o-n-e-s, William Jones, a Negro, and he was the
section chief, and the assistant section chief was Mr. Barry
Bernstein.
That section also had their section chief and assistant
section chief uncleared for a long period of time, then
suspended, and then completely cleared and reinstated, the
whole thing taking maybe two years or two and a half years.
Mr. Schine. In other words, you first tell us that you feel
it is more than coincidence that individuals under
investigation who are not Jewish are kept on, and individual
under investigation who are Jewish are not kept on.
Then you tell us the names of two individuals, the only two
you know of, who are under investigation, non-Jewish, and kept
on. You tell us the names of three individuals, including
yourself, who are under investigation and have merely been
transferred to nonsensitive positions.
Mr. Gross. Well, now, then, remember, I don't have access
to the FBI files, nor to any of the security files at the
laboratory. This is a feeling, as I say. It is from all the
people in the past that have had investigation. It is just data
that has come to me.
The other people that I know of now, Mr. Leeds and his
brother, are Jewish. I know Mr. Ducore is Jewish. I don't know
what Mr. Martin is, but I think I can say I know Mr. Coleman is
Jewish. I will go as far as that.
But I would assume from what I have heard and from what the
grapevine says, which is a tremendous thing in any organization
like the laboratory, that the feeling is, and it seems to be
universal, even between Jews and non-Jews alike, that you have
two strikes against you when you start.
Mr. Schine. Is it not true that 25 percent of the employees
there are Jewish?
Mr. Gross. Not of the total employees of that laboratory:
Maybe of the engineering and the technical personnel, yes.
Mr. Schine. Wouldn't you say that is a large percentage of
Jewish personnel?
Mr. Gross. I wouldn't have guessed it at twenty-five. That
might possibly be true.
Mr. Schine. There is no discrimination, therefore, in the
hiring of these individuals?
Mr. Gross. No, I don't think they can. You see, I think the
Civil Service Commission does the hiring, and then you become a
part of the military organization.
Mr. Schine. In what department do you think the
discrimination exists.
Mr. Gross. G-2, security.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the names of the individuals who
are discriminating?
Mr. Gross. It would be just my own surmise.
Mr. Schine. What is your own surmise?
Mr. Gross. That the civilian head of G-2 is anti-Semitic.
His last name is Reid, R-e-i-d. I don't know what his first
name is.
Mr. Schine. How long has he been the head of G-2 there?
Mr. Gross. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. What is the name of his military counterpart?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. They change more often than
civilians. I would say it was Colonel Sullivan, but I am not
positively sure.
Mr. Jones. I think you are right. Colonel Sullivan is the
name that was mentioned here yesterday.
Mr. Schine. So you really believe that there is
discrimination in that department?
Mr. Gross. I would say so, yes.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever done anything about this?
Mr. Gross. No, I mean every man's religion is his own
business. I don't carry any banner for my own or anybody
else's.
I served in the navy as an officer, and that is pretty
difficult. I never had any trouble. I don't expect it. In fact,
I was one of the last to believe it. It is very hard to
believe.
Mr. Schine. Who was one of the first to believe it?
Mr. Gross. I don't know.
Mr. Schine. It would help us very much if you could think
who was one of the first.
Mr. Gross. I think I heard this three or four years ago.
Mr. Schine. Whom did you hear it from at that time?
Mr. Gross. Possibly the people who were uncleared at that
time. Mr. Bernstein, Mr. Salzman was uncleared at that time.
Mr. Schine. Would you give their full names?
Mr. Gross. It is Barry Bernstein, and I don't know
Salzman's first name. I think it is S-a-l-z-m-a-n.
Mr. Schine. What were their positions?
Mr. Gross. They worked in the test equipment section, and
Mr. Salzman was the technician there and Mr. Bernstein the
section chief.
Mr. Schine. Are they reinstated now?
Mr. Gross. Mr. Bernstein was.
Mr. Schine. And Mr. Salzman wasn't?
Mr. Gross. I don't know, I think he left after he was
cleared.
Mr. Schine. Would that indicate that as discriminatory as
they were, they couldn't possibly push one out?
Mr. Gross. No, they can't, because the final decision on
the clearance at that time was made in Washington.
But I can point out that after a person is cleared, he does
not necessarily have to get his position back, because that
clearance comes back through G-2.
And I have a letter here from the screening board in
Washington, which says that you do not need to tell a person
that he is cleared after it does come back.
Mr. Schine. But in this case one of the gentlemen did get
his position back?
Mr. Gross. They did get their positions back, those two.
Mr. Jones, who is a Negro and not Jewish--when you are cleared,
you used to get your own position back. He did not.
Mr. Schine. In other words, Mr. Salzman and Mr. Bernstein,
who thought that it was discrimination that forced them into
nonsensitive categories, actually were cleared in spite of the
fact that it has to go through G-2, the very place that they
felt was discriminating against them.
Mr. Gross. Well, I am not too sure of this, but I don't
think the chain of command worked that way. The papers were all
handled by G-2, and then they went down to Washington. It was
handled there, and that is tantamount to an order to G-2 to
reinstate the personnel.
Mr. Schine. And G-2 does not have to give the men their
positions back after they have been cleared?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Schine. But in this case they did?
Mr. Gross. In this case they did.
Mr. Schine. What do you think of Mr. Bernstein's and Mr.
Salzman's feeling that they were discriminated against?
Mr. Gross. I think so. Since they were cleared, there were
no charges against them that could be substantiated.
Mr. Schine. Was the same gentleman head of G-2 at that
time?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Schine. What was his name?
Mr. Gross. Reid.
Mr. Schine. Have they ever done anything about their
feelings of discrimination?
Mr. Gross. Not that I know of.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the charges that were made against
them at that time?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Schine. They must have discussed it with you.
Mr. Gross. You see, my wife was a secretary, and I got this
second-hand. I know Barry, Barry Bernstein, that is, slightly.
Mr. Schine. What did she say was the nature of the charges?
Mr. Gross. I think Barry was a member of the AVC, and I
don't know what was the matter with Mr. Salzman at all.
Mr. Schine. Had they been reprimanded prior to that for any
matter?
Mr. Gross. Not that I know of, I wouldn't know. I mean, I
would never have that knowledge.
Mr. Jones. How long has Mr. Reid been security officer?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I would say definitely the last
five years, and most likely longer? I am not sure.
Mr. Jones. When did these alleged suspensions because of
that bias basis start?
Mr. Gross. I understand it was about two years ago, or
three years ago, when this happened. There were about sixteen
who were Jewish.
And at the present time, all the six I know of in my
group--I mean, not the other laboratories; the six that I see--
five are Jewish, and the sixth one, Dr. Daniels' wife is
Jewish.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Gross, you say you were not a member of the
United Federal Workers?
Mr. Gross. No, I wasn't.
Mr. Carr. Was your wife?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Carr. Were you a member of the United Public Workers of
America?
Mr. Gross. No. I never joined any of them.
Mr. Carr. You are sure your wife wasn't a member?
Mr. Gross. I am positive.
Mr. Schine. I asked you before what have you done about
this situation that you strongly believe exists? You started to
tell me what you had done. I don't recall what you said.
Mr. Gross. Well, I talked to my lawyer, a Mr. Katchen, in
Long Branch.
Mr. Schine. When did you talk to him?
Mr. Gross. Oh, recently, not too long ago.
Mr. Jones. How long ago?
Mr. Gross. A week or so. Because the matter had broke in
the headlines.
But I had had contacts with him through Dr. Nabel prior to
that. But he just mentioned the Anti-Defamation League of the
B'nai B'rith. And in the same breath he said, ``They won't do
anything anyway.''
So I told him then, ``If I do get suspended as a result of
any of this, I would like to have you as my lawyer,'' and left
it at that.
But outside, I mean outside the laboratories, or during
lunch, we have discussed what you can do, and there is a shrug
of the shoulders. There is nothing you can do.
Mr. Schine. You waited until recently, when the newspapers
indicated----
Mr. Gross. Well, I did.
But, though that would be surmising, I think others did go
to the B'nai B'rith beforehand. I think Mr. LePato went to the
B'nai B'rith, early last spring, and he informed me of that
fact, and he saw someone in Asbury Park, and they also told him
B'nai B'rith couldn't do anything.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever made any complaints to the
individuals in charge at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. I saw the representative of the inspector
general, and I just complained about the whole system, and I
got a letter back stating that the commanding officer could
take anybody's clearance away at any time in accordance with
some regulation. And that was the end of it.
Mr. Sabine. I understand that a group of you met two
evenings ago. Would you tell us about that?
Mr. Gross. We met at Mr. Katchen's office, mainly because
he is now apparently collecting information for the Anti-
Defamation League, or so I understand,
Mr. Jones. You say he is being retained by the Anti-
Defamation League?
Mr. Gross. I would not know whether he is getting paid for
it, or not, but it may appear, because he said he would handle
these interviews and what not, with no charge.
Mr. Schine. In other words, somebody in the Anti-Defamation
League asked him to collect the information?
Mr. Gross. I think that is the situation.
Mr. Schine. Do you know who that is?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Schine. It was in conjunction with this situation at
Fort Monmouth? Or did it have something to do with this
committee's investigation of the situation?
Mr. Gross. No, with the situation at Fort Monmouth. It had
nothing to do with this. I mean, he just told me to come up
here. I asked him point blank.
And he said, ``Answer everything that doesn't go against
security.''
Mr. Schine. He has been your lawyer for a long while?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Jones. You said Dr. Daniels referred you to Mr.
Katchen?
Mr. Gross. Yes. He is his lawyer.
Mr. Jones. And evidently Mr. Katchen had been doing
considerable work in the line, along this Anti-Defamation line.
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What council did Mr. Katchen have to offer this
meeting the last couple of nights ago?
Mr. Gross. To answer all questions to the best of my
knowledge.
And he said, ``You know your military regulations, what you
can't talk about.''
I said I did. That is 380-5.
Mr. Jones. Who was there, Mr. Gross?
Mr. Gross. Well, Mr. Lovenstein, Mr. LePato, Mr. Brody. Mr.
Martin was there. That was the first time I had seen him in
maybe three or four years.
Mr. Schine. Didn't you think it was rather unusual that he
should expect some of the individuals to tell things that were
classified?
Mr. Gross. No, he didn't question anything that was
classified.
Mr. Schine. But some of the discussion was classified?
Mr. Gross. No. We don't talk about classified equipment
outside.
Mr. Schine. Isn't it true that some of the individuals
outlined what they thought might be held against them?
Mr. Gross. Oh, their charges?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Gross. Yes, Mr. Brody read the charges. He has his.
Mr. Carr. What is Mr. Brody's first name?
Mr. Gross. Ed. I think it is Edwin.
Mr. Schine. Isn't it true that in discussing the charges,
classified information was discussed?
Mr. Gross. No. The charges are unclassified, and what was
in them is certainly unclassified. They accused Mr. Brody's
parents of belonging to the American Labor party.
Mr. Schine. Didn't you think it was rather unusual for a
lawyer to call a group of people together who are under
investigation by a branch of government and gather up all the
charges that the FBI is investigating?
Mr. Gross. It didn't strike me so. Now that I think of it,
it may be, but it didn't strike me as unusual at the time.
Mr. Schine. What do you think about it now?
Mr. Gross. Sort of unusual. The only reason I could see
behind it was the Anti-Defamation League asked him to. I can't
see anything else.
Mr. Jones. This was Dr. Daniels' suggestion anyway, wasn't
it, to meet in the lawyers office?
Mr. Gross. No he was not there that evening.
Mr. Jones. But I mean, it was at his suggestion that Mr.
Katchen became interested in this matter and called all of you,
called all the persons involved, for a brief discussion of this
question; is that right?
Mr. Gross. I don't know whether it was at his suggestion or
not. I couldn't rightly say. It may have been some one of the
other people.
Mr. Jones. Who else was at that meeting?
Mr. Gross. Mr. Goldberg, William Goldberg. Mr. Ducore came
in about half way through, or less than half way through.
Mr. Jones. Were there other lawyers there?
Mr. Gross. Yes, Mr. Harry Green showed up right near the
end.
Mr. Jones. Who is Harry Green?
Mr. Gross. I think he is Mr. Ducore's lawyer.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Ducore's lawyer?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Jones. And what was the name of the other lawyer?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. There was another man there. I
didn't know whether he was a lawyer or not. He seemed to be a
friend of Mr. Katchen's.
Mr. Jones. Did he participate in the discussion?
Mr. Gross. Yes, he did.
Mr. Jones. To what extent?
Mr. Gross. Asking questions.
Mr. Jones. Would you believe that he may be a
representative of the Anti-Defamation League.
Mr. Gross. It didn't occur to me.
Mr. Jones. On the basis of what he said?
Mr. Gross. No. I didn't think so. But he may be. I am not
sure.
Mr. Rainville. Are you a member of the B'nai B'rith?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I am not.
Mr. Rainville. Are you affiliated in any way with the Anti-
Defamation League?
Mr. Gross. No, sir; I am not.
Mr. Schine. Who were the other individuals there?
Mr. Gross. I said, Mr. Lapeto, Mr. Brody, Mr. Goldberg, Mr.
Lovenstein, Bob Martin, Bernard, as you call him. I thought his
name was always Bob. I didn't know it was Bernard
And Ducore. And there seemed to be somebody sitting over
here, in that room, but I can't think of who it was.
Mr. Schine. It will come to you. If the emphasis for the
discussion, the reason for the meeting, was the situation at
Fort Monmouth, rather than this committee's current
investigation, why is it that the question of the methods of
this committee arose, and who brought it up?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I don't know whether it was
brought up as ``methods,'' or not.
It was just the matter of being investigated, and that was
all, period.
Mr. Rainville. Was it the feeling that this committee was
responsible for the changes in your classification?
Mr. Gross. No, not in mine. Let's put it that way. I think
it was suggested by someone there that the army only uncleared
these people after they knew you were going to call us, but
that was open to debate, because nobody knew when the committee
here sent a list of names down that they wanted to speak to. So
we just dropped out. That was discussed, but nobody had any
idea on it.
Mr. Rainville. Did you have another meeting discussing this
thing last night?
Mr. Gross. I did not attend it.
Mr. Rainville. Was there one?
Mr. Gross. Maybe. I don't know. I can't say at all. I only
spoke to one person last night on the phone, and he just wished
me the best of luck and said, ``Just keep calm.''
Mr. Rainville. Was he a person who had been called before
this committee?
Mr. Gross. No. Mr. LePato called me. We got to know each
other there in this area. That was the first time I knew him.
Mr. Rainville. Would you know whether or not it is
customary for the FBI to investigate people, not only for
removing classification status, but for promotions?
Mr. Gross. I would say as far as I know the FBI had nothing
to do with promotions or investigating people for clearance in
connection with promotions.
Mr. Rainville. Then you wouldn't know that an FBI
investigation ever preceded a man's promotion from one job to
another?
Mr. Gross. No. It seems sort of fantastic. Because I was
promoted about a month before I was uncleared. And I never even
knew why I was being handed the promotion. I guessed it was for
doing good work. I didn't know.
Mr. Rainville. May I ask you this question. This unrest is
occasioned by the firing or the changing of status of certain
people out there. Would those people be confined to one or two
particular types of work, or does it spread all through the
organization, into everything that is done out there?
Mr. Gross. The present setup seemed to be confined to well,
these people in the paper were connected with the radar branch.
Dr. Daniels and myself are connected with applied physics. Mr.
Brody and Mr. LePato were connected with the thermionics
branch. So there are three branches at Evans, all of which have
been hit.
Mr. Rainville. Are there more branches at Evans?
Mr. Gross. I think two more, spec and drafting,
specifications and drafting, it would be known as, and
meteorological. I think there is one other.
Mr. Rainville. Then about half of the divisions out there
have actually been touched?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. Have they been touched in such a way that
the people involved are involved in the same type of work, that
is to say; you work in your particular division but you must
work with other divisions on certain specific problems?
Mr. Gross. No, we don't. There is very little connection,
the Radar Branch works on radar, and I don't know what they are
doing. It is military radar, period. That is out. We are in a
more basic research line. We don't work with the final
equipment, except in isolated cases. You may be familiar with
the old moon radar, which hit the moon in 1946. I have that
now. It is an unclassified project. That is the only reason I
am mentioning it. But that is not radar in the sense of
military radar. This is entirely different. This is something
which you don't use for any military applications. It is a
research tool. I mean, we are doing research. They are doing
equipment. There is a distinct difference between the two.
Mr. Rainville. But if they ran into a snag with their
equipment, they might call you in for further research?
Mr. Gross. Only as we are connected on propagation. I mean,
just in that, nothing else. I mean, we are not connected with
anything they would have trouble with in designing a set. We
would only be in the use of the sets.
Mr. Rainville. There are only two other things that run
through my mind. One, in this group of people who were called
together night before last to sit down and discuss with the
attorney the various problems confronting them, you say you
never belonged to any organization that in any way was
controversial. Didn't you stop and think: What am I getting
into here? I don't know anything about these people, except
casually I met three or four of them in my work. Am I possibly
now aligning myself with some people who may have something
against them, whereas I am only involved in this thing for
perhaps clarification, or something else?
Mr. Gross. It occurred to me, and I said, ``Well, they are
all Jewish.''
He asked us at the beginning whether we would stand on the
Fifth Amendment here, or anything like that. Everybody said
they wouldn't. I put in writing to both Representative
Auchincloss and the inspector general that I am not a
Communist, never have been, and never had any connection with
them. So I figured I had nothing to lose, and this was not
doing anything except talking about it.
Mr. Rainville. Except that in the association there you
might be involving yourself with somebody who, totally unknown
to you, would be deeply involved in espionage or something
else.
Mr. Gross. But I might meet a man on the street, or rub
shoulders with him at a lunchroom, and the same thing would be
true.
Mr. Rainville. You would put that in the same category as
meeting with men who might be suspects for some reason or
other? You would assume that a man who attended a meeting on
invitation and aligned himself with that group would be in the
same category as a man who accidentally sat down to the table
and passed a fork?
Mr. Gross. No, but I know Mr. Brody, Mr. LePato, and I know
my own case.
Mr. Rainville. How well do you know those men? I mean, can
you say here, now, categorically, that there is nothing to any
charge against those people, that nothing can be substantiated?
Mr. Gross. No; obviously I can't say that.
Mr. Rainville. What do you know about Mr. Goldberg?
Mr. Gross. Nothing, except that he seems like a nice sort
of person, and a little worried.
Mr. Rainville. And yet by putting your presence there at
what amounts to a committee, you were perfectly willing to say
that by coming in and sitting down and counseling with these
people, ``I accept them as being cleared''?
Mr. Gross. No, if they had given me any statement that it
was Communist, I would have walked out.
Mr. Rainville. Yes, but you see, your mere presence there
built up a committee.
Mr. Gross. Well, if I went to a lawyer, I wouldn't
investigate the lawyer first.
Mr. Rainville. Let's take it out of this field entirely.
Let's talk about the Red Cross.
In your community when they want to raise funds, whom do
they go to, to put on the committee? People who are known and
recognized and give substance to the drive by the fact that
they are leading citizens?
Mr. Gross. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rainville. All right. You were part of a committee that
is going to fight this anti-Semitism, or whatever it is, these
unfair charges, even if it is not concerned with that. You were
part of a committee, and you were putting yourself on that
letterhead.
Mr. Gross. No, they are not forming any committee that I
know of.
Mr. Rainville. But the mere fact that they had a meeting is
a committee. I mean, everybody that comes into this room now
and talks about that meeting you would ask ``Well, who was
there,'' and they would say ``Gross was there.''
Mr. Gross. Well, that is true.
Mr. Rainville. I mean, I don't say it was a mistake, but I
am wondering if you are aware of what you have done in that
connection, and if you really mean to say that you are standing
up as a witness for them against any of these charges?
Mr. Gross. No. I mean, nobody asked for an affidavit
attesting that I know that this person is not a Communist, and
I wouldn't have given it to him unless I knew it.
Mr. Rainville. He didn't ask you to go to the committee
meeting either, and I don't know whether G-2 asked you to go to
the committee meeting.
Mr. Gross. No; they didn't, of course.
Mr. Rainville. You see, it was a voluntary move on your
part.
Mr. Gross. But I was going originally to see a lawyer,
because I knew the lawyer had handled other people's cases.
Mr. Rainville. But he was to be your lawyer, by agreement?
Mr. Carr. No, I had made no agreement with Mr. Katchen
until after that meeting. And then, well, I said, ``I don't
have a lawyer,'' and he asked us if any of us had counsel and
he would get in touch with them. Some of the people did have
counsel.
Mr. Rainville. I was under the impression that you said you
had talked with him before this meeting.
Mr. Carr. Who were some of the counsel at this meeting?
Mr. Gross. I remember Mr. Green. I don't remember the other
persons' names. They were mentioned and forgotten.
Let me go back a little in history. Most of the people that
are being hauled out here to your committee meeting were
notified a day before I was. They were notified at Squire
Laboratory, and I was called the next day. I guess this was
Wednesday, and I was told at 10:30 in the morning at the G-2
building. That was an entirely different building, and
everybody thought, ``Boy, here is an entirely different case.''
I went up, and it was Colonel Sullivan again, and he told
me the same story. Now, Mr. Goldberg and Mr. Lovenstein wanted
to ask him questions about what they could or could not say
here. So I went in first to see the colonel, and he said, ``I
am just a messenger boy, and you have been asked to testify to
the committee, and would you want to go?''
I said, ``Of course. I have nothing to hide.'' I said, ``I
know Mr. Goldberg and Mr. Lovenstein want to ask you some
questions about what they can or cannot say, so may I sit here
and listen also?''
So Mr. Reid went out and got the other two people waiting
outside, and came in, and he just reiterated that 380-5 covered
everything. We knew that anyway.
They asked one or two questions, which meant nothing to
him, I think, about whether they could name other people that
were uncleared. And he said, ``That is not classified
information, so of course you can.''
From that office there, we went for the first time--it was
about lunchtime, to Mr. Katchen. I heard his name, and no doubt
Nagel spoke to him about me, but it was the first time I had
met Mr. Katchen personally. I would have met him if he had been
in. Let's put it that way--his secretary was in, and we just
left a message that I had called. And we came back and saw him
at 3:30 that afternoon. I took two hours annual leave from work
to accomplish that.
Mr. Rainville. Who suggested that you go at that time?
Mr. Gross. We thought as we were going up there we might
possibly need counsel. I had been at technical meetings and
quizzed technically on subjects, but I have never been at
anything like this before, and I am not a lawyer, have no
connection with that, and I am an engineer, and you get sort of
specialized, and I just thought a lawyer may help. He didn't
help. I would have done the same thing whether I went or didn't
go.
Mr. Rainville. What I am getting at: The three of you were
sitting there, and apparently the idea crystalized at that
meeting that you were going to go up and see the attorney. It
must have been, because normally you wouldn't have gone to see
him without an attorney.
Mr. Gross. That is right. We would have called.
Mr. Rainville. Who crystalized that opinion?
Mr. Gross. Well, I had been told--let's see. Who told me,
exactly? Somebody told me that Mr. Katchen had my name as one
of the cases, and if I could possibly get to see him some time
it may be helpful. I think ``I'' in a way, would have been
``the three of us,'' since we were up there anyway, and right
near it, to go over at lunchtime.
Mr. Rainville. Then you suggested that the three of you go
over and see him?
Mr. Gross. By the way, there were four, Mr. LePato went
over at that time.
Mr. Rainville. But he was not in with Colonel Sullivan. He
met you on the way over and joined you and went on over?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. There was one word you used in referring to
your coming down to this meeting, and I just wondered whether
it was just accidental or reflected an attitude. You say you
were going to be ``hauled down'' to this meeting.
Mr. Gross. I didn't say ``hauled,'' I said ``called.'' I am
sorry.
Mr. Rainville. I wrote it down at the moment. Maybe you
meant ``called.''
Mr . Gross. I was perfectly willing to come. I consider
myself not guilty of anything, and certainly not violating any
of the government's regulations in connection with security,
and I figure that everything I can do to help or to clear it
up, I will, but I consider the fact that I am not cleared as
very detrimental to the government. I mean, I am not an
egotist, there are a lot better engineers than I am, but I have
a lot of knowledge, and they have to have it for certain
problems, and if I am not cleared, they do not have it, period.
And that goes for Dr. Daniels and quite a few other people. You
get to be a specialist, and you can't replace a specialist in
six months or a year. It takes a long time to do it.
Mr. Rainville. Maybe you can answer, then, a question that
came up in my mind yesterday.
We had a gentleman testifying here who seemed to be quite
an expert in certain work. Yet every time you asked him a
question about last year, or when did he go to work here, or
what was the firm's name, or who did he work for, or anything
like that, he was very unclear. He couldn't remember even two
years ago. And if you talked to him about his past, you would
assume that the man was a graduate of the fifth grade--day
laborer, and that that is as far as he could go. And yet he
turns out to be skilled technician, a very skilled technician.
In your experience over there in the laboratory, would you
say that there was anything contrary in that?
Mr. Gross. I would say that would be an exception, an
``absent-minded professor.'' You know that type.
Mr. Rainville. This wasn't absent-minded.
Mr. Gross. I don't know the person you are referring to.
Mr. Rainville. He couldn't remember family names, and
things of that kind, and there was no impression of being
absent-minded. He just said he couldn't remember. Not
categorically, ``I don't remember that,'' but ``It could have
been here,'' or ``was about that,'' and so forth and so on.
There was no definitive answer to any single question.
Mr. Gross. I would assume a person with a memory for
technical subjects should be able to remember most of
everything else. I don't think your brain is selective as to
what you can or cannot remember.
Mr. Rainville. I would assume so from your answers, which
are very specific and to the point. You may not remember an
exact day in a given month, but you remember it was either
September 15th or about September 15th, and the year. He had
difficulty remembering the year. He couldn't even get close to
the month, and the day was beyond him.
Mr. Gross. I have got a good memory.
Mr. Rainville. But this would not be normal in your contact
with the people over there?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Rainville. I have nothing further to add.
Mr. Schine. This Communist party member who lived in the
house where you were a bachelor, would you repeat his name,
please.
Mr. Gross. Morris Klein. Let me say I don't say he is a
Communist party member. I just say I understand that afterwards
he was removed or suspended or fired, but he is no longer
working there. And the grapevine told me then--I did not know
at the time I knew him--that for some reason he or his family
had Communist connections.
Mr. Schine. Did you know the year he was suspended?
Mr. Gross. I think it was after I left there, and maybe the
first year after I was married. 1950 would be a good guess, but
it could be '49.
Mr. Schine. Who else was suspended along with him at that
time?
Mr. Gross. I don't think anybody was. I think that was just
an isolated case.
Mr. Schine. Have you seen him since?
Mr. Gross. No. I mean, all the bachelors lived there, and
there was only one or two good restaurants in town to eat at,
and I would see him there, and I think I even double dated with
him once, but that is as far as it went.
Mr. Schine. There are a certain group of individuals who
came from City College over to Fort Monmouth who were in school
at the time you were there. Could you give us their names?
Mr. Gross. Well, let's see. Not in connection with this. I
know a Mr. Harold Stein very well. I went to high school with
him. And in college he was a physicist and I was an engineer,
so we didn't see each other too much. But I went to college
with him, and I came to work, and he came to the same place two
weeks later. He lives in Long Branch now, or somewhere right
near Long Branch.
Mr. Schine. Is that S-t-e-i-n?
Mr. Gross. Yes. I mean, I would say Harold was a close
friend. Let's put it that way. I have met his wife and his
children, and my wife has met his wife and children. But the
other people that went to college at the same time--right off I
can't think of any of the names--Oh, Paul Leeds. His name was
not Leeds at the time. He was an electrical engineer.
Mr. Schine. What was his name at the time?
Mr. Gross. I think it was Leibowitz. Let's see. He was
either half a year ahead of me--you know, at City, you can
start in the middle, and I think he overlapped a year or two
one way or the other. I don't know whether he graduated at the
exact same time or not.
Mr. Schine. Did he tell you of the charges that had been
brought against him?
Mr. Gross. No, Paul and I are very peculiar. We went to
college. Then I met him maybe once after that. Then somewhere
in Penn Station I said, ``Where are you working, Paul?'' He
said ``Oh, I am down at Fort Monmouth.'' I said, ``That is odd.
So am I.'' Then I didn't see him, oddly enough, until Okinawa.
It was just after the war was over, and this man walked over to
me and says ``You are Gross, aren't you?'' and we talked. I
didn't see him then until two years later, back in Red Bank.
And then I just saw him again maybe a couple of months ago. And
I came up here in the car with him today.
Mr. Schine. Did he tell you why he was being called before
this committee?
Mr. Gross. No. He said he didn't know what the charges
were.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Gross, how well do you know Paul Goldberg?
Mr. Gross. Paul Goldberg? Never heard of him.
Mr. Jones. Is that his first name?
Mr. Gross. William?
Mr. Jones. William.
Mr. Gross. No, I just knew he worked at the laboratory, and
I knew he spent two years in England as a liaison for them. I
never met him outside, never worked under him or anything, in
the laboratory.
Mr. Jones. Do you know that his brother-in-law was a
Communist?
Mr. Gross. No, I never did.
Mr. Jones. He had never mentioned that, as a result of your
acquaintance with him, especially during the past few days.
Mr. Gross. No, he didn't. In fact, that strikes me as very
odd, because the lawyer asked us definitely if any of us knew
any Communist connections, and most of us said outright that we
didn't.
And, as I remember, Mr. Goldberg didn't say anything at the
time.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Goldberg made no reference at that time to
his brother-in-law?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Rainville. Who were the others who made no reference?
You said ``most of us said this.''
Mr. Gross. You see, the seating arrangement happened to be
with Mr. Goldberg sitting there and I sitting in back of him,
and I noticed that. But I didn't notice the others. I know Mr.
LePato I heard definitely say ``No, I have no possible
Communist relationships.'' In fact, he also told Mr. Katchen
what the charges seemed to be against him, that he lived in
Washington Village at the time somebody lived next door to him
that was a Communist.
Mr. Jones. Goldberg strikes me as being quite a worried
man. What seems to be bothering him? You mentioned it earlier
here today, too.
Mr. Gross, I don't know. I went out at noon yesterday to
get my car inspected. At that time there was a phone call to
ask Mr. Goldberg to come up here yesterday afternoon instead of
today. He was due to come up here today, and I found out that
Dr. Daniel had said he looked so worried that he called up the
nurse to get him two pills. So he must have been really
worried.
Mr. Jones. What do you believe is bothering him?
Mr. Gross. I don't know. I don't know him well enough to
even think of that.
Mr. Jones. He never gave you any indication or gave Dr.
Daniels any indication at that time, when he offered to get him
some pills?
Mr. Gross. I never talked more than two words to him until
he moved down to the uncleared area. I can't even remember the
date. It has been two or three weeks ago, maybe. And that is
the only time I got to know him. It is a question of ``Are you
going out for lunch?'' Or something like that, because
everybody is sitting around.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Gross, have you ever had any knowledge
brought to your attention, either directly or indirectly, as to
any subversive activities at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Gross. No. The army has very good security regulations
there. We don't have any trouble.
Mr. Jones. When you say ``security regulations'' are you
referring to the present system or the old system?
Mr. Gross. I am referring to 380-5. They have amplified
that with the Blue Book. But I have been uncleared for nine
months, so I don't know all the details. There are a lot of
other ones that have cropped up since then. I would go so far
as to say, though, that security is too strict for a research
organization. You can't do research, and you can't contact
people in naval laboratories, the air force laboratories, if
the regulations are so strict that it is impossible to transmit
information which they need or to get from them information
which you need, without a terrific amount of paper work.
380-5 says you have a law of diminishing returns. If you do
too much, you can't do any other work. If it takes me four
hours to get papers out and everything ready to work, and four
hours to put them away, according to the checkout system, I
can't work any more than day. I think the regulations were
adequate under the old system.
I think the biggest trouble they ever had there was just
absentminded people leaving safes open; and after you got a
double-check system on safes, you have security licked. Because
if you take papers out of an area, or anything like that, you
either have a whiz pass or, I think, the card number is 558, a
little card which says ``The bearer is authorized to carry up
to a certain classification outside'' which means that if I go
to Washington, I don't need to go through all the formality of
getting a whiz pass. If I have a card, I can just take the
papers and go. That has some drawbacks, especially if you run
into absent-minded people. So a while back, instead of anybody
having up to secret, I think only branch chiefs were up to
secret, and section chiefs up to confidential, and other people
up to restricted.
There is the other problem you may have to take equipment
out, not classified. You may work in an outside area and have
to make a field test. On the basis of that card you can take
out equipment. And if the supervisory personnel, in my case Dr.
Daniels, is on the ball, everything is checked in and out of
the safes, and you have a good security control, and you do not
interfere too much. After all, if I want to sell a system to
people there, I have to see the army's point of view, and the
civilian's point of view, and the civilian's point of view is
always that ``You are interfering with me.'' Not in my case, so
much. I have been an officer, and I know both sides. But you
find other people who will always say ``It is too strict.'' I
think it is adequate. ``Adequate'' of course, isn't a good
word.
Mr. Jones. So you think it is virtually impossible under
the present setup there, to remove any top secret or secret
information from Fort Monmouth; is that correct?
Mr. Gross. Yes.
Mr. Jones. In other words, in all the years that you been
out there, you have never had any knowledge either directly or
indirectly of any subversive activities in any way whatsoever?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Jones. Never heard anything about it?
Mr. Gross. No.
Mr. Jones. Nothing on the grapevine at all--that you
referred to a few moments ago?
Mr. Gross. Well, like Mr. Klein was removed for something
in connection with Communists.
There was another case way back, when I first came back
from the navy. And Mr. Sobell was removed from Mr. Stodola's
section.
And they took a man--I think his name was Albert Socol, I
think S-o-c-o-l, but it may be S-o-k-e-l; I don't know. But he
was in the section one day and gone the next. They just had
people come in, who took him out, up to security, bingo, went
through his desk, and that was the last I ever saw of him.
Mr. Schine. Has anybody ever been reprimanded for taking
classified material home, or anything of that sort?
Mr. Gross. No, not in my group, or not among the
connections I had. A reprimand wouldn't be publicized other
than that.
Mr. Schine. Is there any regulation regarding a breach of
that particular security--taking home classified documents?
Mr. Gross. I understand that Mr. Coleman, I think it was--
the grapevine informed me--had taken some stuff home, but I
don't know what happened.
Mr. Schine. Would you say that a situation of that sort
could be of danger?
Mr. Gross. No, not if you know what you are doing. Well,
let me give you an example.
The military still sends you courses as a reserve officer,
and all they want to know is whether you have adequate
facilities there for storing it. You have to have a locked
desk, a locked room, or something adequate to store courses
connected with it. Therefore I would assume that anybody who
took anything home would have the same adequate facilities for
storing it, until it was brought back. I mean, I have never
taken stuff home other than when I was at work and had papers,
and was going to Washington that night on a train, leaving from
Jersey City, I guess, at 12:30. So I would go home and have
supper, and I would have this exact briefcase [indicating],
with something in it, and either permission by whiz pass or
permission by the card which I carried, to get it out of the
gate, show it to the guard, take it out, go down to Washington,
and sit at the meeting. It slept with me in the Pullman. I'd
come back that next night, checked back into our own system in
the office, and that was that.
But I think it is sort of silly to take it home to study at
home. If you can't study, what the heck are you going to do?
There are too many distractions at home, and it is, of course,
not as adequately protected.
Mr. Jones. Have either you or your wife been approached to
become members of the Communist party?
Mr. Gross. No, we were never approached.
Mr. Jones. Never asked in any way to attend meetings, or
join the party?
Mr. Gross. No, never.
Mr. Jones. I have no more questions.
Mr. Schine. Thank you very much.
Will you state your name for the record, please?
STATEMENT OF DR. FRED B. DANIELS
Dr. Daniels. Fred B. Daniels.
Mr. Schine. Will you spell it, please?
Dr. Daniels. Fred B. D-a-n-i-e-l-s.
Mr. Schine. And your current occupation?
Dr. Daniels. Physicist.
Mr. Schine. You are working at Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. What is your classification there?
Dr. Daniels. GS-14.
Mr. Schine. And your duties?
Dr. Daniels. I am the chief of the Electromagnetic Wave
Section.
Mr. Schine. And how long have you been doing this work?
Dr. Daniels. Since about the early part of 1951. I can't
tell you any exact date on that, because it was sort of a
gradual overlapping of duties when I took over, from my
previous one.
Mr. Schine. Where did you get your training, Dr. Daniels?
Dr. Daniels. I got my bachelor's and master's degrees at
the University of Nebraska, and my doctor's at Texas.
Mr. Schine. And after leaving college, would you tell us
briefly of your career?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I got my degree rather late in life, in
1938. I was thirty-seven at the time. And first I couldn't get
a job. They were rather scarce then. I worked as a salesman in
a photographic store for a while. It must have been about eight
or nine months.
Then I got a job in what was then called AGFA in
Binghampton. It is now the ANSCO Corporation. I was doing
photographic research. That was in February of 1940.
I worked there until July 1940 when I was offered the job
at Fort Monmouth, and it was a better paying job, and so I took
that, and I have been at Fort Monmouth ever since.
Mr. Schine. And what was your position when you worked at
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Daniels. I started in as a P-2.
Mr. Schine. Which is what?
Dr. Daniels. Well, let's see. That would be a GS-7, under
the GS rating.
Mr. Schine. What were your duties at that time?
Dr. Daniels. I was doing work in the field of optical
telephony.
Mr. Schine. And how long did you stay in that work?
Dr. Daniels. That was probably about a year that I was
working on that.
Mr. Schine. And then in 1941, what did you do?
Dr. Daniels. I think my next work was in the field of
submarine detection, after optical telephony.
Mr. Schine. And how long did you continue on in that job?
Dr. Daniels. Well, maybe roughly six months to a year. I
can't tell you exactly.
Mr. Schine. And when did you take over the position you now
have?
Dr. Daniels. That wasn't until 1951. In the meantime I
spent quite a long time, from the time I finished my work on
submarine detection, which was taken over by the navy, that is
the reason I dropped that. Then I worked in sound ranging,
until--it must have been somewhere around 1946 or 1947.
Mr. Schine. Would you continue the description of your
work?
Dr. Daniels. Then, after I finished my work in sound
ranging, I was associated with a very highly classified
project. I can't even tell you what it is.
Mr. Schine. This started in what year?
Dr. Daniels. I believe it started around 1947.
Mr. Schine. And you continued on in that position until----
Dr. Daniels. Until some time in 1950.
Mr. Schine. And then you came into your current position
there?
Dr. Daniels. My current position.
Mr. Schine. And you say your duties in your current
position are what?
Dr. Daniels. Research in the field of electromagnetic wave
propagation, and some in compressional wave, too. There are
certain things I am interested in in that field.
Mr. Schine. Are you head of a department?
Dr. Daniels. Yes; head of a section.
Mr. Schine. Head of the propagation section?
Dr. Daniels. The Electromagnetic Wave Propagation Section.
There are other wave propagation sections, too.
Mr. Schine. And you are cleared for security in every way?
Classified material?
Dr. Daniels. Beg pardon?
Mr. Schine. You are cleared for classified material?
Dr. Daniels. Not now.
Mr. Schine. Oh, you are not?
Dr. Daniels. I was suspended--or, I wasn't suspended, but
my security clearance was suspended, about a week ago.
Mr. Jones. Why?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know. I can guess.
Mr. Schine. Why do you think it was?
Dr. Daniels. I think it is just a rehash of a situation
that started years ago, when I gave an incompetent individual
there an unsatisfactory efficiency rating, who worked for me.
Mr. Jones. Who was that man, sir?
Dr. Daniels. Harry Brandt was his name.
Mr. Jones. Harry Brandt?
Dr. Daniels. Harry Brandt. I am not too sure whether his
name was B-r-a-n-d or B-r-a-n-t or B-r-a-n-d-t.
Mr. Schine. Is it true that you have at one time or other
belonged to organizations listed as subversive by the attorney
general's office?
Dr. Daniels. You say have I belonged to any of those
groups?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Dr. Daniels. No, never have.
Mr. Schine. You have never belonged to any union or any
other front organization?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I have been a member of two unions since
I have been there. I was first a member of the National
Federation of Federal Employees, and at the time I sized them
up as more of a drinking society than a union, that spent more
of their time at the bar than at the meeting hall, and when the
United Public Workers was organized, I joined that. I actually
never attended a single meeting. I paid my dues for two or
three years.
Mr. Schine. What was the name of the other union?
Dr. Daniel. The United Public workers of America. It
changed its name once or twice.
Mr. Carr. Were you ever a member of the United Federal
Workers?
Dr. Daniels. United Federal Workers? No.
Mr. Carr. What year was it you joined this United Public
Workers?
Dr. Daniels. Maybe it was '42 or '43, somewhere along in
there.
Mr. Carr. How did you happen to join this? You had been in
the other group?
Dr. Daniels. I had been in the other union, and I believe I
had already dropped out of the other one for some time. They
organized this union, and because the other one was quite
ineffective, I thought it might be a good idea if they had a
little competition, so I joined the new one.
Mr. Carr. Had you ever heard any information concerning the
United Public Workers of America before you joined them?
Dr. Daniels. No. It was a new union at that time, as far as
I knew.
Mr. Carr. Have you since learned that some of the members
of that union and some of the officers were Communists, or
Communist-affiliated?
Dr. Daniels. I know it has been claimed that there were a
number of Communist members. I don't know to what extent that
applied to the local there, because, as I say, the only contact
I ever had with the union actually was with a man who came
around once a month to collect dues. I gave him the money, and
I understand that he was expelled for Communist activities.
Mr. Carr. The man who collected your dues: what was his
name?
Dr. Daniels. Socol, S-o-c-o-l.
Mr. Carr. Do you recall his first name?
Dr. Daniels. I have no idea.
Mr. Carr. Your only connection with the union was through a
man who has been suspended for alleged Communist activity?
Dr. Daniels. Yes. My only connection with them, or with
him, was that he collected the dues. He would come around once
a month, and I would give him the two dollars. I never had any
other connection.
Mr. Carr. If you weren't active in this union, what was
your connection with them?
Dr. Daniels. My connection was that I gave them two dollars
a month.
Mr. Carr. Why?
Dr. Daniels. Beg pardon?
Mr. Carr. Why? Did you derive any benefits from it?
Dr. Daniels. Well, no more than the fact that once I got
started, I just kept on paying.
Mr. Carr. Were these payments continued after you had heard
that the United Public Workers, at least certain of the
national and some of the local officers, were affiliated with
the Communists?
Dr. Daniels. As soon as I heard about Socol, I stopped
paying my dues then.
Mr. Carr. How many years did you pay dues?
Dr. Daniels. I paid dues for two or three years, probably.
Mr. Carr. Two or three years beginning in what year?
Dr. Daniels. It could have been from '43 to '47. The first
year could have been '43 and the last year '47.
Mr. Carr. What was the name of the local?
Dr. Daniels. I don't recall.
Mr. Carr. You don't even recall the number?
Dr. Daniels. I don't recall that.
Mr. Carr. Do you recall any of the officers of it besides
this man Socol?
Dr. Daniels. I never knew any of the officers except that
someone in the past few days told me Bill Jones was the
president, or whatever you call the local head, at one time.
Mr. Carr. And you received literature from the union?
Dr. Daniels. Very little. I remember once receiving
statements and correspondence from them in connection with this
oath that they had to sign regarding the right to strike and
they said that they agreed with the government that federal
employees had no right to strike, and so the union was taking a
stand.
Mr. Carr. The only one you remember in which they agreed
with the government's stand. You don't recall any other
literature you received from them?
Dr. Daniels. No, I don't. I do remember that at the time
the union started up, there was some sort of a bulletin pasted
on the bulletin boards there by the fort authorities saying
that it was perfectly all right to join this union.
Mr. Carr. You never attended any meeting?
Dr. Daniels. I never attended a single meeting of it.
Mr. Carr. Was the man that solicited you to join this same
man, Socol?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't even tell you who asked me to join.
Mr. Carr. And you had no idea that there was any Communist
tinge to this or any alleged Communist tinge to this union?
Dr. Daniels. I had no idea at all.
Mr. Carr. Until Socol was suspended?
Dr. Daniels. Until Socol was suspended and I read the story
about him.
Mr. Carr. Then what did you do? You immediately dropped
your membership? Or you just failed to rejoin?
Dr. Daniels. Well, because he didn't come around to
collect, I naturally stopped paying. Of course, I would have
stopped anyway as soon as I found out it was Communist.
Mr. Carr. Didn't you take part in any of the activities of
the local?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Carr. You never distributed any of their literature
yourself?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Carr. Was your wife a member of this organization?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Carr. Does your wife work?
Dr. Daniels. Let's see. Well, I got a divorce in '43 and
immediately remarried, and my present wife worked at Western
Electric for a while after the war and then was in the
Department of Censorship here in New York.
Mr. Carr. Now, you have said that you yourself have never
been a member of the Communist party.
Dr. Daniels. I never have.
Mr. Carr. Or any alleged front organization of the
Communist party?
Dr. Daniels. Never any front organization either.
Mr. Carr. How about your wife?
Dr. Daniels. I am sure she never has.
Mr. Rainville. You mentioned two wives. Either of them?
Dr. Daniels. As for the first one, the only thing I knew
she was ever a member of was the DAR, and the second one I
don't know that she ever joined anything. She is not the joiner
type.
Mr. Schine. What was Socol doing at the time he was
collecting dues from you?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know what his duties were.
Mr. Schine. Do you know where he worked?
Dr. Daniels. Don't even know where he worked.
Mr. Rainville. Do you know what his classification was?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know.
Mr. Rainville. But he came to see you in your office?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, during lunch time.
Mr. Rainville. Was it possible for any one to just walk
around there without some kind of clearance?
Dr. Daniels. Well, he was cleared at the time, probably.
Everybody in there presumably was.
Mr. Rainville. But you don't know that he was. You never
inquired?
Mr. Daniels. Well, of course, the laboratories have always
been guarded. And, of course, some people have worked in the
past without clearance. But when a man comes into your room for
any reason whatsoever, you don't ask whether he has clearance
unless he wants to talk about classified matters. The situation
has been changed recently, of course.
Mr. Schine. Isn't it true that you were working on a highly
confidential project at that time?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. What year was that?
Dr. Daniels. Let's see. The highly classified projects
started probably in '47, that I mentioned before. I can't tell
you the exact year.
Mr. Schine. And when was Socol collecting dues from you?
Dr. Daniels. Wait a minute. I will take that back. The
classified project started earlier, but I wasn't associated
with it until possibly as late as 1950.
Mr. Schine. And when was Socol collecting dues?
Dr. Daniels. Beg pardon?
Mr. Schine. When was Socol collecting dues from you?
Dr. Daniels. I think '47 was the last year he collected
dues.
Mr. Schine. You had no connection with classified projects
at that time?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, I had connection with classified
projects. I think the highest classification was confidential
at that time.
Mr. Jones. Dr. Daniels, when was your security clearance
lifted?
Dr. Daniels. A week ago last Tuesday.
Mr. Jones. Now, you said you had reason to believe that
this was lifted because of an efficiency rating that you gave
to Harry Brandt?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Will you explain that a little for us, please?
Dr. Daniels. Well, this man Brandt worked for me on a field
trip, when we went out to Wyoming to make some observations,
when some excess munitions were detonated, in Idaho.
Mr. Jones. In what year?
Dr. Daniels. This was '46.
Mr. Jones. You were a member of the United Public Workers
at the time?
Dr. Daniels. At that time, yes. And the project was
unclassified, particularly the project that Brandt was working
on with me. It was just the determination of the temperature
and wind in the upper levels of the atmosphere by observations
on sound from the explosions that were being set off. Brandt
was a radio mechanic working under me at the time. I was in
charge of the expedition. I found him to be quite incompetent.
He had professional status, but he certainly wasn't a
professional man at all. And he did a number of things in such
an incompetent manner that I had to reprimand him right on the
spot for some of the things that he did. And, as a matter of
fact, some of the things amounted to almost deliberately
sabotaging the experiment.
Mr. Rainville. You didn't suspect deliberate sabotage?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I mean sabotage not for the benefit of
any foreign power but just out of pure meanness.
Mr. Jones. Your relations with him were perhaps a little
bit strained at that time?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, they were very much strained.
Mr. Jones. Now will you continue, Doctor?
Dr. Daniels. And when I came back to the laboratory and
reported to Dr. Anderson, the branch chief, on things that had
happened out there, he suggested that I give him an
``unsatisfactory'' efficiency rating. I gave him the rating of
``unsatisfactory,'' and also recommended that he be demoted
from professional to a subprofessional rating, because he had
no college training whatsoever. He had a high school diploma,
and that was all that I could find in his record.
So I gave him the unsatisfactory rating. He appealed it to
the local appeals board, at Fort Monmouth, and we had a hearing
before that board. Dr. Anderson testified. Dr. Crenshaw, who
had had some previous bad experience with him, testified.
Mr. Jones. Will you spell his name, please?
Dr. Daniels. C-r-e-n-s-h-a-w.
Mr. Jones. Dr. Craig Crenshaw?
Dr. Daniel. Dr. Craig Crenshaw.
Mr. Jones. He is still employed at Fort Monmouth?
Dr. Daniels. He is still at Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Jones. He was one of those who reviewed Harry Brandt's
appeal?
Dr. Daniels. He testified at the hearing in my favor.
Mr. Jones. In your favor?
Dr. Daniels. Yes. And during the hearing, Mr. Brandt came
up with some accusations against me.
Mr. Jones. Personal?
Dr. Daniels. Yes. Well, he said that I had given my wife
access to classified information and shown her classified
equipment.
Mr. Jones. Did he attempt to substantiate that accusation?
Dr. Daniels. No. It was pointed out by others at the
hearing that it wasn't true. He also tried to make some--don't
know why he had to drag it in. He had to make some comment
about my wife, which was completely irrelevant, that she asked
him to get her a card permitting her to buy ice cream, and so
on, at the Post Exchange, just because she didn't want to tell
what her age was. And that was completely irrelevant--just to
show the type of thing he would bring up.
Mr. Jones. What was the result of the appeals board
decision?
Dr. Daniels. The appeals board agreed with me and decided
that he was completely unsatisfactory.
Mr. Jones. Then continue about Harry Brandt. As a result of
the decision rendered by the appeals board, he was then
summarily dismissed?
Dr. Daniels. No, a man can't be dismissed for inefficiency.
He can just be downgraded.
Mr. Jones. He cannot be dismissed for inefficiency. He is
downgraded. So he was downgraded?
Dr. Daniels. No, he wasn't. He appealed it again. He
appealed it to the board in Washington.
Mr. Jones. Oh, yes.
Dr. Daniels. And I don't know how accurate this is. I hear
the story that the American Legion financed his appeal and
supplied a lawyer for him in Washington.
Mr. Jones. Do you know the name of that lawyer?
Dr. Daniels. I heard it at the time, but I don't remember.
He was a brigadier general, I believe, or had been.
Mr. Jones. And what was the result of this appeal?
Dr. Daniels. The result of that was that it was reversed
and I was ordered to give him a good efficiency rating.
Mr. Jones. Now, what is Mr. Brandt doing today?
Dr. Daniels. I believe he is working for the Field Test
Equipment Section, or something similar.
Mr. Jones. Do you see him frequently, or occasionally?
Dr. Daniels. I have never seen him since that incident. He
is located at Fort Monmouth, and I am located at Evans, which
are some miles apart.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever had any reason to believe that in
any way whatsoever, Mr. Brandt contributed in any way to
subversive activities while he was employed out there?
Dr. Daniels. No. I don't think he had any connection with
any subversive activities. I think what he did was just out of
pure stupidity. And I consider him mentally incompetent
Mr. Jones. Was he a member of the Communist party?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know of anyone out there who is a member
of the Communist party or was a member of the party?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Jones. You have no knowledge of any person being a
member of the party or any affiliated front organization?
Dr. Daniels. No, I don't.
Mr. Jones. Now, other than Mr. Brandt, have you anything to
which to attribute the lifting of your security clearance?
Dr. Daniels. Well, there might be other reasons. For one
thing, I am one of the few people around there who seem to have
guts enough when a person is unsatisfactory to try to get rid
of him, transfer him out of the section or do something. Most
supervisors are getting so intimidated they are afraid to do
that. And there are other people that we have gotten rid of
recently that might make accusations against me.
Mr. Jones. Well, for example?
Dr. Daniels. I am not sure exactly who they would be. Well,
one possibility is a man by the name of Lartaud, L-a-r-t-a-u-d.
Mr. Jones. What does he do?
Dr. Daniels. He was in the section already when I became
section chief, and he probably expected to be the assistant
section chief. But when I took over the section, I took it over
only under the condition that Mr. Gross would be my executive
assistant.
I told Dr. Anderson when he offered me the job that I would
take the job as chief if he would put Gross in as assistant.
And Lartaud probably felt himself pretty much put out by that,
and there is the possibility that he might have made an
accusation.
Mr. Jones. There developed thereafter, then, a sort of
rivalry and jealousy?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Now, you have considerable confidence, I take
it, in Mr. Gross?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, I do.
Mr. Jones. Now, other than those two reasons, one, the
rating that you had given Harry Brandt, and, two, the
personality conflict, more or less, in your section, you have
no other reason, to the best of your knowledge, to attribute
the lifting of your security clearance at this time to?
Dr. Daniels. No, I don't.
Mr. Jones. You have no other reason?
Dr. Daniels. No. And I have another reason to feel that
that is it. Any time any of my friends have reported to me that
the FBI has investigated me, the one question that always
popped up there was, ``What do you think of Harry Brandt's
reliability?'' It was always asked in connection with any
questions about me.
Mr. Jones. Now, we were told here by three or four
witnesses that within the last two or three days, there was
held a meeting at a lawyer's office.
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What is the name of that lawyer?
Dr. Daniels. Katchen.
Mr. Jones. What is his first name?
Dr. Daniels. Ira.
Mr. Jones. Now, how did this meeting come to be? Who
arranged for the meeting, and who invited these persons to
attend that meeting?
Dr. Daniels. I wasn't at the meeting. I don't know who
arranged it. He may have arranged it himself.
Mr. Jones. You say that Mr. Katchen may have arranged that
meeting himself?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Why?
Dr. Daniels. I understand that the Anti-Defamation League
wanted to look into the matter of whether there was anything in
the line of anti-Semitic activities behind this.
Mr. Rainville. But you your self are not Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. I am not Jewish. My wife is.
Mr. Rainville. Mr. Brandt is not Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. Mr. Brandt is Jewish.
Mr. Rainville. He is Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. Mr. Lartaud? Is he Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. No, he is not Jewish. There does seem to be a
very high correlation, of course, between the individuals who
have been suspended or had their clearance lifted----
Mr. Rainville. But in your own case, 50 percent of them are
Jewish?
Dr. Daniels. It is reversed.
Mr. Rainville. Not entirely. Of the two men you preferred
charges against or in some way demoted because of bringing Mr.
Gross in, one is Jewish and one is not.
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. So you are 50 percent anti-Semitic yourself?
Dr. Daniels. You mean in terms of what I have done to them?
Mr. Rainville. Yes.
Dr. Daniels. Okay, if you want to put it that way. But it
was not on a basis of religion, I can assure you.
Mr. Rainville. But you are jumping to the conclusion that
there is some anti-Semitism here?
Dr. Daniels. No, that is not my conclusion. In fact, I
doubt it, myself.
Mr. Rainville. Well, that is odd. Because some of the
gentlemen who were discussing it here didn't exactly quote you
but inferred that you had brought the matter up. And just a
moment ago you said, ``Now, I am not Jewish, but my wife is''--
as if that might be part of the explanation.
Dr. Daniels. I did feel originally that that might be what
was behind it. And actually I am still, to tell the truth,
somewhat undecided.
Mr. Rainville. But a moment ago, you said there was no
other reason.
Dr. Daniels. Okay, but these accusations all started within
a certain group at Fort Monmouth. And it may be that the
individuals involved there are anti-Semitic. Of course, there
may be other reasons for their activities, too, for their
accusations. I feel in many cases they are just taking
reprisals against somebody who has made some adverse comments
about their methods of investigation.
I know that shortly before my security clearance was
lifted, some time ago, quite obviously in connection with this
Brandt case, I had gone to the military head of the security
there and complained about the way the civilian security
people, Reid and his group there, were using the services of
stool pigeons like this Brandt, and so on. And shortly after
that, my security clearance was lifted for the first time. I
feel that was a reprisal.
Mr. Rainville. How does that tie in with anti-Semitism?
Dr. Daniels. Well, it ties in with what I said. In some
cases, it might be an anti-Semitic bias. In other cases, it may
be a reprisal for some action you have taken that is
unfavorable to them.
Mr. Rainville. Yes, but you are anti-Semitic, too. You
tried to get a man demoted, and a board finally said you were
wrong about his efficiency. Wouldn't that be persecution, or
something?
Dr. Daniels. Some people might look at it that way.
Mr. Rainville. But you are one of the people that are doing
the looking, and you say it looks as if the other guys are
doing it, but you yourself, because you do the same thing, are
not subject to that criticism.
Dr. Daniels. I tried to point out before--I am not being
absolutely dogmatic about it--that I am not firmly convinced
myself that it is anti-Semitism. I am not firmly convinced that
it is not. Let's look at it this way.
Mr. Jones. Then, Dr. Daniels, I wonder if we might get
back, here, to Mr. Katchen for just a moment. Time is rushing
on us, here, and we would like to make every effort to tie all
these ends together. We would appreciate every possible
assistance you could give us in coming to the objectives of
this committee just as hurriedly as possible.
First, you have just said that Mr. Katchen arranged this
meeting of those who were suspended and those whose security
clearance was lifted.
Dr. Daniels. As far as I know.
Mr. Jones. As far as you know?
Dr. Daniels. I was not there.
Mr. Jones. That is right. Now, who attended that meeting,
Dr. Daniels?
Dr. Daniels. I don't even know, for sure.
Mr. Jones. You don't know any of the persons who attended
the meeting?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't say for sure.
Mr. Jones. When was the meeting held, Doctor?
Dr. Daniels. It must have been within the past couple of
days.
Mr. Jones. Where was it held?
Dr. Daniels. In his office.
Mr. Jones. In the afternoon, or in the evening?
Dr. Daniels. I don't remember.
Mr. Jones. You don't remember whether you met in the
afternoon or in the evening?
Dr. Daniels. I didn't go. I wasn't there.
Mr. Jones. Who invited these people to attend the meeting?
Dr. Daniels. I am just assuming that it was Mr. Katchen,
but I don't know for certain, because I wasn't there.
Mr. Jones. And what interest has he in particular in this
situation?
Dr. Daniels. I think his interest comes through his
connection with the Anti-Defamation League.
Mr. Jones. Is he retained by the Anti-Defamation League?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't say that definitely.
Mr. Jones. Who brought this case to his attention? The
Anti-Defamation League?
Dr. Daniels. It is possible.
Mr. Jones. Did you arrange to have Mr. Katchen handle this
matter?
Dr. Daniels. No. I have nothing to do with the Anti-
Defamation League or B'nai B'rith.
Mr. Jones. I understand that, Doctor. But you did not
arrange with Mr. Katchen to arrange this meeting?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Jones. How well do you know Mr. Katchen?
Dr. Daniels. Well, not too well. My main association with
him was when I went to him a few weeks ago to have him draw up
a will for me. That is when I actually met him for the first
time.
Wait a minute. Excuse me. I am wrong. I had a case against
my landlord once, where I sued him for over-collection of rent.
He was my lawyer in that.
Mr. Jones. And the second time was to draw up a will?
Dr. Daniels. The second time was to draw up a will.
Mr. Jones. And who referred you to Mr. Katchen?
Dr. Daniels. In the first case, I am not certain but I
believe it was Harold Stein. I know he had had Mr. Katchen in a
similar case once.
Mr. Jones. And who is Mr. Stein?
Dr. Daniels. Another employee at the laboratory. He works
through a computing group there.
Mr. Jones. And Mr. Stein suggested that you go and see Mr.
Katchen in this suit you had against your landlord?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Following that, you went back to Mr. Katchen to
have him draw up the will?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. And then your third meeting with Mr. Katchen was
at the time that you discussed with him this matter at
Monmouth; is that correct?
Dr. Daniels. Listen, I didn't attend that meeting, I tell
you.
Mr. Jones. No, but you talked with him over the telephone.
Dr. Daniels. I talked with him at the time I went up to
take back the copy of the will and point out some corrections I
wanted in it.
Mr. Jones. And that time you discussed with him the
possible anti-Semitic problem which existed out there?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, I did discuss it with him at that time.
Mr. Jones. And that is how Mr. Katchen's interests had been
aroused in this situation?
Dr. Daniels. No, his interests had already been aroused
because he started asking me questions about it.
Mr. Jones. I see. Now, how well do you know Dr. Craig
Crenshaw?
Dr. Daniels. By the way, I would like to volunteer some
information, further information, in connection with Mr.
Katchen, if I may.
Mr. Jones. Yes, I would like to have that.
Dr. Daniels. He called me last night. It seemed that some
of the people who had been here yesterday went to his office,
and he called me last night to tell me what had happened and
gave his opinion on the thing, if that is of any interest to
you.
Mr. Rainville. His opinion is of much interest.
Dr. Daniels. His opinion was that--well, he said, ``This
seems to be a very sincere attempt on the part of the committee
to find out just how security matters are handled at the fort
there. That is all that I can see.''
Mr. Jones. I may say to you, Doctor, that we were amazed to
learn from several witnesses of this anti-Semitic problem or
alleged problem. It was shocking to hear these allegations made
here, and we want to exercise every effort to clarify this just
as much as possible. Primarily, we are interested in the
security and the loyalty program out there at Monmouth, as you
can well appreciate.
However, I think in order to perhaps arrive at an
understandable picture of that situation, it is necessary to
bring in all these related aspects or unrelated aspects and to
sift it all through and see just what we have.
Now, how well do you know Dr. Craig Crenshaw?
Dr. Daniels. I know him very well, through my connection
with him at the laboratory.
Mr. Jones. How long have you known him?
Dr. Daniels. It must have been about twelve years.
Mr. Jones. You have known him for twelve years?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. On an intimate basis?
Dr. Daniels. We don't meet socially at all but we have been
very closely associated at the laboratory.
Mr. Jones. Professionally, you are quite close?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What other relations have you had with Dr.
Crenshaw out there, in the professional sense?
Dr. Daniels. I can't give it to you exactly. I think at one
time I was his supervisor. And then we had parallel positions
on an equal level for a while. He was called the assistant
chief for administration, and I was the assistant chief for
research in the section.
Mr. Jones. Now, Dr. Crenshaw spoke in your favor during
Harry Brandt's appeal. Is that correct?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Since that time has Dr. Crenshaw ever
volunteered any other assistance in your behalf in one way or
another?
Dr. Daniels. Not that I can think of.
Mr. Jones. In no matters relating to loyalty or security or
anything else?
Dr. Daniels. Oh, he probably has been questioned by the FBI
regarding me. He never discussed it with me that I remember.
Is Dr. Crenshaw currently being investigated by the FBI?
Mr. Jones. For what reason?
Dr. Daniels. Apparently in connection with this Brandt
case. Because he first asked about Dr. Crenshaw, as to his
loyalty, what I thought of it, and so on, and then whether
there was any person who had reason to be antagonistic towards
him. First I couldn't think of anything at all, and then my
mind went back to this Brandt case, and then the man from the
FBI nodded when I said, ``Harry Brandt,'' and I made a few
allusions to certain things that had happened, and the man from
the FBI obviously understood what it was. It was regarding
highly classified information. And I could see right off that
he understood what I meant, though, and vice versa. And it was
Brandt that was accusing Crenshaw.
Mr. Schine. Dr. Daniels, in your electromagnetic
propagation work, you have had some contact with MIT, have you
not?
Dr. Daniels. MIT? Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Do you know a Mr. Yamins?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. What is your contact with Mr. Yamins?
Dr. Daniels. Well, the only contact I have ever had with
him has been either through written memoranda asking him for
information, or occasional trips up there. I might go in and
ask, ``Have you this information I wanted on the TR box?'' or
something like that, and walk out again.
Mr. Schine. What is Mr. Yamins' job at MIT?
Dr. Daniels. How long has he been there?
Mr. Schine. What is his job there?
Dr. Daniels. He is liaison officer, I believe. I am not
sure. He is a liaison man, anyway, to maintain liaison between
the Signal Corps here and work going on at MIT, to keep us
informed of anything that they are doing that might be of
interest to us and to arrange for the loan of government
property, interchange of property, and so on.
Mr. Schine. His work is not solely confined to propagation,
is it?
Dr. Daniels. Oh, no.
Mr. Schine. He is liaison for the entire relationship
between MIT and Fort Monmouth?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Schine. As well as the rest of the Signal Corps?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Schine. He has complete access to classified material?
Dr. Daniels. Mr. Yamins, you mean?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Dr. Daniels. Yes, so far as I know. Certainly. Because he
wore a secret badge. He wore the red badge that indicates
clearance for secret.
Mr. Schine. He comes to Fort Monmouth occasionally?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, I saw him there a couple of days ago
apparently when he came back to receive his suspension, and so
on. I was sitting in Colonel Moses' office waiting to be called
up here, and I saw him with his secret badge on, indicating
that he had been cleared, for secret.
Mr. Schine. He discussed the charge with you?
Dr. Daniels. No. He just nodded to some stenographer and
walked out again. We just nodded.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us briefly what the charges
were, against Mr. Yamins?
Dr. Daniels. I have no idea.
Mr. Schine. Had you heard what the charges were?
Dr. Daniels. I hadn't heard what they are in his case.
Mr. Schine. With whom does Mr. Yamins deal when he comes to
Fort Monmouth?
Dr. Daniels. He would deal directly with the people at
headquarters who are located at Fort Monmouth proper.
Mr. Schine. Yes. Would you give us their names?
Dr. Daniels. That is not at Evans where I am located.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us their names?
Dr. Daniels. Well, Squire Laboratories, the place where he
reports in.
Mr. Schine. With whom does he deal in Squire Laboratories?
Dr. Daniels. I would suspect that he reports directly to
Dr. Zahl, the director of engineering.
Mr. Schine. How do you spell that?
Dr. Daniels. Z-a-h-l.
Mr. Schine. And whenever he wants to confer with anyone
involved with a specific project, he goes to Dr. Zahl and lines
up the meeting, and then he is free to come and go, or he was
free to come and go prior to the lifting of the security?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Is it Dr. Yamins?
Dr. Daniels. No. He doesn't have a doctor's degree.
Mr. Schine. Is he a scientist?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, he is a physicist.
Mr. Schine. Do you know anything about his background?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know anything about it at all.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Dexter Masters?
Dr. Daniels. Masters? The name doesn't sound familiar at
all.
Mr. Jones. Did you know Julius Rosenberg while you were out
there?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us what you did prior to going
to college in 1932?
Dr. Daniels. I worked for a number of years as a
photographer. I started in college in 1918. I had one year of
college, and then I dropped out for about a year or so.
Mr. Schine. Where were you a photographer?
Dr. Daniels. That was at the University of Michigan.
Mr. Schine. You worked as a photographer at the University
of Michigan? Where were you a photographer?
Dr. Daniels. No, that was much later, I worked as a
photographer from about 1926 to 1930.
Mr. Schine. What did you do prior?
Dr. Daniels. Prior to 1926?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Dr. Daniels. As I started to say, I was at the University
of Michigan for one year. That took me up to 1919. And then I
spent a year at home. Part of that year I worked in Kalamazoo
with the tire factory there.
Mr. Schine. And you held odd jobs between that time and the
time you went to----
Dr. Daniels. Well, I went in 1920 to Germany. That was
during the inflation period. And because of the inflation, the
small amount of money that my mother was able to send me that
would enable me to go to school over there.
Mr. Schine. That was when you became interested in
photography?
Dr. Daniels. I had been interested in photography ever
since I was a very young child.
Mr. Schine. Your interest has continued?
Dr. Daniels. Yes. I was a member of a camera club over in
Germany.
Mr. Schine. What kind of cameras do you have?
Mr. Daniels. I have just a little 35-millimeter camera.
Mr. Schine. Do you ever use the Lane Polaroid camera?
Dr. Daniels. I have never used that type yet.
Mr. Schine. Ever use the Minox camera?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. You know what the Minox is?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, one of those small cameras that takes 6-
millimeter film or something like that.
Mr. Schine. You probably saw that camera being developed
when you were in Germany. It was developed in the twenties.
Dr. Daniels. Well, I didn't get any access to what was
being developed there.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever seen a Minox camera?
Dr. Daniels. I believe I have seen the Minox. I think one
of the men at the lab had one at one time.
Mr. Schine. What was his name?
Dr. Daniels. Kaiser.
Mr. Schine. What was his first name?
Dr. Daniels. K-a-i-s-e-r. His first name is Morris.
Mr. Schine. What is Mr. Kaiser doing now?
Dr. Daniels. He is chief of the Counter-Measures Branch.
Mr. Schine. And in that capacity, what are his duties?
Dr. Daniels. He is the chief, head of the whole branch.
Mr. Schine. And what does that work entail?
Dr. Daniels. Well, various methods, countermeasures, such
as detection of enemy radio transmissions, and so on. I don't
know too much about it. It is highly classified.
Mr. Schine. Did it ever occur to you that it was rather
strange that Mr. Kaiser would have the Minox camera in his
office? Isn't there a regulation prohibiting cameras?
Dr. Daniels. There is a regulation preventing it, yes. You
can't take in cameras or binoculars.
Mr. Schine. Did it ever occur to you that it was odd for
him to have the camera?
Dr. Daniels. I don't remember whether he showed it to me in
his office or not.
Mr. Schine. You saw it in the office, though, didn't you?
Dr. Daniels. I believe I did.
Mr. Schine. Did it occur to you that it was peculiar for
Dr. Kaiser to have a camera in his office, particularly a Minox
camera?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I thought at the time it was a little
improper to bring it in.
Mr. Schine. Did you ask him about it?
Dr. Daniels. Well, I didn't say anything about it.
Mr. Schine. Did he say anything about it?
Dr. Daniels. He was in a higher level than I was.
Mr. Schine. Yes. Did he display the camera freely, or did
he just happen to pull it out and show it to you because of
your interest in photography?
Dr. Daniels. He was interested. I think it was one of the
first ones that had ever been imported.
Mr. Schine. I see. This was what year? 1950, wasn't it?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't give you even a guess.
Mr. Schine. Wasn't it around 1950?
Dr. Daniels. That year or before.
Mr. Schine. 1949?
Dr. Daniels. I say either that or earlier.
Mr. Schine. It wasn't before 1949, was it?
Dr. Daniels. I couldn't say definitely. I can't even recall
the exact office.
Mr. Schine. It was a little silver-colored camera?
Dr. Daniels. It was a very, very small camera.
Mr. Schine. That pulled out.
Dr. Daniels. I think that was the name of it. I am not 100
percent sure. It was the smallest camera I had seen.
Mr. Schine. Did he tell you the Gestapo developed this
camera during the war?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, it was a camera that had been developed
in Germany during the war.
Mr. Schine. You had seen that camera in Germany probably?
Dr. Daniels. I hadn't seen it in Germany.
Mr. Schine. Wasn't it through your interest in photography
that this subject first came up?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, it was through that.
Mr. Schine. He didn't display the camera freely, though,
did he?
Dr. Daniels. He knew that I was interested in photography,
and he showed it to me for that reason. I don't know to what
other people he showed it at the time.
Mr. Schine. He didn't display the camera freely, though did
he?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know. He might have. I wasn't in his
office regularly, so I wouldn't know to whom he showed it.
Mr. Schine. But due to the fact that he was in a superior
position to you, you didn't feel that you should discuss with
him the security angle?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. Did you feel you should report it to anyone?
Dr. Daniels. Well, under the circumstances, I didn't feel
that it was necessary. Considering he was a branch chief, or
whatever his position was at the time, I would feel that he was
certainly a reliable individual.
Mr. Schine. Was Mr. Kaiser a close friend of yours?
Dr. Daniels. Well, not too close.
Mr. Schine. He wouldn't show you the camera, though, if you
were a complete stranger.
Dr. Daniels. You see, he was my superior, mainly, and he
knew of my interest in photography.
Mr. Schine. You were more than just a laboratory
acquaintance of his. You knew him socially, didn't you?
Dr. Daniels. I am sorry. I didn't get that question.
Mr. Schine. You knew him socially, didn't you?
Dr. Daniels. Yes.
Mr. Schine. You had seen him from time to time socially?
Dr. Daniels. Well, not too often. Maybe five or six times
in my entire period at the laboratory.
Mr. Schine. But he didn't hesitate to confide in you the
fact that he had this camera, although he probably asked you to
not tell anybody that he had the camera with him in his office?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know that he made such a request in
the office.
Mr. Schine. But he didn't feel it was necessary to make it?
Dr. Daniels. Maybe that was it.
Mr. Schine. It is pretty well known around Fort Monmouth
that you are not supposed to take binoculars and cameras and
other such equipment on the base?
Dr. Daniels. Yes, it is pretty generally known you
shouldn't take cameras in.
Mr. Schine. Had you ever seen him take pictures there?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. He didn't demonstrate it to you?
Dr. Daniels. No.
Mr. Schine. Didn't he pull out some pictures and show them
to you?
Dr. Daniels. I don't know whether he had any pictures at
the time.
Mr. Schine. That were done with the Minox camera? Didn't he
show you the size of the negatives?
Dr. Daniels. He might have, but I wouldn't remember.
Mr. Schine. You don't recall? Try and think back to the
incident.
Dr. Daniels. No, I can't remember.
Mr. Schine. Didn't he pull out some negatives and show you
the size of them?
Dr. Daniels. I really don't remember. It would have been
the obvious thing to do, of course, but I don't remember
whether he did or not.
Mr. Rainville. Is it your feeling that because of the
hearings of this committee you and some of these other people
were perhaps removed from security clearance?
Dr. Daniels. That is what I have been trying to figure out
for myself ever since it started.
Mr. Rainville. Do you think that it has perhaps been more
sweeping than necessary, in an effort to perhaps protect the
security officers themselves from being charged with
negligence?
Dr. Daniels. That is one theory that I have had regarding
the reason that these all happened to come exactly at this
time.
Mr. Jones. That is all. Thank you very much, Dr. Daniels.
Mr. Schine. Would you be seated, please, and state your
name for the record?
STATEMENT OF BERNARD LIPEL
Mr. Lipel. Bernard Lipel.
Mr. Schine. That is L-i-p-e-l-l?
Mr. Lipel. No, one final ``l.''
Mr. Schine. And your current occupation, Mr. Lipel?
Mr. Lipel. I am a physicist at Evans Signal Laboratory Fort
Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us where you got your training
for this work?
Mr. Lipel. Yes. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Mr. Schine. Could you speak a little louder?
Mr. Lipel. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, between 1934
and l938.
Mr. Jones. Is that at Troy, New York?
Mr. Lipel. Troy, New York, yes.
Mr. Schine. And when you left there, in 1938, where did you
go?
Mr. Lipel. I was for a time unemployed, and the first
regular employment I had was working for--I think it was
Optical Research, Incorporated, something like that. Anyhow it
was a company run by a Mr. Feinbloom, who was manufacturing
contact lenses.
Mr. Schine. What year was this?
Mr. Lipel. This was, as well as I can recall, probably in
1939. My employment there was very short. I took that
employment as a temporary job.
Mr. Schine. Would you sketch your history?
Mr. Lipel. Certainly. I was then employed as a machinist
for the Simmon, S-i-m-m-o-n, Brothers, in Long Island City for
a couple of months. I then found my first technical job, which
was for Eagle Electric Company, Eagle Electric Manufacturing
Company, who were then in Brooklyn, New York. They are now in
Long Island City. I remained there until I accepted employment
at the Signal Corps Laboratory.
Mr. Schine. Which was when?
Mr. Lipel. On September 3rd, 1940.
Mr. Schine. And how did you happen to take employment at
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Lipel. During the period of my unemployment, I believe,
I took an examination, a formal examination. During the summer
of 1940, I received an inquiry. And I was interviewed and
offered a position during the summer of 1940. I took the job
effective the 3rd of September.
Mr. Schine. Will you give us the names of the individuals
you stated as references when you filled out your application
form?
Mr. Lipel. That was thirteen years ago, and I can't be sure
about that.
Mr. Schine. So in 1940, you took a position with Fort
Monmouth.
Would you tell us the position and the duties, please?
Mr. Lipel. It was a position as a junior physicist, P-1. I
was assigned to the Sound Ranging Section.
Mr. Schine. Sound ranging?
Mr. Lipel. The Sound Ranging Section.
Mr. Schine. And would you sketch briefly the evolution of
your employment at Fort Monmouth, the various jobs you held?
Mr. Lipel. Well, the section and branch that I was then
assigned to--the laboratories underwent various changes in
names, but I remained essentially with the same group until, I
think, at the end of the year 1947, I left what was then the
General Engineering Branch at Evans Signal laboratory, the
descendant of this original job, and went to work at Cole
Signal Laboratory in the Wire Communications Branch.
Mr. Schine. And what were your duties there?
Mr. Lipel. They were concerned with data transmission
problems.
Mr. Schine. I see. And you continued on at Coles since that
time?
Mr. Lipel. No, I continued at Coles until on the 9th of
August this year. I was transferred again, back to the Applied
Physics Branch, which is actually the original group that I
once worked with, but this time with new duties, in a different
section.
Mr. Schine. Yes. What are your duties?
Mr. Lipel. I am concerned now with the development of
digital computing machinery.
Mr. Schine. Which is what?
Mr. Lipel. Well, digital computing machines are machines
which are mathematical machines.
Mr. Jones. Is that the electric brain?
Mr. Lipel. There has been a lot of publicity of that kind.
Actually, in many cases, they are simply the same thing as a
desk calculator, but required to do more of the job
automatically.
Mr. Schine. In your work at Evans prior to the time you
went to Coles Laboratories, you say you worked on transmission?
Mr. Lipel. No, at Evans Laboratory, with a few temporary
exceptions, for the seven and a half years I originally I was
at Evans Laboratory the vast majority of that time I was
working on sound ranging equipment. I also, for the record,
worked on some underwater equipment and on some heat detecting
equipment.
Mr. Schine. Was all of this work classified?
Mr. Lipel. Most of the time I had duties on classified
projects.
Mr. Schine. Now, you have been cleared for classified work?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And still are?
Mr. Lipel. I am cleared up to secret.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever had any problems with regard to
clearance?
Mr. Lipel. No, I have never had any problems with regard to
clearance.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever been reprimanded for any breach
of security?
Mr. Lipel. Oh, yes; I have been reprimanded.
Mr. Carr. For security negligence?
Mr. Lipel. Security negligence, yes. As a matter of fact, I
have never been satisfied with the case, and I believe that the
records in my file indicate that I have a grievance in the
matter.
But briefly--I won't mention the relative importance of
this material, which would be a point.
Mr. Schine. Was it very important classified material?
Mr. Lipel. No, it was unimportant classified material. But
that has nothing to do with the regulations, since unimportant
material should be safeguarded in the same way as important
material.
Mr. Schine. When did this situation take place?
Mr. Lipel. In 1945. And, briefly, what happened there is
that I had a violation and received a written reprimand, which
is in my file.
Some period later, I believe less than a year, I don't
remember how long, there was a second violation.
Mr. Schine. What was the first violation?
Mr. Lipel. A specification marked secret was found by the
guard who inspected our building. It had been left out by the
group. A note was left that this specification is to be found
in the adjutant's office.
I, as the senior member of that group, and as the one with
the longest employment and, therefore, the longest clear
record, went and got it.
The penalty at that time, the known penalty, for such a
thing, was a reprimand, and I felt that the reprimand would not
hurt me as it would anyone else in the group.
I didn't want to go into this, but the truth of the matter
was that I was in the habit of inspecting that building before
locking up every day. It was wintertime. We were in a very
remote building.
I was in the main building that whole afternoon, actually
working with the specifications people. Because of the bad
weather I said, ``Oh, well, I won't go back today.'' And I
omitted my regular inspection.
However, I felt it my moral duty to be responsible, and
therefore, I went and took the specification. I received that
reprimand.
Mr. Schine. What was the penalty?
Mr. Lipel. There was a written reprimand, which was placed
in my 201 file.
Mr. Schine. This was in 1944?
Mr. Lipel. Either '44 or '45.
Mr. Carr. In February?
Mr. Lipel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. When was the second one?
Mr. Lipel. The second one must have been in April 1945.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us about that, please?
Mr. Lipel. Yes. I was in Washington, I don't remember the
nature of this. There was some kind of a big show in
Washington, and the show was ceased because of the death of
President Roosevelt. Before the ceasing of the show, which
originally was very highly classified, General Somervell took
around a lot of newspaper reporters and showed them all this
equipment in sort of a flamboyant attitude. The newspapers were
supposed to publish articles that all this stuff had been
quickly declassified as a gesture of defiance, because we had
won the war. The articles were of that tone. The last day, when
practically everybody went in there, we were all permitted to
circulate, and I picked up a pamphlet which was marked secret,
but which everybody was permitted to take, including the
newspapermen. In any case, that was an unwise thing to do, of
course, without having it erased.
But I brought it back, and it was among my possessions. We
moved from one room to another, and all these possessions were
filed in a heap.
And, as I deserved to have happen, this secret pamphlet was
on top, and it was found.
Therefore, I again was called to task for a violation of
security. I never made any issue as to the importance of the
matter.
Mr. Schine. What was the penalty then?
Mr. Lipel. The penalty then? As stated, I was sent a
letter, an exact copy of the original reprimand, stating: ``You
are being reprimanded for this.''
I don't remember whether it said, ``It is your first,'' or
``it is your second offense.''
And the nature of that reprimand was such that the case was
closed.
However, that didn't finish the matter, because about a
month later the project officer, Major Geoffrey, the head of
the branch--Mr.----
Mr. Schine. J-e-f-f-r-e-y?
Mr. Lipel. No, Geoffrey, G-e-o-f-f-r-e-y.
He told me that, ``Apparently I have been told that you and
I have to go and see''--I don't know the name of this officer--
``in the front office.''
And having gone down there, I was told, ``Well, it is too
bad, but you had a second offense last month, and the
regulations are mandatory. You are obliged to be suspended for
one day.''
I said, ``I didn't hear about that, but if it is mandatory
I guess I will have to do it.''
There certainly wasn't any time to bring up the question of
the importance of this material or whether I needed to have had
the original reprimand, the first reprimand.
So I agreed to take a date at my own convenience for
suspension at that time. It so happened that I was very busy, I
was preparing to make a trip to California, in connection with
some classified project.
However, I was sent a new form. That is, I was notified in
writing. And the new writing apparently was a substitution for
my original letter of reprimand. It referred to some Civil
Service regulations, which I am not usually familiar with, so I
went to the personnel people and insisted on getting a copy of
the regulations.
The regulation I found had been cited as the authority for
punishing me with a day's suspension, and it merely said that
suspension could be imposed for certain kinds of disciplinary
offenses, provided it was made adequately clear to all the
personnel that such would be the penalty.
In view of the fact that it had not been made clear, for
example, that it had not been made clear in my first letter of
reprimand that the next similar offense would be cause for
suspension, and in view of the fact that I had known of no
signs to that effect around the place, no memoranda on the
matter passed around, and in fact, inasmuch as I had been sent
the second reprimand, which supposedly closed the case, I
thought that it was perhaps some injustice.
So, investigating further, I found that there was in
existence a suspension and discharge committee, I think, in the
charge of some officer. I went down and saw them and found that
that committee was very much perturbed. They felt that they had
been short circuited by the people who had spoken to me.
And they were anxious to have me make a case to fight this,
so that they could reassert their authority.
However, I didn't feel that I wanted to get involved with
anything of that kind.
I also had a long trip to California imminent. I took my
day's suspension and instead wrote up this same material and
requested that this be placed in my 201 file.
About a year later, or more, long after I had returned from
California, I found that in my absence, as a result of my
request to have this objection of mine recorded, a letter had
been written to the branch project officer asking comments on
my objection, and the comment which I found in the file is a
copy of the memorandum stating that this would henceforth be
the penalty.
And that memorandum is dated later than the date of my
offense.
So I feel, naturally, that, if anything, it just proves my
case, which only has to do as to whether I needed to have been
penalized with the day's suspension.
Of course, it has no bearing at all upon whether or not I
committed offenses.
Mr. Schine. Did you know that you have been under
investigation?
Mr. Lipel. No, I have not at any time had any information
of any kind that I am being investigated.
Mr. Schine. And can you think of any reason, other than the
two offenses that you just stated to us, that would bring about
an investigation of you?
Mr. Lipel. I see no reason why those offenses would be
cause for investigation, since everything involved there is
open and aboveboard.
I don't think my loyalty is in any way questionable.
Mr. Schine. Can you tell us if any member of your family is
connected with subversive organizations?
Mr. Lipel. To the best of my knowledge, I know of no such
instance.
Mr. Schine. Do you know if any of the individuals you gave
as references are connected with subversive organizations?
Mr. Lipel. Can you tell me the individuals whom I gave as
reference? I don't recall.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us the names of any of them that
you can remember?
Mr. Lipel. I would be guessing, I would have to give the
people whom I would give today. I don't recall.
In other words, I am sure I can give you a list of names
which would overlap the list of names I gave then. But I just
don't recall the complete list that I gave.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us the names you can give to us?
Mr. Lipel. All right. I am sure I must have given the names
of some of my college professors, probably Professor R. A.
Patterson, P-a-t-t-e-r-s-o-n, and G. H. Carragan, C-a-r-r-a-g-
a-n. They were then the head of the department.
And another senior professor, I may have given the
following people, whom I am sure I have given since.
Mr. Bernard Meltzer, whose present address is in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I could probably find his address
later.
Mr. Samuel Benjamin, who now resides in Washington, D.C.
Mr. Herbert Kaufman, who resides in Brooklyn, New York now.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Barnet Pomerantz?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, Barnet Pomerantz, who was the chief
engineer of the company I worked for at that tine, and who was
an obvious reference.
Mr. Schine. What about Dr. D. A. Wilbur?
Mr. Lipel. He was another professor.
Mr. Schine. You haven't answered the question I asked to
you previously as to whether to your knowledge any of these
references you have given are connected with any subversive
organizations.
Mr. Lipel. No, I have no knowledge of any of those people
being connected with subversive organizations, although now I
have recalled the list of references, I must say that I know
nothing at all about most of these people, except my personal
friends. Except that I know that Dr. Patterson is now at Brook
Haven National Laboratory in one of the senior positions.
Mr. Schine. When were you first approached by a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Lipel. I don't think I ever have been. Approached for
what purpose?
Mr. Schine. Let me rephrase the question. When did you
first meet a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Lipel. Oh, quite likely, when I was seven years old, I
certainly encountered Communists in school. We had a case in my
freshman year where there was a prominent, a very prominent
case, that received a lot of publicity, where one of my
instructors was ejected from the school.
That man is Granville Hicks, who nowadays is an anti-
Communist.
Mr. Schine. And can you tell us what other names you can
supply to us of your contacts with Communists?
Mr. Lipel. I don't know of any. I may have known people at
one time who I knew as Communists, but I don't remember their
names. But nobody I knew well.
Also I may still know people that are Communists, but I
don't know anything about their being Communists.
Let me say this, I know of no person in my acquaintance,
certainly, who is a Communist. I don't know about any of these
references.
Mr. Schine. I am not thinking of the references now.
Mr. Lipel. I can recall no case.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever discuss the Communist party within
the last few years?
Mr. Lipel. Not within the last few years, no. I can
remember when I went to high school we practically debated it
in high school. It was a question of my age.
Incidentally, for the record, I want to say that by the
time I had gotten out of college I was fond of objecting to the
socialist kind of economy.
Mr. Schine. When you leave the laboratory where you work,
how do you usually go home?
Mr. Lipel. You are referring to my present laboratory,
where I have been working only since about the first of August?
I usually drive to----
Mr. Schine. You go home by automobile?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, I usually go home by automobile, driving by
way of--I think it is called Greengrove Road, to Park Avenue.
Mr. Schine. Do you drive home alone?
Mr. Lipel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Nobody drives with you?
Mr. Lipel. Nobody drives with me.
Mr. Schine. What about the last place you worked, the last
laboratory?
Mr. Lipel. Coles Signal Laboratory?
Mr. Schine. Did someone ride home with you?
Mr. Lipel. No, nobody regularly rode home with me. In fact,
99 percent of the time, I rode alone. If anybody ever rode home
with me, it was because he needed a ride temporarily, just as I
might leave my car downtown to be repaired and would request
somebody else for a ride.
Mr. Schine. Do you often take work home with you to work
on?
Mr. Lipel. Not often, but there have been periods where I
have.
For example, from about last October until March, I took
home with me work, and I came into Coles Laboratory to work,
because I was working on a paper for publication.
And I couldn't, naturally, work on that entirely during
laboratory hours.
Most frequently, I would come into the laboratory to work
there because I had better working facilities.
Mr. Schine. When you take this work home with you, do you
usually carry a briefcase?
Mr. Lipel. No, no, I would usually carry it out with me.
Mr. Schine. How do you get your work from your office to
the car? Do they inspect what you are taking out?
Mr. Lipel. No, I see now that you are referring to this
period at Coles Laboratory when I practically every day went
into the laboratory, and perhaps twice a week would take some
of the material home with me.
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Lipel. One of the reasons I would take it home--at that
time I was unmarried, and sometimes after having written things
up I would want to use the period while waiting for dinner in
the restaurant to glance over the material.
Briefly, I will state that.
In connection with this unclassified paper I was writing
for publication, and which was cleared for publication, I let
the guards know that I was cleared for removal of classified
material, and therefore, there was no question about my taking
these papers out, and I utilized that advantage to have easy
access to taking out these folders.
I want to say that at all times I made a record in the book
to indicate when I entered and left, and I didn't think that
this matter was any cause for suspicion.
Mr. Schine. How did you carry these papers out? Did you
have a briefcase?
Mr. Lipel. No. I would usually use an envelope. The most
likely thing for me to use would be a paper envelope. Also, at
one time, I believe I had one of these looseleaf notebooks that
has a zipper around the side, and therefore serves as an
envelope.
Mr. Schine. And inasmuch as you were cleared for property
removal of classified information, if you wanted to take
something to refer to in connection with your writing on this
unclassified paper, even if they had inspected the material you
were taking with you, it wouldn't have made any difference?
Mr. Lipel. In order not to drag this out, I wanted to say
for the record that I have very properly removed classified
information for business purposes, in the same way. We
sometimes take classified information on a trip, and so on.
Mr. Schine. But the guards never did bother to inspect the
papers?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Schine. Once you received the removal slip, you were
able to take the material out freely?
Mr. Lipel. Yes.
Mr. Schine. How did you obtain this removal slip?
Mr. Lipel. I requested it--no, I didn't. A number of
individuals from our group, the senior individuals in the
group, received these passes.
Mr. Schine. From whom?
Mr. Lipel. I believe they were issued in the name of the
laboratory director, and I received them from the
administrative aide to the branch.
Mr. Schine. When did you receive them?
Mr. Lipel. I don't recall exactly, but I have had more than
one of those passes. When the first pass expired, in about a
year, I automatically was issued a second pass.
Mr. Schine. This was roughly right through the '40s?
Mr. Lipel. No, in general from the years about '51 to '53,
about two years. I have utilized such a pass. Without such a
pass, I would have had to get individual permission in each
case to take out material, you see. And that is what I used to
do previously.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Jones?
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lipel, do you know Dr. Craig Crenshaw?
Mr. Lipel. I know of him, as a man who has worked at Evans
Laboratory almost as long as I have. I have never worked with
him, and I have had no social contacts with him.
Mr. Jones. Is he currently being investigated as to his
security classification?
Mr. Lipel. I have no way of knowing the answer to that
question.
Mr. Jones. What form of relations have you had, if any,
with Dr. Craig Crenshaw professionally?
Mr. Lipel. I can recall no instance when I worked with him
professionally; the only connection being that at one time
during my first employment at Evans Laboratory and at Eatontown
Laboratory prior to that, he worked in this same organization.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Dexter Masters?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Harold Ducore?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know an Alex Bichek?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know a Morris Klein?
Mr. Lipel. No. I think I have heard the name, and I may at
one time have been able to associate it with a face. I don't
know the man.
Mr. Jones. You don't know the man. The name just rings a
bell but you can't place it?
Mr. Lipel. That is right.
Mr. Jones. Do you know an Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, I know him. That is, I have met him
professionally. And once this summer I, if you can so call it,
met him socially. I was speaking to some people at the beach,
and he was there, and I introduced him to my wife.
Mr. Jones. And your common bond at the time was your
employment at Monmouth?
Mr. Lipel. Yes. Actually, Coleman was rather embarrassed
and he didn't join the group of us.
Mr. Jones. You know Bob Martin?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Professor Yamins?
Mr. Lipel. I know him by name. If I met him in the street,
I know him well enough to say ``Hello.'' I assume he knows my
name as well as I know his.
Mr. Jones. You have had professional relationships with him
out there?
Mr. Lipel. No. I haven't.
Mr. Jones. How did you meet him in the first place?
Mr. Lipel. To the best of my knowledge, I have never had
professional dealings with him. I have never met him. It is
just that he has been there so long and I have been there so
long that, as I say, he may know my name as I certainly know
his. He at one time had a high enough position at the
laboratory to be known to everybody.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Lipel. Yes, I do.
Mr. Jones. How well do you know Mr. Corwin?
Mr. Lipel. Mr. Corwin was living in the same rooming house
where I was living in the first four or five weeks of my
employment at the laboratory. That was in 1940.
Mr. Jones. And will you give us the residence?
Mr. Lipel. It was on Fifth Avenue, North Fifth Avenue, in
Long Branch. I very shortly moved out of there, because I found
better quarters. At that time I believe somebody at that
rooming house had a car, and a few of us would go out to eat
together in the evenings. I don't think it was every day.
I know Mr. Corwin's wife fairly well, much better than I
know him, because she was employed for a long time in the Evans
Laboratory in our branch.
Mr. Jones. What is her name, Mr. Lipel?
Mr. Lipel. Mary Louise Donovan was her maiden name.
Mr. Jones. Donovan?
Mr. Lipel. Yes. And we were always friendly in a business
way. Oh, yes. And at one time I had two or three social
contacts with the two of them together about the time of their
marriage.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Lipel, have you known Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Lipel. To the best of my knowledge, no.
Mr. Schine. Did you know he was at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Lipel. No.
Mr. Schine. Never met him there?
Mr. Lipel. No. In fact, if he was at Fort Monmouth, I
didn't know where.
Mr. Rainville. What do you think of the security
regulations, in view of your own experience with them and in
view of the fact that security clearances have been lifted from
some of the men recently?
Mr. Lipel. You are asking my opinion on this. This is a
question of opinion.
Mr Rainville. Opinion.
Mr. Lipel. I believe that the security regulations that
have existed during the time of my employment have been
adequate, since I think that any attempt at more rigid
regulations would be impractical, and in the last analysis you
have to depend upon the carefulness and loyalty of the people
involved anyhow. Nobody can stop me from carrying out material
in my head. A good deal of the classified material that I have
worked with has been material which I originated. And I could
just as well have written it down in the first place outside
the laboratory as in. For long periods of time I have been in
effect the inventor of some of these classified equipments I
work with. And any attempt at more careful checking by the
guards, so to speak, would be just an unnecessary impediment,
and not only that is likely to cause somebody who wants to be
smart to see how he can circumvent it.
Mr. Rainville. Thanks very much, Mr. Lipel. We appreciate
your help.
[Whereupon, at 2:20 p.m., a recess was taken until 3:05
p.m.]
Mr. Schine. Will you give your name for the record, please?
STATEMENT OF JAMES EVERS
Mr. Evers. James Evers, E-v-e-r-s.
Mr. Schine. And your current occupation?
Mr. Evers. I am a radar engineer at Evans Signal
Laboratory. I am the assistant branch chief.
Mr. Schine. And your duties as such, Mr. Evers?
Mr. Evers. Well, I am the assistant branch chief of the
Radar Branch.
Mr. Jones. What are your duties as assistant branch chief?
Mr. Evers. Well, as assistant branch chief we have
approximately two hundred people, engineers, scientific
personnel, technicians, and the like, engaged in electronic
work, mostly classified, for the Signal Corps.
Mr. Schine. And you are supervisor of a substantial group
of people working in your department?
Mr. Evers. That is right.
Mr. Schine. How many people are working in your department?
Mr. Evers. As I say, I am assistant branch chief. The chief
of the branch is the main supervisor. I am his assistant in
line. There are two hundred people in the branch.
Mr. Schine. Have you had some problems with regard to
security?
Mr. Evers. Actually, the problems are not ours. We do not
deal in security. That is another branch of the Signal Corps.
We are advised that people are cleared or that they are not.
That is the extent that we are advised on security.
Mr. Schine. You have had a number of individuals working in
your department whose security is under question now?
Mr. Evers. That is correct.
Mr. Schine. Could you give us those names, please?
Mr. Evers. Mr. Coleman, Aaron Coleman, and Harold Ducore
are both suspended. Mr. William Goldberg, I understand, has had
his clearance taken away. He is not suspended. I guess that is
the extent of it. No, Lovenstein is also suspended.
Mr. Schine. All of these individuals are in your
department?
Mr. Evers. Yes, that is right. They work for the Radar
Branch.
Mr. Schine. And what is your feeling about all of this?
Mr. Evers. Well, I am in the position of knowing nothing in
so far as what the charges and the like are. That, as I say, is
entirely a matter for the people who handle our security, and
we are advised that this sort of thing is strictly none of our
business.
Mr. Carr. How closely are you associated with these men
under your supervision? Do you know any of the five who have
been suspended personally?
Mr. Evers. The one I know the best is Mr. Ducore. I have
known him as a business associate, and he has worked with me
most of the time, since 1941.
Mr. Schine. Are you a social acquaintance of his also?
Mr. Evers. No, I have never socialized with him.
Mr. Schine. Outside of at the plant in connection with your
job?
Mr. Evers. Yes. I mean, there have been trips, I have gone
with him to plants. There have been occasional branch picnics,
or something like that. But that is a semi-business
proposition.
Mr. Jones. Have you always found him to be a trusted and
competent employee?
Mr. Evers. That is right.
Mr. Carr. How about Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Evers. He was in charge of the systems section when I
had the Radar Equipment Section of the Radar Branch, and I know
of nothing which could be considered subversive and anti-
American that he has ever done.
Mr. Carr. Now, you yourself have had no connection with any
organization which has been labeled as subversive?
Mr. Evers. Not that I know about.
Mr. Carr. Were you associated with Mr. Yamins in any way?
Mr. Evers. Well, I have known him for a long time, too, as
a business associate, since around 1941.
Mr. Carr. Are you socially acquainted with him?
Mr. Evers. No.
Mr. Carr. You have no reason to suspect his suitability?
Mr. Evers. No.
Mr. Carr. How about Mr. Schoenwetter?
Mr. Evers. I don't know him.
Mr. Carr. How about Mr. Martin, Bob Martin?
Mr. Evers. I haven't known him except just on and off. I
haven't seen him for a long time. I have never heard of
anything, and I know of nothing, against him.
Mr. Carr. Concerning security conditions there in general,
have you noted in recent months that there has been a larger
number, say, in your own branch, in your own division itself, a
larger number of, shall we say, these negligence type cases,
leaving the documents out, leaving the building unsecure, or
anything along that line?
Mr. Evers. No. On the contrary, there has been rather a
continuous tightening up of security. Actually, I can go so far
as to say that the emphasis has been so strongly placed on
security now that it is actually hindering our development
work. There is so much time that must be spent in accounting
for documents and checking them and taking care of them that
our engineers do not have time.
Mr. Jones. It reduces the actual working time of the day
considerably; is that correct?
Mr. Evers. That is right.
Mr. Jones. In other words, there is a point of diminishing
returns that it has almost reached.
Mr. Evers. I think that is so. You would find that inasmuch
as this is a department of defense regulation--I mean, they
have increased the security regulations, as you are undoubtedly
aware of, immeasurably, and to comply with them all of the
services, I think you will find, are really in tough shape.
Mr. Jones. Don't you think there is good reason to tighten
up the security systems?
Mr. Evers. I think perhaps you do reach a point of
diminishing returns. I know it is your business to locate these
things. But if you reduce the time that we can spend on
research and development, and the time it takes to circulate
information within our organizations is increased, then you are
also approaching this curve of diminishing returns, too. There
has to be a nice balance. And I think, like any pendulum, we
have probably gone over a ways, and that it will work itself
out.
Mr. Rainville. You are thinking primarily of production?
Mr. Evers. I am thinking primarily of research and
development, which is my business.
Mr. Jones. The daily work output has been severely reduced.
That point has been brought out now two or three times.
Mr. Rainville. Of course, the question that arises in my
mind is: Isn't there another side to that same coin? You come
to a point where it would be better if you didn't take the next
step if that step was to be carried to the enemy? Wouldn't it
be better to delay things until you are sure that you don't get
them, if the other guy is going to get them simultaneously?
Mr. Evers. Obviously we don't want to give anything to the
enemy, and I don't think that anyone that I know does. But the
system of check and double check and triple check has got to
the point where----
Mr. Rainville. It is cumbersome?
Mr. Evers. Not only cumbersome. It is retarding. It is past
the cumbersome stage.
Mr. Rainville. The point I make is that we have had a
number of people come in. I think at your level you have a
right to make a criticism of it. We have had a number of people
who are not at your level who have made that same criticism.
They say, ``It is too restrictive, too much of a handicap. I
spend two hours getting papers ready, and then I have to spend
two hours putting them back.''
Mr. Evers. This is true. This is the kind of thing.
Mr. Rainville. But it seems to me that there is a point at
which you have got to consider the fact that if we are going to
do the entire experimental work and turn the results over to
them almost simultaneously with arriving at them ourselves, we
might just as well not do them.
Mr. Evers. I agree, if that were to happen.
Mr. Rainville. Now, thinking solely of security, and not of
production, don't you think it would be better to be
handicapped a little bit with too much security?
Mr. Evers. Yes, but let's say in the emphasis that is being
placed the emphasis seemed to be entirely that way, so that
instead of the scales being a little bit like this
[indicating], it has gone way up over.
Mr. Rainville. I don't know too much about physics, but in
these swings a pendulum usually swings no farther one way than
it had originally swung the other; so that if there is far too
much now, there must have been a time when there was far too
little.
Mr. Evers. I don't know whether in this case it has
followed strictly that law.
Mr. Rainville. You are the one that used the pendulum
swinging, and I am merely trying to get to the basic point of:
if there is now too much, has there ever been too little?
Mr. Evers. I can think of a time, in the time when I have
been at the Signal Corps, when I have seen many of the other
government agencies that have suffered from too little.
Mr. Rainville. What would it take to convince you that we
had had too little?
Mr. Evers. Well, as I say, this is a personal opinion, from
the way I have seen things taken care of.
Mr. Rainville. Yes, but my question wasn't about that. My
question goes to the base point. What would it take to convince
you that there is too little security?
Mr. Evers. Well, if I saw an utter disregard for classified
information, then I would be certainly convinced and would do
everything I could to get it stopped.
Mr. Rainville. I am not questioning your background or
anything else. I am merely trying to point out that people
working under you are going to take their impressions from you.
Therefore, if you say there is too much, they will reiterate:
``There is too much.''
If you say, ``There is too little,'' they will reiterate,
``There is too little.''
You have the supervision of some forty men. Is that right?
I was on the phone, but I thought you said forty.
Mr. Evers. Two hundred.
Mr. Rainville. Two hundred. But of the five people
suspended, three of them were in your department.
Mr. Evers. Let me say this. I know nothing of the charges
that these men have had placed against them.
Mr. Rainville. You can't think of any charges against them?
Mr. Evers. To the best of my knowledge, the charges do not
grow out of anything that was done within the laboratories.
Mr. Rainville. Well, but we have had some statements from
the people themselves that they have taken papers home to work
on and that they have been lax about things, that they have
been reprimanded and so forth, which would rather clearly
indicate that it has not been as tight as you feel it now is.
Mr. Evers. Let's say it this way. In most engineering work
and the like, you can never get 100 percent. To achieve 100
percent effectiveness in anything requires an effort which is
almost inevitably not worth what you have put into it. I mean
to achieve 100 percent security, we should take all classified
documents, put them in safes, and never look at them again.
Therefore, we would know they were secure. We would know they
were there.
When you have to deal with people, then you do have the
possibility.
Mr. Rainville. I am sure it isn't the documents that are at
fault in this. I am sure it is the human element. And,
therefore, maybe the best thing to do would be to put the human
beings into the safe.
Mr. Evers. It might very well be.
Mr. Jones. What if anything have time studies out there in
your department revealed in terms of efficiency standards? You
said obviously it is impossible to obtain a hundred percent
efficiency. It is, obviously. But what is the efficiency scale
out there? About 75 percent?
Mr. Evers. Well, I wouldn't be able to make a statement as
to what it was.
Mr. Jones. Have any business consultants, management
consultants, been out there to time study your operations?
Mr. Evers. One doesn't usually do this through an
engineering or research development organization. There has
been at headquarters level a contract placed with an
organization to see what can be done to improve the efficiency
of the Signal Corps engineering lab's organization.
Mr. Schine. What is the name of the company that carried
this work out?
Mr. Evers. I can't tell you. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. One last question, Mr. Evers. In your years of
employment out there, have you ever had any reason, either
directly or indirectly, to suspect subversive activities,
either within your department or within the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Evers. No, I can't remember anything.
Mr. Jones. In other words, in all the time you have been
there, so far as you can see, everything has been decent and
proper?
Mr. Evers. That is correct.
Mr. Jones. I have no more questions.
Mr. Schine. Just one more question. Do you know Mr. Kieser?
Mr. Evers. Sure. Maurice Kieser you are talking about? Yes,
sir.
Mr. Schine. Would you tell us about Maurice Kieser?
Mr. Evers. Well, he is the chief of the Countermeasures
Branch. He was for a long time before that with the Applied
Physics Branch. What there is to tell about him, I don't know.
Mr. Schine. He has a very sensitive job?
Mr. Evers. Oh, exceedingly.
Mr. Schine. Did he come from Europe?
Mr. Evers. I don't know what his background is.
Mr. Schine. You don't know anything about him?
Mr. Evers. No.
Mr. Jones. How do you spell his last name?
Mr. Evers. I think it is K-i-e-s-e-r.
Mr. Rainville. In this term ``countermeasures,'' are you
referring there to a security kind of countermeasures for the
plant itself, or are there over-all countermeasures covered
under this? I am not trying to pry into----
Mr. Evers. Oh, this was in the papers.
Mr. Rainville. What I am getting at is this: We discover
that a foreign country has a certain kind of a weapon. His job
is to counter that weapon, rather than the counter-espionage
type of thing?
Mr. Evers. That is right.
Mr. Rainville. Then as such he would not normally have the
instruments or facilities or background to utilize or proceed
upon a counter-espionage type of work?
Mr. Evers. No. I think that is probably right.
Mr. Rainville. Then if he were to suddenly turn up with the
kind of equipment that would indicate he were in counter-
espionage rather than countermeasures, you would say that is
unusual, that is not in keeping?
Mr. Evers. Well, I would have to know the situation. I mean
generalities--for instance, what do you call counter-espionage?
If he had some electronic device----
Mr. Rainville. He could take a dozen things. Let's just
take one. Pull it out of the air. Speaking within this room, we
understand that our government has a rather new type means of
listening in on telephone conversations, a new type of wire-
tapping equipment. There would be no reason for his having
that, if he was not in counter-espionage, in other words, if he
was not monitoring some of the telephone conversations of
people either coming into the plant or calling out or maybe
some of these men in telephone conversations with people who
are suspect or known Communists. He would not normally have
that kind of equipment?
Mr. Evers. Well, not unless he were assigned some job to
develop.
Mr. Rainville. I mean he is not normally assigned to that.
Mr. Evers. I don't think he is.
Mr. Rainville. That isn't part of his work, and therefore,
if he had that piece of equipment, it would either have been
sent him for repairs or to develop something that would stop it
if the foreign country had it. It would not be something he
would carry in his back pocket.
Mr. Evers. Yes, he would normally have to either have some
special instructions, or verbal instructions, or something.
Mr. Rainville. I wanted to clarify in my own mind what kind
of countermeasures he was handling.
Mr. Evers. I wonder if you fellows would mind telling me
your names, now that we have been talking.
Mr. Schine. This is Mr. Harold Rainville, Senator Dirksen's
administrative assistant, and this is Mr. Robert Jones, Senator
Potter's administrative assistant. That is Mr. Frank Carr, the
executive director of the committee, and I am David Schine.
Thank you very much for coming in.
Mr. Evers. If I can help you any more, feel free to call
me.
Mr. Jones. Would you state your name and address for the
record?
STATEMENT OF SOL BREMMER
Mr. Bremmer. Sol Bremmer, 557 Westwood Avenue.
Mr. Jones. That is B-r-e-n-n-e-r?
Mr. Bremmer. B-r-e-m-m-e-r, two m's.
Mr. Schine. Your current occupation?
Mr. Bremmer. Electronic engineer.
Mr. Schine. And where are you employed?
Mr. Bremmer. Squire Signal laboratory, Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. And what are your duties there?
Mr. Bremmer. At the present time?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Bremmer. I work with the Performance Test Section.
Mr. Schine. And, as such, what do you do? Test equipment?
Mr. Bremmer. Components, particular transformers.
Mr. Schine. How long have you been at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Bremmer. Since March 1946.
Mr. Schine. Did you go to City College?
Mr. Bremmer. No.
Mr. Schine. Where did you go to school?
Mr. Bremmer. Brooklyn College.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever known Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Bremmer. No.
Mr. Schine. You never knew Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Bremmer. No. I don't know who he is.
Mr. Schine. His name isn't familiar to you?
Mr. Bremmer. Vaguely. I may know the man if I saw him. I
don't know. The name doesn't sound familiar.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Bremmer, have you any brothers or sisters?
Mr. Bremmer. Yes, one brother.
Mr. Jones. What is his name?
Mr. Bremmer. Martin.
Mr. Jones. M-a-r-t-i-n?
Mr. Bremmer. That is right.
Mr. Jones. What does he do?
Mr. Bremmer. He is working in the Patent Office,
Washington.
Mr. Jones. He is working in the Patent Office in
Washington, D.C.?
Mr. Bremmer. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What did he do before he worked for the Patent
Office?
Mr. Bremmer. He worked for some short wave equipment place.
Mr. Jones. Where is that located?
Mr. Bremmer. In the Bronx somewhere.
Mr. Jones. Is he now or has he ever been a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Bremmer. I don't know. I am not sure of that.
Mr. Jones. You mean you don't know whether your brother was
or was not a member of the party?
Mr. Bremmer. I haven't seen him now for--I think it was
last November I saw him. And we didn't see each other too
frequently before that, especially since I got married.
Mr. Jones. Are you a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Bremmer. No.
Mr. Jones. Ever have been?
Mr. Bremmer. No.
Mr. Jones. Were you ever a member of the American Labor
party?
Mr. Bremmer. Have I ever been a member? I once enrolled. I
registered in the American Labor party.
Mr. Jones. What year was that?
Mr. Bremmer. It was, I think, 1948 or '49.
Mr. Jones. How were you introduced into the American Labor
party? Through your brother?
Mr. Bremmer. No, I just registered.
Mr. Jones. Yes, you just registered. Well, how did you
happen to register?
Mr. Bremmer. When I was discharged from the army, prior to
my going into the army, the American Labor party was not what
it was when I came out, and I didn't realize the split at the
time, and since that time I realized that there was a definite
split.
Mr. Jones. Yes. You learned that after you got out of the
service?
Mr. Bremmer. Yes.
Mr. Rainville. Had you known it before you went into the
service?
Mr. Bremmer. No.
Mr. Jones. How long was your brother a member of the
American Labor party?
Mr. Bremmer. I don't know.
Mr. Jones. Was it two years? Four years?
Mr. Bremmer. I don't know. I am not sure that he was. If he
was, I don't know how long it was.
Mr. Jones. You say you do not know for certain whether he
was a member of the Communist party or took any active part in
it. Let me just tell you this, Mr. Bremmer. This committee will
carefully look into and check everything you tell us here
today.
Mr. Bremmer. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. This is Mr. Rainville here. He is assistant to
Senator Dirksen of Illinois. My name is Jones. I am assistant
to Senator Potter of Michigan. The fellow presiding here is
named Schine, David Schine. He is chief consultant under
Senator McCarthy. Every word that you say here we will check
and double check. So we will take into consideration that many
of these questions it is impossible for you to answer. Give us
as much help as you can to the best of your knowledge. We can't
expect you to remember everything.
Now, I am asking you again: Do you have any knowledge that
your brother was a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Bremmer. Well, what I was about to say before you
interrupted: I do know that he had a lot of--I shouldn't say
``a lot of ''--a number of his friends that were closely
affiliated with the Communist party. When I say ``affiliated,''
I mean I knew that they either belonged to the Communist party
or were very much interested. The exact extent of their
affiliation, of course, I don't know.
Mr. Jones. Where was he living at the time that he was
active in Communist activities?
Mr. Bremmer. Where was he living?
Mr. Jones. Yes.
Mr. Bremmer. My brother?
Mr. Jones. Yes.
Mr. Bremmer. I didn't say he was active. He presumably was,
being that he knew these people.
Mr. Jones. Sure. Well, where was he living at that time?
Mr. Bremmer. He was living in Brooklyn. He was living at
home.
Mr. Jones. Living at home?
Mr. Bremmer. Yes.
Mr. Jones. Now, who were some of his friends? Can you
remember the names of any of his friends who were members of
the party or at least sympathetic to the party at that time?
Mr. Bremmer. I know their name, but it escapes me at the
moment.
Mr. Jones. How about Morris Klein?
Mr. Bremmer. Well, I don't know. I can tell by sight. I
don't know the name. I had in mind in particular somebody else,
a different name. The name escapes me at the moment.
Mr. Rainville. Might I ask if you would be willing to think
about this and write down a number of these names as they come
to you, and supply them to the committee?
Mr. Bremmer. A number of names?
Mr. Rainville. Well, you might think of this fellow's name,
or you might think of two or three others. If his name comes to
you, a chain of recognition might be established which would
bring in three or four other fellows who came in with him.
Mr. Jones. May I ask what year this was when your brother
was residing at home, and at least ostensibly showed some
interest in Communist activities? What year?
Mr. Bremmer. Well, he was discharged in May 1946. I was
discharged in March. And I would say it was from the latter
part of '46 until sometime in '47.
Mr. Jones. And where was he employed at that time.
Mr. Bremmer. My brother?
Mr. Jones. Yes.
Mr. Bremmer. He was in school.
Mr. Jones. What school?
Mr. Bremmer. He went to City College.
Mr. Jones. He was in City College at the time?
Mr. Bremmer. He reentered City College, completing as an
electrical engineer.
Mr. Jones. What year did he graduate?
Mr. Bremmer. I don't know. It took about two years, I would
say, for him to complete for his degree. He entered in February
'46, and my guess is September '48.
Mr. Jones. Were you ever approached at any time to become a
member of the Communist party, Mr. Bremmer?
Mr. Bremmer. No.
Mr. Jones. I have no other questions.
Mr. Carr. That is all.
Mr. Jones. Will you state your full name and address for
the record?
STATEMENT OF MURRAY MILLER
Mr. Miller. Murray Miller, 924 Rassmere Avenue, Wanamassa,
New Jersey.
Mr. Carr. And you are presently employed at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Miller. At Evans Lab.
Mr. Carr. And what is your position?
Mr. Miller. I am a GS-12 electronics engineer.
Mr. Carr. Has your security clearance been lifted, or is it
still in effect?
Mr. Miller. I have never been questioned about my security.
Mr. Carr. So that you still have clearance up through
secret?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Carr. Where did you go to school, Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. At New York University.
Mr. Carr. Have you ever received any disciplinary action at
Monmouth for security reasons?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Carr. Lack of security, or anything in connection with
security?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Carr. In your particular section, are you in contact
with Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Miller. I am not in that section. I am in another
branch.
Mr. Carr. Do you know Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Miller. I know him from the laboratory.
Mr. Carr. Do you know Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Miller. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Is he in your section?
Mr. Miller. No, he is in another branch too.
Mr. Carr. How do you know him?
Mr. Miller. I went to work with Mr. Coleman. I believe it
was about September 1941. And I worked with him, I think,
through February of '44. I think that is when he went into the
service. And then when I came back from service, he came back.
I am trying to remember dates now. I am just trying to remember
when I went back to work. I came back from service, and the
group was split up, and then they assigned me to Coleman's
section.
Mr. Carr. Are you acquainted with him socially?
Mr. Miller. I shared a house with him in 1943, about six to
eight months.
Mr. Carr. For six to eight months in '43?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Carr. Was that when you were both bachelors?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Carr. Did Jerome Corwin live there at that time?
Mr. Miller. No, I believe he lived there earlier, and again
later.
Mr. Carr. During your association with Mr. Coleman, did you
ever learn of anything which would lead to a question that
would make you suspicious of anything concerning his security?
Mr. Miller. No. Although I worked with him and lived with
him, we weren't too friendly, because I had a personal dislike
for him.
Mr. Jones. Did you ever know a fellow by the name of Dexter
Masters?
Mr. Miller. I never heard the name before.
Mr. Jones. How about Jerome Corwin?
Mr. Miller. I know Jerome Corwin.
Mr. Jones. How well do you know him?
Mr. Miller. Fairly well.
Mr. Jones. Was it a social, or a business relationship?
Mr. Miller. Both.
Mr. Jones. Would you describe that relationship?
Mr. Miller. Well, we happened to build a house on the same
lot. I knew him through the labs. We knew the fellows we used
to hang around with.
Mr. Jones. When did you first meet him?
Mr. Miller. At the laboratory.
Mr. Jones. What year?
Mr. Miller. When I first came to work, in 1941, he was one
of the group working there at the time.
Mr. Jones. And were you asked if you knew Herman Bremmer?
Mr. Miller. I never heard of Herman Bremmer.
Mr. Jones. How well do you know Dr. Daniels?
Mr. Miller. I went to work in Daniels' section in September
of '48, and I believe it was some time in 1950 or '51 when that
section split up, that he took over one group of the section,
and we talked to each other in the hall and had mutual
interests.
Mr. Jones. And I assume also you know Alan Gross?
Mr. Miller. I know Alan Gross through the same means. We
worked in the same group.
Mr. Jones. As long as you have been employed out there at
Evans Laboratory, have you ever had any reason, in one way or
another, to suspect or observe any subversive activities of any
variety or any nature?
Mr. Miller. I haven't seen any subversive activities of any
variety or nature.
Mr. Jones. And you have never heard of any?
Mr. Miller. Not of any activity by individuals. I have
heard the results of the grapevine on suspensions. I never had
any first hand information.
Mr. Jones. These suspensions here?
Mr. Miller. These and prior suspensions.
Mr. Jones. What seemed to be the gist of that grapevine
rumor?
Mr. Miller. Well, I am trying to remember specific charges,
about certain individuals seen buying a copy of the Daily
Worker. That was one of the charges. And certain individuals
being active in the CIO union that they tried to form there.
That was another charge. I don't remember too many of them.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the name of the individual who was
buying the Daily Worker?
Mr. Miller. I don't remember. I can't tie the item up with
the individual.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Paul Goldberg?
Mr. Miller. I never heard of Paul Goldberg.
Mr. Jones. I am sorry. William Goldberg.
Mr. Miller. I know him. He worked in the same branch.
Mr. Jones. Tell me this. I am quite curious. How well do
you know Mr. Goldberg?
Mr. Miller. Just enough to say hello to him in the hall,
and I don't think we have had any dealings in the office where
I had to do any work with him or have contacts with him.
Mr. Jones. When did he return from England?
Mr. Miller. I heard yesterday he returned about two or
three weeks ago.
Mr. Jones. Have you seen him since that time?
Mr. Miller. No, I haven't.
Mr. Jones. You knew him prior to his trip?
Mr. Miller. I knew him through the laboratory prior to
that.
Mr. Jones. Prior to his visit to England, was he a man who
displayed, well, may we say tension, anxiety, worry? And were
these obvious traits?
Mr. Miller. I wouldn't say ``tension.'' I would say rather
his mind was away from him.
Mr. Jones. What seemed to be worrying him?
Mr. Miller. Nothing. In my opinion, it seemed to be more
work and what he was doing, rather than anything that was
evident.
Mr. Jones. Very conscientious?
Mr. Miller. Very.
Mr. Jones. Takes a lot of worries home with him?
Mr. Miller. I don't know. I don't know him that well. I
have never had more than a ``hello'' with him, or a group of
people would be talking and I would happen to be there in the
group with him, and conversation would fly from one person to
another.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Dr. Craig Crenshaw?
Mr. Miller. Dr. Crenshaw is my boss.
Mr. Jones. We have reason to believe from the information
that has come to us that Dr. Crenshaw has been or is now being
investigated for security reasons.
Mr. Miller. I heard about that yesterday, but that is the
first I have heard about it.
Mr. Jones. Now, who told you about it?
Mr. Miller. I don't remember. It was just the talk of
several people that were hanging around.
Mr. Jones. Who were some of those people talking?
Mr. Miller. People in the section.
Mr. Jones. For example? How would they hear of it?
Mr. Miller. May I correct that? I think Mr. Gross mentioned
it today.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Gross mentioned it to you today?
Mr. Miller. He may have mentioned it.
Mr. Jones. And in what connection did he mention it?
Mr. Miller. Just general talk that was going on.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever, at any time, known of an employee
who possessed a small miniature camera on the premises?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever seen a small Minox camera, one of
those about this large [indicating]?
Mr. Miller. I have seen them, but not on the premises.
Mr. Jones. You have never seen any camera on the premises?
Mr. Miller. I have seen and used cameras in the
photographic section, and I have used cameras in connection
with my work, but I have never seen a Minox camera on the
premises at all.
Mr. Jones. Have you had occasion to order photographs or
movies taken of your equipment or work?
Mr. Miller. Quite frequently.
Mr. Jones. Who does that work for you?
Mr. Miller. The reproduction branch.
Mr. Jones. Is that Leo Fary?
Mr. Miller. He is one of the people. I don't think he has
ever done a job for me. There are about a dozen or a half dozen
photographers to come out on assignments.
Mr. Jones. Now, will you describe very clearly and
concisely for the record what follows after you have ordered
that a certain piece of equipment be photographed?
Mr. Miller. Well, the initial work starts with my
requesting the typist to prepare a reproduction work order,
which, as I vaguely remember the channeling through the branch
level, works out in such a way that I believe they pick up a
number, and then it goes on to reproduction, and usually they
call me to make an appointment with the photographer or to size
up the job. The photographer comes with his equipment, and he
may come prior to that and see what the work is like, and he
takes his pictures at my direction and, maybe the same day or a
day later, he will show me the proofs, and if captions are
required for use of the pictures in a report, it goes down to
the reproduction section, and there is work of some of the
individuals there titling the pictures, following standard
form.
Mr. Jones. Is this generally classed as secret information?
Mr. Miller. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever photographed top secret
information?
Mr. Miller. I have no top secret clearance.
Mr. Jones. When these prints are made and reproductions are
made, where are they filed?
Mr. Miller. Usually the negative is filed in the central
file in the reproduction section, and the prints or copies as
we need them are sent to us. If they are confidential or
secret, we----
Mr. Jones [continuing]. Sign off for them?
Mr. Miller. Sign off for them. If they are restricted, we
just sign as the work is done, and they are included in the
reports or, if they are just record shots, they go into the
file.
Mr. Jones. And it is customary at the end of the day's work
to lock these up in the safe?
Mr. Miller. They become part of the official files.
Mr. Jones. Is it possible or would it be possible for a
person skilled in the use of a small camera to photograph any
of the photographs?
Mr. Miller. Very definitely.
Mr. Jones. Very definitely?
Mr. Miller. To my limited knowledge.
Mr. Jones. I have seen these cameras this size
[indicating], where you can just lean over and take a picture
of this document or this paper, like this, and no one would
know the difference.
Mr. Miller. It is highly possible.
Mr. Jones. You say that is highly possible, within your
very sensitive section of the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Miller. It is highly possible, but at least I try to
make it my personal practice, if someone is not concerned with
my work, not to have the information out.
Mr. Schine. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Miller. I didn't know Julius Rosenberg.
Mr. Schine. Did you know him when he was at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Miller. I didn't know he worked at Fort Monmouth up
until a few days ago.
Mr. Jones. Did you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Jones. Did you know Bob Martin?
Mr. Miller. I knew Bob Martin.
Mr. Jones. How did you know Bob Martin?
Mr. Miller. Fairly well.
Mr. Jones. But how did you know Bob Martin?
Mr. Miller. He came to work about the same time, and I got
friendly with him in 1942, when we were both working in
Washington. We used to go out at night to repair the radar
equipment around Washington, in addition to other work. We both
came back from the service, and I got friendly with him,
because I had no car and he had a car and he used to pick me up
for supper and we used to spend the evening together.
Mr. Jones. Did you meet Coleman through Bob Martin?
Mr. Miller. No. I first went to work for him when I was
assigned to his section.
Mr. Jones. Has your name ever been used as a reference by
people working in the plant?
Mr. Miller. I wouldn't know, because only once have I been
questioned, in one division, and I assumed there may have been
a record or may have been an association.
Mr. Jones. Do you know any Communists?
Mr. Miller. I don't.
Mr. Jones. Do you know any persons who belong to any
subversive organizations of any nature?
Mr. Miller. I don't.
Mr. Jones. Employed at the plant out there?
Mr. Miller. I don't.
Mr. Jones. It has been called to our attention, sir, and I
would like to have your comments on this, that the reason
underlying these suspensions is alleged to be one of anti-
Semitism. What do you know about that?
Mr. Miller. I don't know anything specific, or anything but
an opinion, but from what little I know, I believe there is
some basis for it. Bob Martin I understand is under suspension,
and from what I know of him, he is a very conservative person.
I don't believe he is the least bit subversive. Two of these
people sitting outside, Paul Leeds and his brother Woodrow
Leeds, are under suspension, and they are both very
conservative and not in the least bit subversive. Dr. Daniels,
as I say, I knew at work, and he and Mr. Gross were under
suspension. Dr. Daniels isn't Jewish; I believe his wife is. If
you ask me my opinion, are they subversive, I would say no.
Mr. Jones. I am not asking whether they are subversive. I
am asking whether you believe there is any truth to these
allegations that the discharges are as a result of an anti-
Semitism basis.
Mr. Miller. What I was building up to was that in view of
all that and the number of people suspended that are Jewish,
there may be some connection with anti-Semitism.
Mr. Jones. The only reason I ask this is because it was
called to our attention, and we didn't know anything about it
until it was brought out here by some of the people.
Mr. Miller. I kind of rambled on here. I am sorry.
Mr. Schine. Thanks very much for coming over.
Mr. Carr. Which Mr. Leeds are you?
STATEMENT OF SHERWOOD LEEDS
Mr. S. Leeds. I am Sherwood.
Mr. Carr. L-e-e-d-s?
Mr. S. Leeds. That is correct.
Mr. Carr. And what is your employment at Fort Monmouth?
What is your position and section?
Mr. S. Leeds. Well, my official title is chemical engineer,
and I have been working at plastics. I have been there about
five years, and during that time I have never worked on
anything above the grade of restricted.
Mr. Carr. That was ``above restricted''?
Mr. S. Leeds. No. I have worked up to and including
restricted.
Mr. Carr. But never anything higher than restricted?
Mr. S. Leeds. Never anything higher than restricted.
Mr. Carr. Now, you had clearance up to secret at one time?
Mr. S. Leeds. That is correct, until last week.
Mr. Carr. And it was removed last week. Now, do you know
why?
Mr. S. Leeds. No. It is a great mystery to me. I would be
glad to get some light on it and get together and see how much
I could help the government in explaining it. But I don't know.
Mr. Carr. Well, first, do you know of the five men who have
been suspended? I say ``suspended'' rather than speaking of
having their clearances lifted. Do you know Mr. Coleman?
Mr. S. Leeds. No.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Yamins?
Mr. S. Leeds. Just a name to me.
Mr. Carr. Never ran into them at work?
Mr. S. Leeds. I ran into one man who was recently
suspended.
Mr. Carr. Who was that?
Mr. S. Leeds. I believe it is Bernard Martin. Bob Martin,
we call him.
Mr. Carr. And how do you know him?
Mr. S. Leeds. Well, I met him about six years ago, a year
or two after I got out of the army. I don't know the exact
date. And my acquaintance with him has been assisting in his
working. He does a lot of work around the house, builds
cabinets, likes to work with his hands. He builds radios, likes
technical things, and that has been my association with him.
Mr. Rainville. Do you live at the same place he does?
Mr. S. Leeds. No, I don't, but I did live there about ten
days. He, I understand, has worked for the Signal Corps, or for
the army, I should say--he was with the air force--for quite
some time, quite some time before I got up here. When I first
came here, I went to my brother's apartment. My brother
happened to live in the same house as Mr. Bernard Martin, and I
temporarily stayed there until I could find a room of my own.
Mr. Carr. Your brother's first name is----
Mr. S. Leeds. Paul.
Mr. Carr. Now, do you know a man named Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. S. Leeds. I don't even know the name. It is plain Greek
to me.
Mr. Carr. And how closely are you associated with your
brother at the present time?
Mr. S. Leeds. Well, we are both married. We don't see each
other too often. We are both busy. I happen to have a child and
have my own home and am busy around the home. On the average, I
probably see him perhaps an hour a week or so.
Mr. Carr. But you don't see Martin. You have met Martin,
but you don't see him?
Mr. S. Leeds. Well, I haven't seen much of him in the last
year, but I saw quite a bit of him before that time, always on,
we will say, a technical or an informal social basis.
Mr. Carr. Do you mean in connection with work?
Mr. S. Leeds. No, nothing to do with work. Because I don't
work with him.
Mr. Carr. But in groups of persons who work at Monmouth?
Mr. S. Leeds. Well, not necessarily. I mean, for instance,
I have been married now for three years. Before that time, the
boys sometimes had dances. It was strictly social. There was
nothing outside. It had no political significance. We might
have a dancing group.
Mr. Carr. Are you yourself in any way affiliated with the
Communist party?
Mr. S. Leeds. In no way whatsoever.
Mr. Carr. Have you ever joined any Communist party fronts
or what are alleged to be Communist party fronts?
Mr. S. Leeds. No, no Communist party front or no subversive
organization of any kind.
Mr. Carr. Do you belong to a union at the Reeves
Laboratory?
Mr. S. Leeds. No. I do have a savings account with the
federal employees, the government-sanctioned union, but I am
not a member of the union.
Mr. Carr. Were you ever a member of the FEAC, the
Federation of Engineers, Architects, and Chemists?
Mr. S. Leeds. No. The thing is foreign to me. The technical
societies I belong to are the American Institute for Chemical
Engineers and the ACS. As a matter of fact, I was a past
secretary of the Monmouth County section of that.
Mr. Carr. Where did you go to school?
Mr. S. Leeds. I got my degree at the Polytechnic Institute
of Brooklyn. But before going there, I attended Cooper Union at
night. I worked in the day, worked my way through.
Mr. Jones. Do you hold a master's degree?
Mr. S. Leeds. No, just bachelor's.
Mr. Carr. Was any member of your family associated with the
Communist party or Communist fronts, to your knowledge?
Mr. S. Leeds. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Carr. Or associated with the American Labor party?
Mr. S. Leeds. If it is, it is not to my knowledge.
Mr. Carr. Have you ever belonged to the American Veterans
Committee?
Mr. S. Leeds. Never.
Mr. Carr. Are you a member of any veterans organization?
Mr. S. Leeds. No.
Mr. Carr. Were you ever suspended or reprimanded for any
lax security at Monmouth?
Mr. S. Leeds. No.
Mr. Carr. Never received a letter of reprimand for leaving
anything out?
Mr. S. Leeds. No. As a matter of fact, without warning one
day last week, I was asked for my badge. That was the first
indication I had.
Mr. Carr. All right. Thank you very much.
Mr. Carr. Your name is Paul Leeds?
STATEMENT OF PAUL M. LEEDS
Mr. P. Leeds. Paul M. Leeds. The middle initial is M. The
name is Morton.
Mr. Carr. And what is your present position at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. P. Leeds. Well, I am a field engineer. The nature of
the equipment I handle as a field engineer has been changed
since my clearances were dropped. As a field engineer, I handle
our administrative production contracts. Originally I handled
meteorological equipment, and now I am going to handle, I
presume, vehicular radio equipment.
Mr. Carr. Your clearance was suspended what day?
Mr. P. Leeds. I believe it was the 29th of September.
Mr. Carr. Do you have any idea why your clearance was
picked up.
Mr. P. Leeds. No. I really don't. I have been baffled by
it. I have tried to get information about it. The only thing I
can say, and I don't know if it is being held against me or
not, is that I did live with Bob Martin before I was married.
Mr. Carr. You lived at a bachelors' quarter at what
address.
Mr. P. Leeds. 855 Woodgate Avenue.
Mr. Jones. Where is that? In Long Branch?
Mr. P. Leeds. It is Alberon, but Alberon is actually part
of Long Branch. There are other apartments there too. Military
personnel live there.
Mr. Carr. Were you closely associated with Martin when you
lived there?
Mr. P. Leeds. We lived in the same apartment. I never
worked in the same area with him.
Mr. Carr. Were you closely associated personally with him?
Mr. P. Leeds. I would say that I was closely associated
with him as you might be with somebody living in the same
apartment.
Mr. Jones. Did you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. P. Leeds. I know who he is.
Mr. Jones. Where did he live at that time? Do you know?
Mr. P. Leeds. I know he lives in Long Branch, and I believe
he lives on Branchport Avenue, but I wouldn't want to swear to
it.
Mr. Carr. Is there any particular action on Mr. Martin's
part, or any associations of his, that give you any idea as to
why he was suspended?
Mr. P. Leeds. I know of none, but in fairness to you, he
told me about his charges. Because after my clearances were
dropped, I went to see him. Because I hadn't realized what had
happened to him. Because his suspension apparently preceded the
reduction of my clearances. And he told me about what he was
charged with.
Mr. Carr. Well, there is one charge, isn't there? Did he
show you his letter of suspension?
Mr. P. Leeds. He showed me the letter, yes. The only
thing--I can't of course comment on what is involved in his
work, I don't know. And I don't know anything about his father.
I never met him. I will say this: that he was a member of the
American Veterans Committee, I know that. And he had
discussions with me long before what happened to him did
happen.
Mr. Rainville. Are you a member of the American Veterans'
Committee?
Mr. P. Leeds. No, sir.
Mr. Rainville. Are you a member of any veterans'
organization?
Mr. P. Leeds. No, sir.
Mr. Rainville. Are you a veteran?
Mr. P. Leeds. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. What were these discussions about?
Mr. P. Leeds. Well, he discussed what had happened to the
American Veterans Committee in this sense--and it was something
that I had observed, because I had attended one session--he had
some hearing in New York. I don't know exactly what it was
about, because actually he is quite an uncommunicative fellow.
And he asked me if I would want to testify for him about this
particular meeting which I attended. I attended because it was
a meeting on some kind of resolution, anti-Communist, anti-
Fascist resolution, and I told him when he moved in--because he
moved in with us----
Mr. Rainville. You were there first?
Mr. P. Leeds. Yes. He moved in after that meeting had taken
place. I don't remember exactly when. But I told him that the
thing that had happened was a disturbing thing, because within
the organization we apparently at that meeting had developed
this hard nucleus or core of people who apparently were
communistic, and what had developed actually in a looser form,
was a group that were anti-communistic. I couldn't identify the
people who were anti-communistic. I could identify one
Communist at the meeting, who identified himself. He got up and
said, ``I am a Communist.''
Mr. Rainville. Who was that?
Mr. P. Leeds. A fellow by the name of Bennett.
Mr. Rainville. Bennett?
Mr. P. Leeds. Bennett. I don't know whether he worked at
the laboratories or not.
Mr. Carr. Where was this meeting?
Mr. P. Leeds. I know it was in Asbury Park, and I believe
it was at the Jewish War Veterans. I think it was the community
center, the Jewish Community Center, in Asbury Park. And Bob
was also upset, he told me, because at one time he had been
involved in arranging some housing meeting. They were going to
have a speaker down, and he claimed the Communist group
deliberately sabotaged it, because they couldn't get it
themselves.
Those are my only impressions of him in relation to the
AVC, because those were the things he did tell me.
Mr. Rainville. Do you know anybody in your own family that
has had any contact with Communist organizations or Communist
fronts?
Mr. P. Leeds. I am not aware of any.
Mr. Rainville. You yourself have not had any?
Mr. P. Leeds. No, sir.
Mr. Rainville. You have not belonged to any of these so-
called Communist front organizations?
Mr. P. Leeds. I am quite positive of that.
Mr. Rainville. Your wife and her family?
Mr. P. Leeds. Well, I don't know her family well. I will
say that. I really doubt that there are any Communists in her
family. Her father, though, was a conscientious objector in
World War I. She has told me that. I knew it when I married
her. And he may have been radical himself. But he has been dead
for about eleven years. I don't know when he died.
Mr. Rainville. Nobody in your brother's family, that is,
his wife's people, that you know of?
Mr. P. Leeds. I doubt that very strongly. I have met most
of them. I know my sister-in-law's family better than I know my
wife's, actually, because I see them all summer.
Mr. Jones. Did you say you knew Dr. Craig Crenshaw?
Mr. P. Leeds. No.
Mr. Jones. You don't know Dr. Crenshaw?
Mr. P. Leeds. No. I may know him by sight. I don't think I
recognize the name.
Mr. Jones. Did you ever know a Dexter Masters? They are
radar specialists.
Mr. P. Leeds. I know very few people in radar, except those
who may have gone to school with me, in one form or another.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Sol Bremmer?
Mr. P. Leeds. Oh, the fellow--yes, I have met him before. I
have met him also at work.
Mr. Jones. Do you know his brother, Herman, very well?
Mr. P. Leeds. I don't know his brother at all. I know his
wife; that is, she knows me better. She recalled that I worked
with her years ago before I went into the army.
Mr. Jones. As long as you have been employed out there,
have you ever had any reason to believe, either indirectly or
directly, or rather, see either directly or indirectly, any
subversive activities of any nature or variety?
Mr. P. Leeds. No, the only subversion I did see was in the
AVC. That was by a group that I consider a hardcore small group
of people I believe to be Communists.
There is one person who did identify himself, and I know a
quack.
Mr. Jones. Was Harry Brandt a member of that group?
Mr. P. Leeds. I don't know. You see, I know Brandt from the
last year or so. I belonged to the same organization, one of
the organizations he belonged to. I know he belongs to an awful
lot of them.
Mr. Jones. You don't know whether he belonged to this?
Mr. P. Leeds. No, I don't know.
Mr. Rainville. What organization do you belong to?
Mr. P. Leeds. The Knights of Pythias.
Mr. Carr. You have never belonged to the Communist party?
Mr. P. Leeds. Definitely not.
Mr. Jones. You have never been approached to join?
Mr. P. Leeds. The only thing I have ever been approached to
join was the Progressive party, and I refused to join.
Mr. Jones. Do you know of any Communists out there at the
Evans Laboratory?
Mr. P. Leeds. Not knowingly. There is nobody I know out
there who I consider a Communist.
Mr. Jones. No one suspected to be?
Mr. P. Leeds. No. I have to admit my relations there are
mostly business, mainly meteorological equipment, and it is
scarcely social.
Mr. Rainville. What do you think of the security provisions
out there?
Mr. P. Leeds. At Evans itself? Certainly at Evans it is
much more strict than any place I know of, and actually, in so
far as I am concerned, since I have handled really only
unclassified equipment, it has been largely unnecessary. But I
realize they have other things there. It is stricter than
anyplace I know of. I never go in there without having to sign
in, and I never leave without having to sign out.
Mr. Rainville. Do you think it is too strict?
Mr. P. Leeds. At Evans at one point I thought it was. That
is when I had to show both my card and badge when I left. I had
to queue up. It is an awkward place to get in and out of Evans,
because there is such a spread of buildings.
Mr. Rainville. There has been some feeling here that the
holding of these hearings has resulted in this rash of
suspensions and lifting of clearances out there. Do you get
that impression too?
Mr. P. Leeds. I get it very strongly. Because, if I can
speak for myself----
Mr. Rainville. I wish you would.
Mr. P. Leeds [continuing]. I have no reason to question
myself. And I have examined my conscience and my relationships
in the last week, to question myself as a security risk for the
country and I certainly can't. And I don't think anybody who
knows me closely can.
Mr. Rainville. Do you think perhaps this is protective
measure out there, that they think this committee may find
something, or they want to be on the safe side, or they want to
nullify the work the committee is trying to do by beating them
to the punch, so to speak?
I am not trying to put words in your mouth----
Mr. P. Leeds. It is a feeling of mine but it is something I
couldn't substantiate, because I have gone from one office to
the other and wound up at the G-2 Office, and I have been met
with no other information than to sit tight.
Mr. Rainville. One other question. You say you feel that
this committee may have precipitated this thing. Yet we have
had some other fellows in here who feel that this is part of an
organized anti-Semitic movement.
Mr. P. Leeds. I have a similar information. I didn't want
to so address myself to you, because I don't want to give you
the impression that I have a persecution complex.
But knowing a little about probabilities, it seems unlikely
that so many people of the Jewish faith would be affected.
Mr. Rainville. Wouldn't that depend upon how many people of
the Jewish faith were working out there?
Mr. P. Leeds. I don't think it is a very high percentage
there.
Mr. Rainville. What would you guess is the percentage?
Mr. P. Leeds. I would guess it is less than 30 percent.
Mr. Rainville. Well, of course, that is a pretty good
percentage, isn't it, as an overall percentage?
Mr. P. Leeds. It is. I can tell you this. I can tell you
the effect of all of this. Any damage that could be done to me
personally has already been done, because people consider me as
subversive. You see, my job has been changed. Even though I
handled unclassified equipment before, I have been transferred
to other unclassified equipment. I don't know the reason for
it, and I can't find out. I didn't really question it. I have
no reason to question it. But from a unit chief--I am working
now for another unit chief. People ask questions about me,
contractors with whom I have had regular communications, ask
questions, and so it has proven very embarrassing to me.
Mr. Rainville. Yes, but, Mr. Leeds, my point is that if it
is part of an organized anti-Semitic movement, then presumably
it couldn't very well be tied in closely with these meetings
here, because, if it is organized, it must have been planned,
and they just didn't sit back and wait.
Mr. P. Leeds. I didn't mean to imply that it is organized.
I don't know if there is any organized group there. I am sure
that no matter where you go you will find anti-Semitism and
anti-Catholicism and almost anti-anything, in certain degrees
of proportion. But the feeling I got is that it could be the
outgrowth of maybe an individual or a few individuals, and
their anti-Semitism.
Mr. Rainville. Then you would have to kind of put your
finger on it.
Mr. P. Leeds. I can't put my finger on it.
Mr. Rainville. Because almost everybody who has been in
here today has been a unit chief or a division chief or a
section chief. Everybody who was in here yesterday had an
official position, and in every case they were Jewish. Where
does that begin?
Now, Dr. Daniels, here, started talking about the fact that
he thought he was being persecuted because he was tough. He
didn't object to firing a person if they weren't up to snuff at
the job. When you ask him for specifies, he named two people.
One was Jewish and one was not. And his chief trouble is coming
from the Jewish one. He believes that way, anyhow. That would
make him anti-Semitic, and yet he is the one who proposed the
question, that it was because he was married to a Jewish woman.
Mr. P. Leeds. I can give you a logical answer to what seems
a logical question, because I have such a scarcity of
information, actually.
Mr. Rainville. What I am trying to do is to pin the thing
down, actually, as to where this thing comes in.
Mr. P. Leeds. I can tell you where the feeling comes in. It
comes in from references in everyday work. For example, my wife
came home in tears one day. Some woman at the office was
expressing the differences in the prices that the army paid for
something, and the navy, and for some reason or other she
blamed it on the Jews. No reason given. I mean, there is no
logic to it.
Mr. Rainville. Then what you are saying is that this may be
a post, rather than an antecedent of this firing. Perhaps since
they were fired, and there is the coincidence that the fourteen
are Jewish, that has occasioned the feeling.
Mr. P. Leeds. Because there is that kind of conversation. I
mean, I have experienced it myself, and I feel free to discuss
it with anybody, anti-Semitism in different ways and in
different places, and I can't say it is much more marked.
Mr. Rainville. Of course, I could take the other side. I
went to a high school that was 98 percent Jewish. It wasn't
anti-Semitic, it was anti-Christian.
Mr. P. Leeds. I don't say the Jews are any different than
anybody else.
Mr. Jones. Would you say that this alleged anti-Semitism
out there may stem from the security board?
Mr. P. Leeds. I couldn't say for sure.
Mr. Jones. Would you say it would resolve itself down to a
few individuals out there?
Mr. P. Leeds. If you approached it more logically, it seems
to me, yes.
Mr. Jones. Who is the civilian member of the security
board?
Mr. P. Leeds. The only one I have spoken to is Mr. Reid,
and I guess he is the chief investigator. I don't know him
personally, and wouldn't want to make any accusations against
him.
Mr. Rainville. You don't know of any effort on the part of
the B'nai B'rith or the Anti-Defamation Society to take action
in this thing'?
Mr. P. Leeds. I know that the Anti-Defamation League is
looking into it.
Mr. Rainville. You know that directly?
Mr. P. Leeds. I don't know what they are going to do. I
really don't know what they are going to do.
Mr. Rainville. But you do know this directly?
Mr. P. Leeds. I do know that the Anti-Defamation League is
interested. That is all I do know. That is actually as much as
I know.
Mr. Rainville. Where do you get your information from?
Mr. P. Leeds. Well, I have spoken to Mr. Katchen, who is a
lawyer out there, and is the lawyer for the Anti-Defamation
League. I don't know his official position. I would say he is a
representative of the Anti-Defamation League.
Mr. Rainville. What gives you that impression? Something he
said? Or do you know it for a fact?
Mr. P. Leeds. From having spoken to him. I am not a member
of B'nai B'rith or the Anti-Defamation League.
Mr. Rainville. So that you normally would not know whether
he was a member or an official or not. Does he get paid by
them, or what?
Mr. P. Leeds. I don't know that. I went to Mr. Katchen, not
immediately, because he is a member of the Anti-Defamation
League, but because Mr. Katchen is what you might call a
leading citizen out there, and a person who might be able to
help me, because I haven't been presented with any charges. And
there is also the possibility that I might have to retain Mr.
Katchen as a lawyer yet.
Mr. Rainville. Who recommended him to you?
Mr. P. Leeds. Well, I know Mr. Katchen.
Mr. Rainville. You know, him personally?
Mr. P. Leeds. I know him personally. He handled some legal
matters for us when I was living at this bachelor apartment.
Mr. Rainville. Then you have known him over a period? That
was '46, was it?
Mr. P. Leeds. Oh, I have known him--I was also a member of
the Zionist organization at one time, and he was active.
Mr. Rainville. So you have good reason for believing that
he is active in other societies?
Mr. P. Leeds. He is a prominent Jewish leader out there.
There is no question about it.
Mr. Rainville. But being a prominent Jewish leader might
not keep him in the Anti-Defamation League.
Mr. P. Leeds. I have been told--I will put it that way--
that he is a district representative. Now, I may be wrong about
that.
Mr. Rainville. Well, we made an attempt to check, and did
not find so. That doesn't necessarily mean it isn't so.
I don't think I have any more questions.
[Whereupon, at 4:22 p. m., a recess was taken until Monday,
October 12, 1953.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--Marcel Ullmann (1905-1992) later testified
in a public hearing on December 10, 1953. Louis Volp (1910-
1986), William Patrick Lonnie (1914-1995), Henry F. Burkhard
(1898-1987), and Herbert F. Hecker (1911-1973), did not testify
in public.]
----------
MONDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The staff interrogatory was convened at 11:15 a.m.,
pursuant to call, in room 1402 of the Federal Building, Mr. G.
David Schine, chief consultant, presiding.
Present: G. David Schine, chief consultant; Roy M. Cohn,
chief counsel; Francis Carr, staff director; Daniel G. Buckley,
assistant counsel.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Volp, will you give us your name, please?
STATEMENT OF LOUIS J. VOLP
Mr. Volp. Louis J. Volp, V-o-l-p.
Mr. Carr. What is your present position?
Mr. Volp. My present position is deputy chief, System
Section, Radar Branch, Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Carr. Your grade?
Mr. Volp. GS-13.
Mr. Carr. You are deputy chief?
Mr. Volp. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Who is your chief?
Mr. Volp. Mr. Sam Levine.
Mr. Carr. That is at Evans Laboratory at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Volp. That is right.
Mr. Carr. You are cleared for security?
Mr. Volp. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Up through secret?
Mr. Volp. Through secret.
Mr. Carr. And that is still in effect?
Mr. Volp. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Now, would you give us a little of your
background. Were you originally from New York?
Mr. Volp. Yes. I will start from the beginning, if you
want.
Mr. Carr. Just briefly.
Mr. Volp. I was born in Corona, Queens, in 1910, and I
lived there up until 1936. In 1936 I was married, and I moved
to Woodside, and I lived in Woodside until February of 1941.
Mr. Carr. What is your wife's name, please?
Mr. Volp. Maiden name, Anna Baumeister, B-a-u-m-e-i-s-t-e-
r.
In February of 1941, because of illness in her family, and
more particularly we had to give up our apartment and move with
her mother.
In September of 1941, I obtained a job at Fort Monmouth,
and moved down to Long Branch, and I have lived in Long Branch
area since then.
Mr. Carr. You have been working at Monmouth since 1941?
Mr. Volp. Yes, specifically for--let me put it this way--
from September of 1941 until about April or so of 1942, I
worked at Fort Hancock, which was a sub-post of Monmouth, and
then from then on I moved down to Evans and I have been down
there since.
Do you want my schooling?
Mr. Carr. What was your schooling?
Mr. Volp. I attended public school in Queens 16 and 19, and
then Newtown High School, and I graduated from Newtown High
School in 1928 in February, and I stayed over until June taking
postgraduate work in the hopes of obtaining a scholarship, but
because of personal difficulties at home I had to quit, and I
went to work in July of 1928 for the Consolidated Edison
Company of New York.
In September of 1929, I enrolled at City College, night
course, and I continued there and finally graduated in 1939.
Mr. Carr. In 1939?
Mr. Volp. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. You went nights?
Mr. Volp. Nights, yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. While at City College, did you meet Julius
Rosenberg?
Mr. Volp. No, sir, not to my knowledge.
Mr. Carr. Do you know the Julius Rosenberg, the convicted
spy?
Mr. Volp. Yes, sir; I did not.
Mr. Carr. Isn't it true you attended classes with him?
Mr. Volp. Not to my knowledge, sir.
Mr. Carr. What subjects did you take at CCNY?
Mr. Volp. I took the course leading to bachelor of
electrical engineering degree, which included, among other
things, standard history courses----
Mr. Carr. Mathematics?
Mr. Volp. Yes, mathematics, physics, engineering,
theoretical, laboratory, and also economics, English, and
public speaking, and so forth. If I attended classes with him,
I certainly don't recall it.
Mr. Carr. If you attended classes with him, it was a large
class and you didn't realize he was in the class which you
attended?
Mr. Volp. No, sir. These classes were all night classes, by
the way.
Mr. Carr. Your initial is ``J,'' Louis J.?
Mr. Volp. That is right.
Mr. Carr. All right. But you have no personal recollection
of having attended any classes with him?
Mr. Volp. I do not.
Mr. Carr. Did you meet him later when you worked at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Volp. No, I didn't. I did meet a Rosenberg, and I have
given this information to the FBI, by the way, and I met a
Lieutenant Rosenberg who apparently worked at the Newark
dispatcher's office, Signal Corps, and at the time I met him I
was doing contract work on certain equipment for Monmouth, and
the work involved some of the work the inspectors were doing,
and that is the only Rosenberg I recall, with one exception of
another Rosenberg which apparently worked at--I don't recall
particularly now.
Mr. Carr. All right, then. So all of the time you have been
at Monmouth, you have never run into any Rosenberg there?
Mr. Volp. Not to my particular knowledge.
Mr. Carr. Would you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Volp. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. Carr. You never met him?
Mr. Volp. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Now, at the Evans Laboratory, have you had
contact with Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Volp. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. What sort of contact did you have?
Mr. Volp. That is purely on a business basis, and it might
be explained this way--sometime at the end of the war, Mr.
Coleman was returned from active service and was assigned to
the same section I worked in, which was Radar Equipment Section
at that time. Some time later, another section was set up, a
System Section, and he was moved in as chief of that.
As time went on, I was moved out of Radar Equipment Section
and put on the staff of the branch chief handling contracts.
Then my work, or I did come in contact with Mr. Coleman as part
of the contractual activity of the branch and the planning of
the branch.
Mr. Carr. In your contact with him, it was always at the
job?
Mr. Volp. It was always at the job.
Mr. Carr. You never had any social contact with him?
Mr. Volp. No, sir. I do, however, have to admit that we had
a driving pool, and he was a member of that pool.
Mr. Carr. Well, that approaches social activity, doesn't
it?
Mr. Volp. I might give you the background on that. During
the war, with gas rationing, we were directed at the
laboratories to set up driving pools, and this went into effect
very early in 1942, and since that time I have been in a pool
with various individuals, as people come into jobs or move from
place to place.
Mr. Carr. Who else was in the car pool at the time that he
was, in 1942?
Mr. Volp. He was not in it in 1942. He did not come in
until about 1947 or 1948.
Mr. Carr. Who else was in the car pool at that time?
Mr. Volp. Mr. Jerome Corwin, Mr. Harold Ducore, and I think
Mr. William Gould was in it for a time.
Mr. Carr. That car pool existed right up to the present
time?
Mr. Volp. Just about, yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Until Coleman and Ducore were suspended?
Mr. Volp. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Coleman--you didn't live with them, however?
Mr. Volp. No, I did not.
Mr. Carr. However, Coleman and Corwin lived together during
a part of this time?
Mr. Volp. I believe they did, Coleman and Corwin, yes, I
think they did.
I might explain that. I was married, and I have my own
place, and I understand these fellows were bachelors and
apparently shared an apartment or a house.
Mr. Carr. Now, in all of your--how many years has this
been, may I ask you that, that that car pool has existed that
they have all been in?
Mr. Volp. It was 1948 up to----
Mr. Carr. A week or two ago?
Mr. Volp. I would like to add the point, it was from the
spring of 1948 to the best of my recollection, until about the
early part of 1952, that Coleman dropped out and Ducore
continued with the rest of us, and we picked up another rider
late in 1953, just this year.
Mr. Carr. Who was that?
Mr. Volp. Mr. Leonard Shield, and it had existed up until
recently.
Mr. Carr. Now then, in this period of time since 1948 up
through now, you must have become pretty well acquainted with
Mr. Coleman.
Mr. Volp. No. I am afraid I didn't, with the exception of
the work he was doing, and personally, no, and socially, no.
Mr. Carr. You mean that all of that five years of riding in
a car pool, you had little or no conversation with him?
Mr. Volp. We had conversations, yes, naturally;
conversations about the average, every-day occurrences, mutual
engineering problems. I might point out that all of the
individuals except myself were taking additional courses in
school, and there were mutual school problems that came up, and
we talked about administrative problems that we had since we
were all in, you might say, management positions.
Mr. Carr. Did Coleman ever discuss Julius Rosenberg at the
time the Rosenberg case came up, and it was prosecuted
approximately two years ago?
Mr. Volp. I don't recall that Coleman discussed that.
However, I was visited by the FBI at that time, and I was then
informed, after I answered questions, that apparently Coleman
did know Sobell and Rosenberg by name, but as far as
discussions, there were none particularly that I recall.
Mr. Carr. What else did they ask you about Coleman?
Mr. Volp. They asked me if I knew him, and when I first met
him, and had I seen him in school, and had I known him in
school, and so forth, and if I knew anything about his personal
life, and so forth.
Mr. Carr. And you weren't able to help them?
Mr. Volp. I couldn't give them any information, no, sir;
outside of working on the job, I have made maybe, one or two
visits to contractors' plants with him.
Mr. Carr. You never visited his home?
Mr. Volp. I never did, no, sir.
Mr. Carr. Well, now, did you then discuss with Coleman the
fact that the FBI had asked you concerning him?
Mr. Volp. I did not.
Mr. Carr. You never mentioned that?
Mr. Volp. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Let me ask you this: In all of the time he has
been in your car pool, and subsequent to the interview of you
by the FBI, did you ever have any reason to suspect his loyalty
or suitability for work at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Volp. No, I did not.
Mr. Carr. Weren't you concerned over this visit of the FBI
and the fact that they said that he was close to both Rosenberg
and Sobell?
Mr. Volp. I was concerned. However, they did not imply that
he was close; they implied that he knew both of them from
school, and as a matter of fact they asked me if I knew them,
and I was not able to help them. I was concerned with the fact
that both Rosenberg and Sobell went to City College, and so did
I.
Mr. Carr. What year was this interview?
Mr. Volp. I don't recall.
Mr. Carr. What is the last time they contacted you?
Mr. Volp. That was the one and only time they contacted me.
Mr. Carr. Was it a year ago, or two years ago?
Mr. Volp. No, it was probably closer to, as a guess,
probably three years ago.
Mr. Carr. And then--let me ask you, did you know that
Morton Sobell used to visit with Coleman?
Mr. Volp. No, I did not.
Mr. Carr. None of that ever came up in your conversations?
Mr. Volp. It never did.
Mr. Carr. Did you consider yourself a friend of Coleman's?
Mr. Volp. No, I would say a business associate. I might add
that I felt protected in that Coleman was cleared, and I
assumed he ought to be, and we were at least able to discuss
things with him on a business basis; and as far as social life,
and so forth, I had no contact with him.
Mr. Carr. Were you friendly with anybody else in the car
pool on a social basis?
Mr. Volp. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. How about Corwin?
Mr. Volp. I was not socially acquainted with him, and never
visited at his home, either.
Mr. Carr. How about Harold Ducore?
Mr. Volp. I never visited his home, either.
Mr. Carr. Were you asked about Ducore?
Mr. Volp. No, I was not.
Mr. Carr. Only Coleman?
Mr. Volp. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Who remains in the car pool now, just Corwin and
yourself?
Mr. Volp. Corwin, myself, and Sam Levine.
Mr. Carr. Sam Levine. He was a College of the City of New
York graduate?
Mr. Volp. I believe he was.
Mr. Carr. Was he in your class?
Mr. Volp. No, sir. He went to day school, and I don't know
what time he got out.
Mr. Carr. Did he ever mention Rosenberg or Morton Sobell?
Mr. Volp. No, sir, he didn't.
Mr. Carr. During the car pool time, was there anything
discussed by anyone in the car pool concerning the Rosenberg
case?
Mr. Volp. The only thing I can specifically recall was when
the case was brought to a final conclusion, and the general
opinion there was that everyone was satisfied that it was as it
should be, and I might say that all expressed that same
opinion.
Mr. Carr. You mean at the time of the execution?
Mr. Volp. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Was Coleman in accord with the general opinion of
the car pool in that regard?
Mr. Volp. He expressed his opinion as being in accord.
Mr. Cohn. Had Coleman told you that he went to Young
Communist League meetings with Rosenberg?
Mr. Volp. No, sir, he did not.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Volp, do you recall anybody in the car pool
carrying a briefcase regularly?
Mr. Volp. Regularly? I might say that Coleman carried one.
Mr. Schine. Coleman carried a briefcase?
Mr. Volp. I can't say regularly, though.
Mr. Schine. Did Mr. Coleman ever open the briefcase in the
car?
Mr. Volp. Not to my knowledge, no, sir.
Mr. Schine. He never opened the briefcase?
Mr. Volp. No, sir. I might add that quite often when he
carried a briefcase, I think in general it was in connection
with visits that he was making to various plants, and
contractors' plants and other government installations.
Mr. Schine. Would you say he was extremely cautious about
his briefcase?
Mr. Volp. I would say he exercised the caution that we are
supposed to exercise according to regulations; that is, when we
carry a briefcase we are to keep it with us all of the time,
and that is to physically hold it, and I think he did that,
yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And he never reached into it for something, in
the car, or opened it for any reason, as far as you can
remember?
Mr. Volp. Not to my particular knowledge. I know he carried
school books, and whether he carried a briefcase in connection
with the school books is another question, and I don't recall
that, frankly. Specifically, to see him open a briefcase, I
don't recall.
Mr. Carr. That is all, Mr. Volp. Thank you very much.
Is there anything else, Mr. Volp, that you might be able to
help us with?
Mr. Volp. There is only one thing. That is, in my going to
school at night, I had, as far as I know, no contact with any
of the day session people. It took me a long time to get
through, ten years, and of all of the people that have gone
with me to class at night, there is only one that I know of
that is down at Evans now, and that is a Victor Suski. He, as
far as I know again, was a fully night student.
Mr. Carr. You have no reason to suspect his suitability?
Mr. Volp. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. For the work?
Mr. Volp. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How many people were in your car pool originally?
Mr. Volp. Originally, until recently, five.
Mr. Cohn. Then Coleman and how many are in there now? Is
that Coleman and Ducore that were in there?
Mr. Volp. There are three of us left. I made a mistake
before, I am sorry. I would like to correct the record. I am
glad you brought it up. You asked me who was in the car pool.
Now it is myself, Sam Levine, and Jerome Corwin, and Leonard
Shield. There is four, sorry.
Mr. Cohn. The only persons who are missing are Coleman and
Ducore.
Mr. Carr. Ducore dropped out some time ago, just in the
last week when he was suspended, and so it is Coleman and
Ducore.
Mr. Volp. That is right. We tried to keep it five, because
all of us have families and our wives want the cars.
Mr. Carr. Actually, it was six?
Mr. Volp. He came in. We were driving with four there, and
then we picked up a fifth man.
Mr. Carr. That is all.
Mr. Schine. State your name for the record.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM PATRICK LONNIE
Mr. Lonnie. William Patrick Lonnie. L-o-n-n-i-e.
Mr. Schine. And your present occupation, Mr. Lonnie?
Mr. Lonnie. Electrical engineer, or electronic engineer.
Mr. Cohn. I notice in the City College yearbook, it was
spelled L-o-o-n-i-e.
Mr. Lonnie. I officially changed it. It was Loonie. And you
can see why, I guess; we changed it when the first baby came
along, as a matter of fact.
Mr. Cohn. Now, Mr. Lonnie, what are your duties?
Mr. Lonnie. Right now, I am engaged in directing some
search and development work down at Evans Signal Laboratory, in
the physics branch.
Mr. Schine. I understand you were in the Marine Corps.
Mr. Lonnie. That is right.
Mr. Schine. For how long?
Mr. Lonnie. About three years, I think it was a little
less; from October of 1943 to May of 1946.
Mr. Schine. You were a commissioned officer?
Mr. Lonnie. That is right.
Mr. Schine. Where did you attend college, Mr. Lonnie?
Mr. Lonnie. At City College, in New York.
Mr. Schine. Do you know any of the individuals at Fort
Monmouth who were at City College at the same time you were?
Mr. Lonnie. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Will you give their names, please?
Mr. Lonnie. As well as I can remember--this would be not
only my class but others--Henry Burkhart, Samuel Levine, and
Aaron Coleman.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Volp?
Mr. Lonnie. He wasn't in my class, and I don't remember
him.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Hecker?
Mr. Lonnie. He might have been ahead of me, and I didn't
remember him, either.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Rabinowitz?
Mr. Lonnie. No, sir, I don't remember him, either.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Lonnie. He was in the class, but I never knew him at
work.
Mr. Cohn. Did you just find out he was in the class
recently?
Mr. Lonnie. No. He was in some of the classes I attended.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know him personally?
Mr. Lonnie. Well, he was just as another classmate.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have any social contact with him?
Mr. Lonnie. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see him at all after you left college?
Mr. Lonnie. I never saw him after that.
Mr. Cohn. Did you participate in any activities with him at
college?
Mr. Lonnie. No.
Mr. Cohn. You just knew him as a classmate, a guy you saw
in classes?
Mr. Lonnie. That's right.
Mr. Cohn. Who among the Monmouth crowd was he friendly with
at City College?
Mr. Lonnie. I really don't remember enough about him to say
who he was familiar with, unfortunately.
Mr. Cohn. How about Coleman?
Mr. Lonnie. Well, Coleman was in the class ahead of me, and
I wasn't too familiar with those fellows, actually.
Mr. Cohn. Did you associate with Coleman and Rosenberg?
Mr. Lonnie. Not particularly.
Mr. Cohn. Did you associate with them at all?
Mr. Lonnie. No, I don't think so. I never noticed any
association between the two of them.
Mr. Cohn. Do you recall having seen them together?
Mr. Lonnie. No, I don't recall it. I might have, but I
don't remember it now.
Mr. Cohn. How about Morton Sobell. Do you remember him?
Mr. Lonnie. I remember him faintly. He was also in the
class ahead of me.
Mr. Cohn. Do you associate Sobell and Coleman together?
Mr. Lonnie. Well, the only association I had on that was
work one time. I remember we had a contract with an outfit, I
think it was Reeves Instrument in New York, and I believe Mr.
Sobell was down visiting the laboratories with reference to the
contract with a group of other people, and I think Mr. Coleman
was in at that conference. That is about the main association.
Mr. Carr. Do you know that he stayed at Mr. Coleman's
house?
Mr. Lonnie. No.
Mr. Carr. During that visit?
Mr. Lonnie. No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you learned that since?
Mr. Lonnie. I just learned it right now, and I didn't know
it before.
Mr. Carr. At the college, were you a member of any student
organization?
Mr. Lonnie. Well, I belonged to the Newman Club. That is
something I might have belonged to, and no other organizations.
Mr. Carr. You didn't belong to the Young Communist League?
Mr. Lonnie. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever belong to any subversive
organization?
Mr. Lonnie. No. I attended Catholic grammar and high
school.
Mr. Schine. Is there anyone else at Fort Monmouth that you
associate with Rosenberg and Sobell?
Mr. Lonnie. Well, no, I wouldn't say there was anybody at
Fort Monmouth, and I don't remember anybody there. There were
fellows there in the class. There was one other fellow who was
in the class, and I have forgotten--Murray Distell, D-i-s-t-e-
l-l.
Mr. Schine. He was in the class with Rosenberg and Sobell?
Mr. Lonnie. He was in the school about that time, yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And he is now at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Lonnie. Yes, he is at Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. What does he do there?
Mr. Lonnie. He is an electronic engineer, also.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever see him in recent years with
either Rosenberg or Sobell?
Mr. Lonnie. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you associate him in college with Rosenberg
and Sobell?
Mr. Lonnie. No, sir, I didn't. I wouldn't say that I knew
them. I wouldn't say that I would.
Mr. Schine. Did Coleman ever talk about Sobell?
Mr. Lonnie. No, not that I remember. As a matter of fact, I
only happened to have glanced into that room where this
particular conference was going on, and most of the work, by
that time I was a little bit removed from the central office,
and I didn't have too much contact.
Mr. Schine. What was this conference, and when was it held,
approximately?
Mr. Lonnie. I wasn't at the conference, so I could only
guess, and the subject was, I think, some equipment that Reeves
was going to build for the laboratories, and when it was held I
don't remember.
Mr. Schine. Approximately.
Mr. Lonnie. Roughly, I would say it was about 1947. I am
not sure about that.
Mr. Schine. Were there others that represented Fort
Monmouth in the group besides Coleman?
Mr. Lonnie. Yes, there were quite a few representatives
there; but now, who they were, I don't remember distinctly.
There were quite a few people from the section there.
Mr. Schine. Were there others from Reeves besides Sobell?
Mr. Lonnie. Yes, sir, there were others from Reeves down
there, yes. I don't know who they were. I would say, just a
very rough guess, there were probably three or four people from
Reeves, and approximately the same number of people from the
laboratories.
Mr. Schine. And you never discussed with Coleman the fact
that he knew Sobell?
Mr. Lonnie. No. I didn't know Coleman very well. I worked
for him, but I didn't know him very well.
Mr. Schine. And you can't think of anyone else that was in
Sobell's or Rosenberg's class at City College who is now at
Monmouth?
Mr. Lonnie. Not right now.
Mr. Schine. Do you associate anyone with Rosenberg and
Sobell while they were at college that is not at Fort Monmouth
now, but was very friendly with them at that time?
Mr. Lonnie. No, I am sorry. I didn't travel with that group
at all.
Mr. Schine. Can you think of anybody who might have been
friendly with them?
Mr. Lonnie. No, I can't.
Mr. Schine. Try and think carefully. I know by personal
experience I can think back to college and I remember certain
cliques of individuals.
Mr. Lonnie. That is what I am trying to remember.
Mr. Schine. And they probably studied together and listened
to classical music together and went around together, together,
and so on and so forth. Frankly, this could be of great help to
us. You are the first really intelligent individual in this
category of having been at City College and Fort Monmouth with
a good memory. If we could find the names of individuals that
were close to Rosenberg and Sobell, we might stumble on the
names of people, who as the years went by, were doing the same
type of work that Rosenberg and Sobell were doing.
Mr. Lonnie. I would certainly like to help you if I could.
Mr. Schine. Why don't you think about it, and try and
supply the names to us as they might come to your mind, and we
will be here for the next few days.
Mr. Lonnie. All right, I surely will.
Mr. Schine. And will you call any one of the staff?
Mr. Lonnie. Shall I call up here?
Mr. Schine. Surely.
Mr. Lonnie. Okay, surely, I will try to think of it. Right
offhand, of course this was a long time ago, and I am sorry my
memory isn't too good on that.
Mr. Schine. Do you remember the Rosenberg-Sobell activities
at City College? They were probably very vehement in their
views.
Mr. Lonnie. Well, not particularly well. You see, most of
the fellows, or at least I always thought before this other
stuff came out, that most of the fellows who went to the School
of Technology didn't seem to be interested in political
problems as seemed to be the common acts around the school. For
that reason, I guess if they did anything, they would probably
have joined others who were over--you see, it was a separate
school, the School of Technology was separated physically from
the main school, and I think most of this stuff that I ever
heard about went on more in the main building rather than in
the School of Technology, so I wouldn't have been exposed to
much of any activities round there. For instance, I don't know
who they were, but it was not uncommon for somebody to be
passing out leaflets of these various subversive organizations,
YCL, and they could have done that, but I wouldn't have seen
them because they didn't do that too much around the school.
They did it more in other places, probably because there were
more people there, I don't know.
Mr. Schine. Can you recall the names of any professors that
you had at that time, who might have expressed pro-Communist
views?
Mr. Lonnie. Well, there really weren't any in the School of
Technology at all. The rest of them, the subjects were either
mathematics or something like that, and so they wouldn't have
too much occasion to express views.
Mr. Schine. Can you recall the names of any people on
faculty who might have been responsible for the indoctrination
of Rosenberg and Sobell?
Mr. Lonnie. No, I can't, I am sorry to say. In places where
they might have been subject to that sort of propaganda would
be more in the liberal arts, and in the engineering you have a
cut-and-dried course, and I don't remember being in any classes
with them where there might have been that.
Mr. Schine. Do you remember who taught history I?
Mr. Lonnie. There were probably a lot of different teachers
in the history department.
Mr. Schine. How about public speaking? Did you take public
speaking?
Mr. Lonnie. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Who taught public speaking?
Mr. Lonnie. There were quite a group there, too. Now, who
taught them, I wouldn't be sure, and I know one of the teachers
I had had an Irish name, and I think or I believe he may be the
same one that has been promoted to a higher position up there.
Mr. Schine. Were Rosenberg and Sobell in your public
speaking class?
Mr. Lonnie. I don t remember them.
Mr. Schine. You don't recall them getting up on their feet
and making speeches?
Mr. Lonnie. No. As a matter of fact, I don't remember
anyone giving any communistic talks in the public speaking
classes.
Mr. Schine. I have no more questions.
Mr. Carr. How do you spell your last name, L-o-n-n-i-e?
Mr. Lonnie. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Lonnie, if you can recall anything that would
be of assistance to us, we would appreciate your letting us
know.
Mr. Lonnie. I will try to do that.
Mr. Carr. Have you been contacted by the FBI to furnish
them any information concerning this?
Mr. Lonnie. Some time ago, around the time of the trial,
they asked me some questions.
Mr. Carr. All right, fine. Thank you very much. And you
furnished them with everything that you could?
Mr. Lonnie. Everything that I knew at that time, yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Thank you very much.
Mr. Schine. Will you kindly state your name for the record?
STATEMENT OF HENRY F. BURKHARD
Mr. Burkhard. Henry F. Burkhard, B-u-r-k-h-a-r-d.
Mr. Schine. And your occupation?
Mr. Burkhard. Electrical engineer.
Mr. Schine. And you are working at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Burkhard. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. What is your position?
Mr. Burkhard. I am a facsimile design engineer.
Mr. Schine. How long have you been doing this work?
Mr. Burkhard. Well, since 1940.
Mr. Schine. Where did you get your training?
Mr. Burkhard. In City College in New York. I have had
postgraduate training also, and I had one course in Brooklyn
Polytechnic, and one course in Stevens Institute, and a course
in Newark College of Engineering, and Rutgers.
Mr. Schine. While you were at City College, did you know
Julius Rosenberg, or Sobell?
Mr. Burkhard. I can't say I did.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever know them after that time?
Mr. Burkhard. No, sir. They might have been in some of my
classes, but I don't know.
Mr. Schine. You never saw them or knew them after you left
City College?
Mr. Burkhard. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Do you know anybody at Fort Monmouth who was in
City College either at the time you were there, or around the
time you were there?
Mr. Burkhard. There are some members around, and I believe
the previous man who was here.
Mr. Schine. Will you give the names of the people?
Mr. Burkhard. I think it is William Lonnie who was here,
and that is about all I can think of right in the laboratories.
Mr. Schine. Do you know anyone else who was at City College
around the time you were there who is connected with any
laboratory, or scientific development that has some relation to
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Burkhard. Well, there was a Ben Bernstein who became an
inspector for the government, but he didn't have much direct
contact with the laboratories, just a government worker, and I
saw him once or twice after he had gotten out of school. When
they visited the laboratories, it was, but that is about all.
Mr. Schine. What did he do in his function as an inspector
for the government?
Mr. Burkhard. As I understood it, he would go to a factory,
or a plant, and see whether the equipment that they delivered
met the requirements of the specifications.
Mr. Schine. Is that B-e-r-n-s-t-e-i-n?
Mr. Burkhard. Yes, I believe it is. I walked home from
school once or twice, or a little more than that, I guess, but
it was just a casual friend who happened to be going the same
way, and we would walk there.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever belong to any organization while
you were in City College?
Mr. Burkhard. The YMCA.
Mr. Schine. That is the only organization?
Mr. Burkhard. That was the only one.
Mr. Schine. Have you belonged to any organization since
that time?
Mr. Burkhard. Institute of Radio Engineers, and I am still
a member of that.
Mr. Schine. Is there any information you would care to give
the committee concerning security regulations at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Burkhard. I don't know what to offer there. We have a
set of regulations that we are supposed to adhere to quite
rigorously, known as 380-5, and the amendment thereto. That
defines pretty well how we are supposed to handle classified
material. It is how we are supposed to file it and take care of
it, and so forth. We always try to adhere to the regulations on
that.
Mr. Schine. Do you know Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Burkhard. I didn't know him until about August when I
happened to be out on travel orders, and I was introduced to
him.
Mr. Schine. Do you know him well now?
Mr. Burkhard. No, I don't. I met him very casually, at this
one location, and I was introduced, and it was a whole group of
some ten or fifteen people, and we all went out to dinner.
Mr. Schine. Who was in that group?
Mr. Burkhard. It was a Mr. Hamsher----
Mr. Schine. Spell that name.
Mr. Burkhard. H-a-m-s-h-e-r.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the first name?
Mr. Burkhard. Donald.
Mr. Schine. Donald Hamsher.
Mr. Burkhard. Yes. He was the coordinator of the activities
at this location.
Mr. Schine. At which location?
Mr. Burkhard. It was at Michigan State University, Ann
Arbor, Michigan. It was about in August. He was more or less
the man who was a go-between between the university personnel
and the laboratory personnel. The laboratory personnel were
there to supply information to the university people.
Mr. Schine. Who else was in that group that went to dinner?
Mr. Burkhard. Mr. John Rice, who works in the laboratory on
television. There was a man from Evans, and I believe his name
was Charlie Moore, but I am not too sure.
Mr. Schine. What was his job at Evans?
Mr. Burkhard. As I understood it, it was radio direction
finding.
Mr. Schine. Was he a close friend of Ducore's?
Mr. Burkhard. I don't think so, but of course I couldn't
tell. I don't know whether they arrived together, or around the
same time.
Mr. Schine. When did you make this visit?
Mr. Burkhard. In August, and I can't remember the exact
date.
Mr. Schine. Of this year?
Mr. Burkhard. Of this year, yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. You went to Michigan?
Mr. Burkhard. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And what was the purpose of the visit there?
Mr. Burkhard. Michigan State University had a contract
which was of rather wide scope, and I don't think that I am
free to define it too clearly because of its nature.
Mr. Schine. If it is top secret----
Mr. Burkhard. I don't know any top secret information, but
this was confidential. I am sure that you could readily find
out about this project from either the chief's office in
Washington, or Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. And you and Ducore and this other gentleman
went from Monmouth to Michigan in August to discuss with the
people in Michigan this contract, and the progress of their
work?
Mr. Burkhard. No. Primarily we were there to provide
whatever information we had in our own fields. That is why this
thing was more of an individual type of thing. There were a lot
of little conferences going on, and if one concerned facsimile,
I would get in on that one; and if one concerned radio
direction finding, I would have nothing to do with it.
Mr. Schine. Did you talk much with Ducore?
Mr. Burkhard. Very little.
Mr. Schine. Was he in contact with anyone outside of
Michigan during his stay there, and did he talk on the
telephone?
Mr. Burkhard. Not that I know of. I hardly saw the man.
Mr. Schine. Did he get much mail?
Mr. Burkhard. I don't know if he got any.
Mr. Schine. Where was he staying?
Mr. Burkhard. Right on the campus. All of us were only
there a few days.
Mr. Schine. Where on the campus did he stay?
Mr. Burkhard. There was a building in the law quadrangle
set aside more or less for the visitors.
Mr. Schine. And he had his own room?
Mr. Burkhard. He had his own room there.
Mr. Schine. He didn't stay with any faculty member or
anything of that sort?
Mr. Burkhard. No, sir, I am quite sure not. Of course, I
didn't see much of him, and I went to my room; and during the
daytime we would hardly see anything of any of the other
personnel in the groups.
Mr. Schine. Have you heard recently that he is under
investigation?
Mr. Burkhard. I read it in the papers.
Mr. Schine. Have you talked to him about it?
Mr. Burkhard. I don't know him that well.
Mr. Schine. Did you hear why he was under investigation?
Mr. Burkhard. No, outside of what was in the papers.
Mr. Schine. Do you know Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Burkhard. I can't say that I do. If he went to school
around the same time I did, he might have been in some of my
classes, but I don't know him.
Mr. Schine. You never talked to him or you never had any
contact with him?
Mr. Burkhard. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever make any other field trips with
Ducore?
Mr. Burkhard. No, sir, and I wouldn't say that I made that
with him. We arrived at different times, and we didn't have any
association together other than everybody in the laboratories
who was out there was out there to give his own piece of
information.
Mr. Schine. Getting back to this meeting in Michigan, do
you recall seeing Ducore with anybody on the campus or out for
dinner, other than those that you have already mentioned?
Mr. Burkhard. No, I can't say that I do. I didn't have much
contact with him.
Mr. Schine. How do you go home from work? By car?
Mr. Burkhard. I drive my car.
Mr. Schine. You drive alone?
Mr. Burkhard. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Schine. You have never ridden home with Ducore or
Coleman?
Mr. Burkhard. I don't know them that well.
Mr. Schine. Do you know Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Burkhard. I don't know Mr. Coleman. If I met those
fellows on the street, I wouldn't even know enough to say
hello.
Mr. Schine. All right, Mr. Burkhard. If you can think of
the names of any of the individuals that you haven't been able
to recall right now, will you kindly supply them to us?
Mr. Burkhard. You mean personnel who might have been out on
that Michigan trip?
Mr. Schine. Yes, or any people that are at Fort Monmouth
now that you recall were at City College when you were there,
or any subversive activities or front organizations.
Mr. Burkhard. I don't get near those things.
Mr. Schine. Thank you very much. I don't think that we will
need to talk to you anymore today. Thank you very much.
Mr. Schine. Give your full name for the record, please.
STATEMENT OF MARCEL Ullmann
Mr. Ullmann. My name is Marcel Ullmann, M-a-r-c-e-l U-l-l-
m-a-n-n.
Mr. Schine. Will you give us your occupation, Mr. Ullmann,
please?
Mr. Ullmann. I am a television technician.
Mr. Schine. Where are you employed?
Mr. Ullmann. I am employed at Bamberger & Company in
Newark.
Mr. Schine. I am sorry, I can't quite hear.
Mr. Ullmann. B-a-m-b-e-r-g-e-r & Company.
Mr. Schine. What is this company?
Mr. Ullmann. A department store.
Mr. Schine. A department store?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Located where?
Mr. Ullmann. Newark, New Jersey.
Mr. Schine. And how long have you been there?
Mr. Ullmann. Some two years.
Mr. Schine. And your job there is what, sir?
Mr. Ullmann. I am a television technician.
Mr. Schine. And as such, what do you do?
Mr. Ullmann. I repair and service television and radio sets
sold by said company.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever worked for the government?
Mr. Ullmann. I have.
Mr. Schine. Where and when?
Mr. Ullmann. I worked at Fort Monmouth, and I believe it
was December 1, in 1941.
Mr. Schine. You worked in 1941 and 1942?
Mr. Ullmann. Oh, no. I am trying to get the date straight.
When did Pearl Harbor occur?
Mr. Schine. December 7, 1941.
Mr. Ullmann. Well, then I worked there December of 1941.
Mr. Schine. You worked in 1941 and 1942?
Mr. Ullmann. From 1941 through, I believe, 1948.
Mr. Schine. What were your duties at Fort Monmouth, Mr.
Ullmann?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, they progressed. Initially I maintained
and installed radio communication equipment at the post at Fort
Monmouth, that is at the post rather than at the laboratories.
Those duties continued for roughly two years, after which I
transferred to Camp Evans Signal Laboratories where I wrote and
unwrote specifications, and that, too, was about two years.
Mr. Schine. These specifications were classified, were they
not?
Mr. Ullmann. Generally, yes.
Mr. Schine. You were cleared for classified work?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Ranging all of the way to top secret?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, I imagine I was, though as far as I know
I have worked up to secret, and I don't think that the
specifications covered top secret at that time.
Mr. Schine. When you wrote specifications, what does that
mean?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, it meant assimilating and sorting data
from the, shall we say, project engineer on the job, with the
manufacturers or bidders concerned, and the specification
covered the type of equipment and the various conditions.
Mr. Schine. How long did you do this?
Mr. Ullmann. I say roughly two years.
Mr. Schine. Until 1945?
Mr. Ullmann. I think so.
Mr. Schine. What were your duties?
Mr. Ullmann. Then I believe at that time, or around that
time, the air force took over one of the laboratories known as
Watson Laboratories, and I was transferred in bulk, with a
large number of employees, was transferred from the Signal
Corps to the air force command, I will put it that way, and we
were stationed at Camp Watson Laboratories.
Mr. Schine. What were your duties there?
Mr. Ullmann. Initially, I was assigned to evaluation and
rehabilitation of captured enemy equipment, radar equipment,
and that continued for, I should say, possibly two years.
Mr. Schine. What were your other duties?
Mr. Ullmann. I say after that----
Mr. Schine. You say essentially you took charge of enemy
equipment and evaluated it, and what other duties did you have
at that time?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, those were the only duties, and as I
say, there were ramifications, and a variety of work involved,
but it was basically that. You analyzed and you rebuilt, and
you would try to write up reports as to the type of equipment
and the serviceability, and compare the American equipment, and
so forth.
Mr. Schine. Then from 1947, what were your duties and where
did you work?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, I was assigned to a different branch. I
think they called it--let me see if I can remember--the
Performance Evaluation Branch, design approval, at Watson, and
I was assigned as, I believe, assistant associate project
engineer on one or two radar development test programs.
Mr. Schine. You were an engineer involved in research and
development work, and you supervised some of the projects?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, that is right, I supervised tests and
evaluation of equipment.
Mr. Schine. This was all classified work?
Mr. Ullmann. Oh, yes.
Mr. Schine. And you did this work until the time you left
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Ullmann. I did.
Mr. Schine. What was the reason for your departure from
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Ullmann. I was suspended.
Mr. Schine. For what reason?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, the notice stated, and again I can't
quote since I haven't the papers, but I was charged with being
sympathetic to the Communist movement, and possibly having
attended Communist meetings.
Mr. Schine. Any other charges made against you?
Mr. Ullmann. That is the charge, as far as I know.
Mr. Schine. And you went from Fort Monmouth to the
Bamberger Company?
Mr. Ullmann. No, not directly. I believe I worked for a
television service company, I think it was called the Crown
Television--Metropolitan--I think it was the Metropolitan
Television Service Company, or something like that. I worked
there at the bench, and from there I went to Bambergers, I
believe.
Mr. Schine. Let me see. Where did you get your education,
Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, let me see. I was born in Brooklyn.
Mr. Schine. What was the year?
Mr. Ullmann. July 5, 1905.
Mr. Schine. Where did you attend college?
Mr. Ullmann. I went to public school in Brooklyn, and I
think it was PS-122, Williamsburg, and I went there until
graduation, which I think was in 1918; and then I went to high
school, Brooklyn Technical High School, from 1919 to 1923; that
is what it was. And then I attended classes, evening classes,
at City College for about three years. The first year or two
years, again, I attended classes at Dubois High School Building
in Brooklyn, and I had to make up a condition of German; and
after that I took science courses, and I went to the main City
College Building, 135th Street, for possibly a year or two
years. I didn't graduate.
Mr. Schine. You finished your schooling in City College
what year?
Mr. Ullmann. I say roughly 1927.
Mr. Schine. What did you do when you left college?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, I was employed all of that time, this
was evening classes at college, and----
Mr. Schine. Where were you employed during that time?
Mr. Ullmann. I was a radioman; that is, right after high
school I worked at Bell Laboratories.
Mr. Schine. At Bell Laboratories?
Mr. Ullmann. Bell Telephone Laboratories, and I was in
specifications there; and then I worked at a radio
manufacturing company known as the Wiz Manufacturing Company,
and I worked there for possibly three years or more. I believe
they failed then, and then I think I worked for a number of
radio outfits, Walthals, and probably worked for DeVegas, and
basically I was with furniture outfits, and I worked for John
Mullins & Company. And this was during the depression years,
where there was quite a bit of turnover.
From there I went in to R. H. Macy & Company, and from
Macy's I went to Michaels Brothers in Brooklyn, a furniture
outfit, and I was there up to the time I took the Government
position.
Mr. Schine. During all of this time, you did radio and
television work?
Mr. Ullmann. Television was very recent, and it was only
the past year or two, prior to going into the service.
Mr. Schine. When you were in City College, you knew Julius
Rosenberg?
Mr. Ullmann. I did not, as far as I know; first of all,
this I can state: that when I went to City College in Brooklyn,
in academic subjects, relatively simple, and at the time I went
to New York there was a science course, generally Tuesday and
Thursday nights, and the courses were from a quarter to seven
to a quarter to eleven, and I used to have to step on it, being
I was out in the field, and many times I was late, and in fact,
I believe that is the reason I finally dropped school.
I was told by the dean that either I had to be punctual and
very less frequent absences, or I would have to drop it, and I
had a relatively good job, and I made a salary decision.
But the thing, I was on the move all of the time, and after
I got out of school at a quarter of eleven, I would have the
trip to Brooklyn, and I made no acquaintances, and I knew of no
one, to the best of my knowledge.
Mr. Schine. But you knew Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Ullmann. I did not.
Mr. Schine. You knew Morton Sobell?
Mr. Ullmann. To the best of my knowledge, I have never met
the individual, and I have never spoken to him; until the
things broke in the papers, and to the best of my knowledge, I
never met him or knew him or heard of him.
Mr. Schine. Did you meet Julius Rosenberg after you left
City College?
Mr. Ullmann. To the best of my knowledge, I have never met
Julius Rosenberg.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us the names of the
organizations you joined, telling us when you joined them?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, now we come to a province wherein I
shall have to consider very carefully. You see, it is my belief
that my discharge or suspension, or what have you, resulted
from my association with a non-political organization, and I
don't know to what extent anything I may say at this time may
involve me in spheres of which I have no comprehension right
now, and so I am afraid that I shall have to avail myself of
the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Schine. I asked him to give us the names of some of the
organizations that he belonged to, and the dates, and he
availed himself of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Ullmann. I really have no idea where I may
inadvertently involve myself.
Mr. Schine. You are excused now, and will you please return
at 2:30.
Will you state your name for the record, please?
STATEMENT OF HERBERT F. HECKER
Mr. Hecker. Herbert F. Hecker, H-e-c-k-e-r.
Mr. Schine. And your occupation, sir?
Mr. Hecker. Electronic engineer.
Mr. Schine. Where are you employed?
Mr. Hecker. I am chief of the Test Equipment Section at the
Cole Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Schine. And how long have you been working there?
Mr. Hecker. At the Cole Signal Laboratory, I have been
there for almost four years and I have been at the laboratory
as a whole for almost fifteen years.
Mr. Schine. For fifteen years you have been employed at
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Hecker. That is right.
Mr. Schine. And what did you say your occupation was?
Mr. Hecker. Electronic engineer. You mean my position,
chief of the Test Equipment Section.
Mr. Schine. What do you do in that capacity?
Mr. Hecker. Well, I supervise a group of engineers who are
responsible for development of test equipment, for use by the
armed forces, in connection with radio communications and
equipment.
Mr. Schine. This is all classified work?
Mr. Hecker. Well, as it turns out, none of the projects for
which I am responsible is classified in nature.
Mr. Schine. Have you done classified work at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, I have been in contact with classified
material.
Mr. Schine. You are cleared for classified work?
Mr. Hecker. That is right, up to secret.
Mr. Schine. And where did you get your training, Mr.
Hecker?
Mr. Hecker. At City College.
Mr. Schine. And what were the years that you were a student
at City College?
Mr. Hecker. In 1934 to 1938.
Mr. Schine. And where did you go when you left City
College?
Mr. Hecker. I was unemployed most of the time until I got
the appointment at Fort Monmouth, which was in February of
1939, and I graduated from City College in June of 1938.
Mr. Schine. Do you know some of the individuals who were at
City College with you, are now at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us the names of as many as you
can recall?
Mr. Hecker. Aaron Coleman, of course, and Maurice Distell
is one.
Mr. Schine. Would you spell that, please?
Mr. Hecker. D-i-s-t-e-l-l. And Sam Pomerance, and I am
trying to think primarily of classmates of mine. There are
others that I know that attended City College, but I may not
have been in classes with them. Are you interested in those?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Hecker. I believe Jerome Corwin was one, and a couple
of fellows I met up here today, Reish, and Henry Burkhard. Then
there is a fellow by the name of John Bracken, with whom I
worked at Coles, who was at City College, in a later class, I
believe. There were probably others but I can't quite summon
them up right now.
Mr. Schine. You have the best memory of anyone we have had
so far.
Mr. Hecker. Thank you.
Mr. Schine. You can probably be of great help to us. Did
you know Julius Rosenberg when you were at City College?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, I did.
Mr. Schine. And you knew Morton Sobell?
Mr. Hecker. That is right.
Mr. Schine. Will you try and think for a minute of your
days in City College, and recall the names of individuals who
were friendly with Julius Rosenberg and Sobell, and let us take
Rosenberg first.
Mr. Hecker. I have been trying to do that over some period
now, and I cannot recall of any particular associations, close
associations between those individuals and any of the others. I
have tried to, actually, and my own relationship with him was
very casual, and I have no recollection at all of any other
closer relationships than that with these people.
Mr. Schine. With either Rosenberg or Sobell?
Mr. Hecker. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Do you recall the names of any individuals
working at Fort Monmouth who knew Rosenberg, or Sobell?
Mr. Hecker. Well, I assume that most of the people in the
class, in my class, knew them.
Mr. Schine. They were well known individuals at City
College, were they not?
Mr. Hecker. Well, it is hard to say, actually, and I don't
know, Sobell was in our class, and he was in our graduating
class, and I think that Rosenberg was in a later class, and I
really don't know just how well along they were.
Mr. Schine. Do you recall seeing them at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Hecker. No, I have read that Rosenberg was at Fort
Monmouth for a while, but honestly I can't recall having seen
him there.
Mr. Schine. Do you recall seeing Sobell as a representative
of a certain company?
Mr. Hecker. I haven't seen Sobell since I graduated from
school.
Mr. Schine. Did you know that he had come down to Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Hecker. No, I didn't know that.
Mr. Schine. How well do you know Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Hecker. I have lived with Mr. Coleman for close to
three years when we first started our employment down there.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us those years?
Mr. Hecker. That was in March of 1939, to I would say about
the end of 1941, and I am not too sure about that date.
Mr. Schine. You lived with Mr. Coleman for three years?
Mr. Hecker. Approximately.
Mr. Schine. From 1939 to 1941?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Did anyone else live with you and Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, we shared an apartment, there were five of
us, I believe.
Mr. Schine. Who were the other individuals?
Mr. Hecker. Charles Tepper, Charles Cambridge, Sidney
Metzger, that is five.
Mr. Schine. Were Messrs. Tepper, Cambridge and Metzger
working there?
Mr. Hecker. That is right.
Mr. Schine. What was the address?
Mr. Hecker. 677 Girard Avenue, In Long Branch.
Mr. Schine. Who obtained the apartment?
Mr. Hecker. There were a group of us, that had all started
working there the same day, and as I recall either three or
four of the others had located this apartment, and when I met
them that day, they invited me to join them.
Mr. Schine. Now, will you try and recall the names of any
of the individuals that did not live at this apartment with
whom Coleman was particularly friendly?
Mr. Hecker. At that particular time it was pretty hard for
me to say. We were more or less of a close-knit little group
and we were satisfied with each other's company.
Mr. Schine. You spent a lot of time together?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, we did, and we didn't spend the weekends
down there, generally.
Mr. Schine. What happened on weekends?
Mr. Hecker. We usually went home.
Mr. Schine. Where did Coleman go on weekends?
Mr. Hecker. I believe he lived in Brooklyn at the time, and
I assume that that is where he went.
Mr. Schine. Did he often take trips to other places?
Mr. Hecker. Not that I know of, no, not over the weekends.
Mr. Schine. Incidentally, Mr. Coleman was interested in
photography, wasn't he?
Mr. Hecker. I didn't know. He may have developed that hobby
after our association.
Mr. Schine. Did Sobell ever visit your house?
Mr. Hecker. No.
Mr. Schine. When you lived together you rode home together,
did you not, from work?
Mr. Hecker. For a time, we did. There was just one in the
group that had a car.
Mr. Schine. Who was he?
Mr. Hecker. Charles Tepper was the one who had the car
initially.
Mr. Schine. And you rode home together for a time?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Do you recall who in the group had a briefcase?
Mr. Hecker. No, I don't.
Mr. Schine. Did Mr. Coleman frequently carry one with him?
Mr. Hecker. At that time, I don't know, I really have no
recollection of that.
Mr. Schine. Did Mr. Coleman ever express any of his
political views to you?
Mr. Hecker. I don't recall any specific discussions we had
on politics. I am afraid not.
Mr. Schine. During this period, Russia was on the side of
Germany?
Mr. Hecker. I guess that is right, yes.
Mr. Schine. Until the last years you lived together.
Mr. Hecker. That is right.
Mr. Schine. And did you ever talk about Russia with him or
world affairs?
Mr. Hecker. I suppose we did, but my recollection is
definitely nothing unusual or unfavorable, that is what I am
trying to bring out, I can't recall any specific discussions I
had.
Mr. Schine. When Russia started fighting with Germany, do
you recall any degree of enthusiasm on Mr. Coleman's part about
the change?
Mr. Hecker. No, I don't recall any change at all.
Mr. Schine. You know that Mr. Coleman has been under
investigation?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, I do.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever discuss this with him?
Mr. Hecker. Well, as a matter of fact he came to see me
yesterday, and he called and asked if he could come to see me,
and I told him he could, and it was in connection with his
asking me whether I would be willing to submit a statement for
him, and possibly appear at his security hearing.
Mr. Schine. What did he discuss with you during your visit?
Mr. Hecker. He just briefly outlined what the gist of the
charges had been against him.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us these charges?
Mr. Hecker. Well, it was primarily one of the associations
with Rosenberg and Sobell, and two other individuals whom I
don't know.
Mr. Cohn. What were their names?
Mr. Hecker. One was Kitty, I believe.
Mr. Schine. Who was the other one?
Mr. Hecker. I believe it was Percoff--if I am not mistaken.
Mr. Schine. How do you spell that?
Mr. Hecker. It was P-e-r-c or k-o-f-f. I am not sure which.
Mr. Schine. What was the other charge?
Mr. Hecker. The other charge I believe had been attendance
at Young Communist League meetings.
Mr. Cohn. With Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Hecker. He didn't mention that to me, it was just those
charges, and some statement as to his having agreed with the
Communist philosophy, or something of that effect.
Mr. Cohn. Did he deny this?
Mr. Hecker. He told me that he had been at one YCL meeting
and his reaction had been very unfavorable to it, and he had
not any further association.
Mr. Schine. Up until this recent investigation, you never
knew of his associations with Rosenberg and Sobell, did you?
Mr. Hecker. Only whatever casual association at school that
I may have noticed, and I did not know of any other outside
association, outside of school.
Mr. Schine. During the Rosenberg case, he didn't mention to
you that he had seen them since college?
Mr. Hecker. I hadn't seen him, and as a matter of fact
yesterday was the first time I have seen him in two or three
years.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us the names of the
organizations to which you have belonged?
Mr. Hecker. Well, I belong to the Zionist Organization
America, for one thing, and I belong to the American Veterans
Committee for a short period of time.
Mr. Cohn. Did you resign from it, or what?
Mr. Hecker. Well, it was not a matter of resignation, there
was a chapter down at the shore, and I joined and I attended
one meeting and the chapter broke up, and so that was it.
Mr. Cohn. Do you belong to the American Legion?
Mr. Hecker. No.
Mr. Carr. Why did this chapter break up?
Mr. Hecker. I don't know, I never found that out.
Mr. Carr. Wasn't there some question as to whether or not
this committee was tainted with Communists or pro-Communists,
and didn't that subject matter come up concerning this American
Veterans Committee concerning the particular chapter which was
being formed at the time?
Mr. Hecker. My own recollection was that the constitution
of the national organization forbade membership of Communists
in it, and I don't recall any specific discussion of it.
Mr. Carr. You went to only one meeting?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, that is right.
Mr. Carr. And that as far as you know was the only meeting
that was ever held of this organization?
Mr. Hecker. Oh, no, I understood that the organization had
been, the chapter had been operating for some time before that.
Mr. Carr. But after the meeting that you attended, it
folded?
Mr. Hecker. That is right.
Mr. Carr. Do you know why that folded?
Mr. Hecker. As I say, no. I did hear rumors of talk about
pressure being put on them as you say, for a taint of pink of
the organization.
Mr. Schine. You were giving us the organizations and would
you finish doing that? Give us all of them, if you will.
Mr. Hecker. I belonged to a fraternal and benevolent
organization, and it is called the Princeley Club, and sort of
a family affair. That is about all, I am not much of a joiner,
naturally.
Mr. Schine. Had you attended some of these meetings that
Mr. Coleman attended?
Mr. Hecker. No.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever attend any meetings of any
subversive groups?
Mr. Hecker. No, sir; I haven't.
Mr. Carr. When you were in college, did you?
Mr. Hecker. No, sir; I was busy trying to learn how to be
an engineer, and I didn't have time for anything else.
Mr. Schine. Did Coleman subscribe to the Daily Worker when
you lived together?
Mr. Hecker. Oh, no, I never saw it there.
Mr. Schine. What newspaper did he read, do you remember?
Mr. Hecker. I really don't remember.
Mr. Schine. Have you noticed any change in Coleman since
his problems have been investigated?
Mr. Hecker. Well, as I say, I have only seen him this once
and I saw him yesterday, and I didn't notice any particular
change except of course he is pretty disturbed about it, and
concerned about it.
Mr. Schine. Do you know Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, I do.
Mr. Schine. Were you at City College with him?
Mr. Hecker. No, I don't recall him from school. I have met
him socially a few occasions, since we have been out there.
Mr. Schine. You have met him socially recently?
Mr. Hecker. That is right.
Mr. Schine. Could you tell us the names of some of the
close friends of Ducore?
Mr. Hecker. Well, I believe that Jerome Coleman is a close
friend of his, and I am afraid I couldn't say anything, I don't
know him well enough.
Mr. Schine. Is he friendly with Coleman?
Mr. Hecker. I guess they were. They lived at the same
house.
Mr. Schine. By the way, have you given Mr. Coleman your
reply as to whether you will testify in his behalf at the
security hearing?
Mr. Hecker. Well, I told him I would, yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. You will testify he is a good security risk?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. You believe he is completely trustworthy to
handle the highest secret projects?
Mr. Hecker. Yes, sir; I do.
Mr. Schine. You don't think he is involved with any
subversive activities or has been?
Mr. Hecker. No. I believe if there were the slightest doubt
of that, our association in the three years we lived together
was pretty close, and there is an old saying, you don't get to
know anybody until you live with them, and I did live with him,
and I am sure if there had been anything at all there,
something might have leaked out, and a chance remark or
anything like that.
Mr. Schine. And you don't recall a thing?
Mr. Hecker. I can honestly say I don't recall anything that
would even suggest it even remotely.
Mr. Schine. Was he fairly open about everything, and told
you stories about his life and his experiences?
Mr. Hecker. He wasn't secretive about anything, and he was
no mystery, and he was a sort of blunt individual.
Mr. Schine. Didn't you think it was rather odd that he was
so secretive about his attendance at these meetings with
Rosenberg, and some of those things until recently?
Mr. Hecker. Well, possibly, but it may be that he just
considered it a mistake he made while he was a rash youth and
he would rather not discuss it.
Mr. Schine. What did he read when you knew him, what kind
of books?
Mr. Hecker. That is one thing that I recall very definitely
about him, he did practically no recreational reading at all,
and he read technical books mainly, and studied quite
assiduously.
Mr. Schine. And does not the fact that he didn't reveal to
you until just recently after it came out in the papers certain
things about his associations with Rosenberg and Sobell,
doesn't this cast a little doubt on your complete confidence in
him as a security risk?
Mr. Hecker. Well, as I mentioned before, all he did really
reveal to me was his attendance at this one meeting.
Mr. Cohn. What were the circumstances of his going to that
meeting, did he tell you that?
Mr. Hecker. I don't recall any details. He mentioned it, he
mentioned that he had gone to this one meeting.
Mr. Cohn. Did he tell you that Julius Rosenberg had taken
him to the meeting?
Mr. Hecker. I guess he did, now that you mention it. Yes,
that is right, he mentioned that he had been hounded pretty
much by Rosenberg to try to get him to it and Rosenberg put it
in a manner, saying, ``Well, keep an open mind and go yourself
and see what you think of it,'' and he did.
Mr. Schine. If you were an open and blunt sort of in
individual, and he told you everything about his experiences,
wouldn't he have told you this during the few years you lived
together, even though in his opinion it had been a mistake?
Mr. Hecker. Well, it is hard for me to say.
Mr. Schine. If a man thought he made a mistake, but were
open and blunt and a perfectly loyal individual, wouldn't he
tell a close friend, ``I went to this meeting, and I thought it
was a sham,'' particularly since Rosenberg and Sobell were
tried and Rosenberg was executed? Wouldn't it be of interest to
you as a close friend?
Mr. Hecker. Oh, yes, but as I mentioned before, my close
contact with Coleman ended about the time, or about the end of
1941, and that was around the time when he had transferred down
to Evans Laboratory, and he moved down there further south
there to be closer to the lab.
Mr. Schine. You haven't seen him much since then?
Mr. Hecker. I have seen him sporadically, and I saw him--
well, we threw a farewell party for him when he went into the
marines.
Mr. Schine. Who was at that meeting?
Mr. Hecker. The ones I can recall definitely are the
fellows at the house at the time, and I honestly can't recall
who else might have been there.
Mr. Schine. And who is ``we,'' who is the other individual
you say, you said ``we have seen him sporadically.''
Mr. Hecker. I must have been using the editorial ``we.''
Mr. Schine. You threw a party for him?
Mr. Hecker. When I say ``we,'' I speak of the fellows in
the house, since he had been living with us.
Mr. Schine. Then you really haven't known him so well since
1941?
Mr. Hecker. That is right. I have been out of close contact
with him since that time.
Mr. Schine. Then would you testify that he is a safe
security risk even though you haven't been close to him for the
last eleven years?
Mr. Hecker. All he asked me to do is to testify as to what
I have known about him during that period, during which I knew
him, and he has not asked me to go any further than that.
Mr. Schine. Do you think it is possible that if he were
friendly to Rosenberg and Sobell after 1941, that he might
possibly have decided that their thinking was the best
thinking?
Mr. Hecker. If he were friendly with them after 1941, there
is a possibility of that, although, well, I feel I got to know
him well enough at the time to gain a pretty good insight to
his character, and my personal opinion is that people don't
change that radically, even over a period of ten years. Of
course, that is just my personal opinion.
Mr. Schine. What are the circumstances under which you have
seen him since 1941, in addition to this party that you
mentioned?
Mr. Hecker. I have run into him maybe once or twice at
Coles Laboratory, he apparently was working on a project before
his clearance was removed, which involved contact with some of
the people at Coles Laboratory. I just ran into him and spoke
to him briefly and that was all.
Mr. Schine. You have never seen him socially?
Mr. Hecker. There was one occasion, I believe, when I
visited the Teppers, and I believe he was there with his wife
and that was the only occasion I had seen him socially. That
was probably five years ago.
Mr. Schine. Has he kept up his social acquaintance with Mr.
Tepper?
Mr. Hecker. I don't know.
Mr. Schine. What about Mr. Cambridge?
Mr. Hecker. I don't know that either. Mr. Cambridge is no
longer in the area, he is working somewhere else.
Mr. Schine. Is he still working for the government?
Mr. Hecker. I believe he is, yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. What about Mr. Metzger, has he kept up his
social acquaintance with him?
Mr. Hecker. I doubt if he is still with the government. I
don't know it, and I don't know for certain.
Mr. Schine. Were you in the history or government class
with Sobell or Rosenberg?
Mr. Hecker. I don't recall whether I was.
Mr. Schine. Did you take public speaking with him?
Mr. Hecker. I don't know that either. I assume that I was
in classes with him, but which ones they were I don't know.
Mr. Schine. Can you recall the names of the professors that
might have been responsible for their indoctrination into the
Communist party?
Mr. Hecker. No, sir; I don't know.
Mr. Schine. Did you see Rosenberg socially very much during
those years?
Mr. Hecker. No, my contact was just seeing him at school,
that was all.
Mr. Schine. And had you eaten lunch together?
Mr. Hecker. Possibly there were occasions.
Mr. Schine. Do you recall the names of the individuals who
were with you when you ate lunch with him?
Mr. Hecker. That is hard to say.
Mr. Schine. You must have thought about it.
Mr. Hecker. Well, as I say, I am not even sure that I did
eat lunch with him, and I assume I probably did.
Mr. Schine. With Mr. Sobell?
Mr. Hecker. Primarily, because he was in the same class I
was in.
Mr. Schine. Have you been able to recall some of the names
of the people that were particularly friendly with Sobell?
Mr. Hecker. No, again I will have to say ``no'' to that.
Mr. Schine. When you ate lunch together, who was with you?
Mr. Hecker. It could have been practically anybody in the
class, actually, and I really don't recall anything like that.
As I say, I have ever since this thing broke, this has been a
thorn in my side, of course, having been a member the same
class and I have been trying to recall things about it.
Mr. Schine. When were you first approached by the Communist
party?
Mr. Hecker. When was I first approached by the Communist
party?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Hecker. I have never been approached by the Communist
party.
Mr. Schine. They never approached you, and asked you to
participate in their activities?
Mr. Hecker. No.
Mr. Cohn. Weren't you ever asked to go to the Young
Communist League meetings in City College?
Mr. Hecker. Not that I recall.
Mr. Carr. What is your home address?
Mr. Hecker. It is 273 Michael Avenue, and the telephone
number is Deal 1469W.
Mr. Cohn. We will let you know if we want you back.
[Whereupon a recess was taken at one o'clock, p.m., to
convene again at 2:30 p.m., the same day.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--Marcel Ullmann (1905-1992) testified
publicly on December 10, 1953. None of the other witnesses on
October 12, Morris Keiser (1896-1968), Seymour Rabinowitz,
Rudolph C. Riehs, or Carl Greenblum (1916-1997), testified in
public session. Greenblum, however, returned to executive
session on October 16, 1953.]
----------
MONDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met at 2:30 p.m., pursuant to recess, in
room 1402 of the Federal Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
(chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Francis Carr,
staff director; G. David Schine, chief consultant; Daniel G.
Buckley, assistant counsel.
The Chairman. In this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir, I do.
TESTIMONY OF MARCEL Ullmann
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Ullmann, will you give us your full name? You
gave us that this morning. Give it to us again.
Mr. Ullmann. Marcel Ullmann.
Mr. Cohn. Will you spell your last name?
Mr. Ullmann. U-l-l-m-a-n-n.
Mr. Cohn. You know you are entitled to counsel if you care
to have counsel.
Mr. Ullmann. Well, let us proceed, and if I feel that I
might have one, I will tell you.
Mr. Cohn. Now, Mr. Ullmann, where do you work right now?
Mr. Ullmann. I work for L. Bamberger & Company, a
department store in Newark, and I do television repair work.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time have you been
working there?
Mr. Ullmann. Some two years.
The Chairman. Let the record show that the witness has been
notified that he has the right to have counsel if he cares to,
and he says he would rather proceed now, and I understand if
the time arrives when you think you need counsel, you will then
ask for an adjournment so you can employ counsel.
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. At any time you feel you want a lawyer, tell
us and we will give you the necessary adjournment.
Mr. Ullmann. Thank you.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you work before that?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, we have the record, as I stated this
morning. I can tell you to the best of my ability, and I gave
it to you this morning. That is, before I worked for
Bambergers, I worked for, I believe, the Metropolitan
Television Company in Brooklyn; and before that I worked for
the government.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you work for the government?
Mr. Ullmann. At the final place at the time of my dismissal
was at the Watson Laboratories, I believe it is Eatontown.
Mr. Cohn. By what branch of the government were you then
employed?
Mr. Ullmann. It was the air force.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time did you work for
the air force?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, roughly for the period--well, let us
see. I would say two years, and in other words, from the period
that the air force took jurisdiction of Watson Laboratories,
and a number of personnel were transferred in bulk from the
Signal Corps to the Watson Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. Now, was there ever a time when you worked for
the Army Signal Corps at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Ullmann. That was the time.
Mr. Cohn. During what years?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, I will say again to the best of my
recollection, I was given an appointment just prior to Pearl
Harbor; I would say it was probably December 1, 1941.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time were you in the
Army Signal Corps at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Ullmann. Again, I repeat, to the best of my knowledge I
was at Fort Monmouth, at the post there--originally I was
assigned to the post, and I was there roughly three years, I
would say, and then I was transferred to the Signal
Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. What laboratories?
Mr. Ullmann. The Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever work at Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Ullmann. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have access to any classified material
when you were there?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir, I did.
Mr. Cohn. Now, Mr. Ullmann, when you were employed by the
Army Signal Corps and working at Evans Laboratory, did you
organize a Communist party unit known as the Shore Unit?
Mr. Ullmann. As to that, I am afraid I shall have to invoke
the Fifth. I would like to go on record that I should like to
cooperate in every way possible. I consider myself a loyal
American, and I have no interest in any other nation but our
own; but under the circumstances of my discharge and the things
subsequent thereof, I feel that anything I may do, even though
it may be well intentioned, may possibly incriminate me in some
manner or form. So I am reluctant to invoke the Fifth, but I
feel that I must protect myself.
The Chairman. You feel if you answer that question honestly
it might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Ullmann. I imagine it would, yes, because I have no
idea as to what ramifications may involve.
The Chairman. The only ramification is: Did you organize a
Communist cell? If you did not organize a Communist cell, it
would not incriminate you to tell us you did not. If you did
organize one, the answer might well tend to incriminate you,
especially if espionage were involved. So I understand your
answer is that if you told us the truth, that answer might tend
to incriminate you.
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, inasmuch as, again from my understanding
and mind you I am a layman and I am merely a technician, but I
understand it has been a wide variation in interpretations of
what constitutes Communists, and Communist cells and
activities, and I say that therefore, inasmuch as there is
discrepancies of that type, I must invoke the Fifth Amendment
to protect myself.
The Chairman. Did you visit a lawyer before you came here
today?
Mr. Ullmann. No, I did not.
The Chairman. You did not talk to a lawyer?
Mr. Ullmann. I haven't had a chance.
The Chairman. Just: Did you talk to a lawyer?
Mr. Ullmann. No, I did not.
The Chairman. Did you talk to a lawyer since you were first
contacted by my staff?
Mr. Ullmann. I did not.
The Chairman. Did any legal advisers in the military
discuss your testimony with you?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. Just so there is no question about this, then
I understand that you have not consulted a lawyer, either in
the military or out of the military, either a civilian lawyer
or any legal officer in the military?
Mr. Ullmann. That is correct, not up to now. I may have to.
The Chairman. Not up to this point, you have not discussed
it?
Mr. Ullmann. That is right.
The Chairman. Has anyone advised you that you should invoke
the Fifth Amendment?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did anyone in the military discuss your
testimony with you?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. There was no one in the military
establishment who has discussed with you the question of what
you have testified to?
Mr. Ullmann. That is right, sir. I had no contact with
anyone in the military service.
The Chairman. Has any member of the Communist party advised
or discussed with you the testimony you will give today?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. You say ``no''?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Are you a member of the Communist party
today?
Mr. Ullmann. I must invoke the Fifth, naturally.
The Chairman. Were you a member of the Communist party at
all times that you worked in the Signal Corps and had access to
top secret material?
Mr. Ullmann. Again, I repeat inasmuch as a wide
interpretation exists, I must invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. Have you ever indulged in espionage?
Mr. Ullmann. Again I must invoke the Fifth, naturally.
The Chairman. Have you stolen--have you removed secret
material from Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Ullmann. Again, I must invoke the Fifth, naturally.
The Chairman. Have you turned over secret documents--just a
moment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you take some documents given to you by a man
named Bernard Martin and give them to the representative of the
Communist party?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man named Bernard Martin?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Bernard Martin
who is known as Bob Martin?
Mr. Ullmann. I must invoke the Fifth.
Mr. Cohn. Isn't it a fact you worked with this man Martin
at the Signal Corps?
Mr. Ullmann. I must invoke the Fifth.
Mr. Cohn. Isn't it a fact that this man Martin gave you
certain secret documents bearing on radar which you then turned
over to the Communist party?
Mr. Ullmann. I must invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. When did you last work for the government?
Mr. Ullmann. I say the papers are not available to me, but
if I recall----
The Chairman. When did you last work for the government? I
cannot hear you.
Mr. Ullmann. The paper is not available to me, and I
believe that it was April or March of 1948.
The Chairman. Did you quit or were you fired?
Mr. Ullmann. I told you I was suspended.
The Chairman. On what ground?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, I was charged with--again I can't recall
the wording, but basically it was that I was sympathetic to the
Communist movement.
The Chairman. After you were suspended----
Mr. Cohn. Were you suspended by the Signal Corps or the air
force?
Mr. Ullmann. It was by the air force.
Mr. Cohn. From the Signal Corps you went over to the air
force laboratory, from the Signal Corps laboratory, right next
door, right near by?
Mr. Ullmann. It was a complete transfer, from one section,
from the Signal Corps labs at Camp Evans to the air force in
Eatontown.
Mr. Cohn. You were suspended by the air force?
Mr. Ullmann. That is right, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You were not suspended by the Signal Corps?
Mr. Ullmann. The Signal Corps had no jurisdiction at the
time.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, no charges were brought against
you all of the time you were with the Signal Corps?
Mr. Ullmann. That is right, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When you were working for the Signal Corps, did
you work with a man named Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Ullmann. Again I must invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to answer the question.
There is no Fifth Amendment involved. People who worked with
you are a matter of record.
Mr. Ullmann. I mean the thing is, again----
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer the question.
Mr. Ullmann. May I inquire, inasmuch as I have no counsel,
that if I should answer that, would it jeopardize my standing
under the Fifth?
The Chairman. I am not going to advise you as to the law.
If you want a lawyer you can have one here, and I am ordering
you to answer the question.
Mr. Ullmann. I would like to answer it, except that I don't
want to jeopardize my standing here, and I would be only too
glad to if I wouldn't jeopardize my standing.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer it. Do you refuse,
or do you want to answer it?
Mr. Ullmann. Then, may I seek counsel, if that is the case?
The Chairman. You may.
Mr. Ullmann. Because I would like to go ahead.
The Chairman. You may get counsel if you want to. You will
be relieved of the responsibility of answering as of this
moment because of your request to have counsel.
Roy, do you want to ask further questions and see if he
wants counsel on those or not?
Mr. Ullmann, Mr. Cohn has a number of other questions to
ask you, and he will proceed to ask those questions. If you
would rather not answer those until you have counsel here, you
may.
Mr. Ullmann. I will be glad to cooperate as far as
possible, sir.
Mr. Schine. You knew Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Ullmann. I answered that this morning, sir. Well,
again----
Mr. Cohn. You are under oath now, and we want you to answer
that.
Mr. Ullmann. Well, I invoke the Fifth, sir.
Mr. Schine. You knew Morton Sobell?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. Did you ever engage in espionage with either
Rosenberg or Sobell?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. Did you ever give Rosenberg or Sobell
classified material?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know Rosenberg was an espionage agent
when you knew him?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Did vou know Sobell was an espionage agent
when you knew him?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Did you visit at Rosenberg's home?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. Did you visit at Sobell's home?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Do you consider Rosenberg a traitor?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Do you consider Sobell a traitor?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. Do you prefer the Communist system to ours?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. Have you, to your own knowledge, worked in
the interest of international communism?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. Where are you working now?
Mr. Ullmann. I work for Bamberger & Company, in Newark.
The Chairman. What kind of work is that?
Mr. Ullmann. A department store.
The Chairman. In the television section?
Mr. Ullmann. That is right.
The Chairman. Are you married?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. What was your wife's name before you were
married?
Mr. Ullmann. Her name was Jane Horowitz.
The Chairman. When did you get married?
Mr. Ullmann. In Brooklyn, in 1941.
The Chairman. Was your wife a Communist before you married
her?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Is your wife a Communist as of today?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. Was your wife an espionage agent?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. You understand that you are entitled only to
invoke the Fifth Amendment if you feel that a truthful answer
would tend to incriminate you; and if you invoke the Fifth
Amendment, should you feel a truthful answer would not
incriminate you, you are in contempt of the committee.
Mr. Ullmann. I do.
The Chairman. When you say you invoke the Fifth, in each
instance, you are informing the committee that you feel that if
you were to tell us the truth, that truthful answer might tend
to incriminate you. Is that correct?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How many children do you have?
Mr. Ullmann. Two.
The Chairman. What are their names?
Mr. Ullmann. Well I have three actually. The oldest is
Rhoda.
The Chairman. Is she married?
Mr. Ullmann. No. She will be nine in about two weeks.
The Chairman. How old is the other one?
Mr. Ullmann. Six.
The Chairman. What is that one's name?
Mr. Ullmann. His name is Irwin.
The Chairman. How about the third one?
Mr. Ullmann. That is Marjorie, two years old.
The Chairman. You first said you had two children, and then
you said you had three, and I do not quite follow you. You must
know how many children you have.
Mr. Ullmann. Because the baby happens to be very ill, and
we have her at a home, and so we have adopted a technique of
saying we have two, since there are only two at home. You see,
the third is incurably ill.
The Chairman. Were you married before?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. How old are you?
Mr. Ullmann. Forty-seven.
The Chairman. Aside from working for the Signal Corps and
the air force, did you hold any other jobs in government?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir, except those I specified and stated.
The Chairman. You said except those you specified. Did you
work for the government at all except the air force and the
Signal Corps?
Mr. Ullmann. That is right, the post was still Signal
Corps. Signal Corps and air force; you are right, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know Alger Hiss?
Mr. Ullmann. I must invoke the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. You feel if you told us the truth as to
whether you knew Alger Hiss, it would tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You understand, of course, that means to us
you know Alger Hiss.
Mr. Ullmann. It may be, sir, and I say these things are
subject to interpretations of which I have no control or
knowledge, and no way to protect myself.
The Chairman. Do you know Owen Lattimore?
Mr. Ullmann. Again I must invoke the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any Communist cell
meetings with Owen Lattimore?
Mr. Ullmann. I must invoke the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Do you know Dean Acheson?
Mr. Ullmann. I must invoke the Fifth, sir. You flatter me,
sir.
The Chairman. I am not flattering you. This is no joke,
mister. The question is: Do you know Dean Acheson?
Mr. Ullmann. And the answer is, sir, that I invoke the
Fifth.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer the question.
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir, and I invoke the Fifth.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer the question.
Mr. Ullmann. And I must take that up with counsel, too.
The Chairman. You want to talk to your lawyer before you
will tell us about your connections with Acheson, is that
correct?
Mr. Ullmann. Before I can answer that question, yes, sir.
The Chairman. You are entitled to that privilege.
That is all. You will consider yourself under subpoena, and
you want to get a lawyer?
Mr. Ullmann. I would like to.
The Chairman. How much time do you want?
Mr. Ullmann. I don't know.
The Chairman. How much time do you want?
Mr. Ullmann. What is customary in these things?
The Chairman. We try and give the witness, whether he is a
Communist or a spy or not, as much time as he thinks he needs.
We will try and give you that privilege. How much time do you
want?
Mr. Ullmann. May I contact your office when I can make
contact?
The Chairman. You may tell us now how much time you want.
Mr. Ullmann. May I have two days?
The Chairman. You are entitled to that. You will have two
days, and you will return two days from now. We will make it
Thursday morning at ten o'clock.
Have you been giving the FBI any information?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. You have not given them any information?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. Do you think that perhaps you should give the
FBI information as to Communists you knew?
Mr. Ullmann. I invoke the Fifth there, sir.
The Chairman. That is all.
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Keiser. I do.
TESTIMONY OF MORRIS KEISER
Mr. Cohn. Will you give your full name?
Mr. Keiser. Morris Keiser.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you work?
Mr. Keiser. Fort Monmouth, Evans City Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. You have access to classified information?
Mr. Keiser. Oh, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Now, do you own a camera?
Mr. Keiser. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What kind?
Mr. Keiser. I own two, I own one Contax, and one pre-war
Monitor.
Mr. Cohn. How large are these cameras?
Mr. Keiser. One is the Retina, the small one, and one is
about that size, and the other one is about that size.
The Chairman. Would you just for the record tell us about
how large?
Mr. Keiser. The Monitor is about seven inches, by five by
about two. And the Retina I would say is about five, and three
and a half, by one and three-quarters.
Mr. Cohn. Of course, you are not allowed to bring cameras
into the laboratory?
Mr. Keiser. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever?
Mr. Keiser. No, not to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. You have no cameras in addition to those two?
Mr. Keiser. No.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever owned a Minnox camera?
Mr. Keiser. I had one. I borrowed it for a while from the
photographic branch, just as a curiosity, and I don't know
where they get them, but they had quite a few.
Mr. Cohn. Is it a fact that you had that camera in the
laboratory?
Mr. Keiser. I cannot recall, just a curiosity, it belonged
to the photographic branch of the laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. Did you take any pictures?
Mr. Keiser. No.
Mr. Cohn. You never used it?
Mr. Keiser. No, I just had it, there was no film and no
magazines available, and it was just a curiosity.
Mr. Cohn. Why did you borrow the camera?
Mr. Keiser. Just as a curiosity.
Mr. Cohn. I don't know what you mean by as a curiosity.
Mr. Keiser. I knew the man in the photographic branch and
we have contact with them occasionally, and they do work for
us, and they had one, and I looked at it and I asked him
whether I could borrow it and I did. I never took any pictures
with it, there were no films, or no film magazine or anything
of that kind.
Mr. Cohn. You said it was just a curiosity, and you just
wanted to look at it?
Mr. Keiser. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time did you keep it?
Mr. Keiser. It is hard to tell, maybe a week or something
of that sort.
Mr. Cohn. Did you take it home with you?
Mr. Keiser. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You had it in the office and then you took it
home?
Mr. Keiser. I may have had it in the office.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you get it?
Mr. Keiser. I got it from the photographic branch.
Mr. Cohn. At the office?
Mr. Keiser. They were at Fort Monmouth, my office is at the
Evans Signal Laboratory, but I happened to be down there and
they showed me some of the things they had captured during the
war, and that was one of them, and I asked whether I could
borrow it for a while.
Mr. Cohn. Your testimony is that you took no pictures at
all?
Mr. Keiser. There was no film.
Mr. Cohn. You never have had either of your other two
cameras in the laboratory?
Mr. Keiser. No, that is forbidden.
Mr. Cohn. What is your job there?
Mr. Keiser. I am chief of the Countermeasures Branch at the
Evans Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Keiser. Only as somebody around and I never had any
direct professional dealings with him, and the only contact I
had with him in a conference was some years ago when the ORO,
operations and research people made an evaluation of the
project he was working on, and they talked about the
application of it.
Mr. Cohn. Highly classified work is done at the Evans
Signal Laboratory?
Mr. Keiser. My personal clearance is top secret and ``Q.''
Mr. Cohn. If somebody gave papers to which he obtained
access to work in the Evans Signal Laboratory to the enemy,
would that be of assistance to the enemy?
Mr. Keiser. I don't quite get it.
Mr. Cohn. If someone took some of these papers dealing with
the work you do and gave it to the Russians, would that be of
help to them?
Mr. Keiser. Oh, I should say so, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. The work deals with radar and defense?
Mr. Keiser. My work covers the whole field of
countermeasures, and generally the mission is the development
of equipment and methods to counter enemy equipment and we are
responsible for all of those means and methods and equipment
used on the ground, and of course the air force has the air and
the navy has the water.
Mr. Cohn. It includes guided missiles?
Mr. Keiser. In guided missiles, mind you, we do not develop
means of guidance, but in connection with the guided missiles,
our responsibility had been until recently when they organized
a new army set-up, the measurement and determination of the
susceptibility of those missiles to enemy counter-measures, and
then we provide what they call anti-jam information to the
people who develop the equipment.
Mr. Cohn. All of this is very sensitive information?
Mr. Keiser. Oh, yes, and most of our work is highly
classified.
The Chairman. What would the photographic section be doing
with this particular camera? What use would they have for it?
Mr. Keiser. It was a collection of stuff captured during
the war, and they had some German lenses and they had a show
and this was on display.
The Chairman. That is the type of camera that would be very
handy for anyone either working in espionage or counter
espionage?
Mr. Keiser. Oh, yes, and I think that the FBI used it, and
also the OSS.
The Chairman. How large is that camera?
Mr. Keiser. If I remember rightly, it was about a little
longer than my thumb and maybe about an inch wide, and about
half an inch thick.
Mr. Cohn. That is a small camera?
Mr. Keiser. Yes.
The Chairman. Now, Mr. Keiser, I know nothing about you,
and this is the first time I have seen you here today, and one
of the reasons why the staff called you, and I am emphasizing
``one,'' is that other witnesses testified that you had a
Minote camera in your possession, and testified that you showed
it to them, and one witness has testified that to the best of
his knowledge you used that camera, and now the fact he
testified to that does not mean that we are taking his word for
it at all. You understand that.
Mr. Keiser. I never used it. It was just a curiosity and it
wasn't secret and I showed it to people who happened to be
around, and I would have probably taken some pictures
experimentally but there was no film or any magazine reels
available for it.
The Chairman. Do you have reason to suspect that anyone out
at the laboratory was or is either a member of the Communist
party or engaged in espionage?
Mr. Keiser. No, not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. You had no reason to suspect anyone?
Mr. Keiser. No reason.
The Chairman. You think that there are no Communists or
espionage agents over there?
Mr. Keiser. I don't know.
The Chairman. You are in very important work?
Mr. Keiser. I am.
The Chairman. You are working with these people.
Mr. Keiser. That is right.
The Chairman. I am not trying to trap you in any way, and I
just want to get your thought on it. Do you feel that there are
no either Communists or espionage agents over there?
Mr. Keiser. I don't know. All I can speak about is from my
own group, and that is I organized this particular group back
in 1950, in February of 1950, and because the work was so
highly classified, probably the highest classified work in the
laboratory, I made it a point on every key position, and
perhaps lower down, to check with Andrew Reed to find out
whether the man had security clearance or was eligible for it,
and I wouldn't hire anybody, I couldn't mix that up in my
business.
The Chairman. Who is Andrew Reed?
Mr. Keiser. Andy Reed is the intelligence agent at Fort
Monmouth.
The Chairman. I believe you said you knew Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Keiser. I knew him around and as I said, the direct
contact was only in that meeting. However, I have some people
who will contact that group since we do have a responsibility
for anti-jamming.
The Chairman. Did you know that Coleman had been suspended?
Did you know in 1946 a government intelligence agent found
secret material in Coleman's apartment?
Mr. Keiser. I heard of that, yes, sir.
The Chairman. When did you hear of that?
Mr. Keiser. Just rumor, that they had found stuff.
The Chairman. Was it after we started this investigation?
Mr. Keiser. That was a long time ago,
The Chairman. Would you have jurisdiction in that
particular case?
Mr. Keiser. No, none whatsoever. He was in the radar
branch, and the anti-aircraft.
Mr. Cohn. Was he in a sensitive position?
Mr. Keiser. It is hard to say. I don't think that the
position is as sensitive as mine.
Mr. Cohn. Was it very sensitive?
Mr. Keiser. It was considered I think secret, and I don't
know what the classification is now, now that the thing is
developed and they are going to trials soon, I imagine it is
down to restricted, and I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. What do you think it would have been in 1946 or
1947?
Mr. Keiser. In 1946 it might have been higher
classification because it was the beginning of the thing, and
they were developing the methods and means and you keep that
under cover.
The Chairman. If there were espionage agents in your
department, or over at Fort Monmouth, and the Signal Corps, and
if they were passing information on to the Communists, would
you think that that would be a very serious threat to the
security of the nation?
Mr. Keiser. It would be, if the people were highly skilled
and if they could gather a considerable amount of information
on one subject. Because most of the work, the thing is systems
work, and that is the elements themselves might be of a lower
order of classification because they are applied, but the
combination of the elements in a complete system, it would be a
very serious thing. But as I said, it would require a lot of
information, and somebody quite skilled.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Keiser, wasn't it in 1949 or 1950 that you
borrowed that camera?
Mr. Keiser. It might be along about there.
Mr. Schine. Just when these cameras were being imported.
Mr. Keiser. I don't think these particular ones. They were
on display in a group of equipment and apparently had been
captured and it was on display in the photographic branch.
Mr. Schine. Wouldn't it have been possible for someone else
to borrow that same camera?
Mr. Keiser. I don't know, probably. I am not sure.
Mr. Schine. And it probably would have been possible for
this individual to get the camera into his section with no more
trouble than you had getting it into your section?
Mr. Keiser. I doubt it. I doubt whether any Tom, Dick, or
Harry could do it. I have been around there an awful long time
and certainly I don't think anyone would think that I would
mis-use it.
Mr. Schine. But you had no trouble in getting it into your
shop?
Mr. Keiser. Well, I don't know quite what you mean. It was
open and above-board. This was somebody, whoever gave it to me,
and I don't recall exactly who was in charge at the time. I
think it was a man named Sidney Weinrib, and I knew him, and as
a matter of fact during the war I had charge of the gun
location work and Weinrib himself was my alter ego at the
chief's office, and he did the staff work and I met him there,
and I knew him throughout the war.
Mr. Schine. What was the penalty for having a camera in
your office at that time?
Mr. Keiser. I am not sure that I had that in my office. I
had it at home, but I am not sure that I had it there, and I
don't think that I did.
Mr. Schine. May I ask you, did you show the camera to a Dr.
Daniels in your office?
Mr. Keiser. If I brought it into the office, it would have
been likely that I did, because Dr. Daniels is an expert optics
man.
Mr. Schine. He testified that you did show it to him.
Mr. Keiser. Then I think it is correct, if he testified.
This was laboratory property, and it wasn't a private camera.
Mr. Cohn. If you could go in and get a camera and have it
in the laboratory, it might have been possible for someone else
to do the same thing.
Mr. Keiser. I wouldn't know. I doubt it.
Mr. Cohn. You did it.
Mr. Keiser. I was in a pretty big position, and people knew
me.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Coleman was in a pretty big position.
Mr. Keiser. I don't know whether Mr. Coleman would have had
access to it or not, all I can say is that people knew me and
it was a curiosity.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think they knew Coleman too? He worked
there for thirteen years.
Mr. Keiser. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. He was grade 14, and he received ten thousand
dollars a year.
Mr. Keiser. I can't testify to that. He was quite a dynamic
person, and apparently did a very good job at this 4-14-A, the
aircraft defense system.
Mr. Cohn. Would you say he had a pretty complete general
knowledge of it?
Mr. Keiser. Of the system itself, I think--I don't know--
but as I understand, he actually promoted the thing and
developed it and so on. He was the bellwether.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know that he had been taken to Young
Communist League meetings by Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Keiser. I wouldn't know that, and I think these people
are much younger than I am, and I don't meet them socially or
don't have anything to do with them on the outside.
Mr. Schine. What was the penalty for having a camera in
one's office?
Mr. Keiser. I don't know--a private camera, I don't know
what it is. It is just prohibited.
Mr. Schine. The thing I am trying to establish is that even
though it was prohibited to have a camera, it was possible.
Mr. Keiser. This was a laboratory camera, and there are
cameras in the re-production branch that we can borrow for our
work all of the time, and we take pictures of scope phases all
of the time in order to record certain phenomenon, and you can
point it at something else, and I don't see that you have got
to have that in connection with your work.
The Chairman. Let me ask you, Mr. Keiser, and in this
connection I want to say that your name will not be given to
anyone outside of this room unless you give it to them
yourself.
Mr. Keiser. I would appreciate that, because I am afraid
the management would worry, and I have probably the most
sensitive job in the whole place.
The Chairman. The reason we keep all names completely
secret is because we know that many of the people we call here
are good, honest, loyal Americans, and we realize that if word
got out that they were called in an investigation of this
nature that there would be the impression that maybe they were
suspected of having done something improper. So your name will
not be given by anyone in this room, and we have the penalty of
contempt if anyone gives out your name and it has never been
done before. The only way your name will be given out is if you
do it yourself, and as you leave down here you may run into
some newsman. It is possible. We have no control over that, and
if you do just use your own judgment.
Mr. Keiser. I live in a house and I want to keep it clean.
The Chairman. I just want to impress upon you that if you
meet some newsman, you are under no obligation to talk to him,
and if they ask who you are, you can tell them anything you
want to. If you want to give your name, you can do it.
Mr. Keiser. I will refer them to the intelligence people,
or the public relations people at Fort Monmouth.
The Chairman. You can say you are just in the building on
some other business, you can do that. Your name will not be
made public. No one will know you are here, unless you tell
them unless it develops later that we want to call you in
public session. At the present time, it does not appear that we
will want you in public session.
Mr. Keiser. I will be perfectly willing to come whenever
you do it, and I would like you to do one thing. Since I am in
a sensitive position, and the lab is in the process of
reorganization, I would appreciate it very much if you could
give our commanding officer some indication of what your
findings are in respect to me.
The Chairman. Mr. Keiser, did anyone over in your
department over at Monmouth, either in the military or
otherwise, advise you not to give us certain information?
Mr. Keiser. No, they didn't tell me anything. They said you
have made this request, and would I go, and I said, ``Sure,''
and they didn't tell me how or why or anything else.
The Chairman. That is all that I have. I don't think that
we will need you any further at all. But in case we do, we will
contact you.
Mr. Keiser. May I say this session has been entirely
different from what some of the newspapers publish.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Do you solemnly swear in this matter in hearing before the
committee that you will tell the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I do.
TESTIMONY OF SEYMOUR RABINOWITZ
Mr. Schine. State your name, please?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Seymour Rabinowitz.
Mr. Schine. Would you spell it?
Mr. Rabinowitz. R-a-b-i-n-o-w-i-t-z.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Rabinowitz, what is your present
occupation?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I am an electronic engineer.
Mr. Schine. And you are employed at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Rabinowitz. In the Signal Corps Engineering
Laboratories.
Mr. Schine. What is your position there?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I am in the procurement maintenance
engineering division, as a field engineer.
Mr. Schine. What are your duties?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Well, fundamentally, they are in two parts.
One is our function of complex equipments to devices and test
procedures which were subsequently turned over to the
inspection organizations and to act as technical advisers to
them, and to do whatever we can to help solve production
problems.
Mr. Schine. This is classified work?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Is this in the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Rabinowitz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you worked there?
Mr. Rabinowitz. No.
Mr. Cohn. What laboratory do you work with?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I am with the procurement maintenance
engineering division.
Mr. Cohn. Do you work in any laboratory?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Well, this is a division of the Signal
Corps Engineering Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. Which engineering laboratory?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Well, there are three labs, and one
division, which is the procurement maintenance engineering
division.
Mr. Cohn. Now, your division would include all three of the
labs?
Mr. Rabinowitz. No, sir; our division, the procurement
maintenance engineering division is a division that has as its
prime, over-all function the procurement activities and the
maintenance activities.
Mr. Cohn. Have you had any access to classified
information?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have access to classified material now?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You do?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And let me ask you this: Do you know Aaron
Coleman?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I believe vaguely that he was in one of my
classes back in college.
Mr. Cohn. Is that in City College?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I don't recall ever knowing him.
Mr. Cohn. How about Morton Sobell?
Mr. Rabinowitz. The same would apply there.
Mr. Cohn. And William Muterperl?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Muterperl's name is familiar, but I would
like to comment on that. At the time of this mess, the FBI
asked me if I could shed any light, or if I could tell them
something about certain individuals, and they showed me the
series of pictures and asked me if I could identify them, and
shed any light on their activities, and although at the time
none of them particularly seemed familiar, naturally they were
pretty well impressed upon me because of the seriousness of the
situation.
Mr. Cohn. Did you recognize any of those pictures?
Mr. Rabinowitz. At the time, no.
Mr. Cohn. Have you since then placed them?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Not particularly, although the names are
perhaps a little more familiar. As I told the FBI man at the
time, if he gave me pictures at the time I went to school, I
might be better able to identify them.
Mr. Cohn. Have you known any of them out at Monmouth?
Mr. Rabinowitz. No.
Mr. Cohn. How long have you been there?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I have been with the Signal Corps
Engineering Lab since early 1952.
Mr. Cohn. Just since 1952, is that right?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever with them before that?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I was at the Signal Corps before, but not
at the laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. Where?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I was with the procurement district in
Philadelphia, and I was an officer in the Signal Corps.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man named Joseph Levitsky?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Not particularly.
Mr. Cohn. Does the name ring a bell?
Mr. Rabinowitz. None that I can recall particularly, off-
hand.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Coleman?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I remember Coleman's name more than I
remember Coleman.
Mr. Cohn. Have you known him out at Monmouth?
Mr. Rabinowitz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you known Harold Ducore?
Mr. Rabinowitz. In approximately the last year, Ducore
became head of a section which had the development cognizance
over some of the projects I was working on, in production.
Mr. Cohn. How about this section Ducore headed? Did they
have access to classified material?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I would say so.
Mr. Cohn. Was it a sensitive job?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Well, is there a Department of Defense man
present? I was told that there would be and I could ask if I
could make certain statements.
The Chairman. The secretary of the army will be here
starting tomorrow morning, but he is not here this afternoon.
Mr. Rabinowitz. I don't believe it would be revealing
anything, however.
Mr. Cohn. Speak in general terms.
Mr. Rabinowitz. He is head of one of the major sections.
Mr. Cohn. We have his job file and job description here,
and it does involve very sensitive work?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I would imagine so.
Mr. Cohn. Work that, say, if the enemy knew of it, it would
be of considerable assistance to them?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I would presume so.
Mr. Cohn. I have nothing further.
The Chairman. I hope you realize that the mere asking you
of these questions does not indicate that we have any feeling
on it one way or the other, and we always ask witnesses these
questions when they are handling secret work. Are you now or
have you ever been a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Absolutely not.
The Chairman. To your knowledge, did you ever join or
belong to any organization listed by the attorney general as a
front for the Communist party?
Mr. Rabinowitz. To my knowledge, absolutely not.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Rabinowitz, have you ever borrowed a camera
from the photographic section in conjunction with your work?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I don't believe so.
Mr. Schine. If you wanted to take some pictures in
conjunction with your work, wouldn't you ask somebody from the
photographic section to come over and do it?
Mr. Rabinowitz. Well, sir, I have never had occasion to
have pictures taken, and so I really wouldn't know.
Mr. Schine. It is forbidden to have cameras in the office?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I would presume so.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever seen a camera in there?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I guess I have, but I would say in general
they were lab cameras.
Mr. Schine. Usually this work is done by the photographers
from the photographic division?
Mr. Rabinowitz. I wouldn't want to say of my own knowledge,
because this is a development lab, and ours is a production
lab, and I am not too familiar with precisely their
functioning. That is other than as I come in contact with it.
The Chairman. May I say, Mr. Rabinowitz, the fact you were
called here does not indicate that the committee or the staff
thinks that you have done anything improper, and we are merely
trying to get a complete picture of the operation. We have some
extremely disturbing evidence of espionage out there, but that
does not mean that every witness called is suspected even
remotely of having anything to do with it. But we have to call
the various people in the department to get a picture of what
is going on.
Now, we have a hard and fast rule here that your name will
not be given to the press and not be given to anyone else
unless you give it yourself, and the reason for that is that if
we were to give your name out, even though you might be here as
a completely cooperative witness there would be the suspicion
on the part of some of your co-workers that you were called
here because of some improper conduct.
When you leave here, there may be members of the press out
at the door. We never know. And if they contact you, you can
tell them you did testify or did not or you can say you were in
the building for some other purpose, or if you want to you have
a perfect right to say you were a cooperative witness and give
them any information you desire. As far as we are concerned, we
don't give your name.
I may say that I don't think that we will want this witness
back.
Mr. Cohn. I have no present intention.
Mr. Rabinowitz. I might make one suggestion. This has
naturally disturbed me, and as you can imagine, these remarks
are passed around quite freely, particularly people from City
College who were there about the same time as the Rosenbergs
and so on. So I guess I am anxious for this mess to be cleared
up as anyone.
This is strictly an impression of mine, and it is nothing
that I could ever get on the witness stand and swear to,
because it is just an impression, and nothing more than that.
When the FBI people showed me these pictures, and I was frankly
amazed because it had always been my impression that the
Communist activities at the college, and of course there was
always a noisy nucleus, were not in the engineering school, and
so it was quite a shock to hear or have implied that there were
some. At the same time I felt like saying to the FBI that if I
were in their position looking for a nucleus, I would look
essentially in the social sciences group, because it is just an
impression that the noisy groups were generally in that class.
I couldn't say anything positive, and I could never swear that
any particular party was, but it is just an impression.
The Chairman. If you want your commanding officer to call
Mr. Carr or Mr. Cohn, they will be glad to give them a resume
of what has been asked you, and the secretary of the army is
going to attend all sessions starting tomorrow morning, and he
will have a copy of your testimony.
The reason I say that is because if your commanding officer
knows you have been called, he may be very curious to know what
you were questioned about, and if you want him to get a resume,
Mr. Cohn or Mr. Carr will do that.
Mr. Rabinowitz. Mr. Sullivan asked me to send him a note,
or shall I give him a note?
The Chairman. You are absolutely free to give the
commanding officer a complete resume.
Raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear in the matter
now in hearing before this committee you will tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Riehs. I do.
TESTIMONY OF RUDOLPH C. RIEHS
Mr. Schine. What is your full name?
Mr. Riehs. Rudolph C. Riehs. R-i-e-h-s.
Mr. Schine. What is your present occupation?
Mr. Riehs. Electrical engineer.
Mr. Schine. What are your duties there?
Mr. Riehs. I am an assistant to the chief of the Radio
Communications Branch of the Coles Signal Laboratory. I am on
the sort of technical staff.
Mr. Schine. What does this work entail?
Mr. Riehs. Primarily I handle the program planning, as
plans and programs, preparing the budget, budget estimates,
justifications for the budgets, writing up proposals for new
projects, and things of that sort.
Mr. Schine. This involves classified work?
Mr. Riehs. That is right.
Mr. Schine. Are you cleared for security?
Mr. Riehs. Yes, I have clearance through secret at the
laboratories.
Mr. Schine. And you attended City College?
Mr. Riehs. That is right.
Mr. Schine. In what years?
Mr. Riehs. From 1932 to 1936 during the day, and from 1936
to 1938, the early part of 1938 in the evenings.
Mr. Schine. And you knew Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Riehs. No, I did not.
Mr. Schine. Or Morton Sobell?
Mr. Riehs. No.
Mr. Schine. You never saw them or talked to them or knew
them socially or otherwise?
Mr. Riehs. No.
Mr. Schine. Some of your classmates at City College are
currently employed at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Riehs. I believe so, and well, within a year or two, I
know that--either a year ahead or so or a year after.
Mr. Schine. Would you give us the names of those
individuals.
Mr. Riehs. The only ones, I am not certain of all of them,
but Mr. Hecker I believe is a City College graduate, and he was
here earlier today, and I can't remember the others at the
moment, but there were probably six or eight of the people I
worked with who are City College graduates up there.
The Chairman. I am going to ask you a question, and I want
you to understand the fact that we ask this question and it
does not mean that we have an opinion in the matter at all. It
is merely a question we ask of all witnesses who appear before
the committee, and who are doing any classified work.
Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Riehs. No.
The Chairman. Have you ever attended any Communist party
meetings?
Mr. Riehs. No.
The Chairman. Have you ever been solicited to join the
party?
Mr. Riehs. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever join any organization which was
then or was subsequently listed by the attorney general as a
front for the Communist party?
Mr. Riehs. No, I never have, I belong to very few, and the
only ones are technical societies and church and so on.
The Chairman. I have no further questions. And may I say,
Mr. Riehs, I know the impression of most witnesses when they
are called before a Senate committee is that they are suspected
of some wrong-doing, which is completely fallacious assumption.
It is in order to get a complete picture of the operations of
any organization and we start an investigation and we must call
many people who are good, loyal Americans. So the fact that you
are called here is no reflection upon you at all.
However, we have the practice of not giving names of any
witnesses to the public because of the fact that so many people
think that if someone appears before our committee he is
suspected of wrong-doing and the only way that your name will
be known and the only way anyone knows that you have appeared
before the committee is that you tell them yourself.
Mr. Riehs. Is this secret, and nothing is to be divulged?
The Chairman. Except that if you want to examine your
testimony you will have a chance to see it, and, number two,
the secretary of the army has asked that we give him a copy of
all of the testimony taken. But other than that, it will not be
published at all.
You will most likely be met on the way out with some
members of the press, and you may tell them anything you like.
You can tell them you testified or did not testify, if you
want, or you can tell them you were in the building on some
other business.
I may say if your commanding officer or your boss out there
is disturbed by the fact that you were called, if he thinks
that is a reflection on you, you can have him call our staff.
Mr. Riehs. I think they are aware of it. I came down
through the intelligence people up there, and the only thing he
asked me was if I could say anything he would like to know what
happened.
The Chairman. You can give him a full report.
Mr. Riehs. All right, sir. Thank you.
The Chairman. In this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Greenblum. I do.
TESTIMONY OF CARL GREENBLUM
Mr. Schine. Give your full name, please.
Mr. Greenblum. Carl Greenblum, C-a-r-l, G-r-e-e-n-b-l-u-m.
Mr. Schine. And your current occupation?
Mr. Greenblum. I am in the electronic engineering at Fort
Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. What is your work?
Mr. Greenblum. I am connected with research and development
of electronics.
Mr. Schine. This is classified?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And you are cleared for it?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Secret work?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Where did you get your college education?
Mr. Greenblum. At CCNY.
Mr. Schine. While you were at CCNY, you knew Morton Sobell?
Mr. Greenblum. Very vaguely.
Mr. Schine. You were in his class as a matter of fact?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't recall, but I could well have been.
Mr. Schine. You knew him around the school?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. You also knew Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenblum. The same way.
Mr. Schine. And you saw them after you left college on a
number of occasions?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Will you give us the occasions?
Mr. Greenblum. Rosenberg was employed at the Signal Corps
Inspection Agency, and I think I saw him on one or two
occasions at the office there.
Mr. Schine. What were his duties there?
Mr. Greenblum. He was an inspector.
Mr. Schine. What was the year?
Mr. Greenblum. What is that?
Mr. Schine. What was the year that he was employed there?
Mr. Greenblum. I think this was 1940, 1941, or 1942.
Mr. Schine. Would you describe what an inspector did, as
such?
Mr. Greenblum. He would check for conformance to government
specifications, material which was procured by the government.
Mr. Schine. Some of this was classified work?
Mr. Greenblum. Some of it was, yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. In other words he was cleared for secret work?
Mr. Greenblum. I didn't know that.
Mr. Schine. He would have to be to do this work, wouldn't
he?
Mr. Greenblum. I guess so, yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And the other occasions on which you came in
contact with Rosenberg and Sobell after you left college, would
you outline those for us, please?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, I think that I mentioned the ones with
Rosenberg; and with Sobell, when I went to work at Fort
Monmouth, Evans Signal Laboratory, I was employed or I was
directed in the capacity of a project engineer, to go to Reeves
Instrument Corporation, and I went there on a contract which we
had, and he happened to be sitting in the same room with the
engineer who was project engineer on our work.
I nodded my head at him, and this was the social or
contact.
Mr. Schine. He was employed by the company?
Mr. Greenblum. By the Reeves Instrument Company, yes, sir.
The Chairman. In college, you merely knew him as you would
know any other student in college, is that correct?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes; less so, I mean.
The Chairman. And the next time you saw him was when you
went to some project--and I missed the description of it. What
project was that?
Mr. Greenblum. This was a project which was being worked on
by the Reeves Instrument Company, and while I was visiting
there I saw him at the company, and he was not working on this
project.
The Chairman. He was in the engineer's office?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Do you know if he was working there, or was
he just in there as an engineer, visiting as an engineer? Did
he have a desk there?
Mr. Greenblum. He had a desk, yes, sir.
The Chairman. Who was the chief engineer there at that
time, do you know offhand?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't know, sir.
The Chairman. This was what year?
Mr. Greenblum. This was, I think, in 1949.
Mr. Schine. You were telling us that you saw Sobell and
nodded to him when he came to meet with some of the people at
Fort Monmouth in conjunction with his work for the Reeves
Company
Mr. Greenblum. No, I never met him at Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Schine. Where was it that you did meet him?
Mr. Greenblum. At the Reeves plant.
Mr. Schine. And what was the nature of this relationship
between the Reeves Company, for which Sobell worked, and Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, I am not familiar with it.
Mr. Schine. In general terms.
Mr. Greenblum. We had a contract with the Reeves Company,
and they had at the time about eight project engineers. Now the
contract that they had with my section was supervised by a
project engineer by the name of Perry Seay, and he was the man
that I went to see. That was the only time that I ever met
Sobell after I had gone to school.
Mr. Schine., Would you spell that name, Perry----
Mr. Greenblum. S-e-a-y.
Mr. Schine. And what was Sobell's job with the Reeves
Company?
Mr. Greenblum. I believe it was as a project engineer.
Mr. Schine. And he worked with Seay?
Mr. Greenblum. No. As I understand it, they were on a
parallel level, or on the same level, but they handled
different jobs.
Mr. Schine. Is Seay the individual who dealt with Sobell?
Mr. Greenblum. No. Seay was the individual who was the
project engineer on the contract for Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Schine. Then who hired the Reeves Company and dealt
with Sobell?
Mr. Greenblum. The Reeves Instrument Company had contracts
with the government to supply it with apparatus.
Mr. Schine. Somebody had to initiate these contracts and
somebody dealt with Sobell. Could you give us the name of that
individual?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't know who dealt with Sobell at all.
Mr. Cohn. Who did Sobell go to see when you saw Sobell out
at Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. I never saw Sobell out at Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know that he had been out at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. No, I didn't.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know him?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir. Aaron Coleman was the chief of the
section of which I am an engineer.
Mr. Cohn. What section is that?
Mr. Greenblum. The system section.
Mr. Cohn. Is there any classified work in that section?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Is it highly classified work in that section over
the years?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, there is secret work in there, yes.
Mr. Cohn. That deals with the broad terms; that deals with
radar and antiaircraft defense?
Mr. Greenblum. In broad terms, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And I assume information classified secret, if
given to the enemy, would be of value to the enemy; is that
right?
Mr. Greenblum. I believe so, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, have you known Mr. Coleman socially?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
Mr. Cohn. Not at all?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, no. I was over at the house once, in
the five years I was down there.
Mr. Cohn. Who was present at his home?
Mr. Greenblum. Mr. Bookbinder, Benjamin Bookbinder.
Mr. Cohn. And who else?
Mr. Greenblum. That is all.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Coleman knew Mr. Sobell?
Mr. Greenblum. No, I didn't.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Sobell had stayed at Mr.
Coleman's home down at Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Schine. Getting back to the meeting at Reeves where you
saw Sobell, could you tell us the names of the individuals who
were there?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, Perry Seay; there was a man by the
name of Friedman.
Mr. Schine. Do you know his first name?
Mr. Greenblum. Larry Friedman, and he at present works for
the Belloch Instrument Company, and I might mention Harry
Belloch was at that time vice president in charge of Reeves.
Mr. Schine. What did Mr. Friedman do at that time?
Mr. Greenblum. He was a mechanical engineer.
Mr. Schine. For Reeves?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. And who else was at that meeting?
Mr. Greenblum. I want to point out, this was not a meeting
in the sense of a meeting, but there were eight desks in this
room, and I went to see Mr. Friedman and Mr. Seay, and so he
was over there, and I just nodded to him.
Mr. Schine. When you met Mr. Rosenberg, what was the nature
of your conversation with him, when you ran into him when he
was an inspector at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. Just practically nodding heads, and I never
knew him more than to acknowledge him.
Mr. Schine. Did you know any of his friends at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
Mr. Schine. Do you know the names of any of the people with
whom he associated at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir, I don't. My relationship was merely
a nodding of the head.
Mr. Schine. Had you ever seen him walk around Fort Monmouth
with any particular individuals?
Mr. Greenblum. Now wait a minute. I would like to say
something. I never saw Rosenberg at Fort Monmouth. I had seen
him at the Signal Corps inspection agency, which is a
completely different thing.
Mr. Cohn. What was Rosenberg doing? What was the nature of
his duties as far as you could tell?
Mr. Greenblum. As a Signal Corps inspector, you mean?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Greenblum. Well, he would check equipment for
compliance with specifications.
Mr. Cohn. Would he have access to any classified material
in the course of those duties? Would he be apt to come across
any?
Mr. Greenblum. There were all kinds of contracts. Some of
them were classified.
The Chairman. He was inspecting radar equipment and various
types of equipment to make sure that it conformed to the
specifications?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And I assume that the specifications for the
various equipment was generally classified?
Mr. Greenblum. Some of them were, and some of them weren't.
If you would be inspecting a small piece, it wouldn't be
classified, and if you were inspecting an important piece of
equipment, it could be.
The Chairman. Did you ever visit at Rosenberg's home?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did he ever visit your home?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. And did you ever visit Sobell's home?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. Nor he at yours?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever or were you ever solicited by
anyone to join either the Communist party or the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. I am not asking whether you ever joined, and
the question was: Were you ever solicited or asked to join?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any meetings, either of
the Communist party or the Young Communist League?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any reason to feel that
there might be Communists or espionage agents working over in
the Signal Corps at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir, I didn't.
The Chairman. Did you visit in Aaron Coleman's place more
than once?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. I think that you covered this, but I was
talking to one of the investigators at the time. Was that a
dinner party, or just a case of stopping in to say hello, or
what was the occasion of it?
Mr. Greenblum. He asked Bookbinder over and myself, and we
came in the evening.
The Chairman. Is Bookbinder still with the Signal Corps?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. What is his first name?
Mr. Greenblum. Benjamin.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any reason to believe that
Coleman was either a Communist or an espionage agent?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. Had you heard he had been suspended at one
time?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. That was in 1946?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't know, sir. I came to work at Evans
Signal Laboratory in December of 1948.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss his suspension with him?
Mr. Greenblum. No, I didn't.
The Chairman. When you attended the City College, did you
ever attend any meetings with either Rosenberg or Sobell?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. I am not sure you have answered this
question, but did you ever join any organization which was then
listed or subsequently listed by the attorney general as a
front for the Communist party?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. Before you came here to testify, and after
you were called by the staff, did anyone at the Fort Monmouth
base discuss with you your testimony?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. I ask you this question not because it would
be improper, you have a perfect right to do that, but merely
for information.
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
The Chairman. Your answer is that you did not?
Mr. Greenblum. That is right.
Mr. Schine . I have one other question. Where was it that
you saw Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenblum. At the office of the Signal Corps Inspection
Agency.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, this was in the New York Port of
Embarkation in Brooklyn. Inspectors would show up there on
Saturday mornings.
Mr. Schine. Did you visit there very often?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir; only when you didn't have an
assignment.
Mr. Schine. When you visited this place, did you notice any
particular individual who associated with Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Or had lunch with him?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Did you have lunch with him?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir; I did not.
Mr. Schine. Did you talk with him at all?
Mr. Cohn. When did you see Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenblum. This may have been 1940.
The Chairman. I thought that you said you didn't start to
work until 1948?
Mr. Greenblum. You see, I went to work at Fort Monmouth in
1948.
Mr. Cohn. But you had been working with the Signal Corps?
Mr. Greenblum. This is the Signal Corps Inspection Agency,
yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Benjamin Bookbinder--what is his job over there.
He is at Monmouth now?
Mr. Greenblum. He is an engineer.
Mr. Carr. Is he at the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Mr. Greenblum, may I just for your
information tell you that the fact that a witness is called
here does not indicate that this committee or the staff thinks
that he did or did not do anything improper. We are going into
this matter of alleged espionage at the Signal Corps, and in
doing so we will call many good loyal Americans here to get
some information from them, and so the fact that you were
called does not or should not be any reflection upon you or any
other witness.
Our job is not to either clear a witness or vice versa, but
our job is to get information.
In view of the fact that some people might think that the
mere calling of a witness would indicate that he was doing
something improper, we have a hard and fast rule that the names
of no witnesses called in secret session are given out. Your
name will not be given to the press or given to anyone else
unless you give it yourself. You are at perfect liberty to tell
your commanding officer and your superior exactly what went on
here today, if you care to.
You are excused from the subpoena, and I don't think that
we will want this witness any further.
[Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4:00 p.m.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--Joseph Levitsky (1913-1978) testified in a
public hearing on November 24, 1953. Louis Kaplan testified on
December 17, 1954. William Ludwig Ullman (1910-1990), Bernard
Martin, Harry Donohue, Jack Frolow, Bernard Lewis (1917-1978),
and Craig Crenshaw, did not testify in public.]
----------
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met at 10:30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in
room 2804 of the Federal Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
(chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Francis Carr,
staff director; G. David Schine, chief consultant; Daniel G.
Buckley, assistant counsel.
Present also: Hon. Robert T. Stevens, secretary of the
army; and John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
Department of the Army.
The Chairman. In this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Levitsky. I do.
TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH LEVITSKY (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
LEONARD BOUDIN)
Mr. Cohn. Can we get the name of counsel?
Mr. Boudin. Leonard Boudin, B-o-u-d-i-n, 76 Beaver Street,
New York.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Boudin has appeared before the committee, and
I assume is fully conversant with the rules.
Your name is what?
Mr. Levitsky. Joseph Levitsky.
Mr. Cohn. L-e-v-i-t-s-k-y?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. What is your address?
Mr. Levitsky. 65 Rutgers Place, River Edge, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. River Edge, New Jersey?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Levitsky, what do you do at the present time?
Mr. Levitsky. I am an engineer.
Mr. Cohn. You are an engineer?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Are you a graduate engineer?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. What school?
Mr. Levitsky. Cooper Union.
Mr. Cohn. In what year?
Mr. Levitsky. 1935.
Mr. Cohn. Have you worked in the United States Signal
Corps, Army Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. In what year?
Mr. Levitsky. '40 to '43.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you stationed?
Mr. Levitsky. I was working out of two offices of the
Signal Corps; that is, Signal Corps offices had moved during
the war.
Mr. Cohn. Would you give us some of the locations?
Mr. Levitsky. I was stationed at RCA, at Bendix, at Philco
for a short time, and a lot of small plants for very short
durations.
Mr. Cohn. What was the nature of your duties with the
Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. I was inspecting government material at the
plants where they were being manufactured.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever come in contact with any classified
material?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You did?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Levitsky, during the time you were with the
Army Signal Corps in contact with this classified material,
were you a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment in answering that
question.
Mr. Cohn. You refuse to answer on the ground the answer
might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Levitsky, at the time you were with the Army
Signal Corps, were you engaged in espionage against the United
States?
Mr. Levitsky. I certainly was not.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever engaged in espionage against the
United States?
Mr. Levitsky. No, I certainly was not.
Mr. Cohn. Did you appear before a federal grand jury in
this district at any time?
Mr. Boudin. Objection.
Senator, may I say the objection, as I understand the
proceeding before the grand jury, even the appearance, under
the federal rules of criminal procedure and the Constitution,
are not a matter that a congressional committee can go into. I
think that there are several decisions on the subject involving
the sanctity of the grand jury's proceedings.
Mr. Cohn. I would like to know one decision that says
appearance before the grand jury--it is a public record.
Mr. Boudin. That is of no value unless you intend to ask
something regarding the subject matter. Under the decision of
Judge Winfield in this district, as you know from your own
experience, that question is improper.
Mr. Cohn. You mean the district court?
Mr. Boudin. Yes, and he made the only decision in this
district or any other district on that subject, dealing with a
case in which you made a presentment or you handled a
presentment of a grand jury, and that was held to be improper.
The Chairman. The question was: Did you ever appear before
a grand jury, and I think that is a proper question and the
witness will be ordered to answer.
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, I did.
The Chairman. You asked the witness whether he has ever
engaged in espionage against the United States, and I would
suggest you reframe that question and ask him if he was ever
engaged in espionage, and then go down to the document
question.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever engaged in espionage?
Mr. Levitsky. I have already answered that question, I
believe.
Mr. Cohn. It is being asked again.
Mr. Levitsky. I said no.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever take any papers or documents at any
time when you were working with the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. What does that mean, did I ever take any
documents?
Mr. Cohn. You can consult with counsel any time you wish.
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. The question is: Did you ever, in an unauthorized
manner, take any documents while you were working with the
United States Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. Take them where?
The Chairman. Out of the building in which they were
located. Do you understand the question? Did you ever take any
classified documents out of the place where they were properly
located?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I do not know the meaning of the question.
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I was upon occasion sent out from where I
worked to places where equipment was located in the field, and
on those occasions I probably did take some classified
information with me in order to help me work on this equipment
in the field.
Mr. Cohn. Were you authorized to remove that classified
material?
Mr. Levitsky. In those cases, as far as I know----
Mr. Cohn. My question was not applied to that. My question
applies to testimony concerning you, and what I want to know is
whether or not--let me ask you a preliminary question. Were you
ever stationed down in Philadelphia?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What were you doing down in Philadelphia, with
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. What I was doing at Philadelphia?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Levitsky. I was stationed at RCA.
Mr. Cohn. Assigned to inspection for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. The question now is--I will make this specific.
While you were in Philadelphia, did you remove certain
classified documents and give them to a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my recollection, I never did.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever give any documents of any nature to
a member of the Communist party while you were with the Army
Signal Corps?
Mr. Boudin. Could the question be repeated?
Mr. Cohn. Read the question.
[The question was read by the reporter.]
Mr. Boudin. Could I ask a clarifying question?
The Chairman. No. If the witness cannot understand it, he
can ask for it to be clarified.
I will say that we have a rule that counsel does not take
part in the proceedings, as we get long-winded counsel who will
delay the proceedings a great deal. I am not accusing you of
being long-winded, but we have a rule that applies to all
counsel.
If the witness cannot understand the question, he can ask
to have it repeated.
Mr. Levitsky. I never gave any documents of any nature in
violation of regulations.
The Chairman. The question is: Did you ever give any
documents to the Communist party while you were working for the
Signal Corps? It is a very simple question.
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Cohn. What is your answer?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Cohn. You refuse to answer the question?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. On the ground the answer might tend to
incriminate you?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Are you a member of the Communist party today?
Mr. Levitsky. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of the Communist party at all
times while you were employed by the Army Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment to that.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of the Communist party in 1943
when you left the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. Would you please repeat the question?
Mr. Cohn. Read the question.
[The question was read by the reporter.]
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment on that.
The Chairman. Did you ever engage in any illegal
activities, either on behalf of or in connection with or under
the instructions of the Communist party?
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. Not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Then you are ordered to answer counsel's
question. If you have not done anything illegal in connection
with the Communist party, you cannot plead the Fifth Amendment
on the counsel's question whether you were a member when you
left the Signal Corps. You are ordered to answer the question.
Mr. Levitsky. I stand on the Fifth Amendment in answer to
the other question.
The Chairman. To your knowledge, does the Communist party
advocate the overthrow of our government by force and violence?
Mr. Levitsky. The Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Boudin. I assume it is understood when the witness says
the Fifth Amendment, he means the constitutional privilege
against self-incrimination, and doesn't have to go through the
terminology.
The Chairman. Were you a member of the Communist party in
1944?
Mr. Levitsky. The Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. In 1945?
Mr. Levitsky. The Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. In 1946?
Mr. Levitsky. Fifth.
The Chairman. In 1947?
Mr. Levitsky. Fifth.
The Chairman. In 1948?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. Fifth.
The Chairman. 1949?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment on any question
of the past.
The Chairman. In 1950?
Mr. Levitsky. Fifth.
The Chairman. 1951?
Mr. Levitsky. Fifth.
The Chairman.1952?
Mr. Levitsky. Fifth.
The Chairman.1953?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that. As I stated
before, I am not a member today.
The Chairman. Were you a member of the Communist party when
you were called before the grand jury?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. Fifth.
The Chairman. Were you a member of the Communist party last
week?
Mr. Levitsky. Fifth.
The Chairman. You are refusing to tell us whether you were
a member of the Communist party last week on the ground that a
truthful answer to that question might tend to incriminate you,
is that correct?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
The Chairman. You understand, of course, that unless you
honestly feel that a truthful answer might tend to incriminate
you, you are not entitled to avail yourself of the privilege of
the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
The Chairman. Do you know any members of the Communist
party who are as of today working for the Signal Corps?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment on that.
The Chairman. Since you left the Signal Corps, have you
ever attended Communist party meetings which were also attended
by people who were working in the Signal Corps at that time?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment on that.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend meetings with members of
the Communist party where there was discussed the removal of
classified material from the Signal Corps and the turning of
that classified material over to the members of the Communist
party, or Communist espionage agents?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment to all questions
of attendance at Communist party meetings.
The Chairman. You will have to plead it to the specific
question. We do not allow any blanket use of the Fifth
Amendment. I understand you are refusing to answer that
question on the ground a truthful answer might tend to
incriminate you, is that correct?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Boudin. Could I have the senator repeat the last
question, because I got a little involved here in following it.
The Chairman. Will the reporter read the last question and
answer.
[The record was read by the reporter as requested.]
Mr. Boudin. I think the witness wants to consider that, and
could I have a moment, Senator?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Boudin. The witness would like to answer the question
if it could be repeated once more, if the senator will indulge
me.
[The question was reread by the reporter.]
Mr. Levitsky. No, I never attended such a meeting.
The Chairman. You never attended such a meeting?
Mr. Levitsky. No.
The Chairman. Did you understand the question before when
you refused to answer it? You just refused to answer that
question on the ground that a truthful answer night tend to
incriminate you, and did you not understand the question?
Mr. Levitsky. I didn't understand the full question, and I
changed my reply to that question.
The Chairman. You are changing it because you did not
understand the question?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
The Chairman. You have a right to change your answer if you
did not understand the question.
Did you ever hear anyone discuss the removal of classified
material from the Signal Corps and the turning of that material
over to persons who were not entitled to it?
Mr. Levitsky. No, I never did.
The Chairman. Did you know of anyone who removed classified
material from the Signal Corps without authorization?
Mr. Levitsky. No, I never did.
Mr. Cohn. In 1943, where did you go when you left the
Signal Corps? Where did you go when you left the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. You mean where I worked? The Federal
Telecommunication Labs.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time did you work for
the Federal Telecommunication Labs? How long did you work in
that lab?
Mr. Levitsky. From 1943 to 1953.
Mr. Cohn. Until this year?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Until what month of this year were you with the
Federal Telecommunication?
Mr. Levitsky. February.
Mr. Cohn. Was there any classified material around there?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, there was.
Mr. Cohn. And while you were working there up through
February of this year, were you a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Levitsky. I have already pleaded the Fifth on any
question regarding membership in the Communist party.
Mr. Cohn. What is your answer?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth.
Mr. Cohn. Now, can you name for us any other members of the
Communist party who were working at the Federal
Telecommunications Lab in February of this year?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Cohn. Did you attend Communist party meetings with any
of your follow employees at the Federal Telecommunications Lab?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth.
Mr. Cohn. Did you leave that laboratory voluntarily?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You resigned?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You did not leave it as a result of any loyalty
charges?
Mr. Levitsky. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were any charges brought against you when you
were with the Signal Corps?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. No charges were filed against me.
Mr. Cohn. I didn't get the last answer.
Mr. Levitsky. No charges were filed against me.
Mr. Cohn. No charges were brought against you by the Signal
Corps or when you were with the Federal Telecommunications
Company?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Where have you worked since February of 1953?
Mr. Levitsky. At the Telechron Corporation.
Mr. Cohn. Are you still employed there?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do they do any government work?
Mr. Levitsky. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Of no kind at all?
Mr. Levitsky. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. You have never worked on it, is that right?
Mr. Levitsky. I never worked on government work there.
The Chairman. What kind of work do you do?
Mr. Levitsky. I design components for television receivers
right now.
The Chairman. When you were working for Telecommunications,
who was your immediate boss?
Mr. Levitsky. The last one--there were quite a few.
The Chairman. The last one.
Mr. Levitsky. The most recent one, Sidney Metzger.
The Chairman. Did Sidney Metzger ever attend any Communist
party meetings, to your knowledge?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment on that question.
The Chairman. I want to inform you of something now which
you may or may not have known. We do not intend to allow people
to plead the Fifth Amendment for the purpose of unfairly
discrediting any other individual. If we ever get proof that
you knew of no Communist party meetings that Metzger attended,
that means that you are improperly pleading the Fifth Amendment
and it means you are in contempt of this committee. So that
unless you know of Communist party meetings that Metzger
attended, you are not entitled to plead the Fifth Amendment,
and that applies to anyone who asks you about it, because if
you know of no Communist party meeting he attended, it would
not incriminate you to tell us that; and we intend, before we
get through with some of you gentlemen, to teach you a little
more about the Fifth Amendment and let you know that you cannot
play with it, and I will ask you the question again so that you
will know the possibility of your pleading ignorance or a
mistake or did not understand the question, at some future
legal proceedings.
To your knowledge, did Metzger ever attend Communist party
meetings?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. All right, I have reconsidered my answer, and
the answer is no.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss the aims of communism
with Metzger?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. Not to my recollection.
The Chairman. Did Metzger know that you appeared before the
grand jury and did he know what you were questioned about
before the grand jury?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. Not to my knowledge, he didn't.
The Chairman. Did any of your immediate superiors in
Telecommunications, to your knowledge, ever attend meetings of
the Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. Not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Were any of your co-workers at
Telecommunications, to your knowledge, members of the Communist
party?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. Could you please repeat the question? I am
sorry.
The Chairman. Were any of your co-workers at
Telecommunications, to your knowledge, members of the Communist
party?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
The Chairman. To your knowledge, are there Communists still
working in Telecommunications?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Levitsky, you have been in contact since
you left the Signal Corps with people in the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. Just what do you mean by that?
Mr. Schine. Let me rephrase the question: Since you left
the Signal Corps, have you been in contact with people working
for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, I have.
Mr. Schine. Are any of these individuals members of the
Communist party?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. Could you please repeat the question?
Mr. Schine. Were any of these individuals members of the
Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my knowledge, they were not.
Mr. Schine. Would you give the committee the names of the
individuals with the Signal Corps that you have been in contact
with since you left the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. They are Markus Epstein----
Mr. Schine. When were you in contact with him?
Mr. Levitsky. When was the last time I saw him, you mean?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Levitsky. About a year or so ago.
Mr. Schine. Would you continue giving the names, please?
Mr. Levitsky. Carl Greenblum.
Mr. Schine. Spell the last name, please.
Mr. Levitsky. G-r-e-e-n-b-l-u-m.
Mr. Schine. When were you in contact with him?
Mr. Levitsky. I believe I last saw him about a year and a
half ago, or so, and I don't recall exactly.
Mr. Schine. And the other names of individuals you have
been in contact with?
Mr. Levitsky. Isadore Hodes, H-o-d-e-s.
The Chairman. May I ask, did you receive any classified
material from any of the individuals you have just named since
you left the Signal Corps?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. No, I haven't.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Levitsky, you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Will you give us the story on your meeting with
Julius Rosenberg?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I met him when I started working for the
Signal Corps in 1940.
Mr. Schine. He was an inspector at that time?
Mr. Levitsky. He was an inspector too, that is right. Then
I saw him several times at Fort Monmouth where I attended
training school for about a month, in that year.
Mr. Levitsky. You know him on a social basis, did you?
Mr. Levitsky. Well, I don't know what that means. When I
was at RCA, we shared the same car pool going back and forth
from Camden to Philadelphia.
Mr. Schine. Will you tell us the names of the other
individuals in that car pool?
Mr. Levitsky. There were Markus Epstein and Carl Greenblum.
Mr. Schine. And you saw him from time to time through the
years?
Mr. Levitsky. Just what do you mean by that?
Mr. Schine. You met Julius Rosenberg over the years after
you first knew him? When did you first meet Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Levitsky. I am pretty sure it was when I first went to
work for the Signal Corps.
Mr. Schine. And you met him from that time on, over the
years, on a number of occasions?
Mr. Levitsky. The last time I saw him was in 1943.
Mr. Schine. Did you attend Communist party meetings with
Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Schine. You knew Morton Sobell?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my knowledge, I didn't.
The Chairman. May I interrupt? How long did you share in
this car pool?
Mr. Levitsky. A period of about six months or so.
The Chairman. And you would ride back and forth how often?
Mr. Levitsky. Every day from Philadelphia to Camden.
The Chairman. And the other two men were Marcus Epstein and
Carl Greenblum?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
The Chairman. Did Greenblum and Epstein also ride every
day?
Mr. Levitsky. Not exactly. There was a period there when
people would leave the RCA and go somewhere else, and then they
would come back, and I do not recall.
Mr. Cohn. They comprised the core----
Mr. Levitsky. Those were the people, regular riders.
The Chairman. How many times would you say Markus Epstein
had ridden back and forth? I know you cannot remember the exact
number.
Mr. Levitsky. Maybe fifty times, maybe sixty times.
The Chairman. How about Greenblum, roughly the same?
Mr. Levitsky. Greenblum probably much less, because he left
RCA, I think--I am not sure of this, but I think he left RCA in
1940 sometime, and went on another job.
The Chairman. How many months would you say he shared in
that?
Mr. Levitsky. Perhaps two months; I am not sure of these
answers, now, and I don't recall the exact dates.
Mr. Cohn. To the best of your recollection?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
The Chairman. Did you know that either Rosenberg or Epstein
or Greenblum were members of the Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. The Fifth.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any Communist party
meetings with Greenblum?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss either communism or
espionage in those rides back and forth?
Mr. Levitsky. Would you please rephrase the question?
The Chairman. We will break up the two parts of the
question. There are two questions in one, I believe. The
question is: Did you ever discuss communism with Rosenberg,
Epstein and Greenblum while you were riding on these trips in
this car pool?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss with Rosenberg any
espionage work in which he was engaged?
Mr. Levitsky. No, I didn't.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss with either Epstein,
Greenblum, or Rosenberg, the removal of classified material
from either Signal Corps or any other government agency?
Mr. Levitsky. No, I didn't.
The Chairman. Did you know that Rosenberg was engaged in
espionage?
Mr. Levitsky. No, I didn't.
The Chairman. Did you know he was a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend a Communist party meeting
with Greenblum?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. You already asked that question, I believe.
The Chairman. I will ask it again, then.
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
The Chairman. How about Epstein?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
The Chairman. Is Greenblum still working in the Signal
Corps, to your knowledge?
Mr. Levitsky. I believe he is.
The Chairman. When have you last had contact with him? When
have you last talked to him or seen him?
Mr. Levitsky. I am not sure. I think it was about a year
ago, or so.
The Chairman. Did you talk to him since you or he were
notified to appear before this committee?
Mr. Levitsky. No.
The Chairman. You did not?
Mr. Levitsky. No.
The Chairman. You did not discuss your testimony with
Greenblum?
Mr. Levitsky. I beg your pardon.
The Chairman. You did not discuss your testimony with
Greenblum?
Mr. Levitsky. I did not discuss my testimony with
Greenblum? Which testimony are you talking about?
The Chairman. The testimony you were to give here.
Mr. Levitsky. No.
The Chairman. You asked me which testimony. Did you discuss
with Greenblum any testimony which you ever gave before a
committee or a grand jury?
Mr. Levitsky. No, I did not.
The Chairman. Did you ever visit the Rosenberg home? I am
speaking of Julius Rosenberg now.
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
The Chairman. Were you ever present in the Rosenberg home
when Greenblum was also present?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any social gatherings at
which both Rosenberg and Greenblum were present?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I do not recall any such gatherings; I am
sorry, I have to rephrase that.
The Chairman. You may rephrase your answer if you care to.
Mr. Levitsky. Could you please repeat that question?
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any social gatherings at
which both Greenblum and Rosenberg were present?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
The Chairman. Then you want us to strike your previous
answer and have this answer stand?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
The Chairman. Do you feel a truthful answer to that might
tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
The Chairman. As a matter of fact, didn't you and Greenblum
and Rosenberg and Epstein, when you were riding in this car, in
this pool back and forth, freely discuss your membership in the
Communist party, and did you not know that all three of the
other men were Communists? Is that not actually a fact?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Levitsky, is this Markus Epstein the same
Epstein that you gave as a reference when you took a position
with the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Schine. And this Carl Greenblum is the same Carl
Greenblum you gave as a reference when you took a position with
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. I beg your pardon, I did not give them any
references when I took a position with the Signal Corps. The
answer to both questions is no, I am sorry.
Mr. Schine. When did you give them as references?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't recall whom I gave as references a
long time ago.
Mr. Schine. May I refresh your memory? On March 28, 1942,
these two individuals were among references you gave, and what
was the occasion of this giving of references?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't recall giving references on that
particular date, on March 28, 1942.
Mr. Schine. Were you applying for a position around that
time?
Mr. Levitsky. No, to the best of my recollection I was not.
Just what do you have in mind? I don't understand.
Mr. Schine. And you say you did not give these references
when you applied for a position in the Signal Corps?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I was employed in the Signal Corps in 1942.
How could I apply for a position?
Mr. Schine. Did you give them as references for any
application for transfer or promotion or in connection with any
step involved in the promotion?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't recall. I may have, and I don't
recall any such references.
The Chairman. At the time you gave Greenblum as a
reference, did you know whether he was a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment on that.
Mr. Cohn. Did he know you were a member?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment on that.
Mr. Schine. Did you know that Bernard Klean was a member of
the Communist party when you gave him as a reference at the
same time?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Schine. What about Charles Gogolick?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Schine. And how about Isadore Hodes?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Schine. At the time you gave Mr. Hodes as a reference,
did you know he was a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Cohn. Do any of these three people whose names have
just been read to you work for the Signal Corps, Gogolick, and
so on, or did they at any time?
Mr. Levitsky. Hodes did.
Mr. Cohn. Does he work there today?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my knowledge, no.
Mr. Schine. What was his position with the Signal Corps?
Mr. Levitsky. The same position as mine.
The Chairman. Where does Hodes work now?
Mr. Levitsky. I beg your pardon?
The Chairman. Where does he work now?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't know.
The Chairman. When did you last see him?
Mr. Levitsky. About four or five years ago.
Mr. Cohn. What were the circumstances of your meeting with
Greenblum the last time you saw him about a year ago?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I visited at his house.
Mr. Cohn. You were at his house in New Jersey?
Mr. Levitsky. His house in New Jersey, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Where does he live in New Jersey?
Mr. Levitsky. Somewhere near Asbury Park.
Mr. Cohn. When were you last in communication with
Greenblum?
Mr. Levitsky. As I said, I don't recall exactly. Something
like a year ago.
Mr. Cohn. Have you talked to him directly or indirectly
since that time?
Mr. Levitsky. No.
Mr. Cohn. On the telephone?
Mr. Levitsky. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Corresponded with him?
Mr. Levitsky. No.
Mr. Cohn. What was the----
Mr. Levitsky. One correction. He sent me an announcement of
a birth of a child, which I did not answer.
Mr. Cohn. You say you did not answer. Is there any
particular reason for your not answering?
Mr. Levitsky. Just a slip.
Mr. Cohn. There has been no rift between you; it has just
been lack of attention?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Prior to that social call a year ago, when did
you see Greenblum before that?
Mr. Levitsky. Probably about a year before that.
Mr. Cohn. About a year before that?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Another social call?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Did Greenblum know at the time you were at his
home a year ago that you were a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth.
Mr. Cohn. Was he a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth.
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Schine. Mr. Levitsky, do you know a Bernard Martin,
known as Bob Martin?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my recollection, no.
Mr. Schine. Do you know a Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my knowledge, no.
Mr. Schine. Or Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my knowledge, no.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my knowledge, no.
The Chairman. Where did you go to college?
Mr. Levitsky. Cooper Union.
The Chairman. When did you graduate?
Mr. Levitsky. In 1935.
The Chairman. Is that an engineering college?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. I wanted to ask you this: You say there was no
loyalty feature whatsoever connected with your leaving this
Federal Telecommunications Lab?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Cohn. Interpret the question broadly on that.
Mr. Levitsky. I said I was not charged with anything.
Mr. Cohn. There seemed to be some consideration. Was there
any reservation in your mind on that question? Did it enter
into it in any way at all, and was there any discussion about
it?
Mr. Levitsky. I wish you would be a little more specific.
Mr. Cohn. I am trying to find out. I am trying to go into
the circumstances for your leaving, the reason, which has
nothing to do with you. I am trying to go into the
circumstances of your leaving. I want to know, was it a purely
voluntary resignation on your part, or did it have any
connection in any way with any charge of loyalty or security or
anything along those lines?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I was asked by my employer whether I had
known Rosenberg in the past.
Mr. Cohn. They were doing classified government work there,
was that right?
Mr. Levitsky. They were, but I was not. There was some
classified work being done there, but I was not doing
classified work.
Mr. Cohn. But it was done in the same vicinity in which you
worked?
The Chairman. Did you have access to classified material at
Telecommunications?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
The Chairman. If you wanted to steal the classified
material, you could?
Mr. Levitsky. Not very readily, no, I couldn't. There are
guards over there, and they examine what you took out.
The Chairman. If you put same classified material in your
inside pocket, would the guards go through your clothes and
check it?
Mr. Levitsky. It never occurred to me.
The Chairman. I am not asking you whether you ever did it.
I am asking you whether you could do it.
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I don't know. I never tried. I don't know if
I could get away with it.
The Chairman. Were you searched every night when you went
out?
Mr. Levitsky. No, I was not searched, but any handbag I had
was looked into.
The Chairman. How about your pockets?
Mr. Levitsky. No.
The Chairman. They never went through your pockets?
Mr. Levitsky. No.
The Chairman. So if you wanted to pick up classified
material, top secret material, and put it in your pocket, you
would not be searched for that?
Mr. Levitsky. I said I had some access to classified
material, and I did not have access to top secret material.
The Chairman. How about secret material?
Mr. Levitsky. No, I don't think I had any access to secret
material.
The Chairman. You do not think. Do you ever recall having
seen any secret material?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't recall ever having, that is, at
Federal.
The Chairman. Or confidential?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, confidential I did.
The Chairman. If you wanted to remove the confidential
material, you could have done so?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't know. I never tried.
The Chairman. Do you know whether there was anything to
prevent your picking up a confidential document and putting it
in your pocket?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't know that.
The Chairman. You know of nothing that would have prevented
you from doing that?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't know.
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I have no knowledge on the subject.
The Chairman. Pardon me?
Mr. Levitsky. I have no knowledge on the subject.
The Chairman. Do you have any knowledge of anything that
would have prevented you from stealing confidential material if
you wanted to? It is a very simple question. You were in the
plant, and I am asking you, was there anything to prevent you
from having stolen classified material if you wanted to steal
it?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't know.
The Chairman. You do not know?
Mr. Levitsky. I do not know if anything could have
prevented me from doing that or not.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Levitsky, you were nineteen years old in
1931?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Were you a member of the Communist party at
that time?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
The Chairman. Or the Young Communist League?
Mr. Levitsky. The Fifth Amendment on that.
Mr. Schine. You were born in Russia?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Schine. And you entered the United States through
Canada when you were ten years old?
Mr. Levitsky. That is right.
Mr. Schine. What is your father's name?
Mr. Levitsky. Moses.
Mr. Schine. Is he still living?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Where is your father now?
Mr. Levitsky. He is in Brooklyn.
Mr. Schine. In Brooklyn?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Did he enter the United States at the same time
you did?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes.
Mr. Schine. And you both became citizens around that time?
Mr. Levitsky. Well, a little later.
Mr. Schine. Is your father a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. [The witness consulted with his counsel.] To
the best of my knowledge, no.
Mr. Schine. Is any member of your family, any relative, a
member of the Communist party?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
Mr. Schine. Does any other member of your family besides
yourself work for the government or has any other member of
your family besides yourself worked for the United States
government?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. You mean immediate relative?
Mr. Schine. Any member of your family, relative, or in-
laws.
The Chairman. Do any of your brothers or sisters work for
the United States government?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Levitsky. I believe my brother for a short time had a
part-time job with the government.
The Chairman. Where did he work?
Mr. Levitsky. I believe it was somewhere around Ann Arbor.
The Chairman. For what branch of the government?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't know. I don't know what branch.
Mr. Schine. What is your brother's name?
Mr. Levitsky. Abraham Levitsky.
Mr. Schine. Is he a member of the Communist party or has he
ever been?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth on that.
The Chairman. Where does your brother live now?
Mr. Levitsky. He is in Ann Arbor.
The Chairman. Ann Arbor, Michigan?
Mr. Levitsky. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. What does he work at?
Mr. Levitsky. I don't know what he is working at the
moment.
The Chairman. When have you last seen him?
Mr. Levitsky. I saw him eight months ago.
The Chairman. What was he working at then?
Mr. Levitsky. He was working as a psychologist with some
hospital, and I don't know exactly what it was.
The Chairman. Was he teaching?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my recollection, no.
The Chairman. You say that aside from this one brother,
none of your other brothers or sisters have ever worked for the
government?
Mr. Levitsky. No. I am pretty sure they didn't.
The Chairman. How old is your family, your sons and
daughters, if any?
Mr. Levitsky. My daughter is five, and my son is one and a
half.
The Chairman. Has your wife ever worked for the government?
Mr. Levitsky. To the best of my recollection, no.
The Chairman. I think that that is all. You will consider
yourself under subpoena, Mr. Levitsky, and we will want you
back again. To save the staff the expense and trouble and save
you the trouble of being served, we will just notify your
counsel when you are wanted.
Mr. Boudin. That is all right.
The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, may I say that the next
appearance may possibly be in Washington, I do not know, and we
will try to accommodate the lawyers as much as we can so if you
are busy in court on the date he is called, we will contact you
through the staff and we will try and work it out.
Raise your right hand.
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Ullman. I do.
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM LUDWIG ULLMAN
Mr. Cohn. Could we have your full name?
Mr. Ullman. William Ludwig Ullman.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you reside?
Mr. Ullman. Harvey Cedars, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever worked for the United States
government?
Mr. Ullman. Yes, I have.
Mr. Cohn. Would you tell us briefly in what capacity?
Mr. Ullman. I worked in the Resettlement Administration,
and before that in the NRA, as a code examiner, and I worked at
the treasury in economics.
Mr. Cohn. You worked for the air force, too, did you not?
Mr. Ullman. And then I was in the army, and I worked for
the air force, and then back to the treasury.
Mr. Cohn. When you say you were in the army, you were in
the army or in the air force?
Mr. Ullman. I was in the air force.
Mr. Cohn. During what years?
Mr. Ullman. 1943 to 1945.
Mr. Cohn. And where were you stationed? In Washington?
Mr. Ullman. At Washington, except when I was at OCS.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go to OCS?
Mr. Ullman. Miami Beach.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what did you do in 1945 when you got out of
the air force?
Mr. Ullman. I went back to the Treasury Department.
Mr. Cohn. When you were in the air force, did you have any
connection with the air force laboratory in Eatontown, New
Jersey?
Mr. Ullman. Not that I know of.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever see any documents coming from the
air force laboratory, the Watson Laboratory at Eatontown, New
Jersey?
Mr. Ullman. To the best of my knowledge, I never did.
Mr. Cohn. And while you were with the air force, did you
ever see any documents dealing with radar?
Mr. Ullman. I may have seen some dealing with numbers.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see any dealing with--did you ever give
any such documents to any member of the Communist party?
Mr. Ullman. I refuse to answer that question.
Mr. Cohn. On what ground?
Mr. Ullman. On the grounds of the protection afforded me by
the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever engage--I will ask you
specifically--did you ever, with reference to these radar
documents, engage in espionage against the United States?
Mr. Ullman. I refuse to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Mr. Cohn. What was your rank when you left the air force?
Mr. Ullman. Major.
Mr. Cohn. You were a major, is that right?
Mr. Ullman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Who was your immediate superior?
Mr. Ullman. When I left the air force, I am not sure, but I
think it was Colonel Dyson.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell his name?
Mr. Ullman. D-y-s-o-n.
Mr. Cohn. Now, while you had access to classified material
you had access to classified information of various varieties,
did you not?
Mr. Ullman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. While you had access to this classified
information--and that includes these things I was asking you
about--were you a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Ullman. I refuse to answer that question on the same
grounds as stated before.
Mr. Cohn. Were you specifically a member of a Communist spy
ring?
Mr. Ullman. I refuse to answer that question on the same
grounds as stated before.
Mr. Cohn. What are you doing now, by the way?
Mr. Ullman. Building houses.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever visited the Signal Corps
installation at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Ullman. No.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know anybody who works there?
Mr. Ullman. To my best knowledge, I do not.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever known of anyone who worked there?
Mr. Ullman. To my best knowledge, I have not.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever known anyone who worked at the
Watson Laboratory at Eatontown?
Mr. Ullman. To my best knowledge, I have not.
The Chairman. Are you a member of the Communist party as of
today?
Mr. Ullman. I refuse to answer that question on the same
grounds.
The Chairman. Have you engaged in espionage within the past
year?
Mr. Ullman. I refuse to answer that question on the same
grounds as stated before.
The Chairman. Have you been associated, over the past two
months, with individuals known to you as members of the
Communist party, and also known as being engaged in espionage?
Mr. Ullman. I refuse to answer that question on the same
grounds as stated before.
The Chairman. Do you feel a truthful answer to that
question might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Ullman. Well, in my judgment, I refuse to answer that
question.
The Chairman. You will not be entitled to that protection
of the Fifth Amendment unless you feel that a truthful answer
might tend to incriminate you, so I will ask you the question:
Do you feel a truthful answer to that question would tend to
incriminate you? Just so you will understand the position of
the chair, Mr. Ullmann, you are entitled to the protection of
the Fifth Amendment, which protects you against incriminating
yourself, if you have engaged in criminal activities. You are
not entitled to refuse to answer, however, if perjury would
incriminate you, and therefore before we can determine whether
you are entitled to the privilege of the Fifth Amendment, I
must ask you the question: Do you feel that a truthful answer
would tend to incriminate you? I therefore ask you that
question.
Mr. Ullman. Well, that is a question of opinion. It is a
question of opinion in my mind, and to my best judgment I still
refuse to answer the question.
The Chairman. You refuse to answer whether you feel a
truthful answer would tend to incriminate, you?
Mr. Ullman. Yes.
The Chairman. Then you are ordered to answer the original
question.
Mr. Ullman. The original question?
The Chairman. You mean you are refusing to answer whether
you feel a truthful answer would tend to incriminate you, is
that correct?
Mr. Ullman. Well, I was still refusing to answer the
original question.
The Chairman. Just so the record will be completely clear,
I will re-ask you the question, both questions: During the past
two months, have you been associated with individuals known to
you as members of the Communist party and engaged in espionage?
What is your answer to that?
Mr. Ullman. Well, I feel I have to refuse to answer that
question on the grounds that it might tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Do you feel a truthful answer to that
question might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Ullman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Then you are entitled to the privilege. Did
you know Harry Dexter White when you worked in the treasury?
Mr. Ullman. Yes, I did.
The Chairman. Did Harry Dexter White get you your job, or
recommend you for the job in the treasury?
Mr. Ullman. I don't remember whether he did or not, I
worked in his division.
The Chairman. Did you know that he was an espionage agent
at that time?
Mr. Ullman. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds
it might tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Do you know Mr. Carl Greenblum?
Mr. Ullman. To my best knowledge, I do not.
The Chairman. Do you know Mr. Markus Epstein?
Mr. Ullman. To my best knowledge, I do not.
The Chairman. Did you know Mr. Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Ullman. To my best knowledge, I did not.
The Chairman. Did you know Joseph Levitsky?
Mr. Ullman. To my best knowledge, I do not.
The Chairman. I think that that is all.
Mr. Schine. I have a question. Do you know a Marcel
Ullmann?
Mr. Ullman. No.
Mr. Schine. He is no member of your family, or no member of
your family is named Marcel?
Mr. Ullman. No.
The Chairman. That will be all for the time being, and you
will consider yourself under subpoena and you will be notified
when you are wanted to return.
[Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., a recess was taken until 1:30
p.m. of the same day.]
after recess
[The hearing reconvened at 1:35 p.m.]
The Chairman. We will proceed.
Will you stand up and raise your right hand? In the matter
now before the committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you
God?
Mr. Martin. I do.
TESTIMONY OF BERNARD MARTIN
The Chairman. Give your full name, please.
Mr. Martin. Bernard Martin, M-a-r-t-i-n.
The Chairman. You understand, of course, that if you want
to have counsel you have the right to have a lawyer here, and
if you do you can consult him at any time. You understand that.
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You are commonly known as Bob Martin, is that
correct?
Mr. Martin. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Martin, have you been employed at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Martin. Yes, I have.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time?
Mr. Martin. I was originally employed at Fort Monmouth in
March of 1941. I went on military furlough in October of 1943,
and returned to Fort Monmouth in February of 1946, and
immediately transferred to the air force.
Mr. Cohn. To the air force?
Mr. Martin. That is correct, and stayed with the air force
until October of 1951. Correction, it was October of 1950, at
which time I transferred back again to the Signal Corps.
Mr. Cohn. Now, when you were at the air force, were you
there as a civilian?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you work at the Watson Laboratory?
Mr. Martin. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. When you went back, did you go back to Evans?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go?
Mr. Martin. To the Electronic Warfare Center at Monmouth
proper.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have access to classified material?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; I did.
Mr. Cohn. Your present status is you have been suspended?
Mr. Martin. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. That was about ten days ago?
Mr. Martin. About two weeks.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Martin, do you know a man by the name of
Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Martin. I have met him, yes, sir; in the course of
work.
Mr. Cohn. What were the circumstances of your having met
Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Martin. Mr. Ullmann was an engineer at the Watson
Laboratories, and I first met him at Wright Field in July of
1946. I must go back a little bit to explain my position at
Wright Field. When I returned to the air force from military
furlough in 1946, I was immediately sent to Wright Field on
temporary duty to assist the intelligence division there in
some work. I was out there in connection with that work for a
period of approximately five months. At the end of that time,
the intelligence division at Wright Field put on a captured
electronics equipment symposium. It was not confined to
electronics, it was a captured equipment symposium, and I was
one of the men that helped set up the equipment and gather
information for that symposium.
Mr. Ullmann came out there as one of the official
representatives of Watson Laboratories, one of three men, I
believe. I met him there at that time.
Subsequent to that, several weeks after that, I returned to
Watson Laboratories and assumed specific duties on the staff of
the engineering division. Mr. Ullmann was as I have indicated
an employee, an engineer at Watson Laboratories, and I did have
certain official contact with him at that time, which was
fairly heavy initially. It dwindled rather steadily until late
in 1947 or early in 1948, and it was practically over.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever ask you for any classified documents?
Mr. Martin. I rather imagine that he did, sir. Many men in
the organization received classified documents through me.
Mr. Cohn. Well, now, do you specifically recall having
given any to Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Martin. Well, certainly many documents were sent to his
office from my office covered by a receipt system through the
mails system.
Mr. Cohn. You have a specific recollection of that?
Mr. Martin. Not a specific document, but a number of
documents.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever give to Mr. Ullmann any documents
which you were not authorized to give to him?
Mr. Martin. None that I know of, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this: When you were suspended, you
were presented with a letter of charges by Colonel Sullivan?
Mr. Martin. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Just give us the substance of that.
Mr. Martin. The first charge was that I was a member of the
American Veterans Committee, Eastern Monmouth County Chapter.
The second charge was that I did not take a positive anti-
Communist stand at a meeting specifically, a meeting which was
discussed in February of 1947. The third charge was the Ullmann
matter, and that is in which it was stated that I gave him
information which he did not require in the course of his work.
The fourth charge was that my father had registered as an
affiliate of the American Labor party here in New York from
1917 through 1941.
Mr. Cohn. With reference to this third charge, is it a fact
that you did give to Mr. Ullmann information to which he was
not entitled?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; to the best of my knowledge that is
not true.
Mr. Cohn. You say that is not true?
Mr. Martin. That is not true.
Mr. Cohn. What documents do you recall having given to Mr.
Ullmann. Were you working for him?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; I was on the staff of the engineering
division and Mr. Ullmann was employed as an engineer in the
field trial laboratories, which is one of the operating
branches of the engineering division.
Mr. Cohn. You had a pretty good idea just what his duties
were, did you not?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And as to what he would be entitled to and as to
what he would not?
Mr. Martin. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Is it your testimony that you do not recall
having given him anything to which he was not entitled?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; that is correct, and we have also, as
you undoubtedly are aware, the Civil Service Commission once
brought this matter up, with the same charge, along with the
AVC charge. At that time, we discussed in considerable detail
my association with Ullmann, and this is the point I would like
to make at this time, the fact that when the charge was first
presented to me I spent a good deal of time visiting the Watson
Laboratories Group, which has since moved as you probably know
to the Griffiths Air Force Base up in Rome. No one from the
chief engineer or the chief of the engineering division on down
through the number of operating officials to whom I spoke, had
any recollection of any such event.
Furthermore, it developed at the hearing, or at least the
inference was drawn at that hearing, that the source of the
statement regarding Ullmann was a man who was my supervisor at
the time it was supposed to have taken place.
Mr. Cohn. What was his name?
Mr. Martin. Franklin T. Vansant. I have no guarantee that
that is correct, I have no documentary evidence of that.
The Chairman. Could I interrupt you? Were you ever
solicited to join the Communist party?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
The Chairman. Never?
Mr. Martin. Not to my knowledge, that I know of, sir.
The Chairman. Were you ever asked to attend a Communist
meeting?
Mr. Martin. Not that I know of, sir.
The Chairman. You would know, wouldn't you?
Mr. Martin. I would think so if it was presented that way,
if it was completely shrouded in something else I might not
have known.
The Chairman. Were you ever asked to attend what you
considered a Communist meeting? I am not asking you whether you
went. I am asking you whether you were ever invited.
Mr. Martin. I have no recollection of any such thing.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any close friends who
attended Communist meetings?
Mr. Martin. None to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever know a Communist?
Mr. Martin. Well, apparently Ullmann for example was a
Communist, and I did know Ullmann, but there was no one that I
ever consciously associated with whom I knew to be a Communist,
and now at the American Veterans Committee there were several
men who specifically admitted being Communists, but they were
not personnel with whom I associated at any time.
Mr. Cohn. Were any of those persons employed at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Martin. At the present time, no, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Were any of them employed there in the past?
Mr. Martin. Mr. Sockel, who was one of the group whom we
considered to be certainly sympathetic----
Mr. Cohn. What was his full name?
Mr. Martin. Albert Sockel.
Mr. Cohn. How long is it since he has been working at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Martin. My guess would be 1948 or 1949, and I really
don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Anybody else?
Mr. Martin. Ullmann I have mentioned.
Mr. Cohn. When did you learn that Ullmann was a Communist?
Mr. Martin. There were rumors to that effect immediately
after he left.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you hear anything about it while he was
there?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; I had no other contact with him, and
in fact my personal contact with Ullmann was very limited, even
at the laboratories, and he was not in the same building I was
located in, and he seldom personally contacted me. Occasionally
he would send a memorandum to the office or on routine business
that I would send out he would indicate an interest or a need
for specific information.
Mr. Cohn. On this information that was allegedly given to
him, which you should not have, that was classified
information, is that correct?
Mr. Martin. I do not know, sir. The initial Civil Service
interrogatories did not say ``classified information,'' but the
Department of the Army suspension letter did say ``classified
information.''
Mr. Cohn. Don't you have any idea what that information is,
and what it is alleged to have been?
Mr. Martin. Let me put it this way, and let me tell you
what information I was working with, and that may help us. The
association, or the documents with which I was associated, with
Mr. Ullmann, that is not a clean sentence certainly, dealt
primarily with captured German and Japanese equipment. It was
equipment collected during the war, and brought back to this
country, and evaluated extensively. Now, many of these
documents had originally been written by army, air force, navy,
and joint American and British intelligence activities. They
were classified in many cases during the war.
Subsequent to the war, the classifying organizations no
longer existed and it took a higher authority to downgrade
them. Therefore, these documents still retained their
classification, and in many cases were classified only because
nobody could downgrade them. That is the type of document that
we were handling for the most part.
The Chairman. What happened at the hearing after you had
been served with this letter of charges?
Mr. Martin. The interrogatories from the Civil Service
Commission?
The Chairman. Did you have a public hearing?
Mr. Martin. I had a hearing at the Civil Service Commission
offices here in New York, that is correct. The hearing entailed
a very extensive discussion of both of these charges, after
which I introduced a number of witnesses and the hearing was
closed, and some two months later I received a letter stating
that I was eligible for Federal employment on the basis of
loyalty.
The Chairman. The only witnesses who were heard were the
ones that you brought in, is that right?
Mr. Martin. That is correct, and the government witnesses
had been invited and did not appear, presumably the person who
made the Ullmann statement.
The Chairman. I am rather curious about this, and at that
time the loyalty board had considerable information from
federal investigative agencies, and did they indicate why they
didn't call any of the witnesses other than those that you
brought in?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; they did not.
The Chairman. Who was the chairman?
Mr. Martin. I do know that they did invite one witness, who
did not appear.
The Chairman. Who was that?
Mr. Martin. I don't know the name, but I was told it was a
person from Florida.
The Chairman. Who is the chairman of that loyalty board?
Mr. Martin. I am afraid, sir, that I am going to have to
hedge the question, for the fact that it may be classified
information, and I do not know----
The Chairman. I am going to have to order you to answer
that question. The name of the chairman of the loyalty board is
not classified in so far as this committee is concerned. If it
is classified, it is declassified as of now, and so you will be
ordered to give us the name of the chairman of the loyalty
board that cleared you.
Mr. Martin. Andrew C. Clements.
The Chairman. And was he an army officer?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
The Chairman. He was a civilian?
Mr. Martin. Yes, and I believe not connected with the
government.
The Chairman. Who were the other members of the loyalty
board?
Mr. Martin. The same instructions I assume hold?
The Chairman. Yes. For your protection, let the record show
that you are ordered to produce the information.
Mr. Martin. A Mr. Richard Condon, and a Mr. Louis C.
Haggerty.
The Chairman. Did you know any of those people before you
met them at this hearing?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You have there a transcript that was taken, was
it not?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; it was.
Mr. Cohn. How many copies do you have?
Mr. Martin. I have just the one, sir.
The Chairman. We can secure that information.
Mr. Cohn. Was that a Second Regional Civil Service
Commission board?
Mr. Martin. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have that copy with you?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Cohn. Could I look at it for a moment?
Mr. Martin. Surely.
[A document was handed to counsel.]
The Chairman. Where are you working now?
Mr. Martin. I have been suspended but prior to the
suspension I was with the Signal Corps Publications Agency at
Fort Monmouth.
The Chairman. Are you working at all at this time?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; not at the moment.
The Chairman. How long ago were you suspended?
Mr. Martin. On September 29, sir.
The Chairman. Just for your protection, I think you should
know that we have testimony here that you gave or received
classified material without authorization, and would you care
to comment on that? I know that you have to some extent
answered the questions.
Mr. Martin. Was that with Ullmann, sir?
The Chairman. Ullmann was one of the people. Let me ask you
this question: Did you ever give any classified material to any
individual whom you had reason to suspect might be either a
Communist or an espionage agent?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; the only people to whom I have ever
given classified material was in line of duty, and in all cases
it was covered by a proper receipting system. I might add this
one point in connection with Ullmann. It was seldom if at all
that a document was sent or specifically given to Ullmann as a
person or sent to him as a person by name. It was sent to his
organization, and to his laboratory.
The Chairman. On some occasions you would give material to
Ullmann personally, rather than to his laboratory?
Mr. Martin. I think that there were occasions when he would
come into the office and sign for material because he was
passing by, documents that we had already prepared for
distribution to him.
The Chairman. At that time did you have any suspicion he
was a Communist or espionage agent?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; I did not.
The Chairman. Did you ever have a camera, or carry a camera
inside the plant?
Mr. Martin. Not to the best of my knowledge.
The Chairman. Did you ever see one of these little cameras,
called a Minnox Camera?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never saw one?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know Mr. Keiser?
Mr. Martin. Maurice Keiser, is that the name?
The Chairman. Yes, Maurice Keiser.
Mr. Martin. Yes, Mr. Keiser works at Evans, and I have met
him several times and in fact when I transferred back from the
air force to the Signal Corps, I spoke to him and he was one of
the men who interviewed me in connection with that transfer
back.
The Chairman. Did you ever work with him?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; not directly. However the Signal Corps
electronics warfare center for which I did work at Fort
Monmouth did have some official business contact with Mr.
Keiser's organization.
The Chairman. Did you ever see anyone carrying a Minnox
camera?
Mr. Martin. Not that I have any recollection of.
The Chairman. You say you have no recollection. If you saw
someone carrying a Minnox camera, you would remember it?
Mr. Martin. Cameras were prohibited on the post and I would
have remembered it.
The Chairman. Did you ever carry a camera on the post?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever take any classified material off
the post?
Mr. Martin. Not unless I was going from one activity at
Fort Monmouth to another activity. For example, there were
times, I think, when I carried classified information from Fort
Monmouth to Camp Evans, and it was always covered, of course,
by a document receipt.
The Chairman. You never kept any in your apartment?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. You lived with Mr. Coleman and Mr. Corwin for a
period of time, did you not?
Mr. Martin. For a short period.
Mr. Schine. Now by a short period of time, how long do you
mean?
Mr. Martin. I believe it was, well it was----
Mr. Schine. In 1946?
Mr. Martin. No, it was, I would have to check the dates.
Mr. Schine. Wasn't it around 1946 or 1947?
Mr. Martin. It was 1947, I believe, and I think through the
spring and summer of 1947.
Mr. Schine. A number of months?
Mr. Martin. It was about five or six months, I believe.
Mr. Schine. And you had a car pool with Mr. Coleman and Mr.
Corwin, driving to and from work?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; not at that time, because I worked at
Watson Laboratories, at that time, and they used to go to
Evans, and I used to go to Watson Laboratories, which is in a
different direction.
Mr. Schine. You never drove home from work with them?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Do you know a Howard Moss?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Schine. And his name used to be Howard Moshenski?
Mr. Martin. That is right, and he changed it legally some
years ago.
Mr. Schine. Where does he work now?
Mr. Martin. He is at Fort Monmouth in the area called the
Watson area.
Mr. Schine. Is he a good friend of yours?
Mr. Martin. Well, we live together as it happens at the
present time.
Mr Schine. Will you please give us the names of the
organizations which Mr. Moss belongs to?
Mr. Martin. He belongs to the Institute of Radio Engineers,
I know. The only other organization I believe that I know he
belongs to is the Knights of Pythias, and I know of no others.
Mr. Schine. You know of no other organization?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; unless there is a bridge club of some
sort, he plays a good deal of bridge, I know.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever attended any meetings with Howard
Moss?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; correction--I believe he is also a
member of the National Federation of Federal Employees, NFFA,
if I am not mistaken.
Mr. Schine. You have never attended meetings with him?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever meet Coleman and go home from work
with him?
Mr. Martin. Very recently there have been occasions in the
past six or seven months there have been occasions when he has
driven me into town to pick up my car, or something, if I was
having it served or I would do the same for him.
Mr. Schine. He carries a briefcase, does he not?
Mr. Martin. Not at the present time, I don't believe.
Mr. Schine. Do you recall Mr. Coleman carrying a briefcase?
Mr. Martin. You must remember, sir, that Mr. Coleman has
been without a clearance for some eighteen months.
Mr. Schine. I am speaking about 1947.
Mr. Martin. At that time I do not know, at that time Mr.
Coleman--we had no association at that time, except from the
point of view of work, and no work association whatsoever.
Mr. Schine. Didn't you live together?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; we lived together.
Mr. Schine. Wouldn't you know he had a briefcase?
Mr. Martin. Well, he was going to Brooklyn Polytech at
night and he was away several nights a week up there working on
a master's degree, and several nights a week he would go right
from school to New York, very possibly he did carry a
briefcase, and again I have no direct recollection of it.
Mr. Schine. And isn't it true that in addition to having
school books in this briefcase, he had certain classified
material?
Mr. Martin. I do not know that, sir, and I do know that
there was an incident back in 1946 or 1947, where he ran into
some difficulty, and it must have been later.
Mr. Schine. Will you tell us about that incident, then?
Mr. Martin. I believe it happened after he lived with us,
but again I am not certain.
The Chairman. Did you ever see any classified material
around the home or apartment in which you lived with Mr.
Coleman?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
The Chairman. Never any at all?
Mr. Martin. None that I remember, no.
The Chairman. Did he have a camera in the apartment?
Mr. Martin. I don't believe so, and I don't know of him
ever to do any photographic work or have an interest in it.
The Chairman. I think you have answered this before, but
have you owned a camera in the past ten years?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; I do.
The Chairman. What kind of a camera?
Mr. Martin. It is a German camera, and actually I have
several, and one of them is a German camera that I have had
since roughly 1937, and it is a Precian, and it is used with
standard 120 roll film, and it is fairly appreciable in size.
The Chairman. How large a camera is it?
Mr. Martin. The dimensions would be six by two by one and a
half.
The Chairman. Can that be used for photostating?
Mr. Martin. I don't think so, sir; I tried it once with
some clippings back in the early 1940s, some clippings I had
from the 1937 and 1938 were pretty horrible in their results.
The Chairman. What other cameras do you have?
Mr. Martin. I have a 30-millimeter camera which is a
Perfex.
The Chairman. Is that a movie camera?
Mr. Martin. No, that is a still camera, and the physical
size of that is roughly eight by four by three, I would say,
and it is defective actually, the lens is in pretty bad shape
and it has always been that way and I purchased it as a second-
hand camera.
The Chairman. Would that be suitable for photostating?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; it would not, and as a matter of fact
I very rarely use that camera because of the lens fault that
exists.
The Chairman. What other cameras do you have?
Mr. Martin. There is another broken camera in the junk pile
which was an 8-millimeter movie camera which again has not been
used for probably fifteen years, and it is laying in a corner
some place.
The Chairman. And did Coleman ever have those cameras?
Mr. Martin. Not that I know of, sir, and as a matter of
fact I am fairly certain he did not because for a while those
cameras were in New York.
The Chairman. It is your testimony now under oath that you
never as long as you lived with Coleman, never saw any
classified material at the place where you lived?
Mr. Martin. I would say that is correct, sir.
The Chairman. Were you living with Coleman at the time that
the army intelligence or some intelligence agency came and
searched the living quarters?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; that was why I said I think that this
occurred after we were living together.
The Chairman. How long after?
Mr. Cohn. Can't you place the time when you were living
with Coleman?
Mr. Martin. Yes, I can do that, that was roughly in April
of 1947.
The Chairman. Now, he was found with these documents----
Mr. Martin. It was until October or late September of 1947.
Mr. Cohn. You say it is your impression that this document
incident occurred after that time?
Mr. Martin. I believe so.
Mr. Cohn. It occurred before that time.
The Chairman. Didn't he ever discuss with you the fact that
his living quarters had been raided by an intelligence unit,
and they found secret and top secret material there?
Mr. Martin. Not at that time, sir, no.
The Chairman. While you were living with him, didn't he
ever talk to you about that?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; there was a very marked limitation
upon our association, and the fact that he was away several
nights a week and he was away weekends.
The Chairman. How many rooms were there?
Mr. Martin. Three rooms, two bedrooms.
The Chairman. How many of you lived there?
Mr. Martin. Mr. Corwin and myself in one bedroom and Mr.
Coleman had the other one.
The Chairman. If you lived in the same rooms you had fairly
close association for six months and didn't you ever discuss
with him the fact that he had been accused of espionage? Didn't
he ever discuss it with you.
Mr. Martin. No, sir, as I remember.
The Chairman. When did you first meet him, and just try to
answer the question ``yes'' or ``no,'' whenever you can, and if
you want to give any further explanation, you can give it. When
did you first meet him?
Mr. Martin. I first met Mr. Coleman sometime in late 1941,
or possibly early in 1942.
The Chairman. Then you know him continuously, and you lived
with him?
Mr. Martin. We had a business association until he left for
the army.
The Chairman. What was the business association?
Mr. Martin. I was in charge of a group that was handling
literature preparation for classified equipment at Camp Evans,
and Mr. Coleman was working, or was the project engineer on a
number of classified contracts at that time.
The Chairman. Then you knew him until he left to go to the
military, is that correct?
Mr. Martin. He went into the marines.
The Chairman. What year did he go, do you remember?
Mr. Martin. I would say he went in early in 1943, and I
went into the air force in October of 1943. Our contact was
strictly one of business and occasionally manuscripts that had
been submitted by manufacturers were turned over to the project
engineers for a final technical check.
The Chairman. The question is when he entered the marines.
Mr. Martin. I believe early in 1943.
The Chairman. When did he come out?
Mr. Martin. I think in the spring of 1946.
The Chairman. And you met him when he came out of the
marines?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; I don't believe I saw him.
The Chairman. When did you see him? When did you strike up
this contact that resulted in the three of you rooming
together?
Mr. Martin. I would say some time late in 1946 again.
The Chairman. He was back at the Signal Corps then?
Mr. Martin. Yes, he was, and however I was with the air
force at the time.
The Chairman. You were with the air force and he was with
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Martin. That is correct.
The Chairman. And you met him and you decided to get this
apartment, the three of you get the apartment?
Mr. Martin. That is correct.
The Chairman. You must have been pretty good friends, and I
don't reconcile the fact that you were roommates with your
statement that you only saw him casually. You must have seen
him every night.
Mr. Martin. He would come back from New York rather late in
the evening, eleven o'clock or later.
The Chairman. Did you cook in that apartment?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; we did not.
The Chairman. And you say that he never discussed with you
the fact that he had been accused of espionage activities or
the fact his living quarters had been searched, or anything
like that?
Mr. Martin. I don't recall any detailed discussion, and I
think that the discussion, if there was a discussion it was
essentially limited to the fact that he had been accused and
punished effectively for a security violation at that time. The
details we didn't go into, and there was, you see, sir, there
is a marked aversion among all of the people around there to
discuss work outside of working hours, and certainly among
those people who are dealing with classified information.
The Chairman. What was the occasion of your leaving, your
breaking up the joint apartment?
Mr. Martin. The apartment was originally taken primarily on
a temporary basis, and Mr. Coleman had purchased a home and he
was waiting for the apartment in which he planned to live to be
vacated by someone who had a lease on that apartment.
The Chairman. When that apartment was vacated, he went
ahead and lived in that?
Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; and he married about that time.
The Chairman. What did you do? Did you stay in the old
apartment?
Mr. Martin. No, Mr. Corwin and myself then moved in with
another group of men.
The Chairman. What was the financial arrangement between
you and Mr. Coleman and the third man?
Mr. Martin. Just that we split the rent three ways, that is
all.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Martin, when did you lose your position at
Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Martin. September 29, I was suspended.
Mr. Schine. Of this year?
Mr. Martin. That is right.
Mr. Schine. You bought a new car, did you?
Mr. Martin. In May of 1951.
Mr. Schine. That was what?
Mr. Martin. A 1951 Kaiser.
Mr. Schine. Did you have another car previous to this one?
Mr. Martin. I had a 1947 Kaiser prior to that time.
Mr. Schine. You drove to and from work in this car, didn't
you?
Mr. Martin. That is correct.
Mr. Schine. And the others shared the car with you?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; I usually drove alone.
Mr. Schine. You had nobody drive home with you?
Mr. Martin. No, because none of the people I lived with
worked with me and there was no one in the immediate area.
Mr. Cohn. How about Harold Ducore?
Mr. Martin. I lived with him in 1942 and 1943.
The Chairman. Did you have any reason to think he was a
Communist at the time?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever have any reason to believe Coleman
was a Communist?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever tell you he had gone to Young
Communist League meetings with Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Martin. No, sir. That question, barring Mr. Rosenberg,
was asked at the Civil Service Commission hearings, and as far
as I know----
Mr. Cohn. That was back in 1952, is that right?
Mr. Martin. In May of 1952.
Mr. Cohn. So that some of the authorities in the army were
aware of the connection between Mr. Coleman and Mr. Rosenberg
and the Young Communist League back in 1952, and you were asked
about it?
Mr. Martin. I wasn't asked about Mr. Rosenberg, but I was
asked about Mr. Coleman, and my answer to that question----
Mr. Cohn. I just looked at it, and you were asked whether
or not--you were asked about Mr. Rosenberg?
Mr. Martin. They asked me if I knew him and I indicated I
did not.
Mr. Cohn. They asked you with reference to Mr. Coleman, did
they not?
Mr. Martin. I believe so, and I ran through that last
night, and I think there was some separation, and they asked me
if I knew Mr. Sobell, and in fact I didn't recognize when they
first asked me, I didn't recognize the names.
Mr. Cohn. They did ask you about Mr. Coleman and the Young
Communist League, in any event?
Mr. Martin. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. So they must have been aware in 1952 of Mr.
Coleman and the Young Communist League? Did you know Morton
Sobell?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, you say Coleman himself had never told you
that as close as you were to him, that he had gone to Young
Communist meetings with Rosenberg?
Mr. Martin. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did he tell you he knew Rosenberg?
Mr. Martin. Not at that time, and he has told me fairly
recently that he did.
Mr. Cohn. Has he told you----
Mr. Martin. That he had gone to school, and they were in
some classes together.
The Chairman. How recent was that?
Mr. Martin. Within the last six months, I would say.
The Chairman. You still have social contacts with Coleman?
Mr. Martin. Mr. Coleman and I have been working in this
same office for one year. The army, when they took my clearance
away, put me in another building on a loan basis, and Mr.
Coleman and I were placed in the same office.
The Chairman. How long ago was that?
Mr. Martin. That was in August of 1952.
The Chairman. Here is the thing that sort of confuses me,
or puzzles me a bit, Mr. Martin: You were out there in a very
important job, and I think it is conceded that if you were, and
not saying that you are at all, but if you were a Communist or
espionage agent you could do this country a great deal of
damage, and you appear to be a very intelligent person. I would
say much above the average. You are living with a man who
obviously was a member of the Communist party, and obviously
had been removing secret material from the laboratory and there
was knowledge around there that he had done this and they had
found the stuff in the apartment and you are rooming with him,
and you have not even the faintest suspicion that he was
sympathetic to the Communist cause.
To the average person sitting here, it would seem that
either you were extremely naive and stupid--and I don't think
that you are stupid at all--or that you are not being frank
with us. I am not accusing you of that. It is easy for a
chairman to sit here and accuse a witness of something like
that, and I don't want to do it. I never saw you before and I
know nothing about you, and I may say just for your own benefit
I am not at all impressed with your testimony, and I am
impressed with the fact that you are a very smart young man.
From the lack of either recognition of a Communist, your
inability to recognize you are living with one and rooming with
one, either that or your failure to tell us frankly what the
situation was, if I were in the position of the secretary of
the army I would just say, ``Well, the American people are
entitled to the benefit of the doubt, and we can't use this
young man.''
This perhaps will be the last time you will be on the
stand, and I would strongly urge that you proceed to give us a
bit more information than you have. I think it is impossible,
and pardon me for repeating, for you or me or anyone else to
live with a Communist, and room with one, and just have no
suspicion of what he was standing for. The Communists just
don't work that way at all.
Now, if you would care to give us any more information, we
would like to receive it. Or if you haven't any more, that is
all right.
Mr. Martin. Well, frankly, sir, you have made a lot of
statements about Mr. Coleman, but I personally do not believe
many of them to be substantiated in fact. Now, again, I don't
have the facts that you have available to you, and I don't know
these things. Now, Mr. Coleman may be a very excellent actor,
but again that I do not know.
The Chairman. Did you ever go to any meetings of any kind
with Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Martin. None outside of possible business conferences,
in line of duty.
The Chairman. These business conferences, would they be at
the post?
Mr. Martin. At the post, yes, sir; during the working
hours.
The Chairman. Never at any meetings outside of that?
Mr. Martin. None that I know of.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any meetings at the
apartment, or the living quarters?
Mr. Martin. No.
The Chairman. None ever?
Mr. Martin. No.
The Chairman. Did people come there for a social gathering?
Mr. Martin. We had only a limited amount of space there and
we seldom had visitors. We visited other people, or we as
individuals visited other people.
The Chairman. How often would you say people would come
into the living quarters, socially or otherwise, for a drink or
to talk?
Mr. Martin. I am trying to recall specifically instances
where we had visitors, and frankly I cannot at the moment say
we never had any, but I don't recall any.
The Chairman. You never went to the Rosenberg home?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
The Chairman. Nor to the Sobell home?
Mr. Martin. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. We will let you know, Mr. Martin, when we want
you again.
Mr. Martin. No, the transcript.
Mr. Cohn. Here it is.
The Chairman. Your name will not be given to the press,
unless you give it to them yourself
Mr. Martin. Thank you, I shall not. I prefer it that way.
Mr. Schine. After you gave the papers to Mr. Ullmann, and
the trouble arose, you discussed with him, didn't you, the fact
that he was accused of being a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Martin. No, sir; I did not, and I did not see Mr.
Ullmann from the day he left the laboratories, and I don't know
that I saw him at that time. I do know this: That when he did
leave, my files were checked and he had no documents for which
I was responsible, and which I had given him, and they had all
been returned to me and my accounts were perfect.
Mr. Cohn. Of course, he could have made copies of them.
Mr. Martin. That is true, and I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. Kaplan, will you stand and raise your
right hand.
In the matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Kaplan. I do.
TESTIMONY OF LOUIS KAPLAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, MORTON
STAVIS)
Mr. Cohn. Give us your name.
Mr. Kaplan. Louis Kaplan.
Mr. Cohn. Can I have the name of counsel, for the record?
Mr. Stavis. Morton Stavis, 744 Broad Street, Newark, New
Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. Now, Mr. Stavis, I think this is your first
appearance before the committee. The rules of the committee are
that your client is free to consult with you at any time he
desires to. In other words, Mr. Kaplan, you can talk to your
lawyer any time you want, but your counsel cannot participate
directly in the proceeding himself.
Mr. Stavis. May I have your name?
Mr. Cohn. I am Roy Cohn.
The Chairman. I may say also that if in any instance a
matter comes up which I think of sufficient importance that
your client would like to have a private conference with you,
we will arrange for a room for such a conference. The only
restriction upon counsel is that he cannot personally take part
in the proceedings. If he wants to take part, he must do it
through his witness.
Mr. Cohn. What is your address?
Mr. Kaplan. 130 Taylor Avenue, Neptune, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. Now, have you ever been employed by the Army
Signal Corps?
Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir, I was.
Mr. Cohn. During what years?
Mr. Kaplan. I think it was from 1943 through 1947.
Mr. Cohn. 1943 through 1947?
Mr. Kaplan. To my best recollection.
Mr. Cohn. What did you do from 1947 to the present time?
Mr. Kaplan. From 1947 until the present time, I worked at a
big cooperative called the New Jersey Federated Egg Producers
Cooperative, and subsequent to that I was laid off and I was
out of work for a while.
Mr. Cohn. What do you do now?
Mr. Kaplan. At the present moment I sell eggs.
Mr. Cohn. During the time you were employed at the Army
Signal Corps, what was the nature of your duties?
Mr. Kaplan. I was mainly concerned with the standardization
of plastic materials.
The Chairman. As a what?
Mr. Kaplan. I was employed at the Army Electronics
Standards Agency, it was called, and mainly concerned with the
standardization of plastic materials.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have access to any classified material?
Mr. Kaplan. In the course of my work, I believe I did, yes,
sir.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of the Communist party when you
worked for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Kaplan. I would like to invoke the Fifth Amendment and
the privilege which it gives me for not to be forced to testify
against myself.
Mr. Cohn. You refuse to answer on the ground your answer
might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Kaplan. The answer I gave, that I read the Fifth
Amendment and it states that one is not required to bear
witness against one's self.
Mr. Cohn. Well, I am glad you read the amendment, but
unfortunately, these days you have to read a lot of cases by
the courts in connection with the amendment, and those cases
have held that you are entitled to assert that privilege under
the amendment before a congressional committee if you feel that
an answer to the question might tend to incriminate you; and if
that is the ground on which you are asserting the privilege you
are entitled to do that. If you want to confer with counsel,
you may do so.
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Kaplan. I will make the statement you make, but at the
same time my attorney advises me to say that I am also invoking
the privilege of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Are you a member of the Communist party today?
Mr. Kaplan. I would invoke the Fifth Amendment on the same
grounds as previously.
Mr. Cohn. Are any people currently employed by the Signal
Corps at Fort Monmouth who are in the Communist party with you?
Mr. Kaplan. I would invoke the Fifth Amendment on that,
also.
Mr. Cohn. Were you specifically a member of the Shore
Branch of the Communist party?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Kaplan. Well, my attorney advises me that that is the
same question you asked me previously.
Mr. Cohn. Did I mention the Shore Branch?
Mr. Kaplan. On that particular question I also invoke the
privilege of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. When you worked at Monmouth Laboratories, did you
know a man named Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Kaplan. I never knew him.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man named Harold Ducore?
Mr. Kaplan. Yes, I did know him.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend a Communist meeting with him?
Mr. Kaplan. I refuse to answer that question under the
Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. You understand when you say you refuse to
answer on the ground your answer might tend to incriminate you,
that you are in effect saying you attended Communist meetings
with him, because, if you did not attend Communist meetings
with him, the answer to that question could in no way
incriminate you. Now, I want to ask you this question: When you
refuse to answer, invoking the privilege of the Fifth
Amendment, are you doing so on the ground that you honestly
feel that a truthful answer might tend to incriminate you?
You may consult counsel if you wish.
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
Mr. Kaplan. Senator, you can say what your opinion is about
the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. Would you start over again please?
Mr. Kaplan. Your interpretation of the use of the Fifth
Amendment differs somewhat from mine, because I believe that I
can invoke the privilege of the Fifth Amendment in a situation
like this, in view of the fact that I don't know what is being
cooked up, and I feel that I have every right to protect myself
from being implicated in something that I never did or never
would do. The Fifth Amendment gives me the privilege of, in any
criminal case, not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. This is not a criminal case. We have asked
you a very simple question. Unless you feel that a truthful
answer would tend to incriminate you, you are not entitled to
the privilege of the Fifth Amendment, and you are not entitled
to invoke the Fifth Amendment because perjury would incriminate
you, and so you are ordered to answer the question unless you
tell us that you honestly feel that a truthful answer would
tend to incriminate you. My question is: Do you feel that a
truthful answer to that question might tend to incriminate you?
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
The Chairman. In case you do not recall, the question was:
Did you attend Communist meetings with Ducore?
Mr. Kaplan. My attorney advises me that I honestly feel
that I cannot be compelled to answer that question, because of
the provisions of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. You cannot be compelled to answer that
question, but if you do not answer it I will order you to
answer the other question. I cannot compel you to answer
whether or not you honestly feel that a truthful answer might
tend to incriminate you, but if you do not answer it, you are
not entitled to the Fifth Amendment privilege on the other
question. So if you refuse to answer it, I will order you to
answer it--whether you attended Communist meetings.
Mr. Stavis. May I suggest that I think it is somewhat
unfair to debate tenuous legal questions with someone.
The Chairman. I am not going to hear from counsel. I have
ordered the witness to answer a question, and I will not hear
from counsel.
Mr. Kaplan, let us have the record show that you were
asked--we will ask you over again so that there will be no
possibility of your claiming ignorance of the facts or that you
misunderstood the question, at some future legal proceeding.
Did you attend Communist meetings with a Mr. Ducore, whom
you state you knew in the Signal Corps?
Mr. Kaplan. And the answer which I gave was that I invoke
the Fifth Amendment; and then you said something else after
that.
The Chairman. Are you refusing to answer the question? Are
you refusing to answer that question? That is, whether or not
you attended meetings with Ducore?
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
Mr. Kaplan. Yes, on the grounds of the Fifth Amendment
privilege.
The Chairman. Well, now, I will re-ask the other question:
Do you feel a truthful answer to that question might tend to
incriminate you?
Mr. Kaplan. Senator McCarthy----
The Chairman. Yes or no, or you can refuse to answer.
Mr. Stavis. May I confer with my client?
The Chairman. You may.
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
Mr. Stavis. May we have a recess for about five minutes?
The Chairman. You may have one for longer than that while
we have another witness. You are still under subpoena.
The Chairman. Would you stand up, please?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Donohue. I do.
TESTIMONY OF HARRY J. DONOHUE
Mr. Cohn. Could we have your full name?
Mr. Donohue. Harry J. Donahue.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you employed?
Mr. Donohue. At present, I am employed in the Department of
the Interior.
Mr. Cohn. What is your title there?
Mr. Donohue. Special assistant to the assistant secretary
for Public Land Management.
Mr. Cohn. By the way, I want to thank you very much for
coming up here today, and we appreciate your taking the time.
Was there a time when you were with the Army Signal Corps?
Mr. Donohue. Yes, I was with the Army Signal Corps during
the war, and from August 1948 until May 1952.
Mr. Cohn. I want to talk to you particularly about the
period of April 1951, and do you recall that period?
Mr. Donohue. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You were then with the Army Signal Corps?
Mr. Donohue. I was.
Mr. Cohn. Did you hold the title of assistant top secret
control officer at the Signal Corps Intelligence Agency,
Washington?
Mr. Donohue. I did.
Mr. Cohn. And did there come to your attention at that time
an incident concerning some missing documents?
Mr. Donohue. In April of 1951, Captain Herrin, who was the
top secret control officer, was absent on leave, and I took his
place.
Mr. Cohn. You were the acting top secret control officer?
Mr. Donohue. Yes, sir. And a letter came in from the
Pentagon addressed from the Office of the Chief Signal Officer
to the Signal Corps Intelligence Agency, requesting information
concerning certain top secret documents, and numbered about
115, or thereabouts.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what was the purpose of this letter? Did
they seek to ascertain the location of those documents, or
whether or not they were all accounted for or some were
missing?
Mr. Donohue. Well, as I recall, they specified that the
following documents--and it listed them--have been charged to
the Signal Corps Intelligence Agency, and will you please check
your records and notify us as to the disposition.
Mr. Cohn. You did not know the background, and you didn't
know why they had made the request or what allegations had been
made?
Mr. Donohue. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. With particular reference to some fifty-seven of
those documents, were you able to locate them?
Mr. Donohue. I checked the complete files of the agency in
the top secret safe, and I found information regarding the
disposition of all except fifty-seven of the documents.
Mr. Cohn. Tell us about those fifty-seven, will you?
Mr. Donohue. Well, the fifty-seven specified documents, I
could find no record whatsoever that the documents had even
been in the agency.
Mr. Cohn. Could you find any certificates of destruction
for the documents?
Mr. Donohue. Not for the particular documents, no, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What excuse was given for the failure to have any
record that they had been in the agency? Was there something
involving a register?
Mr. Donohue. Well, I sat down and I went over the
documents, over the entire list of documents with Colonel
Hanson, who had previously been the top secret control officer.
When we came up with the fifty-seven documents for which there
was no record, we tried to ascertain why we couldn't find such
a record. We did come across a certificate of destruction which
indicated that three top secret registers had been destroyed by
burning.
Mr. Cohn. Those are the registers which would indicate that
those documents were in existence, is that right?
Mr. Donohue. Well, I couldn't say for certain. That is what
I assumed, because the date of the document coincided pretty
well with the dates that the registers covered.
Mr. Cohn. If you had those registers, those registers would
show that the documents were there?
Mr. Donohue. I would assume that.
Mr. Cohn. Or they should be someplace?
Mr. Donohue. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Now, let us assume those documents had been
destroyed. Would there be certificates of destruction?
Mr. Donohue. There should be. There should have been a
certificate of destruction on file in the agency.
Mr. Cohn. Did you reach any conclusion from the fact that
there were no certificates of destruction on file as to those
documents?
Mr. Donohue. No, not at the time.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever reached any conclusion?
Mr. Donohue. No. It is difficult to say what happened to
the documents. As far as the records that I had would show,
there was no indication.
The Chairman. If a register had been destroyed, should
there not be a certificate of destruction for the destruction
of the register?
Mr. Donohue. That there was. There was a certificate of
destruction which indicated that three registers had been
destroyed.
The Chairman. Does that show why they were destroyed?
Mr. Donohue. No, sir, it didn't, and it seemed to me
fantastic at the time, and Colonel Hanson thought likewise,
inconceivable that a top secret register would be destroyed,
because that is your basic record.
The Chairman. As far as you know, that has been unheard of
in the past, that the registers would be destroyed?
Mr. Donohue. I never heard of such a thing.
The Chairman. Do you know who gave the orders for the
destruction of the register?
Mr. Donohue. No, sir, I don't.
The Chairman. Would that not be on the certificate of
destruction?
Mr. Donohue. No, sir, it wouldn't.
The Chairman. What does the certificate of destruction
contain? I thought it would contain the authority for the
destruction and the name of the destroying officer.
Mr. Donohue. No. Generally it has only the list of
documents destroyed, and the names of the two certifying
officers. Now, a document usually contains, below the title,
someplace in the front of the document, information pertaining
to the destruction of it, and quite often it will say that at
such time as this is of no further use, no longer useful, the
document may be destroyed and report rendered.
The Chairman. Then the only way you can tell why the
document was destroyed is to go to the certifying officer and
depend upon their memory, is that the way it is done?
Mr. Donohue. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. It seems like rather a slipshod method, does
it not? The reason I ask that is that I recall in the Marine
Corps we used to destroy some messages that came in in code,
and each time you did, you had to give the name of the officer
who authorized the destruction, and the reason for the
destruction, and the name of the destroying officer. I may be
wrong on that, but as I recall, that was the setup.
Now, let me ask you this--and pardon me for interrupting
you. I understand there are fifty-seven secret documents that
were missing, and there was no certificate of destruction for
any of those fifty-seven documents, and the register which
contained a listing of the documents was also destroyed, and
there was a certificate of destruction for the register but not
for the destruction of the documents?
Mr. Donohue. That is all true except for this one point: It
is not possible to say really whether the fifty-seven documents
were entered or were not entered in those registers; because of
the dates, we assumed that that was so.
The Chairman. In other words, if the document was dated
June 10, we will say, 1947, and if the register ran for the
month of June and the month of July, you would assume it had
been listed in that destroyed register?
Mr. Donohue. That is right.
The Chairman. As of this time, you cannot think of any
valid reason for the destruction of those registers?
Mr. Donohue. No, sir, I know of no good reason for it.
The Chairman. Were those fifty-seven documents all top
secret?
Mr. Donohue. They were all top secret at such time as they
came into the agency, yes.
The Chairman. If those fifty-seven top secret documents
found their way into the hands of a potential enemy, it could
do tremendous damage to this country, I assume.
Mr. Donohue. I would certainly say so.
The Chairman. Did they have to do with radar defenses, or
defenses against potential atomic bomb attacks, and that sort
of thing?
Mr. Donohue. At this time I couldn't say what they covered.
They could have covered radar, because, of course, we dealt in
that.
The Chairman. Does the register contain any kind of a
description of the documents, so that if you had the register
you would have some idea of what the document contained? Or
does it merely contain the number of the document?
Mr. Donohue. It would contain the number and the title,
which would give some indication of what the content was.
The Chairman. So that if I were an espionage agent working
within the Signal Corps and if I have my Communist apparatus
and stole the fifty-seven documents, the logical thing for me
to do then would be to destroy the register so that no one
would have a picture of what was in the documents?
Mr. Donohue. That would be a very convenient cover-up if it
could be done.
The Chairman. Has anyone ever followed this down and tried
to find out who authorized the destruction of the register?
Mr. Donohue. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. What happened to the documents?
Mr. Donohue. I assume the army has looked into it, but no
indication was ever given to me what was done about it.
Mr. Cohn. Is there any comment you would like to make on
it?
Mr. Donohue. I would like to make one comment on this
question of fifty-seven missing documents, because the House
report on the conditions in the Signal Corps Intelligence
Agency indicated that the army, or the excuse the army gave was
that the officer who completed the report on the missing
documents had submitted an inaccurate report, which of course
was untrue. I was the officer concerned, and the report was
thoroughly accurate, so far as my records permitted me to
reply.
The Chairman. When was that report made?
Mr. Donohue. That report--I got that information from the
House report.
The Chairman. The House Un-American Activities Committee
report?
Mr. Donohue. Yes.
The Chairman. The picture I get from what we have been told
by the army is that while a list of secret and top secret
documents was submitted to your department, that same list was
submitted to various other units, and that while the list was
submitted to your unit it was not submitted with the
understanding that all of those documents had ever been in your
unit at all; that of the fifty-seven, either all of them, or
only one or two or five or ten, ever found their way into your
unit, and that some of them had gone to some other unit. In
other words, there was a multiple questionnaire. What comment
would you have on that?
Mr. Donohue. Well, it has been two and a half years, but as
I recall, the list of documents was submitted to the agency
indicating that the documents had been charged to Signal Corps
Intelligence Agency, and myself and Colonel Hanson proceeded on
the assumption that the documents either should be with us or
we should find information that they had been downgraded or
destroyed.
The Chairman. You understood, in other words, that this
questionnaire concerned documents that had been charged out to
your agency?
Mr. Donohue. Exactly. And another reason why I would assume
that was that Colonel Hanson was called before this Signal
Corps board which was investigating the matter, and although I
wasn't in on the proceedings, I learned from Colonel Hanson
that they covered some of that territory.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this: The fact that, we will
say, document number fifty-seven is found someplace else would
be no proof that it had not been stolen from the Signal Corps?
They might send a secret document to your department and one to
``X'' department and ``Y'' department, and as far as you know,
everything that you searched for had been charged out to you on
the log of some other parent organization?
Mr. Donohue. That is right, under the log of the Office of
the Chief Signal Officer.
The Chairman. We do not like to impose upon you
indefinitely, but when we get the distribution list showing
where it was distributed, you might be able to give us some
help on that.
Let me ask you this question: In making this search do you
recall whether you or the colonel ever went back a step to find
out whether this material had actually been charged out to you?
Mr. Donohue. No, sir, I didn't. I just checked the records
within the agency with Colonel Hanson, and reported to the
Office of the Chief Signal Officer.
The Chairman. You assume that the stuff had been charged
out to you, or you would not be questioned about it?
Mr. Donohue. That is right.
The Chairman. I would say that what we should do is go back
a step and see whether it had actually been charged out to you;
and if it had been, that means that the fifty-seven are still
missing, even though they had been located, duplicate copies,
in some other department.
Mr. Donohue. It is very difficult to say whatever happened,
because those documents could have been sent to the agency and
even returned to the chief signal officer, because, not having
a record book and not having a register, it is impossible to
determine from the record of the agency what happened.
The Chairman. It would seem rather significant that the
registry book covering all fifty-seven was destroyed, the three
registry books.
Mr. Donohue. I could never understand why that was done.
The Chairman. I think I asked you this before, but it would
seem to me that that, in itself, would indicate that something
improper had been done to the documents, the fact that the
registry had just disappeared.
Mr. Donohue. I would make that assumption myself.
The Chairman. I think there is nothing further, unless you
have something further to add.
Mr. Donohue. I don't think so.
The Chairman. We may want to call upon you again, and we
will check with you later.
Thank you very much.
TESTIMONY OF LOUIS KAPLAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, MORTON
STAVIS) (RESUMED)
The Chairman. Now, are you prepared to answer that
question?
Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. I will accept the answer that you
gave on that question.
The Chairman. I did not answer the question. The question
was: Do you feel a truthful answer would tend to incriminate
you?
Mr. Kaplan. The answer to that is yes.
The Chairman. Then you are entitled to the privilege.
Mr. Schine. How long have you known Ducore?
Mr. Kaplan. It should be the past tense. I have not seen
him within the last seven years.
Mr. Schine. When did you first meet Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Kaplan. Probably at a union meeting. The question of
knowing him is a very slight one. It is just a passing
acquaintance, and it is not real knowledge or association, or
anything like that.
Mr. Schine. Is Mr. Ducore a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Kaplan. Well, I refuse to answer that question on the
Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meetings with Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Kaplan. What kind of meetings do you mean?
Mr. Cohn. Any kind of meetings.
Mr. Kaplan. I think possibly a union meeting, although--
shall we continue?
[At this point Senator McCarthy left the room.]
Mr. Schine. Where did you get your schooling, or your
college training?
Mr. Kaplan. College of the City of New York.
Mr. Schine. City College?
Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. When did you first meet Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Kaplan. Will you repeat that again?
Mr. Schine. When did you first meet Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Stavis. I didn't hear the question.
Mr. Schine. When did you first meet Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Kaplan. I never met Julius Rosenberg.
Mr. Schine. You never met him?
Mr. Kaplan. No.
[At this point Senator McCarthy entered the room.]
Mr. Schine. Do you know Mr. Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Kaplan. I did.
Mr. Schine. When did you first meet Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Kaplan. When I was working for the Signal Corps--and
excuse me, can I make a correction in a statement I made
before? On the years that I worked at Fort Monmouth, I put it
'43 to 1947, and that is correct at Fort Monmouth, but I
entered the Signal Corps in August of 1942.
Mr. Schine. Where were you stationed then?
Mr. Kaplan. At Fort Hancock, and then I went to
Philadelphia after that time.
Mr. Schine. Now, when did you first meet Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Kaplan. I don't recall. It was during the period I was
working with the Signal Corps.
Mr. Schine. Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Kaplan. That is correct.
Mr. Schine. Did you attend Communist party meeting with
Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Kaplan. I would invoke the privilege of the Fifth
Amendment to that question.
Mr. Schine. Do you feel if you were to tell us whether you
attended Communist meetings with Mr. Ullmann, that you would
tend to incriminate yourself?
Mr. Kaplan. I believe that was what Senator McCarthy said
before.
Mr. Schine. Do you feel that you would?
Mr. Kaplan. That is correct.
Mr. Schine. Do you know Bernard Martin, known as Bob
Martin?
Mr. Kaplan. Who is that?
Mr. Schine. Bernard Martin, known as Bob Martin.
Mr. Kaplan. I don't know him, no.
The Chairman. How about Mr. Carl Greenblum?
Mr. Kaplan. I never heard of him.
Mr. Cohn. Samuel Pomerance?
Mr. Kaplan. I don't recall him.
The Chairman. How about Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Kaplan. That question was asked me before.
The Chairman. Did you know him?
Mr. Kaplan. I don't know him.
The Chairman. How about Sobell?
Mr. Kaplan. I don't know him, either.
The Chairman. And Greenglass?
Mr. Kaplan. I don't know him.
The Chairman. By ``Greenglass'' I refer to the man
convicted of espionage.
Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever engage in any espionage
yourself?
Mr. Kaplan. At no time did I ever engage in espionage, and
I never will.
The Chairman. Did you ever remove any classified documents
from any government agency?
Mr. Kaplan. Unless I was on a job, I mean so ordered to
fulfill my duties on the job.
The Chairman. Did you ever remove any classified documents
from any government agency and turn those documents over to
either a Communist or to someone whom you knew was going to
give them to a Communist?
Mr. Kaplan. I never turned any documents over to anybody
who was not authorized to receive them; that is, anybody or any
party or any group.
The Chairman. Were you asked whether you are a Communist
today, and you refused to answer?
Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. When was the last time that you have been in
contact with anyone that works at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Stavis. Could we have the question again?
Mr. Carr. When was the last time that you had been in
contact with anyone who works at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Kaplan. To the best of my recollection, it has been
since I left there, about six and a half years.
Mr. Carr. You haven't been--when I say ``contact,'' I mean
to your knowledge have you been in contact with any person
working at Fort Monmouth for six and a half years since you
left there?
Mr. Kaplan. Well, it is one that taxes the memory.
Mr. Carr. That is right.
Mr. Stavis. Hold that just a moment. Could we have the
question read?
[The question was read by the reporter.]
The Chairman. You understand by ``contact,'' counsel means
either by telephone or by letters or personally.
Mr. Kaplan. Let us put it this way: For the most part no,
but it is possible that I may have had contact with one of
these guys or two of these guys, and I don't know, for the last
six and a half years. The general practice has been that I
haven't had any relationship with anybody I used to work with
at the Fort.
The Chairman. Has anyone from the Signal Corps or any other
branch of the government given you any classified material
since you left the Signal Corps?
Mr. Kaplan. Nobody, no, and none.
The Chairman. Did you have access to information on radar
screens?
Mr. Kaplan. The nature of my work, Senator McCarthy, was
one of--I wish I had brought that commendation down. It was in
the main, coordination work between the army and the navy, to
get two discordant bodies together, on a question of
standardizations for plastic materials. It was very rarely
involved with any highly classified information, and at the
most maybe confidential or something like that.
The Chairman. Do you recall that you had access to material
having to do with the radar screens?
Mr. Kaplan. No, I don't recall.
The Chairman. Anything to do with radar?
Mr. Kaplan. Access to any information, you mean?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Kaplan. Well, the only thing on that was that when I
entered the Signal Corps in August of 1942, I was sent to the
Philco Radio School, which was at Philadelphia.
The Chairman. Who gave you the commendation?
Mr. Kaplan. Major General----
The Chairman. Don't you remember who?
Mr. Kaplan. I don't recall.
The Chairman. If you do not know, that is all.
Mr. Kaplan. I have it here right now, Senator.
The Chairman. Do you know Mr. Levitsky?
Mr. Kaplan. No, sir.
The Chairman. You did not know Levitsky, Joseph Levitsky?
Mr. Kaplan. No.
The Chairman. What are you doing now?
Mr. Kaplan. At the present moment----
The Chairman. You have answered that. All right. The last
time you drew money from the government was in 1947?
Mr. Kaplan. I believe it was, yes, sir.
The Chairman. Have you ever received any money from the
Communist party?
Mr. Kaplan. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds
of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. Did you receive money from the Communist
party while you were working in the Signal Corps?
Mr. Kaplan. I refuse to answer that on the grounds of the
Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. Did you receive any money from the Communist
party for any work you did for the Communist party in
connection with your work in the Signal Corps?
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
Mr. Kaplan. Can you repeat that again?
The Chairman. I will be glad to. Did you ever receive any
money from the Communist party for any services which you
performed for the Communist party which also had a relation to
or connection with your work in the Signal Corps?
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
Mr. Stavis. May I hear the question again?
[The question was read by the reporter.]
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
Mr. Kaplan. I think in a previous question as to whether I
ever received any money from the Communist party, I indicated I
had never received--indicated I refused to answer that
question.
The Chairman. Are you refusing to answer this question?
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
The Chairman. If you feel a truthful answer would tend to
incriminate you, you can refuse. Otherwise, you are not
entitled to refuse.
Mr. Kaplan. Yes, my counsel advises me to answer on the
privilege of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. I have nothing further. You are excused for
the time being, and you will be recalled at a later date. So
you will consider yourself under subpoena, and keep your
counsel informed as to where you are so that the staff can
notify your counsel when you are wanted.
Mr. Kaplan. How will I be notified? Through another
subpoena?
The Chairman. No, through your counsel.
Mr. Cohn. What is your address?
Mr. Stavis. 744 Broad Street, Newark; Market 3-1072. I
would be grateful, since I am in the general practice of law,
if you could call me reasonably in advance.
The Chairman. If you find that you are tied up in some
important legal work at the time, courtroom work, if you will
inform Mr. Cohn he will work it out with you.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Kaplan, I have one more question. Did you
discuss with Marcel Ullmann orders that you or Mr. Ullmann were
to carry out for the Communist party?
Mr. Kaplan. I refuse to answer that on the privilege of the
Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Schine. Did some of those orders involve turning over
secret papers to the Communist party?
Mr. Kaplan. I already indicated to Senator McCarthy that I
never at any time handed any secret papers to anybody.
Mr. Schine. I am not talking about handing them. I am
talking about discussion.
Mr. Kaplan. Discussions or anything in relation to any
secret papers, I have never discussed them with anybody.
The Chairman. Do you solemnly swear in this matter now
before the committee that you will tell the truth, the whole
truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Jack L. Frolow. I do.
TESTIMONY OF JACK L. FROLOW
Mr. Cohn. Will you give your full name, please?
Mr. Frolow. Jack L. Frolow.
Mr. Cohn. Will you spell it?
Mr. Frolow. F-r-o-l-o-w.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you work?
Mr. Frolow. Fort Monmouth, engineering laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. Which laboratory?
Mr. Frolow. Watson.
Mr. Cohn. Is that under the air force or the Signal Corps?
Mr. Frolow. Well, it is the Signal Corps, it is the old
name.
Mr. Cohn. They use the old name, but it is known as the
Signal Corps?
Mr. Frolow. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have access to any classified material?
Mr. Frolow. I am cleared for secret matters, sir.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time have you been
employed at Monmouth?
Mr. Frolow. I have been at Monmouth since 1949, that is not
exact, but approximately.
Mr. Cohn. Did you work for the government at all before
that?
Mr. Frolow. Yes, I was employed by the Signal Corps
Procurement in First Avenue, 59th Street, in 1940, and I worked
for the inspection division, succeeding all of those years,
until 1949 when I was transferred over to the laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. When were you in the inspection service?
Mr. Frolow. Since 1940, until 1949.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Frolow. I don't think that I know him there. I don't
know him personally. I may have seen him around, but his face
looked familiar to me and I saw his pictures in the paper.
Mr. Cohn. Do I accurately state the substance, that you
know you have seen him around, but you don't have any personal
recollection?
Mr. Frolow. Not in the Signal Corps.
Mr. Cohn. You do recognize the face?
Mr. Frolow. I recognized the face in the papers, when I saw
it.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you know him?
Mr. Frolow. Well, that is the point. He went to City
College and I think he got out in 1938, and I got out in
February of 1940, so I must have seen him around the Tech
School, but I don't remember him as a personality.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Frolow. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Frolow. I think only, not personally; but I think he
went to City College at the same time and I recognized his
face.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know him at City College?
Mr. Frolow. Not personally, no.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Frolow. Aaron Coleman, I saw his picture in the
newspapers the day before yesterday or so and I recognized him
as going to City College about the same time.
Mr. Cohn. Now, did you recognize him as someone you had
seen around Monmouth?
Mr. Frolow. I have never seen him around Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. How about Harold Ducore?
Mr. Frolow. I don't know him at all.
Mr. Cohn. How about Bob Martin?
Mr. Frolow. He lives with me.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time has he lived with
you?
Mr. Frolow. I have been living in that house for about two
years and I had a room upstairs and I moved downstairs about a
year ago.
Mr. Cohn. Who else lives there?
Mr. Frolow. Dave Raskin, and Greenbaum.
Mr. Cohn. You have been living there for how long?
Mr. Frolow. Downstairs about a year, I would say, and
upstairs I lived about a year, and I had a room upstairs.
Mr. Cohn. How long has Mr. Morton been living there?
Mr. Frolow. I think Bob has been there for sometime, and I
wouldn't know, but it was long before I got there.
Mr. Cohn. How did you happen to move there? Was it through
him?
Mr. Frolow. No, I met a fellow by the name of Max Singer at
the labs through work, and I was an inspector in the
meteorological department, and when I transferred to the fort
he was around there and he works for the same P & MR Division,
and so for about two or three years I lived by myself, and I
got tired of that, and I was on travel duty a lot and so when I
got off travel duty and went to work in the chief's office I
had to get some permanent residence, and I would rather be
around fellows my own age and who are bachelors, and so I moved
in upstairs, and when one of the fellows got married
downstairs.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Vivian Glassman?
Mr. Frolow. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How about William Muterperl?
Mr. Frolow. No.
Mr. Cohn. Max Elicher?
Mr. Frolow. No.
Mr. Cohn. Milton Klein?
Mr. Frolow. No. There is a Milton Klein, or Bill Klein used
to work for inspection, I am sorry, there are two Bill Kleins
work for inspection.
Mr. Frolow. Your testimony is you did not know Rosenberg at
City College?
Mr. Frolow. Not personally. It is fourteen or fifteen years
ago, and I may have bumped into him in the hall but I don't
remember him as a personality at all.
Mr. Cohn. All right, you are excused. Thank you.
The Chairman. Would you stand and be sworn? In this matter
now before the committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Mr. Lewis. I do.
TESTIMONY OF BERNARD LEWIS
Mr. Carr. Mr. Lewis, where are you presently employed?
Mr. Lewis. I am not employed at the present in the
laboratories. I was suspended on August 19 of this year.
Mr. Carr. On August 19 of this year?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Mr. Carr. On what ground?
Mr. Lewis. There were three charges which I answered in
affidavits subsequently, and do you want me to enumerate those
charges?
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Mr. Lewis. The first was that the army had apparently
information to the effect that I and my wife had been dropped
from the Communist party in 1940 to do mass work. That was the
first charge. And the second charge was I had signed a
nominating petition for a Communist candidate in Brooklyn,
Catsione, and my sister-in-law also signed it, plus another
affidavit, earlier, in 1941. And the third item was that a
fellow named Paul Satulow had used my name in an application
for a government job. Federal job. He used my name as a
reference. I answered those charges.
Mr. Carr. What was your answer to the charge number one?
Mr. Lewis. Neither I nor my wife ever belonged to the
Communist party.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any Communist meetings?
Mr. Lewis. Never.
Mr. Carr. Were you ever solicited to join the Communist
party?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir; I never was.
The Chairman. Did you ever belong to any organizations that
were at the time you belonged to them or subsequently listed as
fronts for the Communist party by the attorney general?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir; there is an involved explanation which
I tried to explain in the affidavit that I submitted. Shall I
go into that?
The Chairman. I think it would be a good thing.
Mr. Lewis. Back in 1937 and early in 1936, there used to be
a social and athletic club on the corner of Neptune Avenue and
Cortlandt Street, in the Coney Island section of Brooklyn. My
brother-in-law was the president and I had other friends there.
My wife and I attended dances there, and played ping-pong and
other athletic things.
The Chairman. That was a social club?
Mr. Lewis. A social and athletic club, and nothing else was
involved. They moved out early in 1937, I believe, and a few
months after that the Young Communist League rented the
building and I and my wife weren't going steady at the time,
and we were just dating occasionally. We both attended dances
there, the same as we had done at the social club.
The Chairman. You attended dances, you say you were
attending dances when the social club operated the building,
and when the Young Communist League took over that you
continued going to dances?
Mr. Lewis. That is right, and we continued going to the
dances. Well, that was in 1937, and early in 1938, perhaps. I
was married at the end of 1938, in December of 1938. We never
went there any more, and as a matter of fact I didn't want to
go there, and we went there, and they did try to get us to join
and influence me but I just wasn't interested in that sort of
stuff, and I tried to avoid them, and I put them off. But I
feel that they had our names in some way, and have used them in
some way to implicate me with the Communist party, when I have
done nothing at all.
The Chairman. Let me say for your benefit that it is more
than your names. Your pictures are shown attending these
functions at the Young Communist League, and let me ask you
this: Aside from the dances, did you attend any other meetings
at the Young Communist headquarters?
Mr. Lewis. I don't believe I did, no.
The Chairman. Would they have speakers at the dances, ever?
Mr. Lewis. I don't recall, I don't think so.
The Chairman. Did you ever do any talking yourself at any
of those dances?
Mr. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any meetings other than
those dances at the Young Communist League?
Mr. Lewis. I will tell you one thing I did do there. They
had a little photographic club, and they asked me once to show
them a couple of things, and as I was pretty good as an
amateur, and I did do that.
The Chairman. Did you operate the motion picture machine,
was that it?
Mr. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. I don't quite follow you. You said a
photographic club?
Mr. Lewis. Just an amateur photographic club. We were all
young kids at this time.
The Chairman. Did you show the pictures that you had taken?
Mr. Lewis. No, it was just to exchange information and
ideas.
The Chairman. On photography?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
The Chairman. And you gave some talks or lectures on that,
or what did you do?
Mr. Lewis. I think only once I just wrote them some very
elementary ideas of how pictures were developed and finished.
The Chairman. You explained how to develop your negatives?
Mr. Lewis. That is right, and principles, and I think it
was mostly prints.
The Chairman. You explained the workings of the various
types of cameras, did you?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think I went into anything else, really,
that was important.
The Chairman. Do you know why your picture would have been
taken over at the Young Communist headquarters?
Mr. Lewis. Why my picture had been taken?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Lewis. No, anybody would have taken my picture there.
The Chairman. But that would not have been in connection
with your lectures on cameras and such things?
Mr. Lewis. Maybe somebody had a camera and was using it as
an amateur photographer.
The Chairman. Did you ever demonstrate how the Minnox
camera was operated?
Mr. Lewis. No, I never saw one of those myself.
The Chairman. Did you ever operate a Minnox?
Mr. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. Have you ever seen one?
Mr. Lewis. No, I have a Leica myself which I have always
used, practically ever since I have bothered with cameras, but
I have never bothered with the Minnox. I have seen pictures of
it.
The Chairman. How many cameras do you have?
Mr. Lewis. I have a Leica, and a view camera, five by
seven, and a plate camera for flash pictures, nine by twelve.
The Chairman. Have you ever been accused by any of your co-
workers with having a camera over at the Signal Corps
headquarters?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you sign a pledge to support a Communist
party candidate on a number of occasions?
Mr. Lewis. I probably did, if you have that record. It is
very vague to me, and I don't remember exactly who might have
asked me. It might have been someone who knew me quite well to
get me to sign it, because frankly I would have avoided signing
anything like that, otherwise.
The Chairman. Well, now, it has been testified that you
signed a petition or pledge to support a Communist party
candidate after the Hitler-Stalin Pact, and I mention that
because after that many people who perhaps didn't recognize the
danger of communism were jarred a bit, and they would hesitate
in signing a pledge. Do you recall having signed the pledge to
support the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. Not the Communist party, just the nominating
petition for Castione and the other persons. Is that what you
mean, Senator?
The Chairman. Well, didn't you sign more than one?
Mr. Lewis. I don't remember signing any, and I was told I
signed that one and there were probably two or three names on
it, but it was just one.
The Chairman. Were you shown your signature?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir. I wouldn't deny it, because I know I
was asked many times to sign and I always tried to avoid them,
but apparently this one time I did sign it.
The Chairman. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever meet him?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you go to college?
Mr. Lewis. I didn't go to college, sir, my engineering
rating is on a practical basis, from work I did at the
laboratory.
The Chairman. Did you know Mr. Carl Greenblum?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir; I don't recall that name at all.
The Chairman. You don't recall having met him, having met
Mr. Greenblum? He works over at the Signal Corps.
Mr. Lewis. No, sir, I don't know who he is at all.
Mr. Carr. Did you say it was your brother-in-law, or what
was that about?
Mr. Lewis. In the social club, it was my brother-in-law, he
was the president.
Mr. Carr. What was his name?
Mr. Lewis. William Rogers.
Mr. Carr. Now, this social club was subsequently taken over
by the Young Communist League?
Mr. Lewis. It was just a building, and the club broke up,
and then it left the building, and the Young Communist League
apparently came along and rented the building.
Mr. Carr. And you continued to go to activities at this
place?
Mr. Lewis. The facilities are still there, and they still
have the ping-pong table in the basement.
Mr. Carr. Was your brother-in-law active in the new
organization that took over?
Mr. Lewis. No.
Mr. Carr. Did he go also?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir; he didn't go at all.
Mr. Carr. At the time that you went, you knew this was the
Young Communist League?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, I knew it, and actually in those days, we
didn't have very much money to speak of, and I worked on and
off, and it was just a possibility of going somewhere where we
could spend the evening without spending much money, or have a
good time, and they had the facilities there and everything,
and it was like a bunch of kids trying to get something for
nothing. I wasn't the only one who went there, and I am sure
that other boys and girls went who were not Communists. We went
to have some fun, and maybe some of them were converted, I
don't know.
Mr. Carr. That may be so, but subsequently, you signed a
petition to support a Communist candidate.
Mr. Lewis. That is something that goes on all of the time,
especially in that section of Brooklyn, and it was a big
Communist movement, and during those years you would see them
out on the street corner with bridge tables, with petitions for
this and petitions for that, and there were all kinds of
things.
Mr. Carr. Are you in the habit of signing petitions without
knowing what they are?
Mr. Lewis. No, I am not in the habit of signing, and it was
a sort of time when you got a little lull. First of all, if I
remember, the Russians had already joined World War II on the
Allied side, and there wasn't so much anti-Communist doing like
there is today, and people realize what is going on, and it was
a sort of a debatable subject in those days whether it was good
or bad, and they hadn't done any harm that we knew of to people
like you know about today.
The Chairman. For your information, the information we have
may not be accurate, but just so that you will know what it is,
you signed the pledge to support a Communist candidate during
the Hitler-Stalin Pact, that is while Russia was not in the war
on our side.
Mr. Lewis. I believe the date was August of 1941, and I
believe Russia was attacked in June of 1941.
The Chairman. It is your recollection that it was 1941 that
you signed the petition?
Mr. Lewis. It was August or September.
The Chairman. You were accused of signing several
petitions.
Mr. Lewis. Apparently one petition with several names on
it, and it was just what I remember from the charges.
Mr. Carr. Now, there was another specification in your
letter, and that was the third specification.
Mr. Lewis. A fellow named Paul Satulow whom I knew as a
child, who lived on West Second Street in Coney Island when I
was about seven years old, when I first met him, and he lived
in the same neighborhood for a number of years, and he
subsequently moved away from there and I moved away from there,
and I couldn't have been more than sixteen years old, and I
seldom saw him after that except once in a while maybe on the
beach or the boardwalk in Coney Island.
Mr. Carr. When was the last time you saw him?
Mr. Lewis. I don't know exactly, it may have been in 1940
or 1941, because it was such a chance thing, and I don't know
exactly.
Mr. Carr. Did you know he was suspected with being
connected with the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. I had an idea but I don't know for sure.
Mr. Carr. Had he attended these so-called social meetings
at the Young Communist League?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think so, and he was an older fellow,
and he was older than I was.
The Chairman. Did you go to his home?
Mr. Lewis. Let me see if I did. If I did it must have been
maybe 1937 or 1938.
The Chairman. Weren't you at his home a number of times
after you worked for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think so, no.
The Chairman. Don't you recall that you and your wife went
to his home for dinner?
Mr. Lewis. My wife and I?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Lewis. I may have visited him once.
The Chairman. Didn't you actually visit his home a number
of times between 1945 and the present?
Mr. Lewis. If I went there, he lived on the East Side and
we couldn't get there very easily, and I didn't especially want
to go to his place.
The Chairman. Did he come to your home?
Mr. Lewis. He never came to my house at all.
The Chairman. Did you and he attend any meetings at someone
else's home?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir.
The Chairman. Dinners, or social gatherings?
Mr. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. Are you sure of that?
Mr. Lewis. I saw him once, and I think this is the
recollection of it, that I remember. My wife's brother got
married, and the girl he married lived over here on the East
Side, and I think we dropped in on him that time, and we went
to see her that one time.
The Chairman. Did he ask you to join the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know that he was engaged or suspected
of having engaged in espionage activities?
Mr. Lewis. I didn't know at all.
The Chairman. Who asked you to join the Young Communist
League?
Mr. Lewis. I don't know exactly. There were people there
who were trying to recruit members, I suppose, and they are
always trying to get people to join.
The Chairman. You do not recall who it was?
Mr. Lewis. No, I couldn't remember.
The Chairman. Did you ever pay any money to the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think so, unless it was maybe raffles or
something like that.
The Chairman. Did your wife ever join the Young Communist
League?
Mr. Lewis. As far as I know, she didn't. She tells me she
didn't.
The Chairman. Did either of you ever get a card or anything
showing you had paid dues, or that you were recognized as
members?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think so.
The Chairman. You say no?
Mr. Lewis. Paid dues card?
The Chairman. Did you ever get a card that you carried?
Mr. Lewis. No, I don't think so.
The Chairman. When you went to the dances, did you not
always show a card?
You did not?
Mr. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. A Communist or non-Communist could go to the
dance?
Mr. Lewis. Anybody could come.
The Chairman. Just by paying?
Mr. Lewis. There was admission free, or sometimes they run
them free, I think. They ran them without charge, open nights
like that.
The Chairman. Did they take up collections there for the
Daily Worker or anything like that?
Mr. Lewis. They may have, and I don't know.
Mr. Carr. Was there a fourth specification?
Mr. Lewis. On the charges? Not that I know of.
Mr. Carr. So that, in summary, you were admittedly at what
have been reported to be meetings of the Young Communist
League?
Mr. Lewis. I don't know if I attended meetings, and I don't
know.
Mr. Carr. You were at their place?
Mr. Lewis. Maybe there was a meeting going on sometime.
Mr. Carr. But you were there, and you know that this
Satulow was a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. I don't know if he was a member. I thought he
had some connections, yes.
Mr. Carr. And yet you continued your association with him,
even after you went to work for the government?
Mr. Lewis. I didn't continue that. I visited him just once
that I have mentioned, and it wasn't because I wanted to. We
happened to be a few doors away from his place, and we dropped
in to say hello. That is about all that it amounted to. I never
saw him otherwise, that I know of. I just remember that now,
and I don't think that I recalled it before.
Mr. Carr. You just happened to go to the Young Communist
League affairs, and you just happened to drop in on this man,
and you just happened to sign a signature on a Communist party
petition?
Mr. Lewis. It looks very damaging, I know, but I have no
Communist leanings, and I don't feel that way at all, and I
hate everything that is connected with it.
Mr. Carr. And you are not now a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Lewis. And I never was a member of the Communist party.
Mr. Carr. Were you a member of any of the so-called
Communist fronts?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Other than this Young Communist League?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think I ever belonged to anything else.
Mr. Carr. How old are you, sir?
Mr. Lewis. I am thirty-eight now
Mr. Carr. You are thirty-eight?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Were you a member of the American Youth for
Democracy?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. When was the last time that you went to the young
Communist building?
Mr. Lewis. I don't know. It must have been sometime towards
the end of 1938, perhaps. Once I was married, then my wife
didn't want to go there any more, and I didn't care for that
sort of stuff--period.
Mr. Carr. Is your hobby photography?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Do you develop your own film?
Mr. Lewis. Oh, yes.
Mr. Carr. You have a laboratory?
Mr. Lewis. I have a dark room, yes.
Mr. Carr. Have you maintained contact with persons working
at Fort Monmouth since you were suspended?
Mr. Lewis. No, I haven't. I just didn't want to embarrass
them in any way. They got worried about that.
The Chairman. Have you any idea why you were accused of
having gone underground in 1940?
Mr. Lewis. I have no idea at all.
The Chairman. That was a charge, that you and your wife
went underground.
Mr. Lewis. We were dropped to do mass work, that is what
the charge said. I have never had any connection with the
Communist party whatsoever. That is what is so strange about
it.
The Chairman. Did you ever remove any classified material
from the Signal Corps?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir, I never did.
The Chairman. You never had your cameras in the Signal
Corps?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir, and I was particularly aware of that,
since I was pretty well known as an amateur photographer.
The Chairman. When you made this one visit to the Communist
East Sider to drop in and say hello to him, did you discuss
Communist matters, or give him any documents, or did he give
you any?
Mr. Lewis. You must remember, I knew this man many years,
and whatever his politics was, it is just something that you
remember all of the time, and you can't drop everybody.
The Chairman. I think that is all.
I may say it is not the function of this committee to
decide anything at all in your case. All we do is get all of
the evidence that is available, and get your story, and turn it
over to the army.
Mr. Lewis. I imagine there will be a hearing coming up
sometime.
The Chairman. I think the army loyalty board will hold a
hearing. I am inclined to think so. I do not know if we will
want you any further or not, and I wish you would consider
yourself under subpoena, however. If we want you we will notify
you.
Mr. Lewis. Whatever the army decides on this hearing, I am
perfectly willing to go along with it, and I don't want anyone
to feel I am disloyal or anything like that.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. In this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Crenshaw. I do.
TESTIMONY OF CRAIG CRENSHAW
Mr. Carr. Your name is Craig Crenshaw?
Mr. Crenshaw. That is correct.
Mr. Carr. Where are you presently employed?
Mr. Crenshaw. At Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories,
Fort Monmouth, New Jersey.
Mr. Carr. Is that Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Crenshaw. Yes; specifically the sub laboratory.
Mr. Carr. What is your particular position?
Mr. Crenshaw. I am a physicist, and section chief.
Mr. Carr. Are you cleared for secret, or up to secret or
higher?
Mr. Crenshaw. I am cleared up to secret and higher.
Mr. Carr. Have you ever been reprimanded for anything
whatsoever during your employment by the Signal Corps?
Mr. Crenshaw. No, I have not, not that I can remember of at
present.
Mr. Carr. You were never reprimanded for having classified
material in your possession at home or away from the
laboratory?
Mr. Crenshaw. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Carr. Were you ever reprimanded for having left
classified material in an insecure position at the
laboratories?
Mr. Crenshaw. I don't recall of any instance that way. I
have been working there many years, and I think that I would
remember it.
Mr. Carr. Do you have any reason to believe that you have
been under investigation by an intelligence agency in the last
year?
Mr. Crenshaw. Yes. I have been informed everybody at my
level of clearance was being investigated periodically, and
more than once a year, anyway.
Mr. Carr. Do you have any reason to believe that your
security clearance should be lifted?
Mr. Crenshaw. None whatsoever. I don't quite understand the
reason for such a question.
Mr. Carr. Well, I am asking you if you have any reason to
believe or do you know of anything in your background which
might lead to such a suspension?
Mr. Crenshaw. I still don't understand this. I know of
nothing in my background that would lead to this.
Mr. Carr. That is the answer.
Mr. Crenshaw. I know of people, I have heard of people who
may be attempting to vilify my character; depending upon who is
evaluating information, they can make their own choices, and
that isn't my business. That is the business of somebody else.
Mr. Carr. Could you enlighten us a little on this last
statement, that these people may have said things against your
character?
Mr. Crenshaw. Well, it is only hearsay, and that is the
reason I don't like to repeat it.
Mr. Carr. It may shed light on something.
Mr. Crenshaw. But I supported an unsatisfactory efficiency
rating against an individual, and the individual, I know, is a
man who cannot be trusted, in that he will tell a story
sufficiently, in my opinion, that he will believe them after a
while, and on that basis I would not put it at all past him to
maybe be saying something bad about me, and I don't know.
The Chairman. What does he say? Does he say you were a
Communist?
Mr. Crenshaw. I don't know what he would say, and I have no
idea, and I don't see how he could say anything like that,
because it can't be true.
The Chairman. I am rather curious about this individual.
Does he work with you?
Mr. Crenshaw. No, no longer; after I saw he wasn't any good
I requested he be transferred, and indicated the reason, and he
was transferred to some other place and continued in the same
manner, unsatisfactory efficiency rating was given by the
second man, and I supported it because, in my judgment, that
was the case.
The Chairman. What is his name?
Mr. Crenshaw. Which man?
The Chairman. The man you mention, telling stories about
you.
Mr. Crenshaw. Just a minute, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Who might tell stories about you.
Mr. Crenshaw. Let us get the record straight. Harry Bryant.
It is a matter of record that I supported an unsatisfactory
efficiency rating on him.
Mr. Carr. Is that the one by Dr. Daniels?
Mr. Crenshaw. Yes, Dr. Daniels gave him an unsatisfactory
efficiency rating, and I have heard rumors, gossip to a great
extent, that he was spreading stories about one of us, and I
assume automatically he is probably doing it about both of us,
and it is characteristic of the individual. And however
successful, I believe the efficiency system had a basis for it,
and I assume that people would consider cases like this in the
light of what they were set up for.
The Chairman. Were you ever solicited to join the Communist
party?
Mr. Crenshaw. No.
The Chairman. You were never asked to join the Communist
party? How about the Young Communist League?
Mr. Crenshaw. I never heard of it. I have seen it on lists,
banned lists.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any meetings of the
Communist party?
Mr. Crenshaw. No, I haven't attended any meetings of the
Communist party.
The Chairman. And never paid any money to the Communist
party?
Mr. Crenshaw. Definitely not.
The Chairman. Have you ever removed any classified material
from the Signal Corps?
Mr. Crenshaw. Would you please define your terms a little
closer?
The Chairman. Any classified material.
Mr. Crenshaw. By ``removing,'' I mean.
The Chairman. Did you ever take any out of the building?
Mr. Crenshaw. Yes, just last week or ten days ago I was
listed as an official courier and carried some classified
documents to Washington.
The Chairman. I mean other than when you were doing this in
the course of your work, did you remove any classified
material?
Mr. Crenshaw. I have never removed any classified material
other than in the line of duty.
The Chairman. I get the impression that as far as this
fellow Harry Bryant is concerned, you feel he doesn't have any
great love for you because of the unsatisfactory fitness
report, and you would not consider him too reliable a witness?
Mr. Crenshaw. On the basis of the months that I spent on a
field trip with him, I discovered that stories that he told at
the laboratories before we left, about what he had to do with
the invasion of Europe, were ridiculous. However, they got more
ridiculous as time went on. When I investigated to find out the
truth of the situation, he had been sent over to Europe to do
something and he was returned, and I gathered this, and I can't
vouch for all of the details, but he was returned immediately
because he turned out to be one of the group that was
incompetent.
So it was one of these situations where, when I was asked
for an honest appraisal of the man, I gave it, letting the
chips fall where they might.
The Chairman. I may say, Mr. Crenshaw, that the committee
has practically no information about you at all. We have
statements from several witnesses, and nothing of great
importance. You are merely called here to have you do what you
did today--give us whatever story you had to give. I do not
think we will have any further use for you. This is an
executive session, and we do not tell the press or anyone else
that you were here. One of the reasons is that we know we have
got to call a lot of good, loyal Americans here to get the
complete story, and if the names are given out, some people
will think that they are automatically expected to be
Communists. So the only way your name will be used is if you
give it out yourself. We do not give out your name, and no one
will know you were here unless you give the press your own
name.
Mr. Crenshaw. Is that all?
The Chairman. That is all. Thank you very much.
Mr. Crenshaw. Thank you.
The Chairman. In case we should want any further
information, we will call you, but I do not think we will.
[Whereupon, at 4:10 p.m., the hearing was recessed until
10:30 a.m., Wednesday, October 14, 1953.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--A radar specialist at Fort Monmouth, Aaron
H. Coleman had been officially reprimanded in 1946 for taking
home classified documents. He explained that he had been
authorized to take restricted materials home to work overtime
on important projects, but conceded possible violation of army
regulations in not keeping them in a more secure location.
Coleman testified publicly on December 8 and 9, 1953, at which
time portions of his executive testimony were read into the
record. At a press conference, Senator McCarthy linked Coleman
to the Signal Corps documents that had surfaced in East Germany
and announced that the subcommittee would refer Coleman's case
to the Department of Justice to consider indictment for
espionage and perjury. However, since no evidence of espionage
was produced, the Justice Department took no action. In 1958
Aaron Coleman regained his federal employment rights. He
returned to work at Fort Monmouth and retired from government
service in 1978. Harold Ducore, Samuel Pomerentz, and Hyam G.
Yamins (1910-2000) did not testify in public session.]
----------
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met at 10:30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in
room 36 of the Federal Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
(chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Francis Carr,
staff director; G. David Schine, chief consultant; Daniel G.
Buckley, assistant counsel.
Present also: Hon. Robert T. Stevens, secretary of the
Department of the Army; and John Adams, counselor to the
secretary of the Department of the Army.
The Chairman. In this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Ducore. I do.
TESTIMONY OF HAROLD DUCORE (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, HARRY
GREEN)
Mr. Green. My name is Harry Green, and I am an attorney
representing Mr. Ducore.
The Chairman. Mr. Ducore, will you give the reporter your
full name?
Mr. Ducore. Harold Ducore, D-u-c-o-r-e.
The Chairman. Just for the record, will counsel give his
name and address?
Mr. Green. Harry Green, 16 Church Street, Little Silver,
New Jersey.
The Chairman. I believe this is the first time you have
appeared before the committee, Mr. Green, so we will try to run
over the general rules.
The general rules here, Mr. Green, are that at any time
your client cares to discuss anything with you, he has an
absolute right to break into his testimony at any time. If at
any time you want to have a private conference with your
client, we will arrange a room for that. The only prohibition
we have is that counsel himself cannot take part in the
proceedings, and he must do it through his client.
Mr. Green. For example, if Mr. Ducore wants to consult with
me, he should make a request?
The Chairman. Any time you want to consult with him, you
can stop him, but we do not allow counsel to engage in lengthy
arguments and objections and that sort of thing. If counsel
thinks a question is objectionable, he can tell his client. The
purpose of that, I might say, is that we have had experience in
the past with some attorneys who have been purposely long-
winded to make it difficult to hold a hearing.
Mr. Green. I have attended many legislative hearings, and I
appreciate your position, and I don't think that there will be
any difficulty.
The Chairman. Mr. Ducore, where are you presently working?
Mr. Ducore. At the Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories.
The Chairman. And how long have you worked there?
Mr. Ducore. Since June 9, 1941.
The Chairman. Since June 9, 1941?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And are you still working, or have you been
suspended?
Mr. Ducore. I was suspended on the 28th of September, 1953.
The Chairman. And were letters of charges served upon you
at that time?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, there were.
The Chairman. And do you have the letters of charges with
you?
Mr. Ducore. No, I don't have them.
Mr. Green. I don't either.
Mr. Ducore. I know what the charges are.
The Chairman. I think we have them. What were in the
letters of charges?
Mr. Ducore. The first one was that I was a member of the
UPW, United Public Workers, a CIO union, and that was cited
because it was reported that Communists had infiltrated the
union.
The second charge was that I was reported to have made a
statement that the Russians knew how to treat people; this
country was too liberal.
The third charge, I was reported to have associated with an
Albert Sockel, a reported Communist.
And then they introduced my wife, saying I was married to
Alice Chammer Ducore, who had also been a member of the union,
who was reported to have made pro-Communist statements, and who
was reported to have associated with a Louis Kaplan, also a
reported Communist.
The Chairman. I think counsel has some questions.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Ducore, you have just finished reciting the
charges set out in the letter.
Mr. Ducore. As best I remember, yes.
Mr. Carr. Did you tell the chairman the length of time you
have been at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, I have.
Mr. Carr. Since 1941?
Mr. Ducore. That is right.
Mr. Carr. And have you given the chairman your educational
background?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
Mr. Carr. Would you do that, please?
Mr. Ducore. Do you want to start away back in college?
Mr. Carr. Your high school and college.
Mr. Ducore. I went to Woodcut High School in New York City.
Do you want the dates?
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Mr. Ducore. January or February of 1931 until January of
1935, and then I went to the College of the City of New York,
and I graduated from there in June of 1941, with a bachelor of
science degree in electrical engineering. I am not sure of the
date, but I think it was roughly September of 1947, I enrolled
in the Rutgers University Extension School at Fort Monmouth,
and I got my masters in science degree there in June of 1951.
Mr. Carr. Now, while you were at the College of the City of
New York, from 1938 through 1941, was it?
Mr. Ducore. From 1935 to 1941.
Mr. Carr. Were you in the day school or the evening school?
Mr. Ducore. I went to day school for the first two and a
half years, I think, and then I transferred to evening school,
and I finished up--and I actually took some courses during the
day and some during the evening, depending upon. how my working
hours were, and I had a full-time job at the time.
Mr. Carr. While you were attending the college, were you
familiar with or did you attend classes with one Julius
Rosenberg?
Mr. Ducore. I don't remember him from any of my classes,
no.
Mr. Carr. Do you remember him as being in the school at the
same time?
Mr. Ducore. No.
Mr. Carr. You have no recollection of him whatsoever as a
student?
Mr. Ducore. No, none at all.
Mr. Carr. What is your first knowledge of him as a person?
Mr. Ducore. When the press releases came out about being a
spy.
Mr. Carr. During the time of the arrest and trials?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. You had never seen him or contacted him at any
time while you were working for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Ducore. I had never contacted him at any time, and I
was interrogated sometime ago by the FBI on the same thing, and
at that time I said that I may have passed him in the halls at
the laboratories, I wasn't sure, and he looked like someone,
from the pictures they showed me, whom I may have passed, but I
never had anything to do with him.
Mr. Carr. So it is your statement that you have never had
any personal contact whatsoever with him?
Mr. Ducore. That is right.
Mr. Carr. Are you married?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. How long have you been married?
Mr. Ducore. Since October 8, 1944.
Mr. Carr. Have you been associated with Mr. Aaron Coleman
while you were at the Fort Monmouth Post?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. What was your connection with him? Is he your
superior?
Mr. Ducore. No. Let me see. From the time I started working
until after he came back from the Marine Corps, I had no
business or social association with him at all. I knew him as
one of the engineers at the laboratories, but we didn't see
each other outside at all.
Mr. Carr. You have had no social contact with him
whatsoever?
Mr. Ducore. Up to the time he came back from the Marine
Corps, I knew he worked there--this was approximately 1946, I
think. When he came back from the Marine Corps he was in the
same section I was in for a while. We didn't work on the same
jobs, but he was in the section, and so I knew him in the
section.
The Chairman. On this UPW, how long did you and your wife
belong to the UPW?
Mr. Ducore. I belonged approximately, I think, during 1946
and 1947, roughly those years. I may have joined late in 1945,
and I am not sure.
The Chairman. Did you finally drop out?
Mr. Ducore. I finally just dropped out from sheer
uninterest, and I stopped paying dues and told them I wasn't
interested, and I hadn't attended very many meetings anyway.
The Chairman. When did your wife drop out?
Mr. Ducore. She became pregnant during 1947, and also lost
interest in the union, and just dropped out, and has never had
any contacts since.
The Chairman. At the time you belonged, did you consider
that to be strictly Communist-controlled?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir, we had no indication at that time.
The Chairman. When did you first discover that the UPW was
a Communist-dominated organization?
Mr. Ducore. We never knew that the UPW was Communist-
dominated, but it wasn't until this Louis Kaplan and Albert
Sockel and Marcel Ullmann were suspended that we began to
suspect, and nobody ever told us what the charges were, but all
we could figure out was that they had been security risks.
The Chairman. Were they officers of the UPW?
Mr. Ducore. I am not sure about Louis Kaplan, and I think
that Ullmann and Sockel were at one time or another.
The Chairman. How well did you know Sockel?
Mr. Ducore. Not well at all. I met him two or three
meetings I attended, and he worked down the hall from me in the
laboratory, but in a different section.
The Chairman. Two or three meetings. What type of meetings?
Mr. Ducore. Regular union meetings.
The Chairman. Did you ever visit his home?
Mr. Ducore. Never.
The Chairman. How about Kaplan, did you ever visit his
home?
Mr. Ducore. I was at Kaplan's home once or twice, and he
was in my wife's driving pool, and he didn't have a car, and my
wife took four people to work with her, and he was one of the
four. I think we took him to a union meeting once, when we
drove up, and we took him and his wife to a dance given by the
Signal Corps Standards Agency at one time.
The Chairman. You said you were in his home once?
Mr. Ducore. I said once or twice, and these times we picked
him up either to take him to the union meeting or the dance.
The Chairman. Did you ever have dinner at his home?
Mr. Ducore. No.
The Chairman. Did he ever come to your home?
Mr. Ducore. I am not sure. I think he came once, when he
delivered a typewriter and some union stationery to the house,
and he either brought it or took it away.
The Chairman. Do you consider him a friend of yours?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
The Chairman. Do you think he would go out of his way to
try to hurt you?
Mr. Ducore. I barely know him, and I don't see why he
should.
The Chairman. You can see no reason why he should try to
injure you?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you think he was a Communist?
Mr. Ducore. At that time I didn't, no, sir, and I still
have only the information that I got from the fact that he has
been suspended and reported to be a Communist.
The Chairman. Yesterday he was asked a question whether or
not you were a member of the Communist party, and he refused to
answer on the ground that a truthful answer might tend to
incriminate him, and we explained to him that if he had no
knowledge of any membership on your part that he was not
entitled to the privilege and he would be in contempt of the
committee; and he could only refuse to answer that question,
using the Fifth Amendment, if he felt that a truthful answer
would incriminate him, if he had some knowledge of your
Communist party membership, and he persisted in this refusal to
answer. He very clearly understood that he was creating a
strong impression that you were a member of the party.
I am curious to know whether he has got some reason to try
to hurt you. Is he an enemy of yours or a friend of yours?
Mr. Ducore. He has never been a friend of mine, and I knew
him only from these union meetings, and I saw him possibly
three or four times, and I can't think of any reason why he
should try to hurt me.
The Chairman. How long did Kaplan share the so-called
driving pool with your wife?
Mr. Ducore. The pool started either late in 1944 or early
in 1945, and he was in it, I think, until he left--I don't know
if he was suspended or he resigned, but towards the end of that
time I think he bought a car of his own, and he drove a few
times by himself.
The Chairman. In 1949, did you say?
Mr. Ducore. No. He left, I think it was in 1947, or 1946.
The Chairman. When did your wife quit her government
employment?
Mr. Ducore. In 1947, roughly August, I think.
The Chairman. She hasn't worked for the government since?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you or your wife ever attend any
Communist party meetings?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
The Chairman. Were you ever asked to attend Communist party
meetings?
Mr. Ducore. Never.
The Chairman. Were you ever solicited to join the Communist
party or the Young Communist League?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
The Chairman. How well do you know Mr. Coleman? I believe
you have been asked that question before.
Mr. Ducore. Yes, and I think I got up to the point where,
after his return from service, we were in the same section.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any meetings with Mr.
Ullmann?
Mr. Ducore. Are we talking about Coleman or Ullmann now?
The Chairman. Ullmann.
Mr. Ducore. I saw Ullmann at the union meetings.
The Chairman. And no other meetings?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever suspect that anyone over at the
Signal Corps was removing classified material?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir, I never had any knowledge of that.
The Chairman. You never had any reason to believe that
either Coleman or Ullmann or Kaplan were members of the
Communist party?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you share in this driving pool, also?
Mr. Ducore. No. This was a pool that went up to the Signal
Corps Standards Agency in Red Bank, and later it moved to
Eatontown, and I worked at Evans.
The Chairman. Do you have a camera?
Mr. Ducore. I do, yes, sir.
The Chairman. What kind do you have?
Mr. Ducore. A Kodak Brownie box camera.
The Chairman. What other kinds have you had over the last
number of years?
Mr. Ducore. Just this, or similar types, and I have a toy
camera for one of my children which takes pictures, but that is
about all.
The Chairman. Did you ever have a Minox?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever see a Minox around the Signal
Corps Laboratory?
Mr. Ducore. I don't know what kind of a camera it is, and--
--
The Chairman. It is a camera about that big [indicating],
two inches long.
Mr. Ducore. No.
The Chairman. With that knowledge would you say you ever
saw one around the Signal Corps Laboratory like that?
Mr. Ducore. I may have seen one over in the reproduction
branch, and I am not sure, and it looked like a cigarette
lighter or something like that.
The Chairman. Would you remember who asked you to join the
UPW?
Mr. Ducore. I joined through my wife. At the time, she was
a member, and they were trying to expand.
The Chairman. Where was she working?
Mr. Ducore. At the Signal Corps Standards Agency.
The Chairman. You said your acquaintanceship with Rosenberg
was merely a casual acquaintance which you had with any of the
other college students?
Mr. Ducore. I had no acquaintance with Rosenberg.
The Chairman. I thought you went to school with him.
Mr. Ducore. He went to City College, but I don't remember
him from the school at all.
The Chairman. In other words, you had no acquaintance with
him at all?
Mr. Ducore. No. sir.
The Chairman. Nor with Mrs. Rosenberg?
Mr. Ducore. No.
Mr. Cohn. Could You go to the witness room for a few
moments, please?
The Chairman. Mr. Coleman, will you stand up and be sworn?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Coleman. I do.
TESTIMONY OF AARON H. COLEMAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
RICHARD F. GREEN)
[Mr. Coleman was accompanied by his counsel, Richard F.
Green, 7 West Grand Street, Elizabeth 2, New Jersey; Telephone
1518.]
Mr. Cohn. Give us your full name.
Mr. Coleman. Aaron H. Coleman.
Mr. Cohn. Did you until very recently work at the Fort
Monmouth Evans Signal Corps Laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. Until February 1952, I was at Evans Signal
Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you at Monmouth Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. A total period of fifteen years.
Mr. Cohn. You were suspended by the secretary of the army
on what date?
Mr. Coleman. I received a letter on the 28th of September.
Mr. Cohn. On the 28th of September of this year, is that
right?
Mr. Coleman. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. When you were with the Evans Signal Laboratory,
what was your position?
Mr. Coleman. I was the chief of the Systems Section of the
Radar Branch.
Mr. Cohn. As such, did you have access to classified
material?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I did.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have access to secret material?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I did.
Mr. Cohn. Did some of this material in general terms
involve radar and antiaircraft defense?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, it did.
Mr. Cohn. And would you agree that it was extremely
sensitive material and would be of substantial aid to the enemy
if received by them?
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. I knew Julius Rosenberg at college in one or
two of my classes.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend a meeting of the Young
Communist League with Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. I attended one meeting of the Young Communist
League.
Mr. Cohn. With Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. With Julius Rosenberg.
Mr. Cohn. Did you go to that meeting at the invitation of
Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I did.
Mr. Cohn. Would you tell us the circumstances of that?
Mr. Coleman. I believe it occurred in my senior year, which
would encompass the time between 1937 and 1938. He told me at
that time, for the first time, that he was a member of the
Young Communist League, and he asked me to go to attend a
meeting to see what it was like. I was not particularly
interested at first. He appealed to me on the basis that I
should not have a closed mind, and that I should see for
myself, just to attend one meeting.
He did this a number of times, to the best of my knowledge,
and finally I agreed to go to one meeting. I went to one
meeting, which I think took place in the vicinity of the
college, and I think it took place during the day while at
school. I was there for about an hour or an hour and a half,
that is to the best of my recollection, and I left. I don't
remember what was discussed, and I don't recall seeing anyone
there that I knew.
Mr. Cohn. You mean the only people you can tell us were
there were yourself and Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. You know of nobody else who was there?
Mr. Coleman. I didn't recognize anyone, to the best of my
knowledge now.
Mr. Cohn. Have you seen anybody who was there since that
time?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You have not?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this: Did you see Julius Rosenberg
at all after you left college?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir. I have never seen him or heard from
him, or corresponded with him.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see him after you attended that Young
Communist League meeting with him?
Mr. Coleman. I believe I did in my class.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Now, do you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Coleman. I knew him in several of my classes at City
College.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever see him after you left City College?
Mr. Coleman. I saw him a number of times. Once, I believe
at General Electric by chance, when I met him----
Mr. Cohn. Let the record indicate that Morton Sobell was
convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage and sentenced to
thirty years in prison.
Mr. Coleman. I visited General Electric with a Mr. Brenner,
who is a Signal Corps engineer. We visited the General Electric
Company to see a Mr. Newman, and while we were there, I found
that Morton Sobell was employed there, and this was the first
time I had seen him since school. We exchanged news about
classmates, and Mr. Brenner became interested in some of his
work, and that is about all I remember at this time.
The next time I heard of Morton Sobell was when I visited
the Reeves Instrument Corporation, which had a contract with
the government, and I was the project engineer. I usually
visited the project engineer in a room which contained four or
five individuals, and one of the individuals was Morton Sobell.
There were three or four other people. Naturally, when entering
the room, I would say hello to Sobell, and we exchanged good
morning and greetings of that sort, and then I would get down
to business with the project engineer.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know when you were at City College, when
you knew him at City College, that Sobell was a Communist?
Mr. Coleman. I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Was he at this meeting of the Young Communist
League which Rosenberg took you to?
Mr. Coleman. No, not to the best of my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know he was a close friend and associate
of Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. No, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. You sat right next to Rosenberg in some of your
classes, did you not?
Mr. Coleman. In one laboratory class, I believe I did, in
1936, but I am not sure.
The Chairman. When did you say you first went to the Signal
Corps?
Mr. Coleman. In March of 1939.
The Chairman. March of 1939?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You knew Rosenberg was working there in the
early '40s, did you?
Mr. Coleman. I did not, no, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever learn Rosenberg was working for
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Were you ever called upon by the FBI to give
information with regard to Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I was.
The Chairman. Did you give them all of the information?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, I did.
The Chairman. When was that?
Mr. Coleman. I was called upon after his arrest, and I
would like to give a little more information on this score. In
1949, I was a witness at a hearing for someone else.
Mr. Cohn. What was his name?
Mr. Coleman. His name is Jack Okun, O-k-u-n. I was asked
about this meeting of the Young Communist League, and I told
them that I had attended one meeting, and I was not asked at
that time about anybody else. And if I had been asked, I would
have told them the name of Julius Rosenberg.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you think it would have been relevant?
Mr. Coleman. I was not given the opportunity at that
hearing to volunteer information. I was asked questions, and I
was supposed to answer them.
Mr. Cohn. Go ahead.
The Chairman. Who was the fellow Okun?
Mr. Coleman. He is a close friend of mine, whom I have
known since high school days.
Mr. Cohn. On the subject of Mr. Okun, you and Mr. Okun
lived together, did you not?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Coleman. We first lived together in 1942 when he was
employed at Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. Were you living together in 1946?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, we were.
Mr. Cohn. In the fall of 1946?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, we were.
Mr. Cohn. In October of 1946?
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Coleman, is it not a fact that in October of
1946, investigators of the Army Security Intelligence Division
raided your living quarters and found forty-eight classified
documents?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, that is not the exact circumstances,
and if you will permit me, I would like to describe it.
Mr. Cohn. I would like to have your description, but first
of all I would like to know, number one, was there a raid on
your living quarters?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, there was not a raid.
Mr. Cohn. Was your place searched by the Army Security
Intelligence Division?
Mr. Coleman. I made available to them everything that I had
in my house.
Mr. Cohn. Was your place searched by them? Did they come
over to your house and ask whether you had taken classified
documents from the laboratory to your home?
Mr. Coleman. They asked me, at the Security and
Intelligence Section, and I signed a waiver permitting them to
search, and I took them to my home and they searched everything
I had, and every piece of paper.
Mr. Cohn. Did they find some government documents in your
home?
Mr. Coleman. They found some government documents, two of
which were classified, at that time, and some of which were
marked classified, but were not. Two were still classified at
the time.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know that this was a grave violation of
security regulations, to say the least of it?
Mr. Coleman. I was punished for this violation, and the
violation read as follows: Carelessness in the custodianship of
the documents, and failure to declassify them. I was punished,
and I was reprimanded, and my punishment consisted of two
weeks' suspension. I have never had a security violation since
then.
Mr. Cohn. Now, you say the thing read: Carelessness in the
custodianship of documents. That is one explanation. You take
documents from what you have agreed with us is an extremely
sensitive place, and you take them to your home. Now, that
might be carelessness and it might be something else, isn't
that a fact?
Mr. Coleman. Well, the documents--I was authorized to
remove the documents to my home, and every document was removed
with authorization, and every document was removed with
authorization.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Secretary, we want to call your attention to
the fact that at this time we were down in Monmouth, and the
army made available, as it has and as have all government
agencies, the personnel files not the loyalty and security
files, but the personnel files of various people under
investigation. We examined the file of Mr. Coleman, and took
copious notes from it, and as a matter of fact some documents
were of very great interest and we made verbatim copies of
them.
Instead of taking the files with us and bringing them back
here, they asked us over at Monmouth if we would let them make
photostats, and they would have their records complete. We
agreed to that, and when the photostats arrived we found that
the files had been stripped of some of the most relevant
documents. It so happens that some of the documents of which we
had made verbatim copies were missing.
We wanted to call that to your attention. In the case of
the Coleman file, there had been removed from it all papers
indicating the search of his home by the Security and
Intelligence Division, and the fact that he had been suspended,
and the fact that these classified documents had been removed
by him from the Evans Signal Laboratory and found in his home.
I would say that the files were handled by G-2 in the
Pentagon, and we understand they left Fort Monmouth intact.
On how many occasions did you remove classified documents
from the Evans Signal Corps Laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember.
Mr. Cohn. Would you say there were numerous occasions?
Mr. Coleman. I removed documents with authorization on
numerous times.
Mr. Cohn. How many times without authorization?
Mr. Coleman. Never.
Mr. Cohn. Is it your contention that you were specifically
authorized to remove these documents that you had in your home?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Apparently the army didn't agree with that
contention, did it?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I have the reprimand, a copy of it,
signed by the commanding officer, which states, ``You are
hereby reprimanded for carelessness in custodianship, and for
failure to declassify.''
The Chairman. The reprimand went further than that, did it
not? They told you it was a reprehensible act on your part? The
reprimand told you it was a reprehensible act and a violation
of the Espionage Act?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did it use the word ``reprehensible''?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember if it used the word
``reprehensible,'' but it did not state that it was a violation
of the Espionage Act, and it stated that it was a security
violation.
The Chairman. Do you realize it was a violation of the
Espionage Act to take classified material away from the
laboratory and have it in your home?
Mr. Coleman. I was authorized to remove it to my home, so I
did not realize it at the time. I assumed that if I had been
authorized, it was all right.
The Chairman. Who authorized you to take the material to
your home?
Mr. Cohn. Give us that name, will you, please?
Mr. Coleman. Well, I can't remember. It probably would have
been the branch chief.
The Chairman. Not ``probably.'' You gave us the positive
statement that someone authorized you to take classified
material and--just a moment--to your home. If that is the fact,
you must know who gave you the authorization, and it cannot be
some imaginary person.
Mr. Coleman. No, it could be more than one person, and I
would like to tell you the people who might have been----
The Chairman. Not who it might have been and not who it
might be, but who it was. If you do not know who it was, then
just tell us that. It is a very, very important matter, you
see, taking secret material from the Signal Corps and having it
in your home, and you give us the positive statement that
someone authorized you. Now, it is not an imaginary person who
authorized you. It had to be a man with a face and a name. If
you do not know who it was, tell us; and if you do know, tell
us.
Mr. Coleman. Well, I was authorized to remove the
documents, but I am not sure as of two or three people who it
could be, and I could think pretty well it could be any one of
the two or three people, and if you want, I will mention their
names. But I am not positive.
The Chairman. You do not know now who gave you the
authority?
Mr. Coleman. I am not positive.
The Chairman. When you were brought up on charges in the
Signal Corps, did you at that time give them as a defense the
fact that you were authorized to remove the material?
Mr. Coleman. I was not brought up on charges in this matter
I assume you are talking of, in 1946, and I was not brought up
on charges at that time.
The Chairman. After the security branch raided your
apartment or came to your apartment and removed the classified
material, were letters of charges served on you?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, they were not.
The Chairman. Were you asked to give an answer or an excuse
or an explanation for having had this classified material?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my knowledge, I was not.
The Chairman. You were not?
Mr. Coleman. No.
The Chairman. You never were asked to explain it?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my knowledge, I was not.
The Chairman. In other words, they punished you without
giving you a chance to explain why you had the material in your
apartment?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my knowledge, that is correct.
The Chairman. Just to refresh your recollection, you wrote
a very lengthy explanation, did you not, and submitted it to
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. After I received the reprimand, I wrote for
the record a first endorsement, explaining that my motives were
to catch up with the work I had missed while in the Marine
Corps.
The Chairman. You were given a chance to explain, and you
wrote a lengthy explanation, did you not?
Mr. Coleman. After I was reprimanded.
The Chairman. I do not care when. Did you write an
explanation of why you had those secret documents in your
apartment?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you at that time say that you had
authority from someone?
Mr. Coleman. I am sorry, sir, I am not sure.
The Chairman. You are not sure?
Mr. Coleman. I am not sure. If I could refresh my memory by
looking at the document, I could tell.
The Chairman. That is rather important. That is your reason
for having the Secret documents in your apartment, if you took
them there because someone gave you the authority to do it, and
would you not tell the Signal Corps that?
Mr. Coleman. I was not charged with removing them without
authorization, and therefore I did not attempt to answer that.
I did attempt to answer the things with which I was charged.
The Chairman. Do you know that some of these secret
documents are missing and have shown up in East Berlin in the
Russian laboratories, and have been used by them? Are you aware
of that?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, and I would like to state that of all
of those documents, some of which I had received in the Marine
Corps and some of which were personal notes, and some of which
I had removed from Evans with authorization, only two were
classified at that time, and that classification was
confidential. Therefore, I cannot see of what value they would
have been at that time to anyone, except for the two
confidential documents, and the others were unclassified and
were available to anyone.
Mr. Cohn. When were they unclassified, before or after you
took them to your home?
Mr. Coleman. I do not know.
The Chairman. Did you declassify them yourself?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you have authority to declassify?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. You did not?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Were they marked secret?
Mr. Coleman. Some were marked secret.
Mr. Cohn. Were they declassified at the time you took them
to your home, or declassified after you had them in your home?
Mr. Coleman. I do not know. I would like to add one thing.
I believe, and I am not certain, that an investigation was made
as to the security status of those documents, and I believe it
was determined in that way, but I do not know.
The Chairman. Do you know some were classified secret?
Mr. Coleman. Some were marked secret, and some were marked
confidential, and some were marked restricted, and some were
not marked at all.
The Chairman. Do you know the definition of ``secret''?
Mr. Coleman. I believe it is something which would harm the
national defense if it were revealed.
The Chairman. And would be of great aid to the enemy?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Do you think it was proper, now, for you to
take the secret material and store it in your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. I did not think so at that time, and I felt
that I had committed a security violation, and I was punished
for it.
The Chairman. Why did you do it if you thought it was
improper?
Mr. Coleman. I had just returned from the Marine Corps, and
I had been away for two years, and I had been assigned an
important project. I found that I was far behind in the state
of the art. There were many things about which I did not know.
I felt that in order to do a conscientious job, I had to catch
up with what had happened in those two years. So I did two
things: I went to school towards trying to get my masters
degree and I also worked at home trying to catch up. That was
the only way I could see how to fulfill my responsibilities.
Later, one year later, unfortunately, a book came out that
described all of this information.
The Chairman. When did you leave the Marine Corps?
Mr. Coleman. I left the Marine Corps in January of 1946.
The Chairman. I understood you to give as an excuse the
fact that you just left the Marine Corps, and your apartment
was raided in the late fall of 1946, was it not?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. When did you start to work for the Signal
Corps?
Mr. Coleman. You mean after I came back from the Marine
Corps?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. In January of 1946.
The Chairman. Over what period of time did you accumulate
the forty-eight documents that the security branch picked up?
Mr. Coleman. First I would like to state there were forty-
three documents; and secondly, I don't remember exactly when it
was.
The Chairman. Had you taken other classified documents from
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know. I am not certain whether I did
or not.
The Chairman. You do not know whether you took other
documents or not?
Mr. Coleman. If I did, I returned them to the laboratories.
The Chairman. Well, now, you should remember whether or not
you took others from the laboratory and returned them, or not.
This is a rather important matter to you, I assume.
Mr. Coleman. It is very important to me.
The Chairman. You were suspended for it; and if you took
other documents out and read them and took them back, if that
was your practice, you should remember that.
Mr. Coleman. Well, I can't, since this is a detailed piece
of information, and it requires knowing the title, and it was
seven years ago.
The Chairman. I am not asking you for the title. I am
asking you if you recall now if there were other documents you
took from the Signal Corps laboratory and returned them to the
laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I believe I probably did, but I am not
certain.
The Chairman. You do not remember whether you did or not?
Mr. Coleman. That is right.
The Chairman. Did you give any of these documents to anyone
else?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Who all was living with you at that time?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Jack Okun.
The Chairman. Jack Okun?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Why was he suspended?
Mr. Coleman. I believe he was suspended--one of the charges
was that he was a member of the United Public Workers Union.
The Chairman. What were the other charges? Was he not
charged with Communist activities, your roommate?
Mr. Coleman. I believe he was charged with attending a
meeting of some sort of club.
The Chairman. Don't be coy with me. You know what your
roommate was suspended for.
Mr. Coleman. I am trying to remember.
The Chairman. You testified at his hearing, and you know
whether he was accused of Communist activities, and you tell us
that.
Mr. Coleman. I am trying to remember the exact charges,
sir, and if you give me a little time, I think I can repeat
most of them as they read in the charges.
I would like to give you the exact facts to the best of my
ability.
The Chairman. Do you know whether he was charged with
Communist activities, this roommate of yours?
Mr. Coleman. I don't recall the charge reading, ``You are
charged with Communist activities.'' That is the part that I
don't remember. I would like to tell you the exact charges.
The Chairman. Do you know whether or not that was the
substance of the charge, that he had been engaged in Communist
activities and attending Communist meetings?
Mr. Coleman. I think if you would like to know the
substance of it, I believe the substance of it was association
with individuals reported to have been Communists, and I feel
that would be a fair summary of the charges.
The Chairman. And association with espionage agents, is
that not correct?
Mr. Coleman. In the charges, it was not so mentioned, as
far as I know.
The Chairman. At the time you testified for him, did you
not know that he was accused of association with espionage
agents?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Have you ever been told that by him?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I have not.
The Chairman. Now, you roomed with him for how long?
Mr. Coleman. The rooming, the total period, sir, from the
beginning?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. We roomed in 1942 a year and a half, a total
of two and a half years in which there was a break for a period
in the Marine Corps.
The Chairman. He was your roommate during 1946?
Mr. Coleman. That is right.
The Chairman. During the time you were removing the secret
documents from the Signal Corps and bringing them home, he was
your roommate?
Mr. Coleman. That is right.
The Chairman. Who else roomed with you during that period
of time? Was it a one-room apartment?
Mr. Coleman. This was a two-room apartment.
The Chairman. Just the two of you?
Mr. Coleman. Just the two of us living there.
The Chairman. How long did you continue to live with him
after the raid upon your apartment? Strike the word ``raid''--
after the army security picked up the classified material.
Mr. Coleman. I believe our rooming ended at the end of the
year when he was married, at the end of 1946.
The Chairman. Did you have reason to believe that he was a
member of the Communist party?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Who else had access to your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. I believe the only person who visited us most
frequently at that time was Mr. Peter Rosmovsky, who lived in
the same building.
The Chairman. Rosmovsky?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How do you spell that?
Mr. Coleman. R-o-s-m-o-v-s-k-y.
The Chairman. Does he work at the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, he does.
The Chairman. How long has he been working there?
Mr. Coleman. I believe he has been working there for about
sixteen or seventeen years.
The Chairman. Do you know of anyone else who removed
classified material in the same manner that you did?
Mr. Coleman. I do not know of any specific individual, but
I believe that everyone was authorized to remove documents with
a pass, which was known as a whiz pass, and I believe it was a
common practice.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have a pass to remove these documents?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, I did.
Mr. Cohn. Did you show that pass to the security and
intelligence investigators when they came around? I have the
statement you made back at that time, and there isn't a word in
there about your having been authorized to take these
documents. What you said, the excuse that you gave, was that
your motive was that you wanted to catch up on some work at
home, and therefore you thought it would be all right to take
these documents out; and there isn't a word about having
obtained a pass or permission for it. I would like to get to
the bottom of that.
Mr. Coleman. I would like to.
Mr. Cohn. I want to know who gave you that pass, and
whether or not you had a pass----
Mr. Coleman. I had a pass.
Mr. Cohn [continuing]. To take each and every one of these
secret and classified documents out of the Evans Signal
Laboratory to your home and to retain them in your home. I want
to know who gave you the pass.
Mr. Coleman. The pass was signed by the adjutant of the
laboratories at that time.
Mr. Cohn. Who is the man we can call in here?
Mr. Coleman. I think you should call in the branch chief,
Mr. Yamins.
The Chairman. Who issued the pass? Who signed the pass?
That is the man we want.
Mr. Coleman. The adjutant.
The Chairman. What is his name?
Mr. Coleman. I am sorry, I do not remember.
The Chairman. But it was the adjutant in the year 1946?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And this pass gave you permission to remove
secret material from the laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. If you had all of these things on the basis of a
written pass and written record, why did G-2 go to you and ask
you for a waiver to search your home and see if you have any
classified documents there?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. The thing doesn't make sense, does it?
Mr. Coleman. I think it does.
The Chairman. Let us get the record clear. Remember, you
are under oath. It is your sworn testimony that you had a pass
which granted you permission to take secret material from the
laboratory, is that correct?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And that gave you the right to take whatever
secret material you cared to from the laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I believe it was a pass that was made
out for each individual document, and it was called a whiz
pass.
The Chairman. Do you have any of those passes?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I do not.
The Chairman. But you claim each time you got the forty-
three documents, you went to the adjutant and he signed a pass
giving you permission to remove them?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. How did it happen?
Mr. Coleman. I would like to explain the circumstances, if
you will give me the time.
The Chairman. We will give you all of the time you want.
Mr. Coleman. There was a type of machine that is similarly
used for sales orders, and things like that, which had a large
number of carbon copies for each document, and it was numbered.
This was ordinarily used for removing property, but it was also
used at that time for removing documents. On that pass, your
name was indicated, and the dates, and it indicated where you
were taking the property or the documents, and then there was a
list made of all of the documents, or the property. Then it was
signed by myself, by the branch chief, or the assistant branch
chief if he was present, whichever one was present at the time.
That pass was then removed from this machine, and one copy
was sent, I believe, to the signal property officer, and the
other copy was given to the individual to give to the guard. As
I recall it, that was done. Then as you left the area, you gave
the pass to the guard, and he would look at your documents and
check it with the pass, and he would note whatever was on the
pass to make sure that the signatures were correct, and that is
how you would take the documents out.
The Chairman. Now my question is: Each time you took those
documents, the forty-three of them, on each occasion someone
other than yourself signed the pass?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And on each occasion you gave the guard a
copy of the pass?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And you say that it is common practice to
give passes to take secret material to the homes of the people
working in the laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, I do.
The Chairman. That is common practice?
Mr. Coleman. It was common practice, and after I received
my security violation, the regulations were changed.
If you will permit me, would you permit me, it is my
feeling that I suffered a two-weeks suspension for a practice
that was done by many other people; during the war
particularly, many of them would take their work home. It was a
common practice.
The Chairman. Now, when that pass was signed, you would
sign it yourself, is that right?
Mr. Coleman. That is right, yes, sir.
The Chairman. And the adjutant, the base adjutant, would
sign it?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, the branch chief or the assistant
branch chief.
The Chairman. And it was known by the branch chief and the
assistant branch chief that it was common practice to take
secret material and store it in the apartments of various
people?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know about storing. All I know about
it was that the pass stated these documents were being taken
home, and it so stated on the pass, and therefore he knew
exactly that I was taking the documents home for work at home.
The Chairman. Some of those documents involved the radar
screen?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, to the best of my knowledge they were
not.
The Chairman. Did any of them involve radar?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, they did.
The Chairman. They involved radar?
Mr. Coleman. They did involve radar.
The Chairman. They involved the location of radar
installations?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I don't think so, and I am not sure.
The Chairman. In what way did they concern radar?
Mr. Coleman. They had the principles of radar, the
fundamental principles of radar, for one example; and they had
the sighting of radar, how you go about sighting radar, the
best way of doing it. And those are two of them that I
remember.
The Chairman. The construction of radar equipment?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, not the construction. The fundamental
principles, and applicable to any radar.
The Chairman. Do you think that that material would be of
benefit to the enemy?
Mr. Coleman. At that time, in 1946, I do not think so,
because it was being published in a large number of books at
that very time.
The Chairman. Then it is your position that the material
should not have been classified at all?
Mr. Coleman. The great majority of them, except for the
two, which I don't recall which two they were, should not have
been classified, and I understand they were not classified at
that time.
The Chairman. Let us talk about the ones that were
classified. Do you feel that the information was of such
general nature that they should not have been classified as
secret?
Mr. Coleman. I do not remember exactly which two documents
they were, but they were not classified at that time secret;
they were classified confidential.
The Chairman. Well, now, your reprimand said they were
classified as secret.
Mr. Coleman. Mine says they were classified confidential.
The Chairman. Let us take the reprimand you had against the
one we got from the army.
Mr. Coleman. I have one dated the 21st of October.
The Chairman. You read yours and I will read mine.
I hereby reprimand you for carelessness in the
custodianship of Classified documents, in that you had been
keeping in your apartment in an insecure place, and in
violation of Army Regulation 380-5. a number of documents
marked Secret and Confidential, two of which were in fact
currently classified as Confidential; and also that you did not
comply with current regulations prescribing the downgrading
procedure for lowering the classification of documents.
Did I correctly read it?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, you did.
The Chairman. Now, did you have the authority to downgrade
classified documents?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not have the authority, but I
could have taken action to have them downgraded by somebody
else.
The Chairman. Well, now, apparently some of them were
downgraded after you took them to your apartment, and I note
they were marked secret when you took them, and they say at the
present time they are classified confidential. Do you know who
took the action to have those downgraded after you removed
them?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my knowledge--permit me just to
make sure exactly what your question is. When you say
``downgraded,'' you mean the physical change on the paper from
secret to some other classification?
The Chairman. Well, let us go back a step. They were
stamped secret when you took them?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. They normally would have been classified
secret or they would not have been stamped secret. You do not
stamp a confidential document secret, do you?
Mr. Coleman. That is true, but the classification pertains
to the date at which the material was developed.
The Chairman. So at the time you took them, they were
classified as secret, is that correct?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so, and I think that they were
classified much lower than secret.
The Chairman. Do you know?
Mr. Coleman. I do not know.
The Chairman. But you think they were classified lower?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I do, and the reason I believe so was
because much of this information was appearing in current
electronic journals.
The Chairman. When you were associated or when you knew
Julius Rosenberg, you knew he was a Communist?
Mr. Coleman. I learned he was a Communist under the
circumstances I described previously, in that class in my
senior year, and he told me.
The Chairman. And he repeatedly solicited you to join the
Communist party, did he not?
Mr. Coleman. He tried a number of times to get me to join
the Young Communist League.
The Chairman. That is the Communist party for those who are
not of an age to join the party itself, is that right?
Mr. Coleman. I think so, yes, sir.
The Chairman. And the aims of the Young Communist League
are the same as the Communist party, are they not?
Mr. Coleman. I believe they are, yes, sir.
The Chairman. So there is no distinction between the two,
except the Young Communist League was the harbor for the
younger members of the Communist party.
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And he urged you to join the Young Communist
League?
Mr. Coleman. He tried to get me to join, yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever tell any intelligence agency
that Julius Rosenberg was a Communist, and had solicited you to
join the party?
Mr. Coleman. I told the FBI.
The Chairman. After they called upon you?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Not until then?
Mr. Coleman. That is right, sir.
The Chairman. How soon after he was arrested did they call
upon you?
Mr. Coleman. I am sorry, I don't remember exactly when, and
I think it was a few months, but I am not sure.
The Chairman. They told you then they knew you had attended
Communist meetings with him?
Mr. Coleman. One meeting they told me they knew I had
attended.
The Chairman. And that is the only one that you have
admitted having attended?
Mr. Coleman. That is the only one I have ever attended.
The Chairman. They told you that they had information and
testimony and gave you the date of the meeting you attended, is
that right? Is this correct: that when the FBI first asked you
whether you had attended meetings with Rosenberg, Communist
meetings, you said you couldn't remember any, and it was only
after they gave you the time and place and the date that then
your memory was refreshed and you said that you had recalled
that meeting?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember the exact circumstances, and
I think the circumstances are something like, as I remember one
part of it, they asked me to sign a penciled statement about
Rosenberg, in which I stated that I had known at that time that
he was a Communist, and I did so, and I signed it, because he
told me so.
The Chairman. Let us refresh your recollection. The report
we have is that when the FBI man called upon you, you denied
that you had ever attended a meeting with Rosenberg.
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Just a moment. You said you did not recall
ever having been at such a meeting, and it was only after they
told you that they knew one of the meetings you had attended
that then your memory became refreshed and you said, ``Yes, I
attended that meeting.'' Is that not correct?
Mr. Coleman. I am sorry, sir, I don't remember the exact
circumstances. I would like to make one statement, if you will
permit me. The year before I had testified at this hearing, it
is true, and I stated I had attended the one meeting of the
Young Communist League, and after that time I had realized that
the Communists were dominated by Moscow, and that is the method
by which I learned, that was my method of finding out.
The Chairman. How often did you go to any meetings of any
kind with Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. It was the only meeting I have ever attended
anyplace with Rosenberg.
The Chairman. How about meetings that were not Communist
meetings?
Mr. Coleman. No other meetings to the best of my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. You said the FBI did not come to you until
several months after Rosenberg's arrest. He was arrested on
charges of espionage, involving activity for the Communists,
and now here you are in a position where he had admitted to you
that he was a Communist, which of course would have been
extremely valuable to the FBI and to the government. Why did
you not contact the FBI and give them this information?
Mr. Coleman. I did not know that he was working for the
government, and I had not heard it.
Mr. Cohn. I am talking about the time following his arrest,
when it was all over the front pages that Julius Rosenberg had
been arrested on charges of espionage and Communist espionage.
Why did you not then contact the FBI and give them this
important information that you had concerning Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. Well, I thought the information that I had
wasn't particularly important, because all I knew about him was
that he was a Communist, and had tried to get me to join, and
since they already knew that, I didn't think that I could add
anything to it.
Mr. Cohn. Did you think it was a pretty important element
of proof at the forthcoming trial?
Mr. Coleman. Well, I assumed, and I assumed rightly, that
they would very quickly question everybody in the same class,
and that they would obtain that information.
Mr. Cohn. The fact is, you waited for them to come to you,
and you did not go to them and give the information you had
about Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. That is correct.
The Chairman. Mr. Coleman, at that time what were you
doing, what was your job?
Mr. Cohn. That was 1951.
Mr. Coleman. It was the same as I mentioned before, the
chief of the Systems Section.
The Chairman. Chief of what?
Mr. Coleman. Systems Section, Radar Branch.
The Chairman. A very important job, is it not?
Mr. Coleman. Well, relatively speaking, yes, compared to a
large number of employees, yes.
The Chairman. You read the papers and you knew Rosenberg
was accused of espionage.
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I did.
The Chairman. That was headlined all over the country.
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And you say that you thought that somehow the
FBI might learn that you knew something about Rosenberg and
would come to you, and for that reason you did not pick up the
phone and call anyone in Justice Department and say, ``Here, I
can give you some help,'' you who are head of the section over
in the Signal Corps.
Mr. Coleman. Well, sir, there were two reasons why I may
not have called them. One, I believe the information I had was
nothing that they did not already know, and the newspaper
articles printed it in great detail, everything about him.
The Chairman. You knew that he denied being a Communist at
the time, and you knew he denied being an espionage agent, and
you knew that the Justice Department had to prove that, did you
not?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I knew that they had to prove that, but I
assumed----
The Chairman. Why did you not pick up the phone and say,
``I know this man, and I know he is a Communist''?
Mr. Coleman. Frankly, I don't think the thought occurred to
me at the time.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever in private business with a man
named Harold Ducore?
Mr. Coleman. I would like to explain the circumstances, and
I was not actually in business, but we did form a corporation
which was never activated.
Mr. Cohn. What was the name of the corporation?
Mr. Coleman. Ducore Engineering Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. When was it formed?
Mr. Coleman. I think it was formed in 1947 or 1948.
Mr. Cohn. And did this company formed by you and Mr.
Ducore, this company organized by you and Mr. Ducore, when it
was planning out what it might do, did it solicit business from
a company owned by Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, not that I know.
Mr. Cohn. Is this the first you heard about that?
Mr. Coleman. This is the first I heard about that.
Mr. Cohn. Who was connected with this company, in addition
to Mr. Ducore and yourself?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Corwin.
Mr. Cohn. Who?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Jerome Corwin.
Mr. Cohn. He is still working out at Monmouth?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What position does he hold out at Monmouth?
Mr. Coleman. I believe he is the chief of the Mechanical
Engineering Section at Evans.
Mr. Cohn. Can you tell us whether or not you or Mr. Ducore
or Mr. Corwin ever were in touch with Julius Rosenberg, Bernard
Greenglass, or David Greenglass, with reference to soliciting
business from the G & R Company, G standing for Greenglass and
R for Rosenberg, which was Julius Rosenberg's business at that
time?
Mr. Coleman. As far as I know, to my knowledge we were
never in contact with this company as you mentioned, and I
never even heard of this company until you just mentioned it.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Abraham
Brothman?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I do not. I read his name in the
papers.
Mr. Cohn. You had never met him?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, with what companies did this corporation
formed by yourself and Mr. Ducore and Mr. Corwin, attempt to do
business?
Mr. Coleman. We did not attempt to do business with any
company that I can remember, except one, the American
Association of Railroads.
Mr. Cohn. That is the only one?
Mr. Coleman. That is the only other correspondence--we
wrote a large number of letters requesting catalogs, and a
great deal of that writing was done by the lawyer who had
arranged for the corporation.
Mr. Cohn. What was his name?
Mr. Coleman. His name, I think, was Heyman, and I am not
sure of his first name.
Mr. Cohn. When was this, exactly? Can you fix the time?
Mr. Coleman. I think it was in the early part of 1947, and
that is the best I could do with the time.
Mr. Cohn. Can you tell us whether or not you or Mr. Ducore
or Mr. Corwin went out to any of your friends in the business
which you intended to enter, and asked them whether they could
help you?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What did you do, just organized the thing?
Mr. Coleman. I would like to describe it. We organized this
corporation, and we paid a $25 incorporation fee, and we
printed up some stationery, and we wrote one letter, that I
mentioned, and we wrote for catalogs. And then we decided we
didn't want to go through with it. We did not attempt to get
business from anyone.
Mr. Cohn. You did not attempt to?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You don't know whether Mr. Corwin did or Mr.
Ducore?
Mr. Coleman. I did not attempt to get business from anyone.
Mr. Cohn. I want to ask you this: In the letter of
suspension sent to you, we have covered some of the matters
with which you were charged, is that right?
Mr. Coleman. That is right, you have.
Mr. Cohn. Now, are there any which we haven't covered?
Mr. Coleman. Yes. One of the matters is association with
two individuals by the name of Fred Kitty, and Joe Perkoff, who
have been reported to have been Communist party sympathizers or
party members.
Mr. Cohn. Now, how about that?
Mr. Coleman. As far as Mr. Perkoff is concerned, he was
just a person who was assigned or transferred to my section
about three or four months, something like that, before I went
into the Marine Corps, and he was just someone I knew at the
section, and I even didn't----
Mr. Cohn. Did you have anything to do with the transfer to
your section?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Were you chief of the section?
Mr. Coleman. I was chief of the section.
Mr. Cohn. Did you approve his transfer?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think I actually did. If you will
permit me to describe the circumstances, it was somewhat
unusual. I had a section concerned with a certain type of radar
equipment, and there was another section concerned with
different types of radar equipment, and the two sections were
merged, and I and another individual by the name of Albert S.
White were made co-chiefs, and the officer in charge was the
primary person controlling the entire works.
Now, when that merger took place, Mr. Perkoff was one of
the individuals who came or who moved into this section. So it
was not with my approval or prior knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see him after you returned?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. How about Mr. Kitty?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Kitty was a mechanical engineer who was
assigned to my section, I believe in the latter part of 1942.
He worked on parts lists and he was very good on doing parts
lists, and so I put him in charge of a little unit right in
parts list. For a year I had no contact with him outside of
business. Then after that time, for about six months before I
went into the Marine Corps, I had occasional contact with him
socially.
Mr. Cohn. You say occasional contact socially. Was he not
in your home on several occasions?
Mr. Coleman. He may have been, about once or twice, not
frequently.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know he was a Communist?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss communism with him?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I don't think so. I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss world affairs with him?
Mr. Coleman. I don't recall discussing it, and he seemed to
be interested, frankly, primarily in women at the time, and
that was the general subject of the discussion most of the
time.
Mr. Cohn. What were the others? Did you see Mr. Kitty after
1946?
Mr. Coleman. After 1946 when I came back, I found he was
employed by Bendix as a project engineer. He would come to
visit Evans Signal Laboratory on projects not involving me, but
he would be there, and I would see him in the cafeteria, and we
would say hello and interchange greetings.
Mr. Cohn. Did Mr. Kitty visit your apartment any time after
1946?
Mr. Coleman. He visited my home once on one of these trips.
Mr. Cohn. About when was that?
Mr. Coleman. I think it was about 1948, sometime around
there.
Mr. Cohn. Did he visit your home at all in 1946?
Mr. Coleman. I do not recall him visiting my home in 1946.
Mr. Cohn. You are not sure one way or the other?
Mr. Coleman. I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. Was Mr. Ducore a visitor at your home in 1946?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not know Ducore at that time
socially, and I may have known him as a person in the
laboratories, but not socially.
Mr. Cohn. What were the other charges?
Mr. Coleman. Well, let us see. We covered Rosenberg, and we
covered Sobell, and we covered Kitty and Perkoff. And the other
charge was that I admitted attending several meetings of the
Young Communist League, and expressing approval of their
theories. Would you like me to discuss that?
Mr. Cohn. Surely.
Mr. Coleman. I attended one meeting of the Young Communist
League, and I didn't do it because I wanted to. I was appealed
to on the basis, ``Don't have a closed mind; come and see for
yourself.'' And I did that, and I got the impression----
Mr. Cohn. Who made this appeal?
Mr. Coleman. Rosenberg. I got this impression from this
meeting, that instead of having a discussion, these people were
given the word, and so I asked Rosenberg about it, and ``What
gives here?'' and ``This isn't a democratic organization,''
this is a general tenor of the discussion, and he didn't
explain it very satisfactorily to me, and I was convinced then
and I can at least document that in some of the letters that
people have saved, that the Communist party was dominated by
Moscow.
Mr. Cohn. Well, now, you seem to be saying here your only
objection to communism and the Communist party, at least then,
was that, number one, you didn't like the methods; and number
two, they were too dictatorial and the word was given; and
number three it was dominated by Moscow.
Mr. Coleman. Well, an American party dominated by a foreign
power, I considered equivalent to a traitor.
Mr. Cohn. How about the aims of the party, the abolition of
our form of government and the establishment of socialism?
Mr. Coleman. That went with it, and once they were
dominated by Moscow, it automatically follows that they were
trying to establish it.
Mr. Cohn. You say that the fact that you found they were
dominated by Moscow led you to believe they wanted to establish
communism. You were going to a meeting of the Young Communist
League, and what do you think they had the word ``Communist''
in the title for? Don't you think the object was to establish
communism?
Mr. Coleman. In the '30s, at that time, they claimed that
they were purely an American party, and they had nothing to do
with Moscow.
Mr. Cohn. But they wanted to establish communism, and they
weren't handing out candy or anything.
Mr. Coleman. Well, that is true, but they claimed that they
would have free speech and all of the other stuff, and they
ranted about it and they raved about it.
Mr. Cohn. I will grant you all of that. And, given all of
that, did you believe in the end result which they sought or
which they openly sought to have?
Mr. Coleman. No.
Mr. Cohn. You haven't made that clear this morning. The
objections you have urged have been objections concerning
method and concerning control. How about these letters you say
you have? I would be very much interested in those.
Mr. Coleman. In 1940, I wrote to someone and stated this,
and I don't have the letter but it is being mailed to me, and
so I will state it secondhand.
The Chairman. Who was it to?
Mr. Coleman. I wrote it to either the wife of a friend of
mine or to himself, Mr. David Spear or his wife.
The Chairman. S-p-e-a-r?
Mr. Coleman. That is right.
I was in Panama at the time, on government duty, for about
six months, and this was 1940. At that time I wrote and stated
that Stalin was a dictator just like the three other dictators,
Hitler and Mussolini. Now, as a Jewish individual, I felt very
strongly about Hitler, and when I coupled Stalin in the same
words with Hitler, I expressed my opinion without further need
for clarification.
I also stated in 1940 that we should rearm as rapidly as we
could, because we couldn't fight the war with men alone. We
needed machines.
I also stated that despite all of the difficulties we had,
democracy was the best form of government, and it was the best
thing for us, and this I specifically stated without any
particular reason, and I wrote this to my closest friend, or
his wife, whom I knew very well, and I had no reason to hide my
views from them.
Mr. Cohn. What are the other letters?
Mr. Coleman. This is the only letter that he quoted to me,
and I don't have the letter in my physical possession, and it
is being sent to me.
The Chairman. You said he quoted to you. I do not follow
you on that.
Mr. Coleman. He is not here physically, and so I talked to
him on the telephone, and he told me that he had looked through
and he had found this letter of mine, and he quoted me the
pertinent paragraphs.
The Chairman. You are having the letter sent to you?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. I think it would be well if you produced that
letter; and you say it was written in 1940?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How soon will you get that letter?
Mr. Coleman. I hope to get it within this week.
The Chairman. When did he mail it to you?
Mr. Coleman. He said he mailed it Tuesday from Washington
State.
Mr. Cohn. Were there any other charges?
Mr. Coleman. Would you let me continue on this charge, and
I feel that I have more to say.
Mr. Cohn. All right.
Mr. Coleman. In 1943, I remember having a discussion about
Russia, and this is at the time when Russia was our ally, and I
was highly critical of Russia's action in Finland which had
taken place previously. Now, it seems to me that if I had been
sympathetic in any way to Russia, I wouldn't have been critical
of that action.
At the end of the war, when the war broke out or at the end
of the war after the atomic bomb had been dropped, I felt that
we should not disarm or demobilize; that we should maintain a
strong army and navy. I believe that that was directly opposite
to any line that the Communists may have been following at that
time.
I have been consistent all along, and I believe that there
are a large number of people who can testify to this
consistency.
Mr. Cohn. Any other charges?
Mr. Coleman. And I would like to summarize, if you will
permit me. I feel that from the date of that meeting that I
attended, when I was nineteen years old, I have been anti-
Communist in thought and in speech. I believe I can document it
with letters and with people who have known me for the past
thirteen years.
Mr. Cohn. Of course----
The Chairman. I have one other question. At the time you
attended this Communist meeting with Rosenberg, were other
students present?
Mr. Coleman. I did not recognize who was there, and so I
don't know if there were students. I believe they were, but I
couldn't say for sure.
The Chairman. How many people were present?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my knowledge, it was around ten
or fifteen.
The Chairman. And were you introduced to them?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I was not.
The Chairman. Where was the meeting held?
Mr. Coleman. Well, I would like to describe the location,
and I don't know the address, but you went down a hill, and
there was a big hill leading up to City College, and you went
down the hill and made a left turn, and there was a store
somewhere in that block, and it was a dinky sort of a store,
and it wasn't well lit, and that is all I remember about it.
The Chairman. They were all young people?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, they seemed to be all young people.
The Chairman. Of college age?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, that is right.
The Chairman. And you say Rosenberg did not introduce you
to any of them?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, to the best of my knowledge, he did
not.
The Chairman. You did not recognize any of them?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I don't recall remembering anyone
that I have recognized.
The Chairman. Rosenberg would solicit you repeatedly to
join the party, and did you get any information from him or
from any others as to any other students?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, I did, one student, Nathan Sussman,
and he told me he was a member of the Young Communist League.
The Chairman. Nathan Sussman?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, S-u-s-s-m-a-n.
The Chairman. Anyone else?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I don't remember anyone else. Nathan
Sussman, I remember very well, he told me.
The Chairman. Any of the professors?
Mr. Coleman. He did not mention any of the professors.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Sussman pretty well?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know him at all?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I do not. All I know is, I knew him
by sight, but I don't think he was in any of my classes, the
best I can remember. He may have been in one.
Mr. Cohn. Was he at this meeting of the Young Communist
League?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever see him with Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I used to see him with Rosenberg
occasionally.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever introduced to him?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember if I was actually introduced
to him.
The Chairman. I may say, Mr. Coleman, that your evidence on
this point of what Communists you knew is certainly not
convincing to me. Number one, you did not tell the FBI you went
to this Communist meeting with Rosenberg until they confronted
you with the proof; and number two, the only man you can recall
now as being a Communist is Nathan Sussman, and it so happens
that you know that Mr. Sussman has been giving information on
your Communist activities.
Now, it seems odd that you can only recall Rosenberg, and
recall this meeting, after the FBI confronted you with the time
and place you went to at least one meeting; and Nathan Sussman
after you learned that Sussman has given the information about
the Communist meetings you have attended; and can you not think
of anyone else, someone that we do not know about?
I may say, just for your benefit, this is the pattern
followed so often, and we bring in a man and his memory is
hazy, and finally he is nailed down to a time or place, and
then he suddenly remembers the time and place he went to a
Communist meeting, and then it seems his memory is just no good
at all about any other Communists who were there except those
known to the FBI or notorious as Communists.
Now, you can think of no one except Sussman and Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. If you will let me, I would like to explain
this. When the FBI questioned me on Rosenberg, I told them
about Sussman, and you have just given me information that he
was giving information about my Communist activities. I am now
testifying under oath, and I state I did not know that.
Now, I would like to tell you something about City College,
which might explain why I might not have known. I lived in
Brooklyn, and I went and took an hour and a half to get to the
campus, and I was taking an engineering course and I was trying
to finish in four years, and so at the end of the college day I
would rush right back home and eat my supper and proceed to
study. If it had been an out-of-town college where we would
have dormitories and see each other, I believe what you just
said would be quite pertinent. I myself would doubt testimony I
have read. But this was a different situation. I would go up
and come back at night, and I never participated in
extracurricular activities.
The Chairman. How well did you know Ethel Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. I did not know Ethel Rosenberg at all.
The Chairman. Did you know Greenglass?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never met him?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I don't think so; to the best of my
knowledge I didn't.
The Chairman. When did you last see Rosenberg?
Mr. Coleman. In this class in my senior year, I last saw
Rosenberg.
The Chairman. You never saw him after that?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. You did not know that he worked at the Signal
Corps?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. When did you first learn that he worked at
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. When I read about his arrest in the
newspapers.
Mr. Cohn. Were there any other charges?
Mr. Coleman. Yes. I covered the fourth charge, and you have
taken up the fifth charge, about the security violation.
Mr. Cohn. Anything about the American Labor party?
Mr. Coleman. That is the sixth and seventh. My sister is
reported to have enrolled in the American Labor party in 1948.
Would you like me to discuss that?
Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir.
Mr. Coleman. I discussed this matter with my sister, and
she told me the circumstances under which she had enrolled in
the American Labor party. She told me that in the beginning of
that year, all her friends had gotten married, and she was the
only one left of her social circle, and she was looking to make
new social contacts, and she met a friend of hers whom she had
known in high school who invited her to attend social
gatherings of the Young Progressives Association or League. She
attended a number of these gatherings, and she was persuaded to
enroll for Wallace.
Now, she tells me the only way she could enroll for Wallace
in New York State was to enroll under the American Labor party.
Now, I, unfortunately, was not able to tell her anything
about the American Labor party, because at that, time I was
getting married, and I was away for six weeks, and then I had
the setting up of my house, and I had a nose operation. Then my
father-in-law died, all before that 1948 election.
When I finally got a chance to talk to her and I told her
what was the nature of the American Labor party, she ceased all
association with this Young Progressive business. She realized
she had been duped by he Wallace campaign.
This is the explanation on that charge.
Mr. Cohn. Were you friendly with your sister in 1946?
Mr. Coleman. I would see her occasionally when I would
visit my home, and I have not lived at my home with my folks
for about fifteen years.
The Chairman. Did she work for the government at any time?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, she did not.
The Chairman. Do you have any brothers or sisters who
worked for any government agency?
Mr. Coleman. I believe my youngest sister worked recently
at Picatinny Arsenal for a year.
Mr. Cohn. Picatinny Arsenal?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Is she still there?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, she is not.
Mr. Cohn. Is there anything about her in the specifications
against you?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, there was not.
Mr. Cohn. How old is she now?
Mr. Coleman. Which one?
Mr. Cohn. The one who worked at the Picatinny Arsenal.
Mr. Coleman. She is the youngest, and she is nine years
younger than me, and she is twenty-four, about.
Mr. Cohn. I think we covered number six. How about number
seven?
Mr. Coleman. That is the charge in connection with my
mother, that she enrolled in the American Labor party in two
years.
Mr. Cohn. Which two years?
Mr. Coleman. I think it was 1946 or 1947. Now, my mother
received her citizen papers in 1942, and she can just about
read and write. She doesn't read very well. In 1944 she wanted
to vote for Roosevelt, and in order to do so she had to
register and pass a literacy test, and she took a test and she
failed.
Then the American Labor party went around, advertising
``Come to our school and we will teach you and help you to pass
the literacy test,'' and she went. But they didn't teach her.
What they did is, they took her the next night to register, and
they helped to pass the literacy test. And the way she explains
it, she didn't learn anything at the class, but they sort of
helped her push her through the literacy test.
So apparently what must have happened, they persuaded her
to enroll under the American Labor party in 1944, or
thereabouts. She doesn't know anything about politics, and she
doesn't read the papers, and she is not a literate person. And
when I again found this out and explained it to her, she had
nothing more to do with the American Labor party.
The Chairman. Any other brother or sister working for the
government?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir. I have three sisters, and only one
sister worked for the government.
The Chairman. How about your brother-in-law?
Mr. Coleman. I have a brother-in-law who works at Picatinny
Arsenal.
The Chairman. Picatinny Arsenal?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Is that the husband of the sister who works
at the Arsenal?
Mr. Coleman. I will tell you the whole story so that you
will have it straight.
The Chairman. You are making your whole story too lengthy,
and we will have to call you back this afternoon. We want you
to answer at as great a length as you care to. I want to ask
you a simple question: Which brother-in-law is it? The husband
of the sister who works at the Arsenal?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, it is not.
The Chairman. What is his name?
Mr. Coleman. His name is Saul Slemrod, S-l-e-m-r-o-d.
The Chairman. Then you have another sister who works there?
Mr. Coleman. She doesn't work there now. She left there.
Her name is Gloria Erwin, her married name.
The Chairman. Do you have any other sister-in-laws or
brother-in-laws working for the government?
Mr. Coleman. No, that is all I have.
The Chairman. Could you give us the names of anyone else
who lived in that apartment, in the house in which you lived?
Mr. Coleman. I am sorry, I don't know which house----
The Chairman. In which you lived at the time you were
accused of removing the classified material.
Mr. Coleman. In 1946?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. Well, I think I have mentioned Peter Rosmovsky
and I believe, I am not sure of whether this person lived there
at that time, but there is a Mr. Murray Miller who works at
Evans, and I am not sure whether he lived there in 1946. He
lived in that apartment house at some time, but I don't
remember when.
The Chairman. Was Okun a photography fan?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, not as far as I know he wasn't, and I
am not sure, but never to my knowledge did he indicate any
particular interest in photography.
The Chairman. Did he have cameras in the apartment?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember. I know this: We didn't take
pictures very often, and I don't recall him ever taking
pictures, but he may have.
The Chairman. You do not recall whether he had a camera or
not?
Mr. Coleman. No, I don't.
The Chairman. Did you have any photostatic equipment in
either your apartment or in the apartment building?
Mr. Coleman. In my apartment we did not have any
photostatic equipment, and I don't know if there was any in the
building.
The Chairman. Did you ever do any photostating?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not, and I never have.
The Chairman. Did you ever have anyone else do any
photostating for you?
Mr. Coleman. I am not sure what you mean. Outside the
laboratories, for example?
The Chairman. Outside the laboratories, yes.
Mr. Coleman. I think I may have had my release from active
duty photostated once.
The Chairman. When I use the term ``photostat,'' I am using
it in a broad sense as the reproduction of documents,
regardless of whether you call it technically photostating or
what.
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my knowledge, I can't remember.
It is possible that I may have, but I don't remember anything
particularly.
The Chairman. Did you ever give anyone any of the
classified documents that you removed and took home to your
apartment?
Mr. Coleman. Did I ever give them to anyone else?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. No, I did not.
The Chairman. Okun could have seen them?
Mr. Coleman. I believe he could have.
The Chairman. Where was Okun working then?
Mr. Coleman. He was working at the Watson Laboratories, an
air force installation.
The Chairman. Have you a typewriter in your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so, but I am not sure.
The Chairman. Did you ever copy any of the classified
material you removed from the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so, but I am not sure.
The Chairman. You are not sure whether you recopied any of
the secret material?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so, but I am not sure. I may
have made a note, a particular note, but I didn't do any
extensive copying, like copying more than a line or two.
The Chairman. Was Miller a very close friend of yours?
Mr. Coleman. Miller was not a very close friend, no, and he
lived with me for a short while before I moved into this
apartment, and before I went into the Marine Corps; a very
short while. But he was not a close friend of mine.
The Chairman. Does he work at the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. He is working there now?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Were you one of his references when he got
his job?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know.
The Chairman. Do you have any reason to suspect that he is
a Communist or Communist sympathizer?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I do not.
May I ask you about that previous question? You mean when
he got his job with the Signal Corps? I did not know him, so I
don't know how he could have used my name.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Coleman, who were the people you gave as
references when you became connected with the army at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember. That was quite a while ago,
and I am not sure who I may have mentioned. I may have put a
professor down, or close friends, and I don't remember.
The Chairman. Can you give us any of the names?
Mr. Coleman. If I could get all of my applications, I could
look it up, but I don't remember.
The Chairman. Could you tell us how you happened to take a
position there at that time?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir. I went to the University of Michigan
for graduate study right after I graduated from City College,
and I had taken civil service examinations, and after I had
finished one semester they sent me a telegram and asked me,
``Would you like to take employment?'' And I answered, ``Yes, I
would.''
The Chairman. What were your duties in the Marine Corps?
Mr. Coleman. I was a radar officer in an anti-aircraft
battalion.
The Chairman. As such, at the time you had top secret and
secret work?
Mr. Coleman. Secret, and not top secret.
The Chairman. Secret work?
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
The Chairman. Where was your mother born?
Mr. Coleman. My mother was born either in Russia or Poland,
and I don't know which. She came to this country about forty
years ago.
The Chairman. At one time you were in a car pool driving to
and from work with a number of individuals, and would you give
us their names, please?
Mr. Coleman. I was in quite a few car pools, and which one
do you mean? If you give me the time, I can tell you.
The Chairman. You were in a car pool with Mr. Ducore?
Mr. Coleman. That is right.
The Chairman. And Mr. Corwin?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And was there someone else in this car pool?
Mr. Coleman. Yes. At that time it was Ducore, Corwin,
Samuel Levine, and I think originally there was a fellow by the
name of William Gold, and then I think Lou Volp came in
somewhere, but I am not sure of the exact dates.
The Chairman. This car pool lasted for a number of months?
Mr. Coleman. I think it lasted more than a number of
months.
The Chairman. How long did it last?
Mr. Coleman. Well, I came into this car pool, and it was
going strong when I entered it, after I got married in 1948,
and when I was in that car pool the membership didn't remain
the same, but I was in that car pool until I was removed from
classified work in January or February of 1952.
The Chairman. You were in this car pool until that time?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You carry a briefcase to and from work, do
you?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. You never carried a briefcase?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I would carry a briefcase when I would be
going on travel duty during the day, so I would carry the
briefcase and leave it in the guard booth, because you weren't
permitted to carry any briefcase or suitcase, or I might leave
it in my car if I had my car, and then when I got back and got
out, I would take the suitcase or the briefcase and go on the
travel with it.
The Chairman. Didn't you have the briefcase with you in the
car frequently?
Mr. Coleman. Not that I recall, in that period.
The Chairman. You did not carry a briefcase regularly?
Mr. Coleman. I will tell you why. You see, I went to
school, and I was married then, and I would go home and have a
quick bite and pick up my books and go and join another car
pool to Rutgers, which is where I was going.
The Chairman. Who was in that car pool?
Mr. Coleman. There was Lieutenant Colonel Irving Moskowitz,
and Captain Thomas O'Neill.
The Chairman. Getting back to your mother for a second.
When you filled out your application, you listed where your
mother was born, did you not?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I did.
The Chairman. When you were driving in this car pool, did
you from time to time refer to the contents of the briefcase?
Mr. Coleman. Well, I didn't have the briefcase often enough
to even mention it. There would have been no reason to have a
briefcase that frequently. Now, if I did have it, I probably
told the fellows, ``It is my school books.'' Or if it was a
suitcase, I was going on travel duty that night, and I was
going to leave during the day, so they should not pick me up at
night.
The Chairman. Do I understand you to say that you do not
know where your mother was born?
Mr. Coleman. I think it was either Russia or Poland, but
that thing shifted around quite a bit, and I do not know the
exact town.
The Chairman. You do not know what town she was born in?
Mr. Coleman. No, I am not sure. I think it was somewhere in
that general area, but I don't know the exact town.
The Chairman. In which general area?
Mr. Coleman. Between the boundary of Russia and Poland.
The Chairman. Didn't you ever discuss with her where she
was born and what town she was born in, or anything like that?
Mr. Coleman. I may have, but I don't remember the name of
it. If you wish to explore that a little bit, I remember that
there were general discussions in which we said Minsk, but I
don't think that was the actual name of the town.
The Chairman. So you do not know whether she was born in
Minsk or Omsk, or what?
Mr. Coleman. It was a rural town somewhere in that general
area.
The Chairman. Not that it is terribly important, but it
seems unusual that at no time does your mother ever tell you
whether she was born in Russia or Poland. She would know
whether she was born in Russia or Poland.
Mr. Coleman. You see, since the boundaries did change quite
a bit and she was not a very literate person, she would not
know exactly what it was she was born in. My father might have,
on the other hand.
Mr. Schine. Where was your father born?
Mr. Coleman. Somewhere in that same area, but I don't
remember the town. He told me the town, but I don't remember
it.
The Chairman. You do not know whether he was born in Russia
or Poland?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. Schine. Did you know Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Schine. You never knew him?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Do you know Bernard Martin?
Mr. Coleman. Bob Martin? Yes, I do.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever discuss with him the situation
with regard to his having given secret papers to Marcel
Ullmann?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, he told me about that, and he described
the general circumstances about it.
Mr. Schine. What was the result of your conversation?
Mr. Coleman. I am not sure what you mean. In my mind?
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. Well, I thought he was telling me the truth,
that he was required by the nature of his job to make such
information available to people who were authorized to receive
it; and apparently Marcel Ullmann was authorized to receive it,
and so he made it available to him.
Mr. Schine. Do you know Joseph Levitsky?
Mr. Coleman. No, I do not.
Mr. Schine. Louis Kaplan?
Mr. Coleman. No, I do not.
Mr. Schine. Do you know any Communist party members whose
names you haven't told us, or with whom you have been in
contact directly or indirectly?
Mr. Coleman. No. The only ones I have mentioned was Sussman
and Rosenberg, and I can't think of anyone else. There may have
been, but I don't recall right now.
Mr. Schine. Can you think of any that you would like to
give us besides those two?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember anyone telling me that he was
a Communist party member.
Mr. Schine. Do you remember conversing with anyone who
professed pro-Communist views?
Mr. Coleman. No, I don't. I don't remember.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever met anyone from Russia?
Mr. Coleman. I think yes. I think the wife of Mr. Kitty was
of Russian origin.
Mr. Schine. What was her name?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember her first name.
Mr. Schine. Do you speak Russian?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever been out of the United States?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I have. I was in Panama in 1940 for five
months, and I served overseas in the Pacific, and I also
visited England on business in 1950, and a little time in
Paris.
Mr. Schine. You have never been in any other places but
England, France, and Panama?
Mr. Coleman. That is right, as far as I can recall.
Mr. Schine. Have you ever been to Canada?
Mr. Coleman. I may have been there once, but I don't
remember. I think I may have been there once.
Mr. Schine. Will you tell us when you went to Canada?
Mr. Coleman. I think that I may have been there during the
war on business, but I am not sure.
Mr. Schine. Where did you go in Canada?
Mr. Coleman. It was this company called REL, and frankly, I
don't remember what they mean, REL, but it was doing a lot of
work with the United States government during the war, and I
think I may have visited them.
Mr. Schine. Where was this in Canada?
Mr. Coleman. I think it was Montreal.
Mr. Schine. And with whom did you deal when you visited
this company?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember.
Mr. Schine. What was the nature of the work?
Mr. Coleman. They were producing radar equipment that was
being used by our army.
Mr. Schine. You do not recall the names of any of the
individuals with whom you dealt?
Mr. Coleman. I am sorry, I don't, because I don't think--I
may have made one or two visits, but that is all.
Mr. Schine. What were your actual duties in the Marine
Corps?
Mr. Coleman. I was the radar officer of a battalion, an
anti-aircraft battalion, and it was my responsibility to keep
the radars maintained, to see they were properly sighted, and
to see that they were doing a good job.
Mr. Schine. When were these duties?
Mr. Coleman. In 1944 and 1945.
Mr. Schine. And where were you stationed?
Mr. Coleman. I was stationed at Guadalcanal, and this is my
overseas stations, Langer and Okinawa.
Mr. Schine. Will you repeat your duties in the Marine
Corps?
Mr. Coleman. I was a radar officer for an anti-aircraft
battalion, and I was in three different ones. That is why the
plural. And my job was to maintain the radars in proper
operating condition, to supervise personnel in so doing, and to
see that they operated properly, and in other words that they
did their job.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Coleman, at the request of your counsel, I
wanted to clarify some things here. See if I understand this
correctly.
These forty-three documents which were found in your home,
number one, they were not taken all at once; they were taken at
various times. Is that right?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And number two, they were not all Signal Corps
documents. Some were documents from the Marine Corps. Is that
correct?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How many were from the Marine Corps?
Mr. Coleman. I would say maybe about ten.
Mr. Cohn. Ten Marine Corps and about thirty-three Signal
Corps?
Mr. Coleman. No. Some were personal, and I would say some
were personal notes that I made from textbooks and things like
that.
Mr. Cohn. How many would you say were Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. My guess would be about a third each.
Mr. Cohn. About a third each?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, that is, approximately.
Mr. Cohn. And then your contention is, of course, that the
essence of your offense, the thing which you admit having done
wrong, is having been careless in the custodianship of these
documents in not keeping them under lock and key?
Mr. Coleman. I should have had them in a three-combination
lock, and according to AR-380-5, and I should have had them
downgraded and I didn't.
The Chairman. One other question. You said that you had
received a pass to remove the documents from the Signal Corps.
Did you get any pass or any permission to take the classified
documents from the Marine Corps?
Mr. Coleman. The documents, as far as I know, were not
classified at that time, although they were marked. The
documents for which I was charged and which were classified, I
burned in the company of another officer, and I actually happen
to have the receipt. And the other documents, I considered they
were no longer classified, because I assumed that the war was
over, and I took it home with me.
The Chairman. They were stamped either secret or
confidential or top secret?
Mr. Coleman. I believe that the probability was that they
were restricted or confidential, and I never had top secret
material in my possession.
The Chairman. And they had to do with your work in radar, I
assume.
Mr. Coleman. They were books of the type of fundamental
principles of radar, which was a technical manual put out by
the army, and which was, I think, stamped restricted, and there
were some instruction books on equipment, and things of that
nature.
The Chairman. They had to do with radar, and they were
stamped either secret or confidential or restricted, and not
top secret?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You got no pass to take those documents along
with you, did you?
Mr. Coleman. No specific pass, no.
The Chairman. Well, no pass.
Mr. Coleman. No pass.
The Chairman. No permission from anyone?
Mr. Coleman. That is right.
The Chairman. You had no permission from anyone to take
those military documents?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. When you say ``Yes, sir,'' you mean that you
got no pass or no permission?
Mr. Coleman. I assumed they were no longer classified.
The Chairman. You assumed that the war was over and they
were not classified?
Mr. Coleman. Because I had read the same information in
electronic journals.
Mr. Schine. Isn't it true, Mr. Coleman, that it is possible
for certain individuals to have a pass which will give them the
blanket privilege to remove material whenever they wish?
Mr. Coleman. I believe that occurred after this violation,
but I am not sure, and it is a little white pass.
Mr. Schine. Isn't it true that when you take a document out
on a specific pass, that you are supposed to return it within a
certain time?
Mr. Coleman. I don't recall that there was such a
regulation, and there may have been, but I don't remember. It
certainly did not indicate it on the pass, that I remember.
Mr. Schine. Isn't that logical, that there would be a
regulation that if you have a specific pass to take out a
certain document, that you cannot keep it indefinitely?
Mr. Coleman. I would think it was logical, but it was not
followed up, and it was not a practice, and it was not
indicated on the pass, to the best of my knowledge, and it was
not emphasized at that time.
Mr. Cohn. Counsel wants me to ask you about this book,
entitled Radar System, by Ridenour, and it was published in
1947.\4\ In showing us this book, I believe it is your
contention that much of the material or some of the material
found in your home appeared in this textbook shortly
thereafter, indicating that it would not have been of
substantial benefit to the enemy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Louis Ridenour, Radar System Engineering (New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1947).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. We will be glad to do that.
The Chairman. That will be all.
Did you have any further questions, Mr. Green?
Mr. Green. Thank you, no, Senator, and I think that that
covers the situation.
[Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the hearing was recessed until
1:30 p.m., of the same day.]
afternoon session
[The hearing reconvened at 2:15 p.m.]
The Chairman. We will proceed.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Coleman had something he wanted to add to
the testimony he gave before noon.
You are reminded you are under oath, and you had a
statement you wished to make?
TESTIMONY OF AARON H. COLEMAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
RICHARD F. GREEN) (RESUMED)
Mr. Coleman. Yes. You asked me if I knew or know of any
Communists, Mr. Schine.
The Chairman. Mr. Coleman, you had something additional you
wanted to add to the testimony you gave this morning?
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
The Chairman. You can add whatever you like.
Mr. Coleman. You asked me if I knew of any Communists, or
heard of any and so forth, and I was reconsidering that and
thinking of it and then I recalled that a fellow I used to know
many years ago told me once that his brother was a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. What was his name?
Mr. Coleman. The fellow's name is George Winstein, and his
brother's name is Louis Winstein. Now, I met this fellow and I
bumped into him when I returned from the Marine Corps once, and
I knew him as this brother of this friend of mine, and he lived
with him a couple of blocks from where my folks' house was, and
that is how I happened to bump into him, and he invited me to
his house to meet his wife, and that is the only contact I
remember with him. His brother, I broke off with him years ago,
because, well, he married a girl I thought I wanted to marry,
and we haven't seen each other, and I don't think we have seen
each other for quite a while. That is the circumstances about
this extra fellow.
The Chairman. I missed something there for a minute. This
other Communist you knew, that you think was a Communist,
married a girl you had been dating with?
Mr. Coleman. No, I am sorry. Let me back up a little. I
knew this fellow George Winstein and he and I were close
friends in the late '30s, and now when he married a girl that I
thought I was in love with, after that time circumstance were
such that we didn't see each other very often, but I remember
him telling me at that time that his brother was a Communist.
Now, my contacts with his brother were limited to the few
times that I may have seen him in the same house as George
Winstein. Now, when I returned from the Marine Corps, I bumped
into him once because he lived a few blocks away from my
parents' house. I believe it was around the same month when I
just put on civilian clothes, and it seemed to me around that
time. Since I hadn't seen him, he asked me to come in just to
meet his wife, whom he had married since. I did that but that
was my only contact with him. He never gave me the impression
and never tried to talk about anything at all.
Now, I want to say one more thing. In thinking it over and
I have been doing this thinking at lunch time, his brother I
believe works for the government, not the Communist, but the
brother, George Winstein works for the government somewhere in
the Corps of Engineers, for the New York engineers, in New
York.
Mr. Cohn. He works for the army in the Corps of Engineers?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schine. Could you give us the address of the place this
Communist lived?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know where he lives.
Mr. Schine. You say it was near your parents' place.
Mr. Coleman. At that time it was on Rockaway Parkway, and
East 96th Street.
Mr. Cohn. This was approximately what year?
Mr. Coleman. 1946, January or February, approximately.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. That is all that I have.
Is that all that you wanted to add?
Mr. Coleman. That is all.
The Chairman. There is just one thing else. I want you to
contact your mother and father, and ask them where they were
born, will you?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir; do you want me to send that to you?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. Thank you.
Mr. Schine. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Will you please raise your right hand and be
sworn? In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do
you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Pomerentz. I do.
TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL POMERENTZ
Mr. Cohn. Give us your full name, please.
Mr. Pomerentz. Samuel Pomerentz.
Mr. Cohn. How is that spelled?
Mr. Pomerentz. S-a-m-u-e-l P-o-m-e-r-e-n-t-z.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you reside?
Mr. Pomerentz. 716 Sixth Avenue, Asbury Park, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. What do you do?
Mr. Pomerentz. I am an electronics engineer for the Signal
Corps Engineering Laboratories at Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. How long a period of time have you been at
Monmouth?
Mr. Pomerentz. For the Signal Corps laboratories, you mean?
Mr. Cohn. In any capacity.
Mr. Pomerentz. I was employed there first in July of 1940,
and I have been there since except for my period in the armed
services from September 1943 to April of 1946.
Mr. Cohn. And you are currently employed at the Evans
Laboratory?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have security clearance?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Up to what?
Mr. Pomerentz. Top secret.
Mr. Cohn. Up to top secret?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Pomerentz. I remember him from school.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever seen him since school days?
Mr. Pomerentz. I have never seen him since school days.
Mr. Cohn. Your testimony is that you have never seen him
since school days, is that right?
Mr. Pomerentz. Seeing him, even glimpsing him? I remember
vaguely seeing him outside the Institute of Radio Engineers at
their annual conference.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Pomerentz. Two or three years ago, and I saw him from a
distance and I did not stop to speak to him.
Mr. Cohn. Is it your testimony you did not speak to him at
all since the days you left City College?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You are very sure of that?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man named William Perl or William
Muterperl?
Mr. Pomerentz. I remember William Muterperl from City
College.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever see him after you left college?
Mr. Pomerentz. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Are you very sure of that?
Mr. Pomerentz. I am fairly sure of that, and I don't
remember ever seeing him.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Pomerentz. I am fairly sure of that.
Mr. Cohn. How well did you know him in college?
Mr. Pomerentz. Not well at all, and I think he was in one
of my classes.
Mr. Cohn. How about Sobell?
Mr. Pomerentz. Sobell may have been in one of my classes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you remember Sobell from college?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, I remember him at college.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know him at college?
Mr. Pomerentz. I knew him as one of the students, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have a speaking acquaintance with him?
Mr. Pomerentz. Well, an acquaintance of saying hello, a
speaking acquaintance, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have any social contact with him while
you were in college?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How about Muterperl?
Mr. Pomerentz. None at all.
Mr. Cohn.You did not?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How about Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Pomerentz. I vaguely remember his face, as seeing him
in the papers, from City College. Otherwise I have no knowledge
of him.
Mr. Cohn. You have no knowledge of him at all?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What section do you work in at Evans?
Mr. Pomerentz. Countermeasures Branch.
Mr. Cohn. Is that under Dr. Keiser?
Mr. Pomerentz. Mr. Keiser, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How well do you know Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Pomerentz. I knew him in school, and I met him when I
came to work in the Signal Corps, and I have seen him from time
to time during the period he has been at the laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever known him socially?
Mr. Pomerentz. No.
Mr. Cohn. You have never been to his home?
Mr. Pomerentz. No.
Mr. Cohn. He has never been to your home?
Mr. Pomerentz. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Vivian Glassman?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't know her at all?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man named Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Pomerentz. No. I never heard the name.
Mr. Cohn. How about Louis Kaplan?
Mr. Pomerentz. I never heard that name.
Mr. Cohn. When you say you never have heard the name, I
assume that means that you don't know the individual.
Mr. Pomerentz. I don't know the individual.
Mr. Cohn. That applies to all of the answers you have given
here?
Mr. Pomerentz. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Where was it that you think you saw Sobell two or
three years ago?
Mr. Pomerentz. In the Institute of Radio Engineers in Grand
Central Palace, I saw him standing outside one day.
Mr. Cohn. You did not talk with him?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir. He was talking to somebody else.
Mr. Cohn. To whom was he talking?
Mr. Pomerentz. I didn't recognize the man.
Mr. Cohn. Now, have you ever lived with anybody who works
at Evans Laboratory at Monmouth?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. With whom?
Mr. Pomerentz. I lived with Mr. Coleman back in 1940, not
with him, in the same rooming house, for a short period at the
end of 1940. I lived with Mr. Ducore, he is still at Evans, in
1942 or 1943 before I went into the service, and Mr. Martin
lived at that same place.
Mr. Cohn. Bob Martin?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir. Who is working now, you mean?
Mr. Cohn. Anybody who is there now or anybody who has
worked there.
Mr. Pomerentz. After I came back, I lived with Messrs.
Saltzman and Morrow. They still work.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Carl Greenblum?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How well do you know him?
Mr. Pomerentz. I don't know him very well. I remembered him
from school, and he came to work at the laboratories sometime
after the war, and I believe from the air force.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever belonged to any subversive
organizations?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Of any type?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did anybody ever ask you to join any?
Mr. Pomerentz. Never.
Mr. Cohn. When you were at college, did anybody ever ask
you to join the Young Communist League?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Nobody ever asked you?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Nobody tried to induce you into any subversive
activity?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. In asking about a subversive organization, I
would include any organization named by the attorney general or
any organization that you heard alleged to be subversive.
Mr. Pomerentz. I saw the recent attorney general's list,
and it was passed around the laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. You are very sure the only time you saw Mr.
Sobell--and this is important--is on that one occasion two or
three years ago, and he was not in your house or around your
house, that you know of?
Mr. Pomerentz. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Could you wait in the witness room for a few
minutes?
Mr. Pomerentz. All right.
The Chairman. Before you leave, just for your protection, I
want to tell you that we have witnesses here of sizeable number
who will testify, and we do not make any pre-decision as to
whether they are telling the truth or whether you are. They
will testify in complete opposition to what you have said, so
before you leave and we call in the other witnesses, is it your
positive testimony, number one, that you have never attended
Communist meetings?
Mr. Pomerentz. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You have never been solicited to join the
Communist party?
Mr. Pomerentz. I never have.
The Chairman. And that you were not closely associated with
Sobell?
Mr. Pomerentz. That is true.
The Chairman. If you will wait outside, we will want to
call you back.
The Chairman. Raise your right hand, Mr. Yamins.
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Yamins. I do.
TESTIMONY OF HYAM GERBER YAMINS (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
STUART C. RAND)
Mr. Cohn. Could we get the name and address of counsel?
Mr. Rand. Stuart C. Rand, partner in the firm of Choate,
Hall & Stewart, 30 State Street, Boston 9, Massachusetts.
Mr. Cohn. Could we get your full name?
Mr. Yamins. Hyam Gerber Yamins, H-y-a-m, G-e-r-b-e-r, Y-a-
m-i-n-s.
Mr. Cohn. Now, Mr. Yamins, have you been employed by the
Army Signal Corps at any period of time?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir, I have.
Mr. Cohn. From when to when?
Mr. Yamins. From August of 1940 to date.
Mr. Cohn. Where have you worked?
Mr. Yamins. I have worked physically at the Evans Signal
Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. During what period of time?
Mr. Yamins. In Belmar, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. What period of time?
Mr. Yamins. From the time it started down there, roughly.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Yamins. 1941.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you work from 1940 to 1941?
Mr. Yamins. Out at Sandy Hook with headquarters at Fort
Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. All right. You were at Evans from 1941 to when?
Mr. Yamins. 1947.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go in 1947?
Mr. Yamins. To the headquarters, which are located at
Bradley Beach Hotel.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that?
Mr. Yamins. That was actually in Chalk River Hills.
Mr. Cohn. Where?
Mr. Yamins. New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. And how long were you there?
Mr. Yamins. Until that moved up to Squire Laboratory at
Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Yamins. Some months after that. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you at Squire Lab?
Mr. Yamins. Until the end of 1949.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go then?
Mr. Yamins. Back to Evans Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you there?
Mr. Yamins. Up until May of 1951.
Mr. Cohn. Did you then go to MIT?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And you are chief of the radiation laboratory?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir, I am not.
Mr. Cohn. What are you?
Mr. Yamins. I am technical adviser to MIT and liaison
engineer to agencies in the Boston area for the Signal Corps
Engineering Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. Liaison engineer?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Between MIT and what?
Mr. Yamins. Between the Signal Corps Engineering
Laboratories and agencies in the Boston area.
Mr. Cohn. What is your rating?
Mr. Yamins. GS-14.
Mr. Cohn. What is your salary?
Mr. Yamins. It is either $10,400 or $10,600.
Mr. Cohn. In these capacities which you have, you have
access to classified information?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Up to what?
Mr. Yamins. My clearance has been through top secret, but I
don't believe I have handled any top secret information.
Mr. Cohn. Your clearance has been through top secret, is
that right?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You were suspended on September 28, is that
correct?
Mr. Yamins. I believe that is right.
Mr. Cohn. And you received a letter of charges?
Mr. Yamins. I did, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Why don't we start off with that. What was the
first charge?
Mr. Yamins. May I get that from my counsel?
Mr. Cohn. Surely.
Mr. Rand. September 23 is the date of the letter.
Mr. Cohn. Thank you.
Mr. Yamins. I don't know whether my name was on any
membership list of this outfit.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have a copy of the letter?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Could I see it?
Mr. Yamins. This is the original of it.
Mr. Cohn. We will give it right back to you.
[Document handed to Mr. Cohn.]
Mr. Cohn. First of all, they say your name was on a
membership of the Monmouth County Unit of the New Jersey
Independent Citizens League which in 1947 became affiliated
with the Progressive Citizens of America. Was that accurate?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know whether my name was on any list. I
was not a member and I did not attend any meetings.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever have any connection with it?
Mr. Yamins. The only connection I might have had was that
as a member of the United Public Workers, I might have donated
some money for it.
Mr. Cohn. You might have donated some money, but you were
not a member?
Mr. Yamins. No.
Mr. Cohn. But you know that the organization was Communist
dominated?
Mr. Yamins. I knew nothing about it.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever a member of the United Federal
Workers of America?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know that that was under Communist
domination?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever read that anyplace?
Mr. Yamins. I read it in the papers, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you believe what you read about it?
Mr. Yamins. Well, after 1947 I began to believe it, and at
that time I had nothing more to do with it.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever a member of the United Public
Workers, too? One succeeded the other.
Mr. Yamins. I believe that is right.
The Chairman. The reporter will have some difficulty taking
down what you are saying unless you speak a little louder.
Mr. Yamins. I am sorry, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, getting back to this New Jersey Independent
Citizens League, did you have anything to do with a rally held
by the league at the home of a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. You know of this Brook Farm incident?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know unless you are talking about a
rally for Wallace.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meeting at Applebrook
Farm?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have anything to do with organizing one?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you participate?
Mr. Yamins. I did not participate in any rally.
The Chairman. Did you ever go to Applebrook Farm?
Mr. Yamins. I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meeting in behalf of
Wallace?
Mr. Yamins. I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Now, do you know a man by the name of Marcel
Ullmann?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When did you first meet Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Yamins. I met him when he was an engineer at the Evans
Laboratory, and I don't know the date.
Mr. Cohn. How well did you know him?
Mr. Yamins. I knew him in connection with his work there,
and I also knew him as president of the union, and he came
around to collect dues.
The Chairman. As president of the union?
Mr. Yamins. I believe that is right.
The Chairman. I wonder if you would try to speak a little
louder.
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir. I am sorry, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Ullmann socially at all?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mrs. Ullmann?
Mr. Yamins. No.
Mr. Cohn. Jane Ullmann?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know whether she is Mrs. Ullmann or
not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a woman named Jane Ullmann?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. Cohn. You say Ullmann would come around to collect
dues, and where would he collect these dues? On army property,
or what?
Mr. Yamins. At the office, I believe, and he once came
around to my house.
Mr. Cohn. Yes, he did; and how many times was he at your
home?
Mr. Yamins. Once.
Mr. Cohn. Are you sure it was only once?
Mr. Yamins. I am quite sure.
Mr. Cohn. Who else was present when he was in your home?
Mr. Yamins. His daughter was there, I believe.
The Chairman. You did not know whether she was Mrs. Ullmann
or not, when counsel asked you about that, about Mrs. Jane
Ullmann. I do not quite understand that. Did you know a woman
who you considered Mrs. Ullmann?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir. I might have met her, but I had----
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a woman named Jane Ullmann?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What was his daughter's first name?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. You say his daughter was with him when he came to
your home?
Mr. Yamins. I remember a red-headed girl with him.
Mr. Cohn. You did not know her name was Jane Ullmann?
Mr. Yamins. His daughter?
Mr. Cohn. The lady who was with him the night he called on
you.
Mr. Yamins. No, I did not, if there was a lady with him.
Mr. Cohn. You just told me there was.
Mr. Yamins. Excuse me, can I consult my counsel?
Mr. Cohn. Surely.
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
Mr. Yamins. His daughter was a very young girl.
Mr. Cohn. To whom are you referring, and who came with him
when he went to your house?
Mr. Yamins. I remember his daughter. His wife might have
been there, and I don't remember her.
Mr. Cohn. When you are talking about a lady with red hair,
you are talking about his child?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Was there a lady in addition to the daughter?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. How long did Mr. Ullmann remain at your home?
Mr. Yamins. Perhaps half an hour.
Mr. Cohn. Did you say nobody else was present?
Mr. Yamins. No. There was somebody else.
Mr. Cohn. Who was that?
Mr. Yamins. A mechanic.
Mr. Cohn. What was his name?
Mr. Yamins. I can't remember, but he used to visit us quite
often.
Mr. Cohn. Do you recall his first name or the last name?
Mr. Yamins. Lennie.
Mr. Cohn. We will let you think about that for a moment. In
the meantime, what union was he collecting dues for? Was that
the United Public Workers of America?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you not know that Mr. Ullmann was a well
known Communist?
Mr. Yamins. I didn't at that time.
Mr. Cohn. When did you find that out?
Mr. Yamins. I gathered that from when he was suspended
later on, and I heard that he did not fight the charges.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meeting of any kind at
which Mr. Ullmann was present, in addition to this call at your
house?
Mr. Yamins. I attended meetings of the United Public
Workers at which he was there, and I attended the meeting
referred to there, the Russian War Relief, and he might have
been there, I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. This meeting to which I would refer was held
after the war was over, well after the war was over; in fact,
over a year after the war was over, a meeting to raise money
and collect clothing for Russia.
Mr. Yamins. He might have been there.
Mr. Cohn. Did you attend such a meeting?
Mr. Yamins. I did.
Mr. Cohn. Under whose auspices was that held?
Mr. Yamins. Under the auspices of the organization
mentioned there.
Mr. Cohn. Who asked you to come to that meeting?
Mr. Yamins. Mr. Raymond Wexler.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell that name?
Mr. Yamins. W-e-x-l-e-r.
Mr. Cohn. Is he still working at Monmouth?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir, he is not. He is working at MIT.
Mr. Cohn. For the Signal Corps?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever work for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Yamins. He did.
Mr. Cohn. When did he go to MIT?
Mr. Yamins. I can't tell you that; I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know someone named Louie Kaplan?
Mr. Yamins. I know a Louis Kaplan who is in the Thermionics
Branch, and I heard there was another Louis Kaplan, and I had
nothing to do with him, and I don't know who he is.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man named Bennett Davis?
Mr. Yamins. It means nothing to me whatsoever.
Mr. Cohn. J. Millstein?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, I know J. Millstein.
Mr. Cohn. You say you know Mr. Millstein?
Mr. Yamins. Yes. He is the husband of Dr. Muriel Udin, U-d-
i-n. She is a cousin of my wife's.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know her to be a party member?
Mr. Yamins. I do not.
Mr. Cohn. How friendly are you with Dr. Udin and Mr.
Millstein?
Mr. Yamins. Quite friendly, in a family way.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know that they were Communists or
Communist sympathizers?
Mr. Yamins. I didn't know they were Communists.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know they were Communist sympathizers?
Now, if you are friendly, you must have had some discussions
with them.
Mr. Yamins. I think she was a liberal, possibly
``pinkish.''
Mr. Cohn. Possibly ``pinkish''?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, in the '30s.
Mr. Cohn. When did you last see Dr. Udin?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know. I called her up on the telephone
when I received this letter, and told her that I didn't want to
see her and she wasn't to see me.
Mr. Cohn. When did you see her before you called her up on
the telephone?
Mr. Yamins. It might have been a week or a couple of weeks.
Mr. Cohn. You were pretty friendly with Dr. Udin and her
husband?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, I was.
Mr. Cohn. And you say you thought that she was possibly
``pinkish.'' How about Mr. Millstein?
Mr. Yamins. I think he was very conservative.
Mr. Cohn. As far as Dr. Udin is concerned, what do you mean
by saying ``possibly pinkish,'' and what views did she express
which led you to believe that?
Mr. Yamins. She expressed opinions about the Stuart case
which was going on in Boston.
Mr. Cohn. Stuart case, S-t-u-a-r-t? She thought he was
innocent?
Mr. Yamins. I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. Anything else that she said?
Mr. Yamins. No, I don't think so.
The Chairman. Did you think she was a Communist
sympathizer?
Mr. Yamins. I don't think she is. She may have been in the
'30s.
Mr. Cohn. When did she talk about the Stuart case? That
didn't take place in the '30s.
Mr. Yamins. At the present time, recently.
Mr. Cohn. Well, now, does that jibe with your statement
that she was in the '30s but isn't now? This Stuart case is a
pretty recent matter.
Mr. Yamins. Yes, it is.
Mr. Cohn. Well, then, probably you aren't justified in
thinking she has changed colors, then.
The Chairman. You said you thought she was perhaps a
Communist sympathizer in the early '30s, but not today. What
leads you to arrive at that conclusion?
Mr. Yamins. I really can't answer that. I would say this:
that in the '30s she was in favor of things that the Communists
might have been supporting, and I went to meetings of the
League for Peace and Democracy----
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me.
Mr. Yamins. Meetings of the League for Peace and Democracy
with her.
Mr. Cohn. With her?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, with her, and I would say she was a
leftist.
Mr. Cohn. She took you to meetings of the American League
for Peace and Democracy, is that right?
Mr. Yamins. I went with her, and I don't know that she took
me.
Mr. Cohn. Did you attend any other meetings with her
besides meetings of the American League for Peace and
Democracy?
Mr. Yamins. I went to dances of the IWO which she was
physician for.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you know they were very active Communist
fronts?
Mr. Yamins. Not at that time. I found it out later.
Mr. Cohn. You found it out later.
The Chairman. When you knew her in the '30s, you and she
used to discuss Communists, and she was for everything the
Communists stood for, is that not correct? I am speaking of the
'30s.
Mr. Yamins. May I consult my counsel?
[The witness conferred with his counsel.]
Mr. Yamins. I think that is possibly----
Mr. Rand. I would like to confer with my client, and let me
ask you this: Are you a little nervous and scared? Now, speak
up perfectly clear and tell them that you lived for, I think,
four years in the Udin house, and how it came about. What they
want to know is how she talked and what she talked about. Just
forget where you are, and just talk as freely to Senator
McCarthy and the counsel as you talked with me yesterday. You
satisfied me, and now satisfy them. Just go to it, and unpack
your whole suitcase, and don't be scared.
The Chairman. You needn't be worried about us at all. All
we want is the facts.
Mr. Rand. Just tell all you have got, how you told me
yesterday.
The Chairman. We want some information about some people,
and you have the information.
Mr. Yamins. I think that that is true, and we probably did
speak about it. At the time it was in the middle of the
Depression, and jobs were hard to get, and my connections were
particularly with respect to improving living conditions and
jobs and things of that sort.
Mr. Rand. Tell them this: Didn't you live at the Udin house
from 1934 to 1938?
Mr. Yamins. I lived in Dr. Udin's house from the summer of
1934 to the summer of 1938.
Mr. Cohn. You knew she was a Communist, did you not?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. What other meetings did you attend with her
besides the American League for Peace and Democracy and IWO
dances?
Mr. Yamins. That is all.
Mr. Cohn. Those were the only meetings you ever attended?
Mr. Yamins. With her.
Mr. Cohn. Did she have any friends whom you knew to be
Communists?
Mr. Yamins. No.
Mr. Cohn. You continued your relationship with her
throughout the years?
Mr. Yamins. When I left her house in 1938, I went home, and
I went back to school for a year; and then I went down to
Newark, New Jersey, for a year, and then I went with the Signal
Corps. I saw her occasionally during that time.
Mr. Cohn. Have you seen her during recent years?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir, I have.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you about some matters outside of
these letters of charges. Have you ever been suspended or
reprimanded for any security violations while working for the
Evans Signal Laboratory?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You have?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. For what? Did they concern your handling of
classified documents?
Mr. Yamins. They did.
Mr. Cohn. What were they?
Mr. Yamins. I think it was in connection with classified
cabinet safe.
Mr. Cohn. Was that safe found open?
Mr. Yamins. Yes. And it wasn't that the dial was open. It
was one of the drawers, I believe, was open.
Mr. Cohn. Was that the only occasion?
Mr. Yamins. I believe there was another occasion in which a
briefcase containing classified material was found on the desk
or in the room.
Mr. Cohn. Now, let me ask you this before I forget: Are you
any relation to a man named J. L. Yamins?
Mr. Yamins. He is my brother.
Mr. Cohn. He lives in Fall River, Massachusetts?
Mr. Yamins. He lives in Freeport, Rhode Island.
Mr. Cohn. When did he move to Freeport?
Mr. Yamins. A few years ago.
Mr. Cohn. A few years ago?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir. He was in Elizabeth before that.
Mr. Cohn. Is your brother a Communist?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Has he ever belonged to the Communist party?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Has he ever been sympathetic toward communism?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Has he been anti-Communist?
Mr. Yamins. Yes. I don't think I ever talked to him much
about it.
Mr. Cohn. How do you know that he is not a Communist?
Mr. Yamins. Well, I have never seen any evidence of it.
Mr. Cohn. You have not discussed things of that kind with
him, is that right?
Mr. Yamins. That is right.
The Chairman. Let me suggest, just for the witness'
protection--and I hesitate to do this, with one of the
outstanding lawyers in Boston--but I would suggest that when
counsel asks you whether your brother is a Communist, that you
certainly are not in a position to know, and so instead of
saying positively, ``No, he is not,'' and leaving yourself open
for possible perjury, that you just tell counsel that you have
no information to indicate that he is, to your knowledge.
Am I right, Mr. Counsel?
Mr. Rand. Have you any information to indicate that your
brother is a Communist?
Mr. Yamins. I have no information to indicate that he is a
Communist.
The Chairman. When you say he is not a Communist, you mean
that you do not know he is a Communist and you have no
information that he is?
Mr. Yamins. That is right.
The Chairman. Now, Mr. Yamins, you were Mr. Coleman's
superior officer, is that right?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Were you his superior officer in 1946 when
the army security raided his apartment and found some forty-
three classified documents in his apartment?
Mr. Yamins. I remember there was an incident, and I don't
know what they found.
The Chairman. Mr. Coleman testified this forenoon that he
had received a pass on each occasion he removed a classified
document, some of them secret, and that that pass was signed by
him, and I do not recall if he used your name or not, but he
described your job as the man who signed the pass also. I am
very curious to know whether or not you did actually give Mr.
Coleman a pass to take secret material from the Signal Corps
and take it back to his apartment?
Mr. Yamins. I can't tell you; I don't know. It is my
recollection that we used to sign such passes.
The Chairman. Would you say that it was the common practice
to allow employees to remove secret and top secret material
from the Signal Corps Lab and take it home with them?
Mr. Yamins. I think secret and not top secret.
The Chairman. You say it was a common practice?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir, during the war. I think after the war
things tightened up considerably.
The Chairman. He was testifying to a period in 1946, and he
testified that he came back from the Marine Corps in January of
1946, and his apartment was searched by the army security
officers in October, I believe it was. They found forty-three
classified documents, and he said they were stamped secret,
confidential, and on down the line. He testified that that was
common practice for employees to get a pass to take that type
of material away, that is, after the war. My question is, is
that accurate?
Mr. Yamins. I think it was a practice to allow them to take
them out and to bring them back with them.
The Chairman. Well, now, when a pass was issued, did you
keep any master logbook to show what documents Coleman or some
other employee took out, and what date they returned them?
Mr. Yamins. I do not think so.
The Chairman. You do not think that you did?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir. I think duplicates of this were kept
somewhere.
The Chairman. You were in charge of this, and this was an
extremely important matter. I am just curious to know, and
forget you are being examined here. Will you just realize we
are trying to get some information, and forget you are on the
witness stand, and just follow the advice of your lawyer?
Mr. Yamins. I will, sir.
The Chairman. Here is the secretary of the army, and he is
interested in knowing what kind of a practice you had there. We
all realize that maybe practices at that time were lax during
the war and immediately after that, but we have got to trace
that down to date and see what is going on. You see, we have
information--just to show you how important this is--we have
information, convincing information, that top secret documents
from the Evans Laboratory have been in use over in East Berlin
in the Russian laboratories, and we have the number of the
documents, and we are trying to check those out. They are
documents concerning our radar screen, and materials that could
result in the deaths of vast numbers of American young men.
Mr. Yamins. I understand.
The Chairman. The fact that you are here does not mean that
we think you are a criminal or anything. We just have you here
to get information from you.
Mr. Yamins. I will try to tell you the best I can.
The Chairman. We have your subordinate's testimony, and we
want to get information from you.
Now, the question is this: Just how was this pass system
worked? If Coleman or John Jones or Pete Smith wanted to take
out a top secret or secret document----
Mr. Yamins. No top secret, as far as I know.
The Chairman. Well, let us say secret. I think his
testimony did not concern top secret. It concerned secret and
confidential.
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How would that be worked? Let us take one
document and trace it through. Coleman wants to take it home
with him, and what happens from that point on?
Mr. Yamins. I think that there was some sort of system of
duplicate forms that were written and filled out in triplicate,
something of that kind, on which the title and the person who
borrowed it and perhaps an address, and the date and this was
okayed by the branch chief or by somebody designated by him.
The Chairman. Were you the branch chief at that time?
Mr. Yamins. I believe I was.
The Chairman. Do you know whether or not you did repeatedly
sign these passes allowing employees to take secret material
home?
Mr. Yamins. I think that I did, and I probably did.
The Chairman. I wish you would elaborate. To me that sounds
inconceivable. The definition of ``secret'' is that it is
material of such a nature that if a potential enemy obtained
possession of it, it could do irreparable damage to this
country and result in our losing battles and the war. The rules
covering the handling of secret material are so very strict--I
was in the Marine Corps, and we just would not let a secret
document out of our hands. It had to be either locked up in a
safe, and we had guards around the safe, or if it was destroyed
you had to have a certificate of destruction. I know of nothing
in army regulations--and we were operating under army
regulations--which allows you to let employees, hit-or-miss,
take stuff home to their apartments and keep it there.
I am curious to know, and I am not saying you are
responsible for it. I am curious to know who the devil was
responsible for it.
Mr. Yamins. During the war it was done without any check,
and I did that myself.
The Chairman. Was that not a complete violation of army
regulations?
Let me ask you, what are the regulations concerning the
handling of secret materials, as of today?
Mr. Yamins. I think as of today they are supposed to be
kept under a continuous receipt system, stored under a three-
combination lock, and I don't know what the regulations are on
who is allowed to carry them. I know that at the laboratory,
regulations tightened up gradually after the war to a point
where civilians were not allowed to take them out, and were
encouraged to mail them to where they were going; but on
occasions, sometimes they had to, going to meetings where they
couldn't be mailed on time.
The Chairman. How about this practice of allowing a man to
take secret documents home to his apartment? Is that indulged
in at the present time?
Mr. Yamins. I don't believe it is at all.
The Chairman. You should know. You are the man who signs
the pass, are you not?
Mr. Yamins. I haven't done this very recently.
The Chairman. What was your job when you were suspended?
Mr. Yamins. I was chief of the branch at that time, yes,
sir.
The Chairman. You were suspended how long ago?
Mr. Yamins. September 23.
The Chairman. That is only about a month ago.
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Now, the question is: The week before you
were suspended, we will say, at that time it would be your task
to sign these passes, and it is your job to know whether or not
secret material is taken out.
Mr. Yamins. I didn't have that job at that time. I have
been up at MIT for the past two years.
The Chairman. I beg your pardon. How would you describe
your job now?
Mr. Yamins. It is essentially a liaison job.
The Chairman. At MIT?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, with other agencies in the Boston area.
The Chairman. So that for the past two years, your function
has not been to sign passes and to give permission to take out
secret documents?
Mr. Yamins. Not whatever, not since May of 1951.
The Chairman. At the time Coleman was found to have these
classified documents in his possession--some of them,
incidentally, from his stretch in the Marine Corps. He said
about ten of them were secret or classified documents
concerning radar which he picked up in the Marine Corps when he
was a radar specialist there. When the army security officers
picked up this classified material, I assume it was your task
to determine whether or not he would be fired or suspended, or
what punishment he would get; is that right? You were his boss.
Mr. Yamins. I think the director of the laboratory did
that.
The Chairman. Did you not make the recommendation, and was
it not your job at the time to make the recommendation?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know.
The Chairman. My God, man, this is an important matter when
you find a man with forty-three classified documents, some of
them secret and some of them confidential, in his apartment,
and his roommate was fired because of Communist activities, and
that roommate was living with him and had access to this secret
material. Army security officers received a tip that he was
stealing it, and they went over to his apartment and they
searched it, and they picked it up. You are his boss, and I am
just curious to know what your attitude was, and what happened
then.
Mr. Yamins. I didn't know he was stealing it, and may I
tell you my impression of what happened at that to me?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Yamins. My impression was that those documents that
were found there--and I don't know how many there were--were
documents on old radars that should have been downgraded a long
time ago, and it was stuff that had been out in print. This
thing was handled pretty much by the director, and possibly the
security people, and I had no knowledge of what he had or what
was in his room or what they found.
The Chairman. Well, did you approve of this practice of
allowing employees to take secret material home?
Mr. Yamins. During the war it was the only way of doing it.
The Chairman. After the war, in 1946, did you approve of
the practice?
Mr. Yamins. Well, I dropped it myself, and didn't do it.
The Chairman. You were doing it in 1946 and you approved of
it at that time?
Mr. Yamins. I would say up until then; and after then, no.
The Chairman. Well, what I am curious about is this: If you
have those strict security regulations, and in 1946 the
security regulations did not give you the right to sign out
secret material, and if you signed it out to a man to take home
to his apartment, before you would do that you would say, ``Who
do you room with, and is he a Communist, and what kind of a
lock do you have on the apartment when you leave there and you
leave that material in your apartment?''
Mr. Yamins. I think it was assumed that he would keep it
with him.
The Chairman. Then see if I have this right: that it is
your testimony--and that is Coleman's testimony, too--that the
Signal Corps just indiscriminately, in 1946, allowed any
employee to sign out secret material and take it home with him.
You had no check on who he was living with, where he kept it,
whether it was safe or anything?
Mr. Yamins. I don't like your use of the word ``any''
employee, and I would say with key employees who had
responsible positions, probably.
The Chairman. Any employee working with classified
material, is that correct, any employee working with classified
material was allowed to take it home with him? Is that correct?
If it is not, tell me. I am trying to get the facts.
Mr. Yamins. I would say this: If he were responsible, a
section head or a responsible project head, yes. I would not
think any mechanic who happened to be working on a classified
job, or----
The Chairman. How many people in your section or department
would have the right to sign out secret material and take it
home to his apartment?
Mr. Yamins. Possibly the five or six section heads, and I
don't know how many there were, and possibly in each section
perhaps three project engineers.
The Chairman. Is it not a fact that anyone who had
clearance to handle secret material----
Mr. Yamins. No.
The Chairman. Wait a second, and let us see if this is
correct or not.
Is it a fact that anyone who had clearance to handle secret
material also was allowed to take that secret material home
with him? Was that not the way you made the decision? If a man
did have secret clearance to handle secret material, then you
figured he had clearance to take that home with him?
Mr. Yamins. We may have figured that that was a clearance,
but we didn't extend that to everybody who had that clearance,
and my impression is that everybody who was in the laboratory
had secret clearance, practically everybody.
The Chairman. Did you ever refuse to sign a pass for anyone
who had secret clearance, a pass which gave them the right to
take secret material home? Did you ever refuse?
Mr. Yamins. I can't recall at the moment.
The Chairman. And you know that people in the laboratory
day after day after day took secret material home, just for
their own purpose of study?
Mr. Yamins. When was this, sir?
The Chairman. You tell me when it was.
Mr. Yamins. During the war.
The Chairman. During the war?
Mr. Yamins. Definitely.
The Chairman. How about the first year after the war?
Mr. Yamins. Possibly towards the beginning; we began to
tighten up, and I don't know the exact dates, sir.
The Chairman. I wish you would just forget that you are on
the stand here, and try and give us this information.
Mr. Yamins. All right. Things gradually tightened up.
The Chairman. Who tightened them up, and who decided that
it was wrong to let them take secret material home, and was
there an order from someplace topside, and did you issue the
order?
Mr. Yamins. It was from topside.
The Chairman. From whom?
Mr. Yamins. From the commanding officer, and possibly the
director.
The Chairman. Did the time ever come when there was an
order issued saying that no one could take secret material home
with them?
Mr. Yamins. I never saw any such order.
The Chairman. Did the time ever come that there was an
order issued saying that only certain people could take secret
material home with them?
Mr. Yamins. I believe that was so.
The Chairman. Could you search your mind?
Mr. Yamins. The pass system only lasted a little while, and
I am not positive about that. Cards were issued after that.
The Chairman. Cards were issued?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Allowing them to take secret material home?
Mr. Yamins. Anywhere.
The Chairman. I do not care whether it is a pass or a card,
I want to know if and when the time came that you or someone
said, ``No longer will people take secret material to their
apartments and their homes''? If you know, tell me. And if you
do not know, just tell me.
Mr. Yamins. Well, at Evans, for example, everybody was told
not to even take it to meetings, so I assume they weren't to
take it home.
The Chairman. I may say, for your benefit, that the reports
we have gotten from Eastern Berlin is that they had access to
everything in the Evans Laboratory, and we are trying to find
out how they got it. We are beginning to get the picture now,
when we find that people could freely take things to their
apartments and to their homes. We find now that instead of
having secret material locked up in a safe with a guard there,
all you needed to do was, as Coleman said, ``I signed the pass
myself, and the chief of my section signed it also, and I could
take it home.''
Now, I am asking you, did the time come while you were over
there in the Laboratory when someone said, ``There will be no
more signing out of this material to people's homes''?
Mr. Yamins. I don't think so, not in those terms. I think
it was the exception that this was done. This was not done as a
regular thing. The total number of these was very small.
The Chairman. Now, when was the last time that you had been
in a position to sign these cards or passes?
Mr. Yamins. The last time I would have been in a position
to do this, I left the radar branch in 1947, and I went to
headquarters, and it seems to me there the individuals, most of
them had passes of their own, and then after that I went back
to the meteorological branch in 1949.
The Chairman. You said they had passes of their own. Did
those passes allow them to take secret material out with them?
Mr. Yamins. I beg pardon?
The Chairman. You said they had passes of their own.
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did those passes allow them to take secret
material out of there?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. In other words, people who had secret
clearance had passes?
Mr. Yamins. These were key individuals at headquarters
level.
The Chairman. About how many of those individuals were
there?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know. I would say something on the
order of fifteen, and that is a pretty round guess.
The Chairman. That is in the entire Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Yamins. No, this is at the headquarters at Fort
Monmouth.
The Chairman. How many people were in the headquarters, all
told?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know; twenty-five, maybe more.
The Chairman. So that over half of the people in the
department had a pass?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How did that differ from the pass that the
other people in the headquarters had to have?
Mr. Yamins. The others didn't have them.
The Chairman. Did they not have passes for getting in and
out of the place?
Mr. Yamins. They had a badge.
The Chairman. A badge?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir, and an identification card.
The Chairman. This pass that the others had, what did that
cover?
Mr. Yamins. I am sorry. There was a separate pass, that is
right.
The Chairman. What was on that pass? Was there something on
it that said that you can take secret documents out of the
plant?
Mr. Yamins. I think it was something of the sort; the Form
968 sticks in my mind, but I am not sure it is right.
The Chairman. Is it correct that anyone who had a pass
giving them clearance to secret and top secret material could
take material out and the guards would not bother them? Is that
not actually the situation?
Mr. Yamins. Will you repeat that again?
The Chairman. Is it not a fact that the people who had
these passes had complete freedom of action, and they could
take secret material out and they could bring it back in when
they cared to?
Mr. Yamins. That is quite right, that had these special
passes.
The Chairman. Now, if there were fifteen in the
headquarters, how many would you estimate there were in the
entire Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Yamins. This was not at Evans, and I wouldn't know. You
are asking me for data I don't know.
The Chairman. If you do not know, just say you do not know
Mr. Yamins. I don't know, Senator.
The Chairman. You said headquarters----
Mr. Yamins. They are just guesses, and I had no control
over the total number.
The Chairman. But see if this is correct, as far as you
know: At one time, in order to remove secret material you had
to have a special pass signed by the head of the section or the
division, whatever you would call it, and there came a time
when that practice was done away with and people received
passes showing they had clearance to handle secret and top
secret material?
Mr. Yamins. Secret.
The Chairman. Did not some have passes to show that they
could handle top secret material?
Mr. Yamins. I know very little about top secret material.
My impression is that top secret material was stored
separately, and only relatively few people had access to it,
and this was only on special occasions for special jobs. It was
all registered and there was a special top secret officer.
The Chairman. Would you have any idea how many people had
the type of pass which you described in the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Yamins. At what time, sir?
The Chairman. Pick any time. Let us say 1949.
Mr. Yamins. I don't know, because when I went back there in
1949, I went to the meteorological branch, which was not
primarily concerned with classified material.
The Chairman. As of today, as of the 22nd of September,
that is, the day before you were suspended, you had access to
secret material, did you?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir, I did.
The Chairman. How about top secret?
Mr. Yamins. I had top secret clearance, but I don't know
what that meant as far----
The Chairman. What kind of a pass did you have?
Mr. Yamins. I had a pass that said I could take secret
material out.
The Chairman. And that pass allowed you to take secret
material out of the building and out of the safe and take it
home with you?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. When was the last time that you took secret
material home with you?
Mr. Yamins. The last time I took it home--this was not to
take it home. It was to take it down to a meeting in
Washington.
The Chairman. The last time you took it home.
Mr. Yamins. I would say back in 1946.
The Chairman. But on the 22nd of September 1953, if you had
wanted to, you could have gone to the safe and taken as much
secret material home as you cared to, and that would have been
no violation as far as you know?
Mr. Yamins. I think that is quite right. Certainly it
wasn't in the spirit of things, and I certainly didn't do it
and wouldn't do it.
The Chairman. I am not asking you whether you did.
Mr. Yamins. I could have done it, yes, sir.
The Chairman. And with the pass you had, no guard would
have bothered you?
Mr. Yamins. This is down at Fort Monmouth you are talking
about?
The Chairman. Any place that you worked.
Mr. Yamins. Well, at MIT there are only two of us in our
Signal Corps office, and of course the guards were not military
guards, they are MIT guards.
The Chairman. There was nothing to prevent your taking the
secret material and taking it home?
Mr. Yamins. That is quite right.
The Chairman. Is this substantially true: that during the
war there was practically no check whatsoever on secret
material there, and anyone in the plant could take the stuff in
and take it out and bring it back in?
Mr. Yamins. I would say essentially so, during parts of it,
and I don't know when the system started. This was done, and I
did it myself. This was a time we were working, just before the
war, sixteen hours a day and seven days a week, trying to get
this radar stuff going.
The Chairman. If a classification means anything at all,
then the classification must be respected. I will agree that
many times you had overly eager individuals who classified
things far too highly, and they would take something which
should not be classified at all or classified restricted, and
they would stamp it top secret or secret. But the answer is not
to disregard the classification, but it is to get rid of those
who improperly classify things.
I have nothing further.
Mr. Schine. I have two things.
Mr. Yamins. Do any of the members of your family work for
the government?
Mr. Yamins. Outside of myself, no, sir.
The Chairman. That is brothers and sisters, and sons and
daughters, and sisters-in-law and brothers-in-law.
Mr. Yamins. None of them.
Mr. Schine. Are any members of your family connected with
any subversive organizations, or have they ever been connected
with any subversive organizations?
Mr. Yamins. My immediate family, no.
Mr. Schine. Cousins, uncles, aunts, or any relatives?
Mr. Yamins. Except through marriage.
Mr. Schine. Will you tell us about that connection, please?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, I will. Dr. Udin, of course.
Mr. Schine. Will you spell that?
Mr. Yamins. Dr. Udin, U-d-i-n. was first for the IWO. I
believe she is not connected now, and I don't know. This
organization was on the list.
Mr. Schine. What was the relationship?
Mr. Yamins. She was physician for this organization.
Mr. Schine. How about the relationship with your family?
Through marriage?
Mr. Yamins. My wife has cousins on two sides, and one side
of the family married into the Chase family in New Hampshire,
who are supposedly Communist.
Mr. Schine. Is Dr. Udin a Communist?
Mr. Yamins. I don't think she is.
The Chairman. Could I see the letters of charges again,
please?
[Documents handed to the Chairman.]
Mr. Schine. You say that the Chase family are supposedly
Communists?
Mr. Yamins. I have read in the paper they are.
Mr. Schine. Where do they reside?
Mr. Yamins. I believe it is in Hillsboro, New Hampshire.
Mr. Schine. And when you say the ``Chase family,'' who do
you mean?
Mr. Yamins. I think particularly it is Elba Chase.
Mr. Cohn. Is that Elba Chase Nelson?
Mr. Schine. She is a cousin of your wife?
Mr. Yamins. No. Her daughter married a cousin of my wife's.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Elba Chase Nelson?
Mr. Yamins. I have seen her.
Mr. Cohn. Where have you seen her?
Mr. Yamins. Up on her farm.
Mr. Cohn. When were you there?
Mr. Yamins. In 1936.
Mr. Cohn. Have you seen her since that time?
Mr. Yamins. And in 1937, I was there once. I haven't since
then.
Mr. Cohn. Did you not know she was a Communist party
organizer?
Mr. Yamins. At that time, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. When did you find that out?
Mr. Yamins. Reading it in the papers.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know. There were some articles
recently.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this question: Obviously you
have no control over who marries your cousins, and you are not
responsible for it.
Mr. Yamins. Quite right.
The Chairman. But let me ask you this: When did you first
visit her farm?
Mr. Yamins. I think it was in 1936.
The Chairman. How long did you stay there, how many days or
how many hours?
Mr. Yamins. I think that I stayed overnight at Nelson's
cabin. They had rooms.
The Chairman. And then you visited her farm again in 1937?
Mr. Yamins. I went up again one day with Dr. Udin, and I
think that I had dinner there, and I think that that is all.
The Chairman. Was your wife along with you?
Mr. Yamins. I believe she was. I am not sure about that.
The Chairman. At that time, it was public knowledge, was it
not, Roy, in 1937, that this woman was a top Communist
organizer?
Mr. Cohn. She is an open Communist, and always has been.
The Chairman. We are discussing someone, you understand,
who is not a secret or undercover Communist, but a person who
admits and brags about their importance in the Communist
movement.
Mr. Cohn. She was section organizer in New England in 1936
and 1937 and 1938.
The Chairman. Did you know when you went up and stayed at
the farm that she was a Communist?
Mr. Yamins. I think that I knew she was a Communist
sympathizer.
The Chairman. You knew that Dr. Udin was also a Communist
sympathizer?
Mr. Yamins. I think she might have been.
The Chairman. You said Miss Chase was a Communist
sympathizer, and did you not know she was an organizer for the
Communist party, and well known as such? She was not a
sympathizer, but an organizer. Did you know that?
Mr. Yamins. I didn't know that.
The Chairman. Where were you working at that time?
Mr. Yamins. At Ratheon Company.
The Chairman. Actually, did you not see Miss Chase in the
'40s, also?
Mr. Yamins. I beg your pardon?
The Chairman. Did you not see her during the 1940s, also,
that is, Elba Chase, or Elba Chase Nelson, the woman at whose
farm you visited in 1936 and 1937? Did you not actually see her
a number of times in the '40s?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
The Chairman. You are sure of that?
Mr. Yamins. Quite sure.
The Chairman. You say you are quite sure?
Mr. Yamins. Well, I went up once to Dr. Udin's cottage she
had on Mellon Pond. She rented a pond, and I thought that was
in 1939.
Mr. Cohn. Was Elba Chase Nelson there?
Mr. Yamins. I don't think so.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever see Dr. Udin and Elba Chase Nelson
together?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. They were good friends, weren't they?
Mr. Yamins. They were friends through the family, yes, sir.
The Chairman. In 1945, to be specific, in November of 1945,
did you not have a visit with Elba Chase Nelson?
Mr. Yamins. No, I don't think so. In November?
The Chairman. Yes. Just a minute, I beg your pardon.
November of 1946, and not 1945.
Mr. Yamins. No.
The Chairman. Was the answer ``no''?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Are you sure of that?
Mr. Yamins. Quite sure. Where was this? Where was I
supposed to have been?
The Chairman. I am asking you. Did you ever see her since
1945, since January 1, 1945?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
The Chairman. The answer is ``no''?
Mr. Yamins. The answer is ``no.''
The Chairman. Did you ever talk to her over the telephone?
Mr. Yamins. No.
The Chairman. I beg your pardon?
Mr. Yamins. No.
The Chairman. You are sure of that?
Mr. Yamins. I am quite sure.
The Chairman. You must have known Elba Chase Nelson rather
well to have gone up and stayed at her farm.
Mr. Yamins. I didn't know her well. I just went up there as
a vacation.
The Chairman. I think you have already testified to this,
but when did you start to work in the Signal Corps?
Mr. Yamins. August of 1940.
The Chairman. And did you work in the government before
that?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Who got you your job with the Signal Corps in
1940?
Mr. Yamins. Through Civil Service.
The Chairman. How old were you then?
Mr. Yamins. Thirty.
The Chairman. And who recommended you for the job?
Mr. Yamins. It was through Civil Service, sir.
The Chairman. You just applied?
Mr. Yamins. I applied through Civil Service and received a
rating and received the job.
The Chairman. Who were your----
Mr. Yamins. The letter was signed by Captain J. D.
O'Connell.
The Chairman. Normally you give certain people as
references, and do you recall who you used?
Mr. Yamins. No, I can't.
The Chairman. Were you a graduate engineer at that time?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir, I was.
The Chairman. How did you happen to get into the Signal
Corps? Did you apply for that?
Mr. Yamins. I just applied to Civil Service, sir, and it
was a general Civil Service examination. I received offers of
several places.
The Chairman. You were within draft age at that time, and
did you get a deferment?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir, I did.
The Chairman. On the ground you were doing important work?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Were you married then?
Mr. Yamins. I married shortly after, I guess one year
after.
The Chairman. What year did you get married?
Mr. Yamins. November of 1941.
The Chairman. To your knowledge, did your wife ever attend
any Communist party meetings?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you discuss communism or your work with
Elba Chase Nelson?
Mr. Yamins. I beg your pardon?
The Chairman. Did you discuss communism with Nelson when
you were up at her farm?
Mr. Yamins. No.
The Chairman. Not at all?
Mr. Yamins. No.
The Chairman. Did anyone ever solicit you to join the
party?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, I believe so.
The Chairman. Who solicited you to join the party?
Mr. Yamins. Pauline Levinson.
The Chairman. What kind of work is she doing now?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know what she was doing.
The Chairman. How well did you know her?
Mr. Yamins. I knew her very casually, and she was a friend
of a friend of mine.
The Chairman. When did you first meet her? Is that the
same----
Mr. Yamins. Yes, it is. She was at school when I was there.
The Chairman. Is her name still Levinson, do you know?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know.
The Chairman. When did you last see her?
Mr. Yamins. At that time, 1937.
The Chairman. Do you know Elba Chase Nelson's son? Do you
know her son?
Mr. Yamins. I believe she has several sons.
The Chairman. Did you ever talk to them?
Mr. Yamins. Just casually.
The Chairman. Did you know that one is and was an extremely
important functionary of the Communist party?
Mr. Yamins. No.
The Chairman. Was he at the farm at the time you were
there?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know. There were several of them there.
The Chairman. When did you last see him?
Mr. Yamins. I beg pardon?
The Chairman. When did you last see any of the sons?
Mr. Yamins. Well, at the time I was there.
The Chairman. When did you last see Levinson?
Mr. Yamins. In 1937.
The Chairman. I have nothing further.
Mr. Yamins. I would like to clear up one point.
Mr. Schine. Will you answer this question, please: Will you
give us the names of the individuals who were at the farmhouse
when you visited there?
Mr. Yamins. Dr. Udin, Albert Udin, I think--he is the
father of the daughter who married into the Chase family--and
Harry Udin, a son, my wife, her mother, and there were a lot of
other people I don't know.
Mr. Schine. Now about how many Communists would you say
were there?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know.
Mr. Schine. Try and think, because it is important that we
know.
Mr. Yamins. I don't know.
Mr. Schine. All right. Now, Mr. Yamins, would you please
give us the names of any Communists that you are acquainted
with in MIT or in Boston or anywhere else?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know that these people are Communists,
except from what I have read in the newspapers.
Mr. Schine. Will you give us their names, please?
Mr. Yamins. I know Dr. Furry, and I took a course under
him.
Mr. Schine. How do you spell that?
Mr. Yamins. F-u-r-r-y.
Mr. Schine. And where is he teaching?
Mr. Yamins. Harvard University, Physics Department, and I
know Lawrence Arguimbau.
Mr. Schine. Would you spell that?
Mr. Yamins. A-r-g-u-i-m-b-a-u.
Mr. Schine. Where is Mr. Arguimbau located?
Mr. Yamins. MIT.
Mr. Schine. What is his function there?
Mr. Yamins. He is a professor of electrical engineering.
Mr. Schine. Will you give us the other names?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know that these are Communists, it is
from what I read in the papers. I knew Levinson at school very
casually.
Mr. Schine. That is L-e-v-i-n-s-o-n?
Mr. Yamins. Norman Levinson.
Mr. Schine. Where is he located now?
Mr. Yamins. I think he is at MIT, and I don't know, I
haven't had any contact with him.
Mr. Schine. Will you continue to give us the names? Give us
all of them, please.
Mr. Yamins. Excuse me a moment.
[The witness consulted his counsel.]
Mr. Yamins. Marcel Ullmann, if he is.
Mr. Schine. Yes.
Mr. Yamins. The Chases, if you say that they are.
Mr.COHN. You know Elba Chase Nelson is a Communist?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, that is quite right. I read that in the
papers.
Mr. Schine. Proceed, please. Give us every name that you
can, please.
Mr. Yamins. Pauline Levinson, if she was.
Mr. Schine. Pauline Levinson?
Mr. Yamins. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Are any of these individuals doing work for the
government?
Mr. Yamins. I think Arguimbau is working at the Research
Laboratory of Electronics, at MIT, which has a government
contract, unclassified.
Mr. Schine. Are there any others?
Mr. Yamins. No, I don't think so.
The Chairman. There will be nothing further.
Mr. Yamins. May I still clear up that point, Senator?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Yamins. The Civil Service examination I took was a
general examination and it wasn't for any one specific place,
and I had no idea where job offers would be.
The Chairman. I think you said your job as of September 22
was principally liaison with MIT and the Signal Corps, is that
right?
Mr. Yamins. And other agencies in the Boston area.
The Chairman. And your liaison concerns itself principally
with classified work being done by MIT for the Signal Corps and
other government agencies?
Mr. Yamins. Not principally classified, I would say half of
it was classified.
The Chairman. Half of it was classified?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And you are cleared for top secret but you
say you have not seen top secret stuff yourself for how long?
Mr. Yamins. I don't know that I ever have.
The Chairman. To your knowledge, do you personally know of
anyone who has given classified material to anyone from any
government agency, to any unauthorized person?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir; I don't.
The Chairman. I think that I have asked you before, but did
you ever join the Communist party?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir; I did not.
The Chairman. You were solicited at one time by Pauline
Levinson, and you refused to join?
Mr. Yamins. That is right.
The Chairman. And did you ever attend any meetings that you
would consider Communist party meetings, and I don't mean
closed meetings, but meetings principally attended by
Communists?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
The Chairman. To your knowledge was your wife ever a
Communist?
Mr. Yamins. Not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Did she ever lead you to believe that she was
either a Communist, or sympathetic to Communist causes?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never engaged in any espionage of any
kind?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir; not at all.
The Chairman. You never gave classified material to any
unauthorized personnel?
Mr. Yamins. No, sir.
The Chairman. Have you kept classified material in your
home or your apartment?
Mr. Yamins. Kept it, sir?
The Chairman. Yes, have you taken any home?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, I did.
The Chairman. And what is the longest time that you ever
kept that in your home?
Mr. Yamins. Overnight.
The Chairman. Overnight?
Mr. Yamins. Yes, sir; and weekends.
The Chairman. Was that for the purpose of taking it there
en route to some other destination, or to take it there to
study it?
Mr. Yamins. Both.
The Chairman. About how often would you say you took secret
material home?
Mr. Yamins. I would say since about 1946, or 1947, I
haven't done it at all, except to go to a destination.
The Chairman. We have no further questions, and you will
consider yourself under subpoena in case we want you back.
May I say that the press will not be given your name unless
you give it to them. We have a rule of the committee that no
one in this room gives out the name of any witness unless the
witness himself wants to tell the press.
Now, if you meet members of the press and they ask you
whether you testified, you can tell them yes, or you can tell
them no, or you can tell them to go to the devil, or whatever
you want to.
Some of the people who were suspended have given out their
own names, and the Signal Corps has given out the names of
their co-workers, but your name will not be given out by this
committee. We give the press a resume of all testimony, without
identifying the witnesses at all.
We will contact your counsel in case we want you back.
[Whereupon, at 4:00 p.m., the hearing was recessed until
7:00 p.m., of the same day.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--In September, the subcommittee staff
received what appeared to be a letter from FBI Director J.
Edgar Hoover to Gen. Alexander Bolling, chief of army
intelligence, accusing thirty-five scientists, engineers and
technicians at the Army Signal Corps facility at Fort Monmouth,
New Jersey, of subversive activities. This evidence contributed
to the decision to launch an investigation of employees at Fort
Monmouth, although it later transpired that the original
letter, dated 1951, had made no specific accusations of
espionage or subversion, but had catalogued unsubstantiated
allegations collected during FBI field examinations. The
subcommittee also discovered an air force intelligence report
about an East German defector who had seen microfilmed copies
of documents that had originated at Fort Monmouth. The army
considered the defector's testimony unreliable and concluded
that the microfilmed documents were those that the U.S. had
turned over to the Soviet government under Lend-Lease
agreements during World War II. Soviet representatives had also
been stationed openly at Fort Monmouth during the war and had
official access to classified materials at that time.
In its annual report for 1953, the subcommittee commended
Maj. Gen. Kirke B. Lawton (1894-1979), commanding general at
Fort Monmouth, for having ``assisted the investigation in every
way possible without violating the Army's security
provisions.'' Gen. Lawton had exercised his discretion as
commander to suspend suspected security risks and summarily
remove forty-two Signal Corps employees. Later, during the
Army-McCarthy hearings, Senator McCarthy accused the army of
having blocked Gen. Lawton's promotion because of his
cooperation with the subcommittee. On July 21, 1954, Gen.
Lawton was ordered to Walter Reed Hospital for a medical
evaluation. He retired from military service on medical
disability on August 31, 1954.
None of the witnesses at the evening session on October 14,
Harold Ducore, Jack Okun, or Gen. Lawton, testified in public
session, although a portion of Gen. Lawton's testimony was read
into the record in Hearings Before the Special Senate
Investigation on Charges and Countercharges Involving:
Secretary of the Army Robert T. Stevens, John G. Adams, H.
Struve Hensel, and Senator Joe McCarthy, Roy M. Cohn, and
Francis P. Carr, (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,
1954), part 43.]
----------
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met at 7:40 p.m., pursuant to recess, in
room 36 of the Federal Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
(chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Francis Carr,
staff director; G. David Schine, chief consultant; Daniel G.
Buckley, assistant counsel.
Present also: John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
Department of the Army.
The Chairman. We will proceed.
TESTIMONY OF HAROLD DUCORE (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, HARRY
GREEN) (RESUMED)
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Ducore, we were going over your letter of
charges. Now, have we covered all of them? Do you have a copy
of that letter with you?
Mr. Ducore. No.
Mr. Cohn. Let us go over them.
Mr. Ducore. The first was, I was a member of the UPW.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of the UPW?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, I was.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know it was under Communist domination?
Mr. Ducore. No, I certainly didn't.
Mr. Cohn. When did you leave that union?
Mr. Ducore. Sometime in 1947.
Mr. Cohn. All right. Didn't you read in the newspapers
prior to that time that it was charged with being Communist
dominated?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You heard no discussion whatsoever about the fact
it was a Communist union?
Mr. Ducore. If I had known it was Communist dominated, I
wouldn't have joined in the first place.
Mr. Cohn. But having joined, when you were in there did you
not hear the allegations it was Communist dominated?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir, I don't remember anything like that.
Mr. Cohn. You were a member in 1947?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member out in New Jersey?
Mr. Ducore. In New Jersey, yes, in Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. Was the head of the chapter a man named Marcel
Ullmann?
Mr. Ducore. At one time I think he was president.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Ducore. I know him from meeting him at the union.
Mr. Cohn. Did you not know that he was a functionary of the
Communist party?
Mr. Ducore. I had no idea of that.
Mr. Cohn. When did you find out?
Mr. Ducore. I never actually found out. It was just a rumor
that I heard after he had been suspended, that the reason for
suspension was he was a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know him socially at all?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You did not?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What were the other charges in the letter?
Mr. Ducore. I was reported to have made a statement that
the Russians know how to treat people, and this country was too
liberal.
Mr. Cohn. Did you?
Mr. Ducore. I never did make such a statement.
Mr. Cohn. Did you make any statement similar to that?
Mr. Ducore. I couldn't have made any statement in favor of
Russia, since I have no faith in the Communist party, the
Communist form of government, or anything like that.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever had?
Mr. Ducore. I never have had.
Mr. Cohn. What were the other charges?
Mr. Ducore. I was reported to have associated with Albert
Sockel, who was a reported Communist.
Mr. Cohn. Was that a fact?
Mr. Ducore. Certainly not. I know Sockel from the union,
and he worked down the hall from me, and he must have been
there a couple of years, and I never had anything to do with
him socially, and I had one business contact with him while he
was in the laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. And that was not the only association that you
were charged with?
Mr. Ducore. That was the only association with which I was
charged.
Mr. Cohn. What is that?
Mr. Ducore. With my wife. These were the charges, and then
they continued and said my wife had been a member of the union.
Mr. Cohn. Had she?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, she had.
Mr. Cohn. Had she ever worked at the Signal Corps?
Mr. Ducore. She was working at the Signal Corps Standards
Agency at the time.
Mr. Cohn. And when did she leave there?
Mr. Ducore. I think August of 1947.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what else concerning your wife?
Mr. Ducore. That she had or it was reported that she had
made pro-Communist statements.
Mr. Cohn. Had she?
Mr. Ducore. She had never made such statements, and she was
not a Communist, a Communist sympathizer, and couldn't have
been.
Mr. Cohn. What else concerning your wife? Was there another
question of association?
Mr. Ducore. Association with a Louis Kaplan, who was also
reported to be a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. Did you not know Louis Kaplan yourself?
Mr. Ducore. Yes, I knew Kaplan.
Mr. Cohn. Did you not know that he was a functionary of the
Communist party, and the organizer of the Shore Club of the
Communist party?
Mr. Ducore. I never had any such idea.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you know he was a Communist?
Mr. Ducore. No.
The Chairman. One of the things that disturbed me yesterday
about Mr. Kaplan's testimony is this: He refused to tell
whether you were a member of the Communist party, and he said
that if he told us the truth it might tend to incriminate him.
We very carefully explained to him that he could not take
advantage of that privilege unless he had some reason to
believe you were a Communist; otherwise he would be in contempt
of the committee and would be subject to the usual contempt
proceedings.
I am not sure whether I asked you that question this
morning or not, but I just wonder whether Kaplan is an enemy of
yours, or why he would refuse to answer whether he knew you
were a Communist or not, on the ground that that testimony
might incriminate him. If he had no knowledge of your being a
Communist, he could have very frankly said no. When he refused
to testify, be left himself wide open to a contempt proceeding.
I just wonder if you could shed some light on that.
Mr. Ducore. As I said before, I knew Kaplan casually, and
he was a union member. At the two or three meetings that I
attended, I saw him there. He was also in my wife's driving
pool, and so I know him through my wife, and of course I knew
the people she drove with. And on I think one occasion we drove
him to a union meeting, and on one occasion we took him and his
wife to a dance. But I have no idea why he would refuse to
answer that, or why he should make a mystery of it. I am not a
Communist and I never have been, and I never have intentions of
being a Communist.
The Chairman. Let me read the question that was asked of
Kaplan. This was yesterday. The question is by Mr. Cohn:
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man named Harold Ducore?
Mr. Kaplan. Yes, I did know him.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend a Communist meeting with him?
Mr. Kaplan. I refuse to answer that question under the
Fifth Amendment.
Then the chairman said:
You understand when you say you refuse to answer on the
ground your answer might tend to incriminate you, that you are
in effect saying you attended Communist meetings with him,
because if you did not attend Communist meetings with him, the
answer to that question could in no way incriminate you. Now, I
want to ask you this question: When you refuse to answer,
invoking the privilege of the Fifth Amendment, are you doing so
on the ground that you honestly feel that a truthful answer
might tend to incriminate you?
And after a lot of stalling, he said yes, he thinks a
truthful answer might tend to incriminate him.
The thing that has puzzled me somewhat is why this man
Kaplan, who is apparently a close enough friend so that he rode
to work with your wife each day in the car----
Mr. Ducore. That wasn't a question of friendship. It was a
driving pool.
The Chairman. A financial arrangement?
Mr. Ducore. I don't know whether she actually collected
money, but this was during the war that the pool started, and
in order to get gasoline for a car you had to show a number of
riders or a share-the-driving plan.
The Chairman. I realize that.
Mr. Ducore. That was the only connection.
The Chairman. I realize we cannot indict you because of the
answer of a Communist, but I was just wondering why he would
say it would incriminate him if he said whether or not Ducore
was a Communist, or whether or not Ducore went to Communist
meetings, and I am curious to know, did Kaplan have some
grievance against you?
Mr. Ducore. I knew him casually, of course, and he spoke to
my wife in the car. I never attended any meeting with him other
than the two or three union meetings at which I saw him.
The Chairman. You went to City College?
Mr. Ducore. I did.
The Chairman. You may have covered this previously, but did
you know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Ducore. I don't recall him in any of my classes at City
College.
The Chairman. Or Ethel Rosenberg?
Mr. Ducore. Definitely not.
The Chairman. Julius was there at the same time you were?
Mr. Ducore. There was an overlap there, yes, but he wasn't
in my classes.
The Chairman. How about William Muterperl?
Mr. Ducore. I don't remember him from my classes, although
there is a possibility. Do you know what class he was in?
The Chairman. Muterperl was in social sciences, and he was
graduated in 1940, I believe.
Mr. Ducore. In engineering?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Ducore. In 1940?
The Chairman. That is right.
Mr. Ducore. It is so long ago, it is hard to picture
anybody in the class, but if he was in my class I was no
associate of his.
The Chairman. You have seen his picture?
Mr. Ducore. I saw it once in a paper, some time ago.
The Chairman. Is it your testimony now that, number one,
you never joined the Communist party?
Mr. Ducore. That is right.
The Chairman. And never joined the Young Communist League?
Mr. Ducore. Never, sir.
The Chairman. You were never solicited to join either one?
Mr. Ducore. Never, by anybody.
The Chairman. As far as you know, your wife never belonged
to either one?
Mr. Ducore. She never belonged to any party.
The Chairman. And your testimony is you never removed any
classified material from the Signal Corps?
Mr. Ducore. Not without authorization.
The Chairman. Maybe you could shed some light on this for
us. We have had unusual testimony here the last couple of days,
testimony to the effect that anyone who had clearance to handle
secret material could remove that secret material and take it
home to their apartments and leave it there, even though they
had no safe to keep it in, even though their roommates were not
checked. Is that your understanding of the rules and
regulations over there?
Mr. Ducore. At the time I started work, I know that there
were people who took material home and worked on it at home.
Sometime after that, I don't know when, a ruling came out that
the only time you could take classified material home to work
on it would be if you had a three-combination safe lock at
home.
The Chairman. When did that ruling come out?
Mr. Ducore. I do not remember the date, but it was several
years back.
The Chairman. In other words, it would be 1950 or 1951?
Mr. Ducore. I think much before that.
The Chairman. When did you start to work in the Signal
Corps?
Mr. Ducore. June 9, 1941.
The Chairman. And then you worked there until when?
Mr. Ducore. Until September 28 when I was suspended.
The Chairman. Did you ever take secret material home with
you?
Mr. Ducore. The only occasion I took secret material home
was when I had authorization, and not to work on it, but to
take it someplace. One specific instance I remember, I was
going to Washington, I think, on a Sunday night train, and I
left the material at the laboratories and picked it up Sunday,
so that I would not have to keep it at the house overnight.
The Chairman. In other words, your testimony is that the
only time you ever took secret material to your home was when
you were taking it there en route to some destination where you
were ordered to take it?
Mr. Ducore. I made it a habit all of the time I worked
there never to work at home on any material.
The Chairman. Did you have cameras?
Mr. Ducore. I mentioned this afternoon I have a Kodak
Brownie.
The Chairman. You do not have a Minox?
Mr. Ducore. No, sir. That is the only camera I have.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Ducore, do you have any relatives working
for the government?
Mr. Ducore. None that I know of.
The Chairman. Let us narrow that.
Mr. Schine. Any brothers or sisters or cousins?
Mr. Ducore. I can't answer for the rest. I am not very
close to my family.
Mr. Schine. Do you know of any member of your family who
has had Communist connections of any sort?
Mr. Ducore. Again I answer no, but I say I have very loose
connections with the rest of my family.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Ducore, would you please give us the names
of any Communists with whom you have been acquainted over the
years?
Mr. Ducore. I don't know of any Communists.
Mr. Schine. You never have been acquainted with any
Communist party members?
Mr. Ducore. Nobody has come to me and said, ``I am a
Communist.'' Possibly at City College there were some.
The Chairman. How about Kaplan? Did you know he was a
Communist?
Mr. Ducore. I didn't know he was a Communist, and the only
time I found out, as I said, was after he was suspended or
resigned, the rumor was that it had been under pressure and
probably because be was subversive.
The Chairman. When were you married?
Mr. Ducore. October 8, 1944.
The Chairman. You never roomed with Kaplan or any of the
other people who were suspended?
Mr. Ducore. In this case, at one time I lived with Bob
Martin, Bernard Martin.
The Chairman. How long did you live with him?
Mr. Ducore. About two years, from 1942 to 1943.
The Chairman. Did you know that Martin was removing
classified material at the time you lived with him?
Mr. Ducore. No. I am sure he wasn't, and he never brought
anything into the house that I know of.
The Chairman. I may say we have testimony to the effect
that he had been removing secret material. Is that right?
Mr. Schine. That is right.
The Chairman. Did he ever bring anything into the house or
the apartment?
Mr. Ducore. Not that I can remember. This is a long time
ago.
The Chairman. How many rooms in the apartment?
Mr. Ducore. It was a large house. There were five of us
living in it, and it was eleven rooms.
The Chairman. Who else was there?
Mr. Ducore. Jerome Corwin, Shepherd Bedler, and Samuel
Pomerentz, and Bernard Martin, and myself.
The Chairman. How about Pomerentz, did you know he was ever
accused of removing secret material?
Mr. Ducore. No, I didn't know he had ever been accused of
that.
The Chairman. Let me ask you one further question, and then
counsel has some questions.
We have very convincing proof that secret material from the
Signal Corps laboratories has been used in laboratories in the
Soviet Zone, and some of the documents have been tentatively
identified as to numbers and contents. Would you have any idea
how those documents might have been removed from the Signal
Corps and might have gotten over to the Soviet Zone?
Mr. Ducore. I have no idea at all.
The Chairman. There is no one in the Signal Corps whom you
would suspect?
Mr. Ducore. No. I heard the rumor at one time that certain
documents had been reported missing at the laboratory, but
shortly after that I heard the further rumor that they had
found the certificates of destruction for these, and there was
no problem.
Mr. Schine. You just said that you had heard that Mr.
Kaplan was a Communist, or was tied up with a subversive
movement.
Mr. Ducore. I said I didn't hear that; this was the rumor
that went around after he had left the Signal Corps Standards
Agency.
Mr. Schine. And you knew Mr. Kaplan?
Mr. Ducore. I knew him from the meetings that I attended.
Mr. Schine. So this is one individual who was in one way or
another alleged to have been connected with subversive
movements. Now, could you think carefully and try and give us
the names of any others?
Mr. Ducore. Well, I can give you the names of the people
who were removed and could not successfully appeal, and were
removed supposedly for being Communists, and that is Louis
Kaplan, Albert Sockel, Marcel Ullmann----
Mr. Cohn. Jack Okun?
Mr. Ducore. He was reinstated after a hearing, and was
cleared.
Mr. Schine. Can you give us the names of other people who
have been accused of being Communists whom you have known over
the years?
Mr. Ducore. I am trying to think. The name of Dan Welker.
Mr. Schine. Will you spell that?
Mr. Ducore. I can't even spell it for you. Welker.
The Chairman. Does he work for the Signal Corps now?
Mr. Ducore. No. He was suspended some time ago, and I think
he was working for the air force at the time, and I don't know
what the charges were, but I suspected at the time it was the
same thing.
The Chairman. What were his duties for the air force?
Mr. Ducore. I have no idea, and I can't even connect the
name with the face.
The Chairman. Can you think of any other individuals in
this category?
Mr. Ducore. Those are the only ones I know who were
suspended and could not successfully appeal.
The Chairman. What about individuals not working for the
government who have been accused or rumored to have been tied
up in one way or another with the Communist movement?
Mr. Ducore. I don't know of any that I know, that I could
say hello to.
The Chairman. I have one more question, Mr. Ducore. You
formed a company with Mr. Coleman and Mr. Corwin, is that true?
Mr. Ducore. That is true.
The Chairman. In what year did you form this company?
Mr. Ducore. It was either late 1946 or early 1947.
The Chairman. For what purpose was this company formed?
Mr. Ducore. We had ideas at that time of going into
business for ourselves, and we thought the best thing to do
would be to incorporate, and each take equal stock in the
company, and then if we could get the backing financially and
the place to work, we would leave the government and start in
the electronics business, hoping at the beginning to pick up
some business from the Philadelphia Signal Depot, which around
that time was putting out orders for replenishment of parts.
The Chairman. Did you do business with the R & G Company?
Mr. Ducore. We never did business with any company, and we
never actually got into business.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss with any company the
possibility of doing business in the event you went into
operations? I assume you did not plan this thing without
sounding out the possibilities.
Mr. Ducore. The only people we sounded out were people who
we thought could back us financially.
The Chairman. Do you know who were backers of the R & G
Company?
Mr. Ducore. No.
The Chairman. May I say that we have, in fact, evidence--
and it does not mean it is of necessity true, but we have
testimony that your company was dealing with the G & R Company,
and the two people in that company were Greenglass, convicted
of espionage, and Rosenberg, who was executed, who formed that
company. The testimony is you formed this company to do
business with the G & R Company. Would you care to comment on
that?
Mr. Ducore. I don't see how you could have that
information, because we never actually did any business with
anybody.
The Chairman. Did you ever talk to them about doing
business with them?
Mr. Ducore. No. The G & R Company doesn't sound familiar to
me. There were two people we spoke to for financial backing.
The Chairman. Who were they?
Mr. Ducore. One was a Benjamin Corwin, who was Jerome
Corwin's brother; and the other was some outfit up in Mount
Vernon that made cameras for the export market, and I think it
is out of business now.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Ducore, you had a falling out with Mr.
Coleman and Mr. Corwin some time ago didn't you?
Mr. Ducore. With Mr. Coleman, and we actually bought a
house together, to cut down expenses. This was a two-family
house, and he had one apartment and I had the other, and the
first couple of years we got along fine, and then the question
of personalities and little bickerings about who mowed the lawn
and how well you did it came up, and for the last few years we
haven't been seeing each other socially at all.
The Chairman. Thank you. That will be all. You will
consider yourself under subpoena in case we want you again. I
may say again that your name will not be given to the press or
anyone unless you give it yourself. They may recognize you as
you go out, and if they ask you if you have testified you can
say yes, or no, or whatever you want to. Thank you.
The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand? In this
matter now in hearing before this committee, do you solemnly
swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you God?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
TESTIMONY OF JACK OKUN
Mr. Cohn. Will you give your full name?
Mr. Okun. Jack Okun. O-k-u-n.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Okun, where do you live?
Mr. Okun. 10 Wardell Place, Wanamassa, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. What do you do now?
Mr. Okun. I work for Trat Television, T-r-a-t.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time?
Mr. Okun. Two years, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Prior to that, what did you do?
Mr. Okun. I worked for the United States Air Force.
Mr. Cohn. Where?
Mr. Okun. At Watson.
Mr. Cohn. And for how long a period of time were you with
the air force?
Mr. Okun. From January of 1945 to July '51, I guess.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever work for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When?
Mr. Okun. From early 1942, I think it was April, sir, to
the time of transfer to Watson Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. And then the source changed from Signal Corps to
air force, and you were an air force employee rather than a
Signal Corps employee?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Because of the transfer in functions?
Mr. Okun. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Now, was there ever a time when you were
suspended?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir, I was suspended in 1949, had a hearing
before the local security board, and I was reinstated.
Mr. Cohn. Why were you suspended?
Mr. Okun. I was suspended for associating with alleged
Communist sympathizers in the local union that I was a member
of.
Mr. Cohn. Is that the only charge?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Weren't there other specifications?
Mr. Okun. Well, they said that my association was based on
the fact I was on the executive committee with these people.
However, the charges were disproved in the sense I was not a
member of the executive committee.
Mr. Cohn. Did you receive a formal letter containing the
charges?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And what were the specifications in that letter?
Weren't there more than one?
Mr. Okun. The charges, as I remember them, were concerned
with the fact that I was a member of the executive committee of
this local.
Mr. Cohn. Wasn't there something involving something else?
Mr. Okun. Then they went on to say in that capacity I
associated with those two individuals.
Mr. Cohn. Wasn't there anything else outside of the union?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I don't think so.
Mr. Cohn. Were there any allegations of Communist sympathy
or support on your part?
Mr. Okun. I don't think so, sir, no, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Don't you remember that?
Mr. Okun. No. I believe the charges were based on
association with those two individuals in the union.
The Chairman. You mean two men accused of being Communists?
Mr. Okun. I don't know whether they accused them of being
Communists directly. I think they accused them of having been
later discharged from the service as either sympathizers or
perhaps Communists, I don't know.
The Chairman. Let us not waste our time back and forth
here, because we know your charges.
Mr. Okun. I am sure you do.
The Chairman. The letter of charges accused you of
associating with people who were known Communists, or known
espionage agents.
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I don't believe it said that.
Mr. Cohn. What were the names of the people?
Mr. Okun. Mr. Ullmann and Mr. Sockel.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Marcel Ullmann, is that right?
Mr. Okun. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. What was Mr. Sockel's first name?
Mr. Okun. I think it was Albert.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Albert Sockel?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Ullmann and did you know Mr.
Sockel?
Mr. Okun. I knew Mr. Ullmann as a fellow employee, and I
knew him as a fellow union member. I only knew Mr. Sockel as a
fellow union member, and I had never known him as a fellow
employee.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever have any social contact with Mr.
Ullmann?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. With Mr. Sockel?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever go to any meetings with Mr. Ullmann?
Mr. Okun. Yes, I did.
Mr. Cohn. Did you not know Mr. Ullmann was a well known
Communist?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't know that about Mr. Sockel, either?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. What else was there in this letter of
specifications?
Mr. Okun. I think there was a reference to a joint meeting
that the union allegedly held with the Walt Whitman Club, and I
never heard of it.
Mr. Cohn. The Walt Whitman Club of the Communist party, is
that correct?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I think the Walt Whitman Club of
Monmouth County, or the Shore Area.
The Chairman. Did you know that the charge was that the
Walt Whitman Club was a Communist club?
Mr. Okun. I never heard of the Walt Whitman Club.
The Chairman. When they accused you of belonging to it----
Mr. Okun. I didn't belong to it.
The Chairman. I am not asking you that, but when you were
charged with that, was the charge that you belonged to a
Communist club?
Mr. Okun. No, sir. The charge was that I had attended a
joint meeting of the union with the Walt Whitman Club.
The Chairman. Did they tell you what the Walt Whitman Club
was?
Mr. Okun. They said it was known to be the shore arm or
suspected of being the shore arm of the Communist party, as I
recall it.
The Chairman. I was not asking you whether you belonged. I
was asking you if you knew what it was.
Mr. Okun. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Is that all you recall concerning the letter of
charges?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Nothing else?
Mr. Okun. Nothing else.
Mr. Cohn. You say a hearing was held, is that right?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Was anything else brought up at the hearing?
Mr. Okun. Well, the hearing--there was a lot of testimony
given by witnesses and a lot of comments made by the members of
the board, and frankly, sir, I don't recall all of the things
that was mentioned.
Mr. Cohn. What were you told concerning the nature of this
Walt Whitman Club?
Mr. Okun. At the meeting, at the board hearing?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Okun. I don't think I was told anything at the hearing
with respect to Walt Whitman, and I tried to prove conclusively
that I had not attended any such meeting, nor did I ever belong
to the Walt Whitman Club, nor did I ever hear of it prior to
the mention of the charges.
Mr. Cohn. What did they tell you at the hearing? They never
told you anything about the club?
Mr. Okun. I don't have any recollection of it.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't they tell you anything about the club and
its connection with the Communist party, and didn't they ask
you anything about that at the hearing?
Mr. Okun. I think my attorney and I went over the facts,
and we searched the records of the Shore Area, and I went to
the library and he searched the records to find out when they
had met, and we attempted to show the committee that we had
done this by going to the various papers. To that extent the
discussion was in the hearing about the Walt Whitman Club, in
an effort to prove I hadn't attended any such meeting.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever live with Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir, I did.
Mr. Cohn. And at the time you lived with Mr. Coleman, was
his home raided?
Mr. Okun. I don't think his home was ever raided.
Mr. Cohn. Was it searched?
Mr. Okun. I believe it was.
Mr. Cohn. Searched by representatives of the army security
intelligence?
Mr. Okun. I think he told me that, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Classified documents were found there?
Mr. Okun. I believe so, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know that those documents were there?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you ever see Mr. Coleman with any of these
documents in his possession?
Mr. Okun. I never knew Mr. Coleman--I never knew of the
possession of the documents specifically, and I knew he took
documents home to work on, but I didn't work with Mr. Coleman
at that time, and I worked at the air force, and I wasn't
concerned with his activities.
Mr. Cohn. You lived with him?
Mr. Okun. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. The question was: Did you know whether or not, or
did you know before this search, that there were any documents
from the Signal Corps in your establishment?
Mr. Okun. I did not know that there were documents from the
Signal Corps in our establishment.
Mr. Cohn. You did not see him bring them in?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever see his work on them?
Mr. Okun. I saw him working, but I didn't know what he was
working on.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever see him working with documents?
Mr. Okun. Well, documents--I saw him working on papers, and
I saw him working on papers.
The Chairman. How do you pronounce your name?
Mr. Okun. O-kun.
The Chairman. You were rooming with Coleman?
Mr. Okun. Yes.
The Chairman. The army security came and searched the
apartment and found forty-three secret and confidential
documents which he was not entitled to have. Did you know any
of those documents were in the apartment?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. You did not?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Were you present when army security came and
made the search?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I was not.
The Chairman. You never knew there were any classified
documents in the apartment?
Mr. Okun. I did not know there were any classified
documents in the apartment.
The Chairman. And you never read any of them?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. How about the cameras in the apartment?
Mr. Okun. I never saw any cameras in the apartment.
The Chairman. You did not?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. That is rather unusual. Mr. Coleman himself
testified that he had a number of them there.
Mr. Okun. I never saw them.
The Chairman. You didn't know they were there?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. You did not know Mr. Coleman had cameras?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Did you ever see a Minox camera?
Mr. Okun. I don't know what a Minox camera is, sir.
The Chairman. I will tell you. It is a little camera about
half as big as this pencil.
Mr. Okun. I never saw one.
The Chairman. You never saw one of those?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never saw any cameras there?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you see a typewriter there?
Mr. Okun. I don't think there was a typewriter in the
apartment, sir.
The Chairman. Well, Mr. Coleman testified that there was.
Mr. Okun. If he did, then there might have been, and I do
not recall the typewriter in the apartment.
The Chairman. You lived with him there, and he has
testified that he had two or three cameras, and he testified he
had a typewriter. And you never saw it?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. How big an apartment was it?
Mr. Okun. It was--or there was----
The Chairman. How many rooms?
Mr. Okun. I think it was called a 2\1/2\-room apartment.
The Chairman. That would be a bedroom and a living room and
a bathroom?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir, and a dining area.
The Chairman. You lived with Coleman for how many months?
Mr. Okun. When he returned from the service until I got
married, a matter of perhaps a year or so.
The Chairman. About a year?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And during that entire year, you did not know
that Coleman was an amateur photographer and made that one of
his hobbies?
Mr. Okun. I never saw Coleman as an amateur photographer at
all.
The Chairman. You never saw his photostating equipment in
the apartment?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know he copied any of those
documents?
Mr. Okun. I never saw Mr. Coleman copy any documents, and I
never saw him copy anything but doing his studies and his
writings, and I don't know what he was writing.
The Chairman. I am rather curious at this point--and you
may be able to shed some light on this--where the documents
were hidden, if you did not see them. Forty-three is quite a
sizable number, you understand.
Mr. Okun. It does sound like a lot.
The Chairman. Documents classified as secret and
confidential and dealing with radar. Would you have any way of
telling us how it happened you lived in this two-room apartment
and you never saw any of the secret documents?
Mr. Okun. Mr. Coleman came back from the service with a lot
of papers and a lot of booklets, and I never had anything to do
with it, and I am not a technical man. I had nothing to do with
it and I left them strictly alone.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss with him the raid upon
the apartment by the army security officers?
Mr. Okun. Only in the sense that he told me that they had
asked him to come to the apartment, and he had agreed to let
them come.
The Chairman. Did he tell you that they searched it and
found forty-three classified documents?
Mr. Okun. He didn't tell me they found forty-three
documents. He said they found some papers, that they took.
The Chairman. Did he tell you why he was suspended?
Mr. Okun. At that time, yes, sir, and he said that he had
violated security.
The Chairman. Did he tell you that he had stolen secret
documents?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. He did not?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ask him what security he had
violated?
Mr. Okun. I don't recall, Senator. I might have, and I
really don't remember.
The Chairman. Were you not interested when you learned
about it?
Mr. Okun. Yes, but he was very disturbed about it, and I
didn't bother him. I thought he worked out his own salvation on
the subject, and I had nothing to help him with.
The Chairman. Where are you working now?
Mr. Okun. Trat Television, sir.
The Chairman. When did you leave the Signal Corps?
Mr. Okun. In 1951.
The Chairman. Does this Trat Television work for any
government agency?
Mr. Okun. We have some contracts with the Signal Corps and
air force and navy.
The Chairman. You do classified work, do you?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I don't think that there is anything
classified in the plant.
The Chairman. What kind of work do you do for them?
Mr. Okun. I am concerned with the packaging of commercial
and whatever other governmental equipment is fabricated in the
plant.
The Chairman. How about the Signal Corps, what kind of work
do you do for them?
Mr. Okun. We have same contracts with the Signal Corps.
The Chairman. What kind of work do you do for the Signal
Corps?
Mr. Okun. Specifically, all of the projects that have
packaging problems are done by myself for packaging and
shipping.
The Chairman. Do you package and ship any classified
material?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Are you sure of that?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. In other words, your testimony is that your
company handles no classified material for any government
agency?
Mr. Okun. To the best of my knowledge, yes, sir.
The Chairman. If you are handling classified material,
would you know it?
Mr. Okun. I think that if there were classified material to
be shipped, I would hear about it, yes, sir.
The Chairman. You may have covered this before, but did you
ever join the Communist party?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I have never joined the Communist party.
The Chairman. Were you ever solicited to join?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever belong to any organizations
listed by the attorney general as fronts for the Communist
party?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. How many brothers and sisters do you have?
Mr. Okun. I have two brothers.
The Chairman. They are not working for the government?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Your wife is not a Communist?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. She is not working for the government?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever remove any secret material from
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Never at any time?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Were you cleared for handling secret and top
secret material?
Mr. Okun. I never had clearance for top secret, and I think
that was reserved for very few people.
The Chairman. You had a clearance for secret?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. There has been testimony today that anyone
with a clearance for handling secret material could remove
material from the laboratory.
Mr. Okun. I beg pardon?
The Chairman. We have had testimony today that anyone with
secret clearance could remove secret material from the
laboratory. Was that your understanding of the situation?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I don't think anybody had a right to
remove any documents that were classified without a pass.
The Chairman. So that it is your opinion if anyone took
documents, or took secret documents from the laboratory without
a pass, they would be violating the Espionage Act; is that
right?
Mr. Okun. I don't know what the Espionage Act is with
respect to that situation, but I would say anybody who took any
secret documents without any passes, they would be violating at
least the regulations of the installation.
The Chairman. You may step down. I do not think we will
need you again, but in case we do, we will call you.
Mr. Okun. Thank you.
The Chairman. Consider yourself under subpoena. I may say
we do not inform the press or anyone of your name, and the only
way they will know you are here is if you tell them. And if you
want to tell them you are here, that is up to you.
Did you know Mr. Sobell?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I never met Mr. Sobell.
The Chairman. How about Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Okun. I never met him, either.
The Chairman. How about Ullmann?
Mr. Okun. I knew him as a fellow union member, but I never
associated with him on a social basis or any other basis.
The Chairman. Did you ever visit his home?
Mr. Okun. I think I visited his home at one union party
that was given, which was a general open party, but that was
all, sir.
The Chairman. That was the only time?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did he ever come to your home?
Mr. Okun. Yes, to pick me up to take me to a union meeting,
but not to stay.
The Chairman. Now many times has he picked you up?
Mr. Okun. I would say perhaps three, two or three times, or
maybe four.
The Chairman. You are aware of the fact now, of course,
that he was a Communist?
Mr. Okun. As soon as he was suspended, sir, I never saw the
gentleman again excepting at my hearing, and in fact, I had a
call from a friend of mine who was working in the city at the
time, and he asked me about a fellow who had come up to ask him
for a position, and the man's name was Mr. Ullmann, and I told
him that ``I would not hire Mr. Ullmann if I were you, because
the man has been suspended for potential subversive
activities,'' and that was written into my hearing record, sir.
The Chairman. Who did you tell that to?
Mr. Okun. To Mr. Harvey Sachs, who called me on the
telephone about it, and that was the situation.
The Chairman. What year was this, do you know?
Mr. Okun. This was in 1949, sir, I believe.
The Chairman. It was in 1949 they interviewed you and said,
``What do you think of Ullmann?'' And you said, ``I do not
think I would hire him because he has been discharged.'' I
think that that is all. If we want you again, we will call you.
In the meantime, consider yourself under subpoena.
Mr. Okun. I will be very pleased to.
The Chairman. I hope you understand that the mere fact you
are called here does not mean that the committee feels one way
or the other about your activities. We just call you to get
information.
Mr. Okun. I will be very happy to offer whatever I have,
sir.
The Chairman. To this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Gen. Lawton. I do.
TESTIMONY OF MAJOR GENERAL KIRKE B. LAWTON
Mr. Carr. General, you are the commanding general at Fort
Monmouth at the present time?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. How long have you been commanding general there?
Gen. Lawton. Nineteen months.
Mr. Carr. Nineteen months?
General Lawton. Yes, sir--or rather, twenty-one months.
Mr. Carr. Prior to that, you were the deputy chief of staff
of the Signal Corps?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Immediately prior to that?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir, in the Pentagon.
Mr. Carr. Now, to get right down to the subject matter, at
Fort Monmouth, as you are aware, there have been security
risks, and you have already suspended some people from Fort
Monmouth, or the secretary of the army has. We would like to
know what action has been taken at Fort Monmouth concerning
security risks, in a general way to begin with.
To help you on that score, we understand that there has
been an investigation conducted over a period of time, and we
would like to know what the result of that investigation
disclosed.
Now, you can consult with Mr. Adams concerning any security
regulations on that, but we would like to know what the result
of that investigation disclosed, General Lawton.
Gen. Lawton. Having been in the Pentagon as deputy chief
signal officer, I will start with a little background as to why
I knew what the problem was anywhere in the country, Monmouth
or some other place.
Now the war is over, and there are a lot of things that
have been classified like travel orders, troops, officers going
overseas. That is classified. The war is now over, and nobody
during the war had time to declassify, or in fact, you couldn't
declassify it, and the war is now over so you have to clean out
your files.
I had a committee of three officers who spent about a year
and a half declassifying records in the chief signal officer's
office, and finally got that down to a current working basis.
We set up a cage and put people in it, like a bank cashier, so
that everything was formally handled and recorded.
Then when I went to Monmouth, I was completely security
conscious, and in my investigations of each particular
activity, including the laboratory--and I have got many other
places that have just as secure information as that is--
detailed corrections had to be made with the person who kept
the records to see that they were checked out and they were
checked in, and a physical count was made periodically.
My impression was that there had grown up in the army a
system which was not foolproof for accounting for these things,
and so I required a physical check, just like you would
property in the army. You sign a memorandum, but every once in
a while some officer goes around and makes a physical check of
property.
So after my arrival at Fort Monmouth, I instituted that,
and have had it going on----
Mr. Carr. This is a physical check. When you arrived at
Monmouth, shortly thereafter you instituted a physical check to
determine security as far as these documents that you were
talking about were concerned, to see what your security was and
to account for them?
Gen. Lawton. That is right, and it was possible for the
girl with the security records to loan one out to an authorized
person, and he might have it six months. To my way of thinking,
that is not good. He should come back every thirty days with
it, or somebody should go to him and say, ``You are charged
with ten documents. Let us see them.''
If you don't do that, the things are going to get
misplaced, and possibly lost, and you don't discover it for six
months. So in general, we check all of the security documents
every thirty days.
Mr. Carr. That is your present system?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. To get back specifically to security risks as far
as personnel are concerned, did you make a study at that, also,
when you arrived at Monmouth?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir, and long before.
Mr. Carr. You mean beginning when you were deputy chief of
staff?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. That investigation consisted of what, in general
terms? What did they do?
Gen. Lawton. The only reason I am hesitating is, I can't
mention names and I can't mention the people.
Mr. Carr. I don't want the names at this point. I would
like to know just what steps you took.
Gen. Lawton. I had a chart, a monthly staff reading, like I
count the costs of electricity and motor transport. I had a
chart made of the number of security risks we had in which we
had forwarded through channels to Washington, and that goes up
in a bar on the top side; and then right aside of it, the
number that had been returned approved for removal.
I don't think I can give you that figure, according to this
regulation, as to how many removals I had versus the number I
had sent in to Washington.
The Chairman. May I say, you may want to talk to Mr. Adams
about this, but we have had so much experience with this
executive order and the various interpretations. If you feel
strongly that that would be a violation of the rules, I would
not want to order you to answer it.
Gen. Lawton. I would love to tell you, but I honestly feel
that it is, and you can get it so easily another way.
The Chairman. May I say, General, if you honestly feel you
would be violating a rule, I would not want to put you between
two fires: of being in contempt of this committee or being
subject to a court martial for having violated the presidential
directive. For that reason I am not going to order you to
answer the question.
I would like to make it very clear for the record that I
think it is ridiculous to the point of being ludicrous to think
that an army officer cannot tell the American people how many
Communists or disloyal people he has gotten rid of. I may say
that all of the evidence of infiltration by Communists and
subversion of the army has caused the army to drop to a rather
low point in the estimation of the American people, and it is
bad for this country. It would be a good thing if the American
people could learn that we have someone someplace who is
kicking the Communists out. I know how many security risks you
have been working on, and how many cases of subversion; and if
the president of the United States wants to continue to operate
under a rule which is going to keep the facts in the dark, that
is all right. I may say I do not blame the president for this.
I do not think he has any conception of the fact that army
officers will come before a committee and refuse to give this
testimony. Again, I am not blaming you, you understand. You
feel that that is the correct interpretation, and you have a
legal officer of the army here, and he tells you that that is
the interpretation.
If I may risk being boresome by repetition, I think it is
the most fantastic and it is the most unbelievable situation
that I have ever heard, to think the people cannot hear the
facts about whether or not you are clearing house. I think
somebody over there has been doing an excellent job over the
past month, and I think that your suspicion of people, and the
removal of them from handling top secret work, is an excellent
thing. And I think it would be a good thing if the people knew
that. But I am not going to order you to answer it.
Gen. Lawton. May I say that I agree with everything that
you have said, and I think the public should know it, and I
think that you should know it. I will have to stand on that
interpretation of this change of the regulations, but let me
say this: I would love to have you just stick it on a piece of
paper so that it would be in writing like this and present it
to the secretary, and then you can quarrel with the secretary.
I will give you help on the telephone.
The Chairman. I have the figures here, which shows you have
been speeding up your security survey, and the result of the
survey since you have been there, initiated by you--an
excellent idea, I think, that you had; that you found between
100 and 115 people who were considered security risks; that you
yourself, or the secretary of the army, I do not know which has
ordered the survey to be speeded up, and that you got rid of
the worst of those security risks as soon as possible.
I think that that is information the American people should
have; and if that is correct, I think it is something that
would restore some of the lost confidence in the military.
I think it is unfortunate that all we can do is expose the
bad things about the army. I would like to come in here and
expose some of the good things you have been doing over the
past.
Gen. Lawton. Why didn't the secretary answer that question?
He knows what he is doing.
The Chairman. We did not ask him that question. We have
refrained from putting the secretary under oath or anything of
the kind, and he was merely here as a spectator. We have not
asked him for any information at all. The secretary will come
back, and we will talk to him about it.
Gen. Lawton. If he will just say yes, you have got it.
The Chairman. Let me see if we can ask some questions that
will not put you on the spot as far as violating the
regulations is concerned. Can we phrase the question this way:
Would you say that since you have taken over, and especially
over the past six months, you have been working to get rid of
the accumulation of security risks in the Signal Corps, and
that you have suspended a sizable number, and you are working
toward getting rid of all of those that you now consider
loyalty or security risks? Would that be a safe statement?
Gen. Lawton. That is a question I will answer ``yes,'' but
don't go back six months. Let us go back--effective results
have been in the offing in the last two weeks. I have been
working for the last twenty-one months trying to accomplish
what is being accomplished in the last two weeks.
The Chairman. I think that covers that. So that you would
say that in the past several weeks, you are getting some
effective results?
Gen. Lawton. Absolutely, that we have not gotten for the
last four years.
The Chairman. And you have the complete cooperation of the
secretary of the army in this, I understand.
Gen. Lawton. Absolutely, and things are moving.
The Chairman. Could you tell us why it is only in the last
two or three weeks that you are getting these effective
results?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, but I had better not. I know this so
well, but I am working for Mr. Stevens.
The Chairman. Here is one of the things that has disturbed
me a very great deal. We have the testimony of Mr. Coleman to
the effect that he could remove secret material at will; and we
have the testimony of his superior officer, who was not his
superior officer during your regime, but he has been over at
MIT since then, to the effect--and I am not putting it
verbatim--that almost anyone with secret clearance could remove
secret documents and take them home to their apartments and
their homes, regardless of who they lived with and whether they
had a safe or not, and keep them there for a day or two days or
three days. Yamins testified that during the war there was no
check-out system at all, no check-in and check-out. He
testified during the war there was no system of checking in and
checking out. When we asked about that, he said that the reason
was they were working sixteen or eighteen hours a day.
I am just curious to know whether you think that was not a
direct violation of the regulations for handling secret
material.
Gen. Lawton. If the man had a three-combination safe at his
home to put it in while he was asleep or when he went to eat,
and when he wasn't personally guarding it, it is my opinion
that that is not a violation. In my own case, I have a safe,
and when I went to Monmouth I couldn't get my paperwork done
during the daytime, and I had a safe in my quarters and I took
home my work. When it was uncompleted, I would put it in the
safe, because there were servants around. Then when I got ready
to work on them, I would open it up and do my work and put them
back in the safe and go to bed. That is the only way you can
handle classified material when you take it out of your office.
The Chairman. From the survey which you have been making,
General, would you agree with the thoughts which I think all of
our staff have, and which I have, that is, that there
apparently has been a very serious espionage problem over
there? If so, you might elaborate on that. I would appreciate
it very much.
Gen. Lawton. I don't know of any since I have been there or
when I was the deputy. We have had several reports that we had
lost papers which did not turn out to be true. I will tell
you--do you want me to take three minutes to go into how these
things happen?
The Chairman. Yes.
Gen. Lawton. Let us take last summer. A report came
through--and this is hearsay--the Asbury Park--let us not
mention the press. They will raise hell with you if you happen
to be wrong, but let us say the press. Sixteen documents we had
lost in the laboratories, and it came out in the press.
The Chairman. I may say this testimony is not made public.
This is an executive session.
Gen. Lawton. Can I refute that by saying some day later you
may change your mind, and it is----
The Chairman. That is right.
Gen. Lawton. All right, we understand each other. Let us
say we got a report in the press we had lost sixteen documents.
This is on a Thursday, I think, it came out in the press, and
we got a hold of it and went to work on it Friday. They had
specified where it was lost, and we knew where it was. And it
was specified in the right place, because one of those physical
check routines that I had had discovered that this particular
girl had checked these out and they had been out thirty days
and they couldn't find them. So they would have normally taken
a week to hunt around during the daytime to find them.
Our supposition is that either somebody in the lab that
didn't like us, or some friend of his he talked to one night,
said ``The Signal Corps is in a mess because they can't find
sixteen papers,'' or ``The boys are disturbed because they have
lost sixteen papers.'' That is how I think it got in the press.
Of course, we don't lose papers, and people don't steal
papers that are in this business. That is the last thing you
do. You copy the paper and you photograph it, but you never get
it out of the laboratory. That is the worst thing to do,
although you have seen evidence where they did, and yet maybe
he had a right to take it, I don't know.
So we detailed men to this, and this crowd went to work on
Friday. I told them they would work Friday night and Saturday
night and Sunday night, and Monday morning I wanted the papers
found. They found the papers about two o'clock on Saturday
morning, and here was the sequence:
They borrowed them from the check girl for an engineer and,
well, he had worked on this as part of his business, and other
engineers, four or five of them, on the same. And he had loaned
it to another lad, and he didn't get a receipt. You see, this
guy didn't get a receipt. The girl got a receipt all right, but
he didn't get a receipt. And so when the physical check was
made we went to him and he said, ``I haven't got the paper.''
``Who did you give it to?'' And he said, ``I don't know. I
think I gave it to somebody.''
At two o'clock in the morning they went through everybody's
files and they found the sixteen papers.
But the press came out and said the Signal Corps had lost
sixteen papers. We hadn't lost anything.
That is what this physical check will do, and without it
you can't run one of these systems. He could have had it a year
if you don't have a physical check, and it might have gotten
lost in cleaning out.
Mr. Cohn. I want to ask you a few questions there. Is
there, to your knowledge, an espionage ring operating at
Monmouth now?
Gen. Lawton. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Has there ever been?
Gen. Lawton. Not to my knowledge, no, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know of any papers which you had
information concerning to the effect they had gone from the
Evans Signal Laboratory into the hands of the Russians?
Gen. Lawton. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever receive any information to that
effect?
Gen. Lawton. No, sir, not in the hands of the Russians. The
first I heard of it was when I saw it in the press yesterday or
the day before.
Mr. Cohn. Your testimony is you had never heard from any
responsible quarter--or let us make it first of all from any
quarter whatsoever, that documents from the Evans Signal
Laboratory had been seen and found in the possession of the
Communists?
Gen. Lawton. The answer is no, I never have.
Mr. Cohn. You never have?
The Chairman. Did you understand that question?
Gen. Lawton. To the best of my memory, yes. They threw a
case at me today that I had seen, but I had forgotten about it.
It was a year old.
The Chairman. Did you not get the reports from the air
force intelligence in Europe, a detailed report that material
from Evans Laboratory was very freely available to the
Communists?
Gen. Lawton. No.
The Chairman. Strike that question. I want to make this
very clear. Did you not receive a report from the air force
intelligence that a Communist who had left the Pirma Laboratory
and came over into West Germany, gave details of secret
documents from the Signal Corps at Evans Signal Laboratory? You
got that report?
Gen. Lawton. I saw it this morning, and I saw it a year
ago.
The Chairman. Well, that does not jibe with your answer.
Gen. Lawton. I don't remember reading in the report that it
got to the Russians, and the report----
The Chairman. What was the report, General?
Gen. Lawton. As I remember the report, it listed a number
of equipments that we had, and the air force reported this. The
air force intelligence reported to us.
The next paper on this report--and I have forgotten how
many days or weeks or months later--said that the party that
made that report had denied the facts in the report, and the
air force notified us that it was a closed case.
The Chairman. That report, I assume, disturbed you a great
deal, General, if you learned that stuff came from your
laboratory and was in the hands of the Communists.
Gen. Lawton. The air force said it is a closed case because
nothing happened.
The Chairman. It is not a closed case, General, until you
are satisfied it is closed. When you first got the report--when
did you first get the report?
Gen. Lawton. That I don't know. When they showed it to me
today, it was a year old, and I remember now having seen it.
The Chairman. Did you see it a year ago?
Gen. Lawton. I presume I did.
The Chairman. Well, now, that was of more than passing
concern, General, when you get a report from the air force
intelligence. The first report was that here is a reliable
informant, and they examined the material, according to their
report, and they said, ``This came from the Signal Corps
Laboratory, and it was used in the Pirma Laboratory, a
Communist laboratory, in East Germany.'' Did you see that then,
and what did you do, General?
Gen. Lawton. I can't answer your question, because today
when they showed me that paper I had no recollection of ever
having seen it, and I am sure if I had I would have taken the
same attitude that you think I should now.
The Chairman. Then you did not see it until today?
Gen. Lawton. I wouldn't say I didn't see it. I don't
remember having seen it, and I am sure if I had I would have
moved on it, and I well would have remembered it like the
newspaper report. I have a stamp and I stamp everything that
crosses my desk, and I didn't see it on there. I asked my boys
today, ``What makes you think I saw this?'' And they said,
``You did.'' And I said, ``Well, all right.''
The Chairman. Here is part of the report. I will read it to
you:
The incident document indicates that the defectee had seen
an entire film based on Oak Ridge, Tennessee, the atomic energy
location, while he was with Prima in the Russian Zone, and the
information he supplied concerning the film clearly indicates
that he actually had seen it, and it contains much technical
data as well as some physical.
I am speaking of that. Did you see that?
Gen. Lawton. No. This is a list of signal equipment, some
I.F.F., some identification of friend or foe radio equipment.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this, then: Here is the Air
Corps intelligence report. Let me quote--number one, it
consists of eight pages.
Gen. Lawton. I only saw two pages in the report I saw.
The Chairman. The last three pages consist of drawings. Did
you see the drawings?
Gen. Lawton. No, sir.
The Chairman. The report states that the defectee--by that
I mean a Russian scientist who left and came over to West
Berlin--saw microfilms of blueprints of documents bearing the
name of the Evans Signal Corps. Did you see that in the report?
Gen. Lawton. No, sir.
The Chairman. ``He testified that materials had actually
been built from the documents, and he indicated that the
Russians could obtain any information that they desired from
Evans Signal Corps Laboratory.'' Did you see that report?
Gen. Lawton. No, sir.
The Chairman. Can you give us any reason why you should not
have seen it?
Gen. Lawton. No, sir, I can't. Has it been at Fort
Monmouth?
The Chairman. I do not know. I just cannot imagine why you,
the commanding officer of the Signal Corps, should not see it.
Gen. Lawton. I agree with you. I don't, either, if such a
thing ever landed here. Not even my G-2 would get something
like that without bringing it to me.
The Chairman. I may say there was an investigation at Fort
Monmouth, and it was finally held up by someone over in Fort
Monmouth, so it has been over there, General.
Gen. Lawton. What is the date it was over there?
The Chairman. I do not know what date it was there. I know
it has been there for a long time. It has been there for a
number of months, more than four months.
Gen. Lawton. Oh, no.
The Chairman. I am going to ask you, General--I think this
is a matter of tremendous importance, and I am going to ask you
to go back and get a report on this, and come back and see us
tomorrow.
Gen. Lawton. I will be glad to; if anything like that is in
my place and I don't know about it, it is wrong. And it is
wrong if something hasn't been done about it, of course.
The Chairman. Do you know anything about this defectee who
came over into Western Germany----
Gen. Lawton. No, sir.
The Chairman. [continuing] and gave the information about
the material received from Evans Signal Corps Laboratory?
Gen. Lawton. No, sir, that doesn't ring a bell anywhere,
even my two years in the Pentagon and the two years up here.
Mr. Cohn. If you had, it certainly would have rung a bell.
Gen. Lawton. Oh, yes, we would have turned things upside
down.
Mr. Cohn. Let me put it this way, if I may, General: You
are the commanding officer out at the Signal Corps installation
at Fort Monmouth, part of which was this Evans Signal
Laboratory, which was working on highly classified radar
material vital to the antiaircraft defenses of the country.
Now, another thing, you know, of course, that before your
time there, Julius Rosenberg had worked there, and Vivian
Glassman, and you know about Dr. Grundfest and a lot of other
things. If, on top of all of that, you come across or there
comes to you a secret or top secret document from intelligence,
from air force intelligence and Signal Corps intelligence,
saying that a defectee Russian scientist has jumped the lines
over in Germany and he was working for years over at the Pirma
Laboratories in the Soviet Zone for the Russians on highly
classified work over there, and he gave a detailed description
of film involving atomic energy which was checked and found to
be completely accurate, so he must have seen it, and be never
had been around the Allied territories before; furthermore, he
said he had seen a number of highly classified documents from
the Evans Signal Laboratory, and that they had built radar
devices from some of these documents, and that it was possible
for them to receive any documents that they wanted over there
from the Evans Signal Laboratory--now, there are other details,
and this man, the record will show, was a scientist, and I
don't doubt that the numbers might have been wrong and his
description might have been off on certain things, but
basically it indicates that the thing rang true. Wouldn't that
have shocked you if it was called to your attention?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir, and my memory is not so bad that I
would not remember it.
Mr. Cohn. If they had acted properly and showed that to
you, undoubtedly that is something that you would know?
Gen. Lawton. I would remember it just like I told you about
the press report.
Mr. Cohn. This would be more substantial than a press
report, is that right?
Gen. Lawton. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. It is an intelligence report, and the thing rings
true, and you don't get a man, a Communist, walking across the
lines and giving a head-to-foot description of a film on atomic
energy which is ours, and throwing around the terms about the
Evans Signal Laboratory and describing documents, without that
being something which is going to really ring a bell.
Gen. Lawton. I have never seen it, but let me recall one
thing to my own mind. I said this once on a minor thing, and it
wasn't this important, and nothing has ever been this
important. They brought me in a paper that I had initialed four
years before and made a liar out of me. And so you can do this
to me, but I am sure if this is within a year, I know that I
have never seen it, or heard of it even.
The Chairman. The document number, Signal Corps
Intelligence, is ATI-1004-52, Air Technical Intelligence, dated
June 5, 1952, and this refers not to the documents stolen from
the Signal Corps but to the air force intelligence report,
which certainly should have been forwarded on to you and which
you should have. The air force number is AF-4677-53, and it is
classified as secret. The document originated at headquarters,
USAF, Europe, Air Technical Intelligence Branch. It consists of
eight pages, the first five pages of which are typewriting, and
the last three pages consists of drawings. The typewritten part
is to the effect that the defectee saw microfilms, blueprints
of documents bearing the name of the Evans Signal Corps, and it
indicates that the defectee testified that materials had been
built by the Russians using the specifications set forth in the
Signal Corps documents. This document indicates that the
defectee testified that the Russians could obtain any
information that they desired from Evans Signal Corps
Laboratory.
I may say that he had apparently convinced the air force
intelligence completely, because here was a man who was never
in this country and would normally have no knowledge whatsoever
of secret documents in Evans Signal Corps, and would not know
there was such a place as Evans Signal Corps, and he describes
the stuff in detail.
Now, the information indicates that someone in the Pentagon
ordered that there be no investigation made of this document. I
am sure that would interest you. You would be interested in
knowing who it was that said, ``Let us not investigate and find
out who stole these documents.''
If we can give you any more information on this, we will,
but I think that that should be enough.
Gen. Lawton. I think those numbers ought to start me off on
it.
Mr. Cohn. It is very clear, General, you might have seen
this, but certainly the full impact of it could not have been
called to your attention; is that right?
Gen. Lawton. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. This would be something of a major thing.
Gen. Lawton. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Now, General, about Dr. Gruenfest--G-r-u-e-n-f-e-
s-t, I think, is the spelling.\5\ Let me ask you this: Could it
be, just to avoid any technical error here, there is anything
similar to this which was called to your attention since you
have been commanding general?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Professor Harry Grundfest testified in a public hearing on
November 25, 1953.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Lawton. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What was that?
Gen. Lawton. Well, my G-2 showed me a paper today that came
from air force intelligence and had two pages, and it listed
some equipment. All of the items that were listed were
declassified except one. That was marked ``Confidential,'' and
I have forgotten which piece it was. And then the third page
came along, and I don't know how long after the first two pages
before the third page came from the air force and said, ``We
have found that the informant was wrong,'' and they didn't even
say ``unreliable.'' They said he was wrong. ``Disregard it. The
case is closed.''
Mr. Cohn. When was that first called to your attention?
Gen. Lawton. Today, as far as I remember, and I asked my G-
2 if I saw it a year ago, and he said yes, I did, and I said,
``Show me how you know I did, because my stamp is not on it.''
Mr. Cohn. That is another thing which would have hit you
very forcefully that was called to your attention?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. So I understand this correctly, probably what
happened is one of two things: Either they are in error, and
they didn't show it to you, or if they showed it to you it was
rushed through in such a way that it was not called to your
attention.
Gen. Lawton. I am sure it never hit my desk, unless it is
one of those remote cases.
Mr. Cohn. That is the kind of thing, if it had hit your
desk, what we are talking about, or what you are talking about,
those lists or this, or if they are the same thing or part of
the same thing or if they are different things, it is something
that, particularly in this background of the mess there before
you came, would have hit you very forcefully, and you certainly
would have done something about it personally.
Gen. Lawton. And why I say that is that every month we have
sent out task forces, in addition to routine things, to check
people, and I go myself. On 1 September I got kind of sick--let
us use better English--I was a little disgusted at my own
people for the violations that I was continuously finding. Now,
these are little things about carbon paper and desk pads and
unlocked drawers with steno things in them, which is a
violation, and so I set 1 September of this year as the target
date, and anybody found with a violation, no matter how small,
the minimum price was an official reprimand and $25. With
civilian personnel we had a scale, depending upon what it was;
a desk pad was so much and stenos was so much and carbon paper
was so much. The G-2 boys worked it out, and that is the ground
rules. Since 1 September, three officers have gotten punished
and, I don't know, eight or ten civilians.
This is a continuing thing, and they will get punished just
the same as people would punish people for automobile traffic
violations.
The Chairman. I still do not have the picture of this other
document, General, you discussed. You said it contained a list
of equipment, and then you stopped there. You mean equipment
that allegedly disappeared from the Signal Corps?
Gen. Lawton. Oh, no. It would be wartime stuff that they
had gotten a hold of, and nothing new, because it wasn't
classified. It might not have been wartime stuff, and it wasn't
classified equipment that this fellow had gotten a hold of.
The Chairman. This equipment was supposed to have been
gotten a hold of by whom?
Gen. Lawton. They didn't name him, some informant. The air
force intelligence said ``this informant.'' I can't answer that
question. This equipment had gotten into the hands, I would
presume, of the Russians, or something.
The Chairman. In what way would that affect the Signal
Corps, it being equipment----
Gen. Lawton. Some of our troops maybe over in Germany had
lost some.
The Chairman. Was it Signal Corps equipment?
Gen. Lawton. Some of it was Signal Corps equipment, and
that is why the air force sent it to us.
The Chairman. But you did not receive, and up to this point
you have not received, any information about the documents from
Evans Signal Corps?
Gen. Lawton. No, sir, I knew nothing of that until I saw it
in the press the other day.
The Chairman. I may say that I can understand why it was
not brought to your attention, because our information
indicates that someone in the Pentagon did order that the
investigation of this be discontinued. So that I can see where
you perhaps did not have this information.
Let me ask you this: In view of the fact that you took over
the Signal Corps here, and one of your tasks, I assume, was to
clean house there and clean things up--and you are apparently
doing a pretty good job of that--does it not seem just unusual
in the extreme that they not let you know about this
allegation, which the air force intelligence thinks is valid,
to the effect the Russians could get anything they wanted from
Evans Signal Corps? It would seem to me one of the things that
should promptly be done would be to go over and, in detail,
interview this defectee and find out all of the information he
has, and get the whole picture.
Gen. Lawton. The answer to your question I must dream, and
I know nothing about it, but couldn't it be possible--and it
does happen this way--that G-2 of the army, getting this, said
``Let us not stop the leak, let us let it continue,'' like the
opium cops do, ``and let us let it continue and get the big
fellows.''
The Chairman. That could be.
Gen. Lawton. I don't know, but I will agree with you that
unless there is something like that, that should have come to
me.
The Chairman. That might be one excuse for not making
anything of it publicly, although the indication there that we
have is that they ordered the investigation to be discontinued.
Gen. Lawton. If they did that, I would say that there is
something here that doesn't meet the eye.
The Chairman. Unless there may be something we do not know
about, that they wanted to encourage, in effect, those who were
doing the stealing to get the ringleader. That is possible. The
information we have is that the document was impounded in the
safe by Mr. Garhardt, if you want to make a note of that name,
G-a-r-h-a-r-d-t, in case they say they cannot find it.
Gen. Lawton. It is still in the signal intelligence?
The Chairman. I think so.
General, what did you do before you went over to the Signal
Corps?
Gen. Lawton. At Fort Monmouth? I was in the Pentagon as
deputy chief signal officer, and four years before that I was
the comptroller for the signal officer in the Pentagon.
The Chairman. I know it is rather difficult for a man to
evaluate his own work, but do you think that you are making
some progress in cleaning up that mess over there?
Gen. Lawton. In the chief signal officer's office, that was
done before I left. It was cleaned up, the same board of three
officers.
The Chairman. I mean in Fort Monmouth and Evans Laboratory.
Gen. Lawton. Oh, yes, I am satisfied that Fort Monmouth is
fit, and I am also satisfied there isn't a month going by but
what I find an officer and a civilian, and this is a continuing
thing. You see, I have got eight thousand civilians and twelve
hundred officers.
The Chairman. Who is doing the suspending of these security
risks? Is that your function?
Gen. Lawton. No, it can be done on a lower level on this
graded scale I talk about. Now, if the man doesn't like it and
he thinks it is unjust, he can appeal to me to go to a
grievance board.
The Chairman. I was wondering who we could give credit to
for the eight or ten suspensions that we had over the last
month.
Gen. Lawton. I am the only one who can suspend them.
The Chairman. So that those suspensions are due to that? Is
that correct?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir, and you can't give that to me. I
only know that indirectly.
Mr. Cohn. How about Dr. Gruenfest?
Gen. Lawton. I never heard of him.
Mr. Cohn. Is that the first you have heard of him?
Gen. Lawton. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Gruenfest is the name.
Gen. Lawton. No.
Mr. Cohn. This is the first you heard about him?
Gen. Lawton. He is not at Monmouth, I hope.
Mr. Cohn. He was there.
When do you think that you could get up to date on this and
have your people brief you on this stuff and come back here?
Gen. Lawton. You are talking about this document? Well,
what I will do, I will send somebody--I will be in the Signal
Corps intelligence with them in the morning, and I will start a
search, and they should have something.
Mr. Cohn. They talked to you about it this morning?
Gen. Lawton. You have talked to them?
Mr. Cohn. No, you said you talked to them.
Gen. Lawton. I never heard of this thing before.
Mr. Cohn. Here is the point. On the thing they talked to
you about this morning, plus what we have called to your
attention, why don't you make it both?
Gen. Lawton. I will make it both.
The Chairman. Could you do this: I know you have a long
ride out there, and it is 9:30 now. You have a two-hour ride to
get back to the base.
Gen. Lawton. I know where my people are, and I don't mind
working nights. If you want this in the morning, as far as this
air force report that I have got at my station, I can get that
and bring it back up here at nine or ten o'clock tomorrow
morning.
The Chairman. If you could do this, General: If you could
get all of the information you could on this--I hate to impose
upon you too much, but I think we both feel the same about
this--if you could come back tomorrow afternoon, good. And if
you find that you do not have sufficient information to come
back tomorrow, would you call us, Courtland 77100. Have your
aide call us and tell us what time you could come back Friday.
Mr. Cohn. If you can make it tomorrow afternoon, good. If
not, Friday morning would be all right.
The Chairman. Have your aide let us know whether it will be
tomorrow or Friday.
After each session we give the press a briefing on what has
been said, and normally the names of the witnesses are not
given to the press. However, you are famous enough a man so
that they knew that you are coming. Now, I am going to give
them a brief resume of this, and not give them much
information, but merely point out that you feel a lot of
progress is being made, and especially in recent weeks; and
that the documents having to do with the secret Signal Corps
material found in Pirma Laboratory or, let us say, in the
Soviet Zone, has not been brought to your attention; that we
gave you all of the information we had on that, and you intend
to make a search for the material, to contact the Pentagon and
see where it is, and you are coming back Friday. I think that
that is sufficient.
If you would care to stay here and listen to what I tell
them, you are perfectly welcome to do it, and to add anything
to it you care to.
Gen. Lawton. I will add nothing. I will be glad to listen
to you.
The Chairman. Otherwise, if your aide wants a copy, also,
of the testimony here to go over for you, that will be
available.
[Whereupon, at 9:30 p.m., the hearing was recessed until
10:30 a.m., Thursday, October 15, 1953.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note--Following this executive session, Senator
McCarthy told reporters that the recently executed Julius
Rosenberg had formed a Communist spy ring at Fort Monmouth,
while working there as a technician in 1942 and 1943.
McCarthy's chief counsel, Roy Cohn, had served on the staff of
the U.S. Attorney for New York and had assisted in Rosenberg's
prosecution. Cohn drew on that experience while investigating
subversion at Fort Monmouth.
At Rosenberg's trial, Max Elitcher had admitted having been
a member of the Communist party and accused Rosenberg, his City
College classmate, of having tried to recruit him as a spy.
During World War II, Elitcher had worked with Morton Sobell at
the Navy Bureau of Ordnance, and said he had been present when
Sobell passed film to Rosenberg. Another witness at the trial,
William Perl (Mutterperl), had been a member of the Young
Communist League with Rosenberg, Sobell, and Joel Barr. Perl
testified that following Rosenberg's arrest in 1950, Barr's
fiancee, Vivian Glassman, had visited him in Cleveland with a
check for $2,000 and urged him to leave the country.
Marcel Ullmann (1905-1992) testified in a public hearing on
December 10, 1953. On December 8, the U.S. District Court in
New York denied an injunction filed by Eleanor Glassman Hutner
to prevent the subcommittee from calling her to testify in open
session; however, she never testified publicly. Vivian Glassman
Pataki, Samuel I. Greenman (1915-1991), Ira J. Katchen (1900-
1987), Max Elitcher, Eugene Hutner (1921-1990), Col. John V.
Mills, Maj. James J. Gallagner, Benjamin Zuckerman, and
Benjamin Bookbinder, did not testify in public.]
----------
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 15, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met at 10:40 a.m., pursuant to recess, in
room 36 of the Federal Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
(chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Francis Carr,
staff director; G. David Schine, chief consultant; Daniel G.
Buckley, assistant counsel; Harold Rainville, administrative
assistant to Senator Dirksen; and Robert Jones, research
assistant to Senator Potter.
Present also: John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
Department of the Army.
The Chairman. Raise your right hand and be sworn.
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mrs. Pataki. I do.
TESTIMONY OF VIVIAN GLASSMAN PATAKI (ACCOMPANIED BY HER
COUNSEL, VICTOR RABINOWITZ)
Mr. Cohn. For the record, the name of counsel is Victor
Rabinowitz.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Victor Rabinowitz was a member of the Communist party from 1942
until 1961. His law office, Neuburger, Shapiro, Rabinowitz, and Boudin,
represented the Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists, and
Technicians, a CIO union, and its members often called on him for
representation when they were subpoenaed by the subcommittee. See
Victor Rabinowitz, Unrepentent Leftist: A Lawyer's Memoir (Urbana:
University of Illinois Press, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Could we have your full name?
Mrs. Pataki. Vivian Pataki, P-a-t-a-k-i.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you reside?
Mrs. Pataki. 343 East 8th Street, New York City.
Mr. Cohn. What is your occupation?
Mrs. Pataki. I am a social worker.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you work?
Mrs. Pataki. At the moment I am not employed.
Mr. Cohn. What was your last employment?
Mrs. Pataki. I was doing research work at New York
University, Research Center for Mental Health.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mrs. Pataki. That isn't right. I had worked since then.
Mr. Cohn. When were you with New York University?
Mrs. Pataki. From about February of 1953 until about June
of 1953, and I am not exactly sure of the dates.
Mr. Cohn. What did you do after June of 1953?
Mrs. Pataki. Then I worked at a day camp.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that?
Mrs. Pataki. It was out in Middle Village, Queens Village,
in Long Island.
Mr. Cohn. What was the name of that?
Mrs. Pataki. Belle Park Manor Terrace.
Mr. Cohn. Now, that was the last position you held?
Mrs. Pataki. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. What did you do directly before going with NYU in
February of 1953?
Mrs. Pataki. I was unemployed for a while prior to that, I
would say about a year.
Mr. Cohn. And prior to that?
Mrs. Pataki. Prior to that I worked at Long Island College
Hospital.
Mr. Cohn. Doing the same type of work?
Mrs. Pataki. Psychiatric casework, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this: What is your husband's name?
Mrs. Pataki. Ernest Pataki.
Mr. Cohn. He resides at the same residence?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have any brothers or sisters?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, I do.
Mr. Cohn. Could we have their names?
Mrs. Pataki. I have a brother Milton Glassman, and I have a
sister Eleanor Hutner, H-u-t-n-e-r, and I have a sister Gladys
Boudin, B-o-u-d-i-n, and I have another sister, Hortense
Skolnick, S-k-o-l-n-i-c-k.
Mr. Cohn. Was there ever a time when you worked for the
Army Signal Corps?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, I did.
Mr. Cohn. When did you work for the Army Signal Corps?
Mrs. Pataki. From about June of 1942 until about August or
September of 1943.
Mr. Cohn. Was that the only government position you ever
held?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, it is.
Mr. Cohn. And where were you stationed when you worked for
the Signal Corps?
Mrs. Pataki. At Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you live when you were down at Fort
Monmouth working at Fort Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. In Long Branch.
Mr. Cohn. Do you recall the address?
Mrs. Pataki. No, not offhand.
Mr. Cohn. Where at Fort Monmouth did you work, in what
particular section or part of it?
Mrs. Pataki. I had worked in two places. One was at Fort
Monmouth proper, which was called the Fort Monmouth
Laboratories, I believe; and then I worked subsequent to that
at a place called Eatontown, which was also one of the sections
of the Signal Corps proper out there.
Mr. Cohn. What kind of work did you do at Eatontown?
Mrs. Pataki. At Eatontown I was teaching, and I was called
a job relations trainer.
Mr. Cohn. Who would you instruct? People in the Signal
Corps, or what?
Mrs. Pataki. It covered both civilian and army personnel, I
would say. It was primarily people in supervisory capacity.
Mr. Cohn. Down at Fort Monmouth, is that right?
Mrs. Pataki. I believe it was Eatontown, and I don't
recall.
Mr. Cohn. At the Signal Corps installation?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, sir, and I don't recall whether the
people I taught came specifically from Eatontown or whether
they had come from the Fort Monmouth Laboratories, but it was
that kind of thing.
Mr. Cohn. You would teach, and what would you do at the end
of the course? Did they get marks or ratings, or what?
Mrs. Pataki. It wasn't a question of ratings. It was a
course on how to work with personnel, and it was a personnel
course. Since many of the people had recently taken on
supervisory jobs, I was trained to train them how to get along
with their staff.
Mr. Cohn. Now, getting back to the first thing you did, you
say you worked at the Fort Monmouth Laboratories, and what type
of work did you do there?
Mrs. Pataki. There I did routine examination, I would say,
and testing of equipment.
Mr. Cohn. And inspections?
Mrs. Pataki. It wasn't exactly inspections.
Mr. Cohn. You say it was testing?
Mrs. Pataki. Testing, for example, flashlights to determine
if one flashlight would hold up under certain conditions better
than another type of flashlight, as an example.
Mr. Cohn. Did you work at the Evans Laboratory at all, one
of the Monmouth Laboratories?
Mrs. Pataki. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Which laboratory did you work at?
Mrs. Pataki. The Fort Monmouth Laboratory, which was called
Fort Monmouth Laboratory, I believe; and then the Eatontown
Laboratory, which was an adjunct of it.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know the Evans Laboratory? Isn't that
what you mean when you refer to Fort Monmouth Laboratory, do
you know?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't know. It is my recollection that that
was actually called the Fort Monmouth section of the total Fort
Monmouth Laboratory, but I am not sure, because it is a long
time ago.
The Chairman. Do I understand you to say, when you refer to
the Fort Monmouth Laboratory, you mean Evans Laboratory?
Mrs. Pataki. I am not sure that that section--it was the
initial unit setup, I believe, and that is what we commonly
referred to as the Fort Monmouth Laboratory, which was almost
sort of one part of the total Fort Monmouth Laboratory, which
then included several other laboratories. But I am not sure
whether that was later called the Evans, or if it was always
called the Evans.
The Chairman. It was a part that might have covered or had
relationship to the whole setup, is that right? It was not a
separate thing?
Mrs. Pataki. The laboratory was one unit, just as Squire,
for example, and Coles, and Eatontown, and they were all part
of the total overall United States Signal Corps Fort Monmouth
Laboratories, but the one that I had gone to initially I
believe was the one that most of us came to when we were first
hired.
Mr. Cohn. When you were there, did you have access to any
classified material or information or equipment?
Mrs. Pataki. I am really not in a position to tell you the
nature of the material. I can only tell you that it was
material which was common to everybody, and it was routine
material which just about everybody, I would say, had access
to, and to----
Mr. Cohn. Everybody working down there?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, naturally everybody working down there.
Mr. Cohn. You couldn't walk in from the outside and go
around fooling around with that equipment?
Mrs. Pataki. No, because each of us had a badge.
Mr. Cohn. You had clearance and a badge?
Mrs. Pataki. I guess clearance and a badge, and you entered
because you were an employee.
Mr. Cohn. While you were working at the Signal Corps
installation at Fort Monmouth, were you a member of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't wish to answer that question, on the
basis of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Because the answer might tend to incriminate you?
Mrs. Pataki. On the ground no person may be compelled to
bear witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. Now, did Julius Rosenberg have anything to do
with your obtaining a position at the Signal Corps?
Mrs. Pataki. I do not wish to answer that question, on the
basis of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. Do you think a truthful answer to that
question might tend to incriminate you?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, I think that the answer might tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Cohn. Now, were you in contact with Julius Rosenberg
during the period of your employment with the Signal Corps?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't wish to answer that question on the
basis of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see Rosenberg, or did you associate with
Rosenberg down at Fort Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't wish to answer that question on the
basis of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Were you engaged in espionage with Rosenberg at
that time?
Mrs. Pataki. I do not wish to answer that question on the
basis of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Now, did you ask certain persons working at Fort
Monmouth when you were there, to obtain classified documents
and give them to Julius Rosenberg?
Mrs. Pataki. I do not wish to answer that question on the
ground of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man named Joel Barr when you were
working with the Signal Corps?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't wish to answer that question on the
basis of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Were you and Barr and Rosenberg members of an
espionage ring operating at that time?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't wish to answer that question on the
basis of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you yourself give to Rosenberg any classified
information concerning radar which you had obtained from Fort
Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't wish to answer that question on the
basis of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Now, where did you go when you left Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. I returned to New York City.
Mr. Cohn. Did you attempt to obtain employment for anyone
other than yourself at the Signal Corps?
Mrs. Pataki. I am not sure I understand the question.
Mr. Cohn. Did you help anybody else get a job? Did you help
anybody else get a job at Monmouth, in the Signal Corps? You
can confer with Mr. Rabinowitz any time you want to.
[The witness conferred with her counsel.]
Mrs. Pataki. I don't remember ever helping anybody obtain a
job at the Signal Corps.
Mr. Cohn. While you were working at the Signal Corps, were
you acquainted----
The Chairman. I did not hear the answer to that question.
Mrs. Pataki. I said I don't recall helping anybody obtain
any kind of a job.
The Chairman. Did you ever recommend to anyone that they
apply for a job at the Signal Corps?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't recall ever doing that.
The Chairman. Did anyone who applied for a job there use
you as a reference?
Mrs. Pataki. I couldn't say, because somebody might have,
you see, without my knowledge, for example.
The Chairman. Do you know of any espionage agents who got a
job at the Signal Corps after you got your job there?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't wish to answer that question on the
grounds of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. When you refuse, you cannot state you do not
wish; you must refuse to answer on the ground a truthful answer
might tend to incriminate you.
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Do you know of any espionage agents working
in the Signal Corps as of this time?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer on the basis of the Fifth
Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. When you were working down there, did you know a
man by the name of Aaron Coleman?
Mrs. Pataki. I don't wish to answer that question, I refuse
to answer that question on the basis of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man by the name of Carl Greenblum?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. To your knowledge, was Mr. Coleman part of an
espionage ring?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. Did you ever receive classified documents
from Mr. Coleman?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend a Communist party meeting
with Mr. Rosenberg and Mr. Coleman?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man named Max Epstein at Fort
Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever in the company of Rosenberg,
Epstein, and Greenblum?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Now, your sister Eleanor was working down there
when you were there, was that right? She was working at Fort
Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, she was at Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. Was she working in the same laboratory you were
working in, or where?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, she was working in the same laboratory;
not at Eatontown, I believe, but I believe she was at Fort
Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. Was your sister at that time a member of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Was she engaged in espionage along with you?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Now, after you left Monmouth, Mrs. Pataki, where
did you go?
Mrs. Pataki. I came back to New York City.
Mr. Cohn. What did you do?
Mrs. Pataki. I took a job as a psychiatric case worker in
practice.
Mr. Cohn. Where?
Mrs. Pataki. Brooklyn State Hospital.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you there, from 1943 to when?
Mrs. Pataki. Until about January of 1945.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go in January of 1945?
Mrs. Pataki. I went to school for a time.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that?
Mrs. Pataki. The New York School of Social Work, Columbia.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you there? 1945 to when?
Mrs. Pataki. To 1946.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go in 1946?
Mrs. Pataki. I took a job for the Jewish Board of Guardians
as a psychiatric caseworker.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you there?
Mrs. Pataki. I was there from about April until about
October or November of 1946, I believe.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go then?
Mrs. Pataki. I took a job with the United Seamen's Service.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you with the United Seamen's
Service?
Mrs. Pataki. About four months.
Mr. Cohn. You were there about four months?
Mrs. Pataki. I would say from about October to about
February, and I am not exactly sure of the dates, but that
would be approximately.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go from there?
Mrs. Pataki. When I worked for the United Seamen's Service
I was stationed at the National Maritime Union, but I was
employed by the United Seamen's Service. After I was retrenched
or laid off because they could no longer employ so many people,
I remained at the National Maritime Union, but at that time I
became employed by the National Maritime Union itself.
Mr. Cohn. And how long were you with the National Maritime
Union?
Mrs. Pataki. I remained with them for about a year, until
about February, I believe, of 1948.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go then?
Mrs. Pataki. United Service for New Americans, as a
caseworker.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you there?
Mrs. Pataki. Almost three years.
Mr. Cohn. That covers that period?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. After Julius Rosenberg was arrested for
espionage, did you go to Cleveland, Ohio, and, in behalf of
this espionage ring, give $5,000 to a man named William Perl,
and ask him to leave the country before he was apprehended by
the FBI?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did Rosenberg ask you to go to Cleveland and tell
Perl to get out of the country?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you visit Rosenberg and Mrs. Rosenberg at
their apartment shortly prior to their arrest?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Were you engaged in espionage with Julius and
Ethel Rosenberg?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know David Greenglass?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Alfred Sarant, S-a-r-a-n-t?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of----
The Chairman. How long have you known Ethel Rosenberg?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. Do you think she did anything worse than you
have done by way of espionage?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. If the Rosenbergs were properly executed, do
you feel that you, being a part of the same ring, in justice
deserve the same fate they got?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did Julius Rosenberg ask you to obtain this
position at Fort Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you meet with Julius Rosenberg in New York in
April of 1943 when he was working for the Signal Corps, and did
he at that meeting suggest to you that you file an application
for employment with the Signal Corps?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Harry Gold?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Max Elitcher?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Mr. Cohn. You are aware of the fact that William Perl has
testified that you came to Cleveland and went to his home, and
gave him $5,000 and suggested to him that he leave the country?
I am just asking if she is aware of the fact.
Mr. Rabinowitz. I wanted to make it clear to the witness
that it went to her awareness of his testimony.
Mr. Cohn. You can confer with Mr. Rabinowitz.
[The witness conferred with her counsel.]
Mrs. Pataki. I have no personal knowledge of the testimony
that he gave.
Mr. Cohn. Did you not read anyplace or have it related to
you that Mr. Perl had stated that you came to Cleveland and
entered his room and wrote out instructions for him on a piece
of paper, and offered him $5,000 to leave the country?
[The witness conferred with her counsel.]
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. I would like you to recall for us, if you can,
when you were working down at Monmouth--you say you lived at
Long Branch. Can you recall the street address for us?
Mrs. Pataki. I really can't recall, because I had lived at
several places, as a matter of fact, and there wasn't just one
street address. I lived at about four places. I can't recall
exactly, because I had lived at several places at Fort
Monmouth, and I would say in about four or five places. I moved
as soon as a better housing arrangement became available.
Mr. Cohn. With whom did you live? Did you have any
roommates or anything like that?
Mrs. Pataki. I lived in boarding houses for a while.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have any roommates that were also working
at Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Can you give us the names of those that you can
recall?
Mrs. Pataki. I usually shared a room with my sister. That
was my roommate.
Mr. Cohn. Was there anybody else?
Mrs. Pataki. I am sure I lived with other people around,
but as a roommate I shared it with my sister.
Mr. Cohn. Can you recall any of the other people who were
around?
[The witness conferred with her counsel.]
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Who was your supervisor----
The Chairman. You are refusing to give us the names of the
people living in the same house with you?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, I do.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to give us those names,
to give the names of the people who lived in that boarding
house.
[The witness conferred with her counsel.]
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. We will have the record show that the witness
refuses to give the names of people who lived in the same
boarding house with her, and she was ordered to answer the
question. She thereupon conferred with counsel, Mr. Rabinowitz,
and refused to answer the question.
Mr. Cohn. Who was your supervisor at Fort Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. At one point I believe it was Professor
Merrill, and I am not sure if he was considered my supervisor.
Mr. Cohn. He was one of the people up the chain?
Mrs. Pataki. But I worked for him, you see. Now, whether I
was considered to be working under one of the army people
there, or one of the section chiefs, I don't recall.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Professor Merrill before you went to
Monmouth?
Mrs. Pataki. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You just met him down there?
Mrs. Pataki. Yes, I met him when I came to Monmouth, and I
was assigned to him.
Mr. Cohn. Have you seen him since you left there?
Mrs. Pataki. No.
Mr. Cohn. You worked with him while you were there?
Mrs. Pataki. For part of the time, while I worked at the
Fort Monmouth Laboratories, and then when I was switched to
Eatontown, I worked for a captain.
Mr. Cohn. Do you remember his name?
Mrs. Pataki. I am really not sure, and I don't recall his
name, but I do know that he was one of the army people.
Mr. Cohn. Was there anybody else you recall besides
Professor Merrill and this captain who was your supervisor?
Mrs. Pataki. No, I don't recall.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Carl Greenblum?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. When did you last see Mrs. Morton Sobell?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Have you been in indirect communication with
Sobell since he has been in Alcatraz?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Did you receive instructions from the Communist
party concerning what your testimony should be here today?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Are you a member of the Communist party today?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. I have just one or two questions. To your
knowledge, does the Communist party advocate the overthrow of
this government by force and violence?
Mrs. Pataki. I refuse to answer that question on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. You are instructed that you will consider
yourself under subpoena, and you will keep in touch with your
lawyer daily so that we can ask him to have you available.
We are not going to take the time trying to find you, but
we will merely contact your lawyer, and we understand you will
contact him daily so if we contact him one day to have you here
the next day, you will be available.
Mr. Rabinowitz. That is satisfactory to me, except,
Senator, may I just request, in so far as it is possible, that
we be given as much notice as possible, more for my convenience
than the witness.
Mr. Cohn. If you have any problem, we will do our best to
work it out.
There are two things we would like her to recall. Number
one, any of the street addresses where she resided at Monmouth,
and any of the other people who were her supervisors there.
Mr. Rabinowitz. Certainly.
The Chairman. Raise your right hand.
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mrs. Hutner. I do.
TESTIMONY OF ELEANOR GLASSMAN HUTNER (ACCOMPANIED BY HER
COUNSEL, VICTOR RABINOWITZ)
Mr. Cohn. May we have your full name?
Mrs. Hutner. Eleanor Glassman Hutner, H-u-t-n-e-r.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you reside?
Mrs. Hutner. At 144 Henry Street in Brooklyn.
Mr. Cohn. Henry Street?
Mrs. Hutner. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. In Brooklyn?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And you are a sister of Vivian Pataki who was
just in here?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What do you do at the present time?
Mrs. Hutner. I am a housewife.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever do any work other than that?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes, I have done social work.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you employed?
Mrs. Hutner. My last employment was at the Bureau of Child
Guidance for the Board of Education.
Mr. Cohn. New York City?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mrs. Hutner. Well, I started employment there at the end of
January 1952, and I resigned in June, and I came back after the
summer recess to finish up some work. I came back after the
summer recess to finish up my work.
Mr. Cohn. When did you finish up?
Mrs. Hutner. My last day was last Thursday.
Mr. Cohn. Until last Thursday you were with the Bureau of
Child Guidance of the New York Board of Education?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And during the time you were with the Bureau of
Child Guidance of the Board of Education, were you a member of
the Communist party?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question on the
grounds of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Now, let me ask you this: What were the
circumstances of your leaving there on Thursday?
Mrs. Hutner. I resigned because I wanted to stay home and
raise a family.
Mr. Cohn. Did you finish your work last Thursday? Is that
right?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You were not asked to resign----
Mrs. Hutner. No.
The Chairman [continuing]. Because of any Communist
activities?
Mrs. Hutner. I was asked to remain on the job as late as
last Thursday. They asked me to stay part-time if I wanted to
stay.
Mr. Cohn. Who asked you to stay?
Mrs. Hutner. The head of the department.
Mr. Cohn. What is that gentleman's name?
Mrs. Hutner. It came through--I didn't speak to her
directly, but through a telephone conversation with a person
taking over my work, and the head of the department is Miss
Goldman, who is the head of the social work, the acting head of
the social work department within the bureau.
The Chairman. You say Miss Goldman asked you to stay on in
the Board of Education?
Mr. Cohn. She sent word to you?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes.
The Chairman. Did she know you were a member of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you ever tell her that you were a member
of the Communist party?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend Communist party meetings
with her?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. On the ground a truthful answer might tend to
incriminate you?
Mrs. Hutner. On the ground a witness may not be compelled
to answer questions against herself.
The Chairman. Do you feel if you told us the truth as to
whether or not you attended Communist meetings with Miss
Goldman that that truthful answer would tend to incriminate
you?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you before you were with the Bureau of
Child Guidance?
Mrs. Hutner. I worked most recently before that at the Beth
Israel Hospital.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you before that time?
Mrs. Hutner. I was with the Bureau of Child Guidance for a
short period before that.
Mr. Cohn. And then before that?
Mrs. Hutner. Before that, with the Jewish Board of
Guardians.
Mr. Cohn. And before that?
Mrs. Hutner. Before that I was in social work school at
Smith College.
The Chairman. Did you teach there?
Mrs. Hutner. No, I was a student.
The Chairman. Did you have any teachers who were known to
you as members of the Communist party?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you know any teachers that you thought
were not members of the Communist party?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. What course did you take at Smith?
Mrs. Hutner. I took a course of psychiatric casework.
The Chairman. One course?
Mrs. Hutner. That was the over-all nature of the course,
and there were a number of courses there.
The Chairman. Who were your teachers?
Mrs. Hutner. If you refresh my memory, I can.
The Chairman. I did not go to school with you.
Mrs. Hutner. There was a Miss Garrett.
The Chairman. G-a-r-r-e-t-t?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And the names of your other teachers?
Mrs. Hutner. I beg pardon?
The Chairman. Any other teachers? How many teachers did you
have, roughly?
Mrs. Hutner. I imagine about fifteen or twenty.
Mr. Rainville. You can only remember one out of fifteen or
twenty?
Mrs. Hutner. I will have to think a little further.
The Chairman. Did you ever work at the Signal Corps
Laboratory?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes, sir, I did.
The Chairman. During what period of time?
Mrs. Hutner. I believe it was the end of June 1942 until
December of 1943.
The Chairman. June of 1942 to December of 1943?
Mrs. Hutner. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. At the time you were working in the Signal
Corps Laboratories, were you engaged in espionage?
Mrs. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. You were not?
Mrs. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Were you a member of the Communist party at
that time?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you know Julius Rosenberg at that time?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did Julius Rosenberg ever ask you to obtain
any classified material for him?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you ever supply classified material to
Julius Rosenberg?
Mrs. Hutner. I never supplied any information to any
unauthorized person.
The Chairman. Did you ever supply any information to Julius
Rosenberg?
Mrs. Hutner. I never supplied any information to any
unauthorized person.
The Chairman. That is not the question. You see, a
Communist may have a different idea of what an authorized
person is than we have, and I have asked you a simple question:
Did you ever supply information to Julius Rosenberg? And by
``Julius Rosenberg,'' I mean the one who was recently executed
as a Communist spy. Do you understand the question?
Mrs. Hutner. Will you repeat the question?
The Chairman. I will be glad to repeat it. Did you ever
supply information to Julius Rosenberg?
Mrs. Hutner. No, I didn't.
The Chairman. Did you visit at his home?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you see him a number of times while you
were working in the Signal Corps Laboratory?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you see his wife, Ethel Rosenberg, while
you were working at the Signal Corps Laboratories?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you ever supply Ethel Rosenberg with any
information?
Mrs. Hutner. No, I didn't.
The Chairman. At the time you were working in the Signal
Corps Laboratories and visiting at the Rosenberg home, did you
know that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were part of an espionage
ring?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Do you now know that Julius and Ethel
Rosenberg were part of an espionage ring?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Was your sister a part of the Rosenberg
espionage ring?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did your sister ever tell you that she was
supplying secret information from the Signal Corps Laboratory
to the Rosenbergs?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you know William Perl?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Who was your immediate superior in the Signal
Corps Laboratory?
Mrs. Hutner. Lieutenant Iannarone, I-a-n-n-a-r-o-n-e.
The Chairman. He was not a member of the Communist party,
to your knowledge?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Was he your only superior?
Mrs. Hutner. When I worked in his section, I believe there
was a Mr. Finkelstein in that section.
The Chairman. Did you know Mr. Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you know Mr. Carl Greenblum?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. You realize, of course, when you give the
names of the lieutenant and Mr. Finkelstein and say you knew
them, and then refuse to say whether you knew Aaron Coleman or
Carl Greenblum, who you of course knew, you are creating the
impression that there is something illegal about your contact
with Coleman and Greenblum. That is the only conclusion we can
arrive at. I just wanted you to be aware of that.
Did you attend Communist party meetings with Coleman?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you ever give Mr. Coleman any classified
material?
Mrs. Hutner. I have answered before that I never gave
anyone any material.
The Chairman. Did you give Mr. Coleman any?
Mrs. Hutner. No, I didn't.
The Chairman. Did you ever take any classified material
away from the laboratory?
Mrs. Hutner. No, I didn't.
The Chairman. Did you ever relate to anyone the contents of
any classified document?
Mrs. Hutner. No, I didn't.
The Chairman. You never discussed classified material with
your sister?
Mrs. Hutner. No, I did not.
The Chairman. Did you know Mr. Epstein?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Did you ever turn any classified material
from any government agency over to the Communist party?
Mrs. Hutner. I did not turn over any information to anyone.
The Chairman. To anyone in the Communist party?
Mrs. Hutner. No, sir.
The Chairman. To your knowledge, does the Communist party
advocate the overthrow of this government by force and
violence?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
Mr. Rainville. May I ask one question there?
You say you never turned over any material to an agent of
the Communist party. Would you know such an agent to turn
material over to if you had it?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. We will want you back again, Mrs. Hutner.
Your maiden name was what?
Mrs. Hutner. Glassman.
The Chairman. When were you married?
Mrs. Hutner. In January of 1952.
The Chairman. What does your husband do?
Mrs. Hutner. He is a teacher of art.
The Chairman. Where does he teach?
Mrs. Hutner. At Morris High School.
The Chairman. Did your husband ever work for the
government?
Mrs. Hutner. I don't know.
The Chairman. You do not know?
Mrs. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Is your husband a member of the Communist
party?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Do you know whether your husband has
attempted to recruit his students into the Communist party?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Have you had some of his students at your
home?
Mrs. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Have you had Communist cell meetings in your
home?
Mrs. Hutner. I refuse to answer that question.
The Chairman. Will he be at the high school at this time?
Mrs. Hutner. I imagine he is.
The Chairman. What is his first name?
Mrs. Hutner. Eugene.
The Chairman. May I say to counsel that if you want, I
assume Mr. Hutner will be your client also, and if you want to
save him the embarrassment of having a marshal go over and
serve him, if you care to call him and ask him to be here, we
will refrain from serving a subpoena on him.
Mr. Rabinowitz. Let me step out and advise with him in ten
or fifteen minutes.
The Chairman. That is all. You will consider yourself under
subpoena, and you will contact your counsel daily and let him
know exactly where you are so that if we call for you, you will
be available.
Mrs. Hutner. Yes.
The Chairman. You may step down.
The Chairman. Will you stand and raise your right hand?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Greenman. I do.
TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL I. GREENMAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
IRA J. KATCHEN)
The Chairman. Your name is what?
Mr. Katchen. May I be permitted to----
Mr. Greenman. Samuel I. Greenman,
Mr. Katchen. My name is Ira J. Katchen, 156 Broadway, Long
Branch, New Jersey.
The Chairman. You have appeared before the committee
before, Mr. Katchen, so we will briefly give you the rules
covering the conduct of counsel.
Your client can discuss any matter with you at any time he
cares to, and if a matter comes up that you consider of
sufficient importance that you want a private conference with
your counsel, we will arrange a room for that. We do not allow
counsel to take any part in the proceedings. If counsel has any
objection to the questions or how the hearing is being
conducted, he can consult with his client and make the
objection through his client.
Mr. Katchen. I am sure I will have no objection.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Greenman, you are employed at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. At the Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Greenman. At the Evans Laboratory.
Mr. Carr. In what position?
Mr. Greenman. I am a physicist.
Mr. Carr. And what is your grade?
Mr. Greenman. GS-12?
Mr. Carr. Are you assigned to any particular section?
Mr. Greenman. I am assigned to the Physical Optics Section.
Mr. Carr. Who is your immediate superior in that section?
Mr. Greenman. Mr. Maurice Distell.
Mr. Carr. Where do you live, Mr. Greenman?
Mr. Greenman. I live at 855 Woodgate Avenue in Long Branch.
Mr. Carr. That is a bachelor's apartment there?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Is one of your roommates a man named Bernard
Martin?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. How long have you known Bernard Martin?
Mr. Greenman. I have known Mr. Martin for a period of time.
I cannot say exactly how long, but let us say arbitrarily about
a year before I moved into this house, and I moved in about
three years ago.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever attended Communist party meetings?
Mr. Greenman. I attended meetings, and this was back about
1936 or 1937, and I belonged to a union then, and the union had
meetings, and a couple of those meetings I would say turned
into Communist party meetings.
Mr. Cohn. What is that?
Mr. Greenman. A couple of those meetings turned into
Communist party meetings. Not Communist party, excuse me, may I
correct that, but Communist meetings.
Mr. Cohn. Who else was present at those Communist meetings?
Mr. Greenman. I really do not recall, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You don't recall anybody?
Mr. Greenman. Well, there was one person I recall, and this
man's name, as I recalled it the other day, was Sol Portugal,
P-o-r-t-u-g-a-l. I don't think that that spelling is exactly
correct, but I think it is very close.
The Chairman. I missed the question. What was the question?
Mr. Cohn. A person at the Communist meetings.
Mr. Carr. You say it was a Communist meeting, and when did
you discover it was a Communist meeting? At the time?
Mr. Greenman. At the start, it was like a double meeting.
There would be a union meeting, and then it seemed that there
was a Communist meeting, and it would be like a double-session
affair.
Mr. Carr. It was a meeting of the United Electrical
Workers, jointly with another group?
Mr. Greenman. I would not say that it was necessarily with
another group, but that the group of people at the meeting, or
part of the group.
Mr. Carr. In other words, it started out, as far as you
were concerned, as a meeting of the union?
Mr. Greenman. I was ostensibly attending union meetings.
Mr. Carr. But within this union, the United Electrical
Workers, there was a Communist group?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. And they apparently took over this meeting that
you attended; is that what you mean to say?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Did you know that the United Electrical Workers
had been heavily infiltrated by Communist party members at that
time?
Mr. Greenman. Well, I learned at the meeting, that was
pretty early, and I later learned that the United Electrical
and Radio Workers had some Communist people.
Mr. Carr. At that time, to attend a Communist party meeting
was not repugnant to you, anyhow, regardless of whether or not
you went through a union meeting?
Mr. Greenman. I was interested at that time in seeing a
union where I was working, and I was interested as much on a
selfish basis as anything else. I thought it would do me some
good in the sense of better wages, primarily.
The Chairman. How old are you now?
Mr. Greenman. I am thirty-seven.
Mr. Carr. But isn't it a fact that at that time--and this
is 1936, roughly 1937?
Mr. Greenman. It was about 1936 or 1937.
Mr. Carr. At that time, isn't it true that to attend
Communist party meetings was not repugnant to your thinking at
that time?
Mr. Greenman. No, I wouldn't put it that way. I would say
this, that let us say I did not run away from it. I was
primarily interested in seeing a union; and that this happened,
that it turned into a Communist meeting, did not cause me to
run away from it. In other words, if I may qualify it, sir,
what I now find, to use a strong term, an abomination, was not
an abomination to me then, and there wasn't anything that I
found meritorious.
Mr. Carr. Did you attend several of these meetings?
Mr. Greenman. I would say there were at least two or three
meetings of that type, yes, sir.
Mr. Carr. Now, after the first one, you knew that they were
Communist meetings?
Mr. Greenman. I would not necessarily know that I was going
to a Communist meeting, per se.
The Chairman. What happened at those meetings? Would you
describe what went on at those meetings?
Mr. Greenman. At that period, as I recall, the union was
trying to build up its membership, and the question of----
The Chairman. You mean the Communist organization?
Mr. Greenman. The union was trying to build up its
membership, and I specifically don't recall more details than
that, except that I would say that the Communist interest at
that time tied into that same objective.
The Chairman. Well, were Communist speakers there? What did
they talk about, and just what happened?
Mr. Greenman. Sir, I don't recall such fine details.
The Chairman. How did you know these were Communist
meetings? How did you recognize the Communist meetings?
Mr. Greenman. Well, this man that I mentioned before had
identified himself as a Communist, and indicated to me that
this was the situation.
The Chairman. He told you this was a Communist party
meeting?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir, and I would like to say that these
specific details are not clear to me any more.
The Chairman. How about this Mr. Portugal, where does he
now work?
Mr. Greenman. I don't know.
The Chairman. When did you last see him?
Mr. Greenman. About that time, sir.
The Chairman. Are you married now?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
The Chairman. You say you are living at bachelors'
quarters, and do some of the other men from the Signal Corps
live at the same quarters?
Mr. Greenman. Where I live? Yes, sir. Do you want me to
name them?
The Chairman. If you will.
Mr. Greenman. It was Bernard Martin, Jack Frolow, Howard
Moss, and David Raskin.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any reason to believe
Martin was a Communist?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir, I have never had any reason to
believe he was a Communist.
The Chairman. Do you have top secret clearance?
Mr. Greenman. To my knowledge, my clearance is secret, sir.
The Chairman. Does that give you the right to take secret
material from the laboratory?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
The Chairman. If you wanted to take some secret material
home to study, how would you go about getting that?
Mr. Greenman. I have avoided that, sir, so that I can only
say in general the procedure, as I understand it, is to show
what your need is for material, and apply for a pass, and I do
not know that the rules permit you today to take the material
home.
The Chairman. Did you work in the laboratory during the
war? When did you start work there?
Mr. Greenman. In 1942.
The Chairman. One of the witnesses testified yesterday that
during the war there was no check of any kind upon secret
material, and anyone who had clearance could take material in
and out at will; and he said since the war was over they first
had cards, or rather, a pass, which the individual signed
himself, and someone in the section countersigned it. He said
as of today if you have a pass showing you have secret
clearance, that you can take secret material out. Is that
correct or not?
Mr. Greenman. Not exactly correct, sir. To my best
recollection, there has always been at sometime a requirement
that you have some kind of written authorization, pass if you
will call it that, to remove material. Generally people are
reluctant----
The Chairman. Did you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Greenman. I met Aaron Coleman, I know him slightly.
The Chairman. Have you visited at his apartment or home?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know him in 1946?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
The Chairman. When did you first get to know him?
Mr. Greenman. When I came to work at Evans. I came to work
at Evans about four and a half years ago.
The Chairman. Four and a half years ago?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir, and I would say within--whether it
was when I first came there, or within a year, or a year and a
half of that time, I met him very briefly, and that was the
only contact I have had with Aaron Coleman until this summer.
The Chairman. What branch of the military did you serve in?
Mr. Greenman. I have no military service, sir.
The Chairman. Did you get deferred?
Mr. Greenman. At the laboratories.
The Chairman. Because of the work you were doing?
Mr. Greenman. Because of the work, yes, sir.
The Chairman. Where did you work before 1942?
Mr. Greenman. I worked at the Bureau of Standards.
The Chairman. Were you deferred because of your work at the
Bureau of Standards?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir. I applied to the Signal Corps for a
job about the fall of 1941, I believe.
The Chairman. So that you got your deferment because of the
job at the Signal Corps?
Mr. Greenman. No, I think that I got the job, the deferment
after I got to work in the Signal Corps.
The Chairman. This is a matter of no great importance, but
I am curious to know how you were deferred until you got the
job with the Signal Corps?
Mr. Greenman. Well at that time, as I recall, sir, I don't
think there were any heavy calls, any heavy draft calls, and
they were following a number system, I believe. They did not
call me.
The Chairman. Did you ever know Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
The Chairman. How about Greenglass?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Harry Gold?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
The Chairman. You say you never removed any classified
material from the laboratory?
Mr. Greenman. I didn't say that, sir.
The Chairman. Did you?
Mr. Greenman. I have had to go on trips, and I know that at
times on these trips, sometimes dealing in classified material,
I might have to take something with me.
The Chairman. So that on occasion, in line with your work,
you had to take classified material along with you?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever turn any classified material
over to anyone other than an authorized employee in the Signal
Corps?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir. Wait a minute, excuse me, I have. I
don't know that I have turned over classified material, but I
have discussed classified information with people who were
authorized and given clearance.
Mr. Cohn. When did you attend your last Communist meeting?
When was the last one of these meetings that you have
described?
Mr. Greenman. It was in that period of 1936 to 1937.
Mr. Cohn. It was probably in 1937, then?
Mr. Greenman. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. If these meetings were in 1936 and 1937.
Mr. Greenman. I can't tell you, sir. I don't recall.
Mr. Cohn. Were you, yourself, ever a Communist?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever believe in socialism?
Mr. Greenman. I believe not in--let me say it this way. I
believed in economic socialism, the abstract theory, at one
time, and I won't say I was a strong believer, but it seemed to
me to have some possibilities.
Mr. Cohn. When did you say that was? You say ``at one
time.'' When did that time end?
Mr. Greenman. That was after I had been working for a
while, and I saw that organizations couldn't plan everything so
that everything worked perfectly, and I realized that the
planning process was basically inadequate; and the period, I
would say, goes back about to 1942, about that time.
The Chairman. You say you are a believer or you were a
believer?
Mr. Greenman. I was, sir.
The Chairman. Up to what time?
Mr. Greenman. I would say up to about that period of 1942.
The Chairman. How would you differentiate between economic
socialism and Marxism? I am not referring to communism, but
Marxism.
Mr. Greenman. I don't know that I really know the
difference, if there is a difference. Let me explain what I
mean by economic socialism. That is where the manufactured
goods and services and agricultural produce somehow find an
equitable distribution so that people do not necessarily want
and that everybody is happy, and I would mention a pamphlet
that I think at that time I had read, and that was a pamphlet
by Oscar Wilde, and I recall that one, and I won't say a
pamphlet.
The Chairman. So far you have merely described the campaign
speeches of both Democrats and Republicans, and you refer to
economic socialism, normally referring to Marxism as
distinguished from Marxism-Leninism.
Mr. Greenman. If I can say this, the word Marxism today to
me bears notions of the Russian type of system, and that isn't
at all what I mean or have in mind.
The Chairman. Did you ever read Karl Marx?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
The Chairman. And you say that you read ``The Soul of
Economic Socialism?''
Mr. Greenman. It was a pamphlet, and I remember it had to
do with how the artist was going to find his way into
socialism.
The Chairman. Do you know who put the book out?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir. This was written by Oscar Wilde,
and I don't remember, I was thinking that it was in a
collection of material by Oscar Wilde that I once bought, but I
am not certain that it is in there, but maybe it is. This was
one of these series of collections of Oscar Wilde and Victor
Hugo, and I bought at one time two or three volumes.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Greenman, you have given us the name of one
Communist that you say you can remember who was at these
meetings with you, and can you give us the names of any other
Communist party members you have known over the years?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Any Communists?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Did you ever take steps to tell the FBI
anything about these Communist meetings that you attended?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir, I didn't.
Mr. Schine. Did it ever occur to you that it might be of
value to the FBI in piecing together the puzzle of subversion;
that you might have some valuable information they would want
to know about?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
Mr. Schine. Does it occur to you now that it might be
useful?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir, it does.
Mr. Schine. In other words, this is the first time you have
ever disclosed any of this information?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rainville. When did you leave the United Electrical
Workers Union?
Mr. Greenman. That was at about June or July of 1937, sir.
Mr. Rainville. Do you belong to another union now?
Mr. Greenman. I belong to no union, sir.
Mr. Rainville. Have you belonged to any since 1937?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rainville. Have you had the same experience in the
other unions that you had with the United Electrical Workers?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
Mr. Rainville. What other unions have you belonged to?
Mr. Greenman. I belonged to one other union. I believe it
was the United Federal Workers.
Mr. Rainville. How long did you belong to that union?
Mr. Greenman. From about 1942 to 1944.
Mr. Rainville. Why don't you belong to them now?
Mr. Greenman. Because I realized that nothing was being
accomplished very much, and the requirement for a union in the
government service is somewhat different than it is outside.
There are grievance procedures, and for grievances you can
avail yourself of the established procedures; and as far as
conditions of work and hours and wages, a union becomes a
lobbying organization.
Mr. Rainville. Actually, you are just saving yourself
money, because it adds nothing to what you could otherwise do?
Mr. Greenman. It does. I don't see that it is basically to
my advantage.
Mr. Jones. As long as you have been at Monmouth, have you
ever had any reason to believe, either directly or indirectly,
any subversive activities were going on?
Mr. Greenman. Definitely not.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever seen anyone with a camera inside
the plant?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir. But let me say this, sir, that we
have a photographic branch, and these people must use cameras,
and they come around and photograph our equipment in the
section in which I am.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever ordered any photographs to be
taken by this official photographer yourself?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. What happens after you issue the order and these
photographs are taken? What happens to the prints and the
negative, and so forth?
Mr. Greenman. Prints and negatives are issued to you. The
negatives, as I recall, they generally retain unless it is
something that is definitely--like once I had a chart
reproduced, and this was like, you might say, a textbook chart,
and they didn't want to burden themselves with keeping the
negative. But in general I think that they keep negatives on
file, and they release prints to you upon your request. You
tell them what your need is for.
Mr. Jones. When you sign out for printing, you return, I
assume, with this print to your own division, and you use it
there in the course of your work; and upon completion of the
day's work, you lock that print in a safe?
Mr. Greenman. If it is classified, yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. You are allowed to take this print home with you
if necessary?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir, not unless you have some reason for
taking it home, and you go through the usual procedure to
remove classified material.
Mr. Jones. Well, you are allowed to take home classified
materials if you sign out for them.
Mr. Greenman. You have to get permission to do that, sir,
and it requires at least one or two signatures.
Mr. Jones. By that same permission, you were also allowed
to take home photographs in connection with that?
Mr. Greenman. I would say--you have got me. I have had no
occasion to take home photographs, and if you are asking me
what I think the general rule is, I don't know. If you can show
the man who is responsible why perhaps it is necessary, perhaps
that is done.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever seen any other camera, other than
the official photographer's?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
Mr. Jones. Do you own a camera?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jones. What kind?
Mr. Greenman. It is an old Zicon, a German-made camera
about two and one-fourth by three and one-fourth.
Mr. Jones. You have never brought that camera within the
plant for any reason at all?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
Mr. Jones. You don't know of anyone who has brought a
camera within the plant?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
Mr. Jones. Have you ever seen a Minox camera?
Mr. Greenman. I have seen the small cameras, but not inside
the plant.
Mr. Jones. Where have you seen them?
Mr. Greenman. I have seen them in shops.
Mr. Rainville. I must leave, but I wanted to ask a
question. What happens to the camera equipment after hours?
Mr. Greenman. After hours, it is handled in this fashion:
Let me not speak for the reproduction branch and other people--
--
Mr. Rainville. Just what you know about it.
Mr. Greenman. If in our work and our group we have had
occasion to borrow camera equipment from elsewhere, we store it
like we store other property. In other words----
Mr. Rainville. You would have a safe where you could put it
or a locker where you could put it away and lock it up?
Mr. Greenman. We have generally locked it in the safe, but
I would say the reason has been different. It didn't occur to
us to lock it on account of security reasons, but because it
was a valuable commodity.
Mr. Rainville. You do have cameras, and you can keep them
after hours if you are working with them and they are left on
the premises all night?
Mr. Greenman. Our cameras in the group in which I work are
all modified, and they are very special, and I don't want to go
into what modifications or other things they are.
Mr. Rainville. They do leave their equipment at the office
and they don't take it home with them?
Mr. Greenman. Not that I know of, sir.
Mr. Rainville. Do they lock it up, the same as you do, for
protection?
Mr. Greenman. I don't know how they handle their cameras.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Greenman, have you any information you would
like to give to this committee in respect to the security set-
up out there at Evans?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir.
Mr. Jones. You have no suggestions to make at all in that
respect?
Mr. Greenman. No, sir, except this, that security is very
necessary. As a working physicist, it makes your work extremely
difficult because every time you move you have got to meet the
requirements of security. If it is necessary to talk with
someone, you have to arrange for clearances in advance, and so
on, I would say, sir, if I could--I am not saying that security
should be relaxed at all, but from my own viewpoint----
The Chairman. Just try and answer the question.
Mr. Cohn. You were a member of the United Electrical
Workers?
Mr. Greenman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When did you leave there?
Mr. Greenman. About June of 1937.
Mr. Cohn. Why did you leave?
Mr. Greenman. I got another job, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Could you wait outside for a few minutes, because
I want to talk to counsel for just a moment.
Mr. Cohn. This is Mr. Ira Katchen, counsel for the last
witness.
STATEMENT OF IRA J. KATCHEN
Mr. Cohn. Now, Mr. Katchen, I just wanted to ask you one or
two questions to clarify something. One of the witnesses, one
of those whose clearance was lifted, said he had been told that
he and some of the others who had consulted you would not have
to pay fees; that their legal expenses would be covered by the
B'nai B'rith, or the Anti-Defamation League.
I just wondered whether or not that is true, and whether or
not the B'nai B'rith or Anti-Defamation League had taken any
official interest in these cases?
Mr. Katchen. So far as my connection is concerned, I am not
representing the B'nai B'rith or the Anti-Defamation League in
any capacity, but I am simply representing these fellows who
have come to me as their attorney.
Mr. Cohn. So far as you know, the B'nai B'rith and the
Anti-Defamation League have no interest?
Mr. Katchen. They may have an interest, and the interest
they expressed is on their own, but has nothing to do with
anything I have done.
Mr. Cohn. Have you yourself come across any valid evidence
of anti-Semitism in any of the suspensions?
Mr. Katchen. I have not, sir, up until this day.
Mr. Cohn. If you do, I might say, come across any evidence
along those lines at all, the counsel for the Department of the
Army is here, and he has indicated he would be very happy to
receive that information, and it will be given the promptest
attention by him and by Secretary Stevens, both of whom the
committee has observed have been scrupulously fair and
impartial and unbiased in their handling of this very serious
situation.
Mr. Katchen. I appreciate that offer, and I would like to
submit to him any such material that I may hear about.
Mr. Cohn. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., a recess was taken until 1:30
p.m. of the same day.]
afternoon session
The Chairman. In this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Elitcher. I do.
TESTIMONY OF MAX ELITCHER
Mr. Cohn. Will you give us your full name?
Mr. Elitcher. Max Elitcher, E-l-i-t-c-h-e-r.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Elitcher, was there a time when you became
acquainted with Julius Rosenberg and Morton Sobell?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. About when was that?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, Morton Sobell in high school, and also
through college, my college years.
Mr. Cohn. You knew him at City College?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir; and Rosenberg sometime I would say
starting my junior year at City College.
Mr. Cohn. While you were at City College, were you a member
of the Young Communist League?
Mr. Elitcher. No, I was not.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meetings?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir; I did.
Mr. Cohn. Do you recall any of the persons who attended
those meetings along with you?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, I didn't recall, I don't recall seeing
either Sobell or Rosenberg there. There was only one that I
know specifically. The only one is Stanley Rich.
Mr. Cohn. Was there anybody in your class at City College
whom you knew or now know to have been a Communist?
Mr. Elitcher. William Danziger. I think that is all that I
know of.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man named Carl Greenblum?
Mr. Elitcher. The name is familiar.
Mr. Cohn. It rings a bell, but you don't place him?
Mr. Elitcher. No.
Mr. Cohn. Now, after you left City College, did you have
occasion to see Sobell at all?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Were you working down in Washington?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. For the navy?
Mr. Elitcher. For the navy, yes.
Mr. Cohn. And did Sobell come down to see you?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir; he came down to work, also.
Mr. Cohn. He worked in the navy, too?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did he recruit you into the Communist party?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, he did.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of a Communist party unit
consisting of navy employees?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And Sobell was a member of that unit?
Mr. Elitcher. No.
Mr. Cohn. He was not?
Mr. Elitcher. He was not a member of that unit. He had left
Washington before I was in that particular unit.
Mr. Cohn. How long a period of time did you remain in that
unit?
Mr. Elitcher. I would say from '43 through '48. It was up
to approximately the middle of 1948.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see Sobell after you left Washington?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever speak to you about, or ever try to
induce you to become a member of an espionage ring?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, he himself not specifically, he did not
attempt to recruit me.
Mr. Cohn. What did he say to you?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, the only direct connection he would
have had with that was in conversation I had with Rosenberg at
one time, in regard to relating to his request that I remain at
the Navy Department.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, Sobell urged you to remain in the
Navy Department?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did there come a time in 1945 when you met Julius
Rosenberg? Is that the year?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, 1943, from 1943 on.
Mr. Cohn. What were the circumstances of your meeting
Rosenberg?
Mr. Elitcher. Rosenberg starting in 1943 came to Washington
to visit me and asked me to enter into an espionage, and that
carried through 1948.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, without going into all of the
details which we both know, from 1943 to 1948 off and on you
were asked to join an espionage ring via Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. During that time you became aware of the fact of
course that Rosenberg himself was engaged in espionage?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you likewise become aware of the fact that
Sobell was?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Now, was there an occasion, too, in 1948 when you
drove from Washington to the home of Morton Sobell?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Would you tell the committee what happened on
that night? I am trying to skip most of the details.
Mr. Elitcher. Well, I came up to find a place to live, and
upon driving up noticed I had been followed on my way up and
when I got to my destination that night, Sobell's house, to
stay, while looking for a place to live, and when I arrived or
after I arrived I told Sobell that I had been followed, and he
became upset and told me that he had some material, the way he
put it, that was valuable and he wanted to bring it to
Rosenberg, rather than destroy it, it had some value. He didn't
reveal the nature of the specific nature of the material, or in
what form it was in, but he did take what appeared to be a film
can with him and he asked me to accompany him into the city
while he delivered this material to Rosenberg.
Mr. Cohn. Did you accompany him?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You drove in?
Mr. Elitcher. We drove into the East Side.
Mr. Cohn. Right near the courthouse?
Mr. Elitcher. Actually near the courthouse, and he parked
the car, it was his car, and he left, and he returned a short
time later.
Mr. Cohn. Did he tell you anything Rosenberg said to him?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, yes, I asked him what did he think,
what did Juley think.
Mr. Cohn. About the fact you had reported that you had been
followed by someone coming up from Washington?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, and he said something that was, Juley
says it is all right, he had spoken to Elizabeth Bentley on the
phone, or he had spoken to Elizabeth Bentley on the phone at
one time, but that she didn't know who he was, and everything
was all right, and not to worry about it. I think that is about
all that was said.
Mr. Cohn. Now, in the course of these contacts you had with
Rosenberg, between 1943 and 1948 when he was trying to recruit
you into this espionage ring, did you have occasion to see
Rosenberg in New York and have dinner with him at any time?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever see a woman by the name of Vivien
Glassman?
Mr. Elitcher. No, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. You never saw her on any occasion?
Mr. Elitcher. No, I think that I saw her when I was
appearing at the grand jury, but other than that----
Mr. Cohn. Who are some of the people you saw with
Rosenberg?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, there was William Perl, Joel Barr, and
I forget the fellow's name who we visited downtown.
Mr. Cohn. Alfred Sarant?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Anybody else?
Mr. Elitcher. Perl's brother, and Sobell.
Mr. Cohn. Who had a sister who lived there?
Mr. Elitcher. Barr had a sister.
Mr. Cohn. What was her name?
Mr. Elitcher. I don't know, I only met her on one occasion
and just briefly.
Mr. Cohn. Did we ever establish what her name was, do you
recall that?
Mr. Elitcher. No.
Mr. Cohn. Was she a teacher or something like that?
Mr. Elitcher. She might have been a teacher.
Mr. Cohn. She had dinner with you one night?
Mr. Elitcher. She did have dinner with us, the teacher was
something else. We had dinner when we went to Joel Barr's house
and while we were up there, it was a penthouse apartment on
98th Street, approximately the West Side, his sister appeared.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this: Did you meet David
Greenglass at all?
Mr. Elitcher. I never met Greenglass.
Mr. Cohn. At any time during your relationship with Sobell
or Rosenberg, was there any mention of espionage with reference
to the Army Signal Corps or the army or anything along those
lines?
Mr. Elitcher. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Was there any reference to espionage connected
with any companies doing business with the army or the Army
Signal Corps?
Mr. Elitcher. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How about General Electric?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, of course Sobell was at GE, and----
Mr. Cohn. Did GE have Signal Corps contracts at that time?
Mr. Elitcher. I imagine they did, they had a lot of
contracts with the navy and with the air force and I don't know
whether they had with Signal Corps.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether any radar work was being done
at GE?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Was it definitely?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Sobell was doing any of that work?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir; he was involved in some of the
work.
Mr. Cohn. I know he did something on radar, and what
exactly was that?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, at the time he was at GE, he was an
engineer involved with devices for controlling radar or
telescope or anything, and he was involved in the design of
these controls, and so he worked on various systems that GE was
working on.
Mr. Cohn. I suppose it would be a pretty safe assumption
that he wouldn't keep those things a secret?
Mr. Elitcher. I would assume that.
Mr. Cohn. From Rosenberg and some of his colleagues?
Mr. Elitcher. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. You gather from your conversation with him that
that would be the kind of stuff they were interested in?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. About what year was that, that Sobell was working
on these control devices?
Mr. Elitcher. He started working at GE about 1943, and he
was there in 1943, and he left there about 1947, through that
period.
Mr. Cohn. Do I recall this correctly, that Sobell and
possibly Rosenberg talked to you about the possibility of
recruiting other people----
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn [continuing]. Into this espionage ring?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Were they trying to concentrate, if my
recollection on this is correct, that they wanted to
concentrate particularly on engineers, and people who would
deal with just things like these things?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir; specifically engineers.
Mr. Cohn. Is that right, people who would deal with things
like Sobell was, and that was a definite object of this
espionage ring?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. It was very clear that they wanted material on
classified material on devices such as these things, is that
right?
Mr. Elitcher. That is right.
Mr. Jones. How long did you live in Washington?
Mr. Elitcher. From 1938 to 1948.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever know an Edward Rothschild?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How did you know him?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, if it is the same person I am thinking
of, he lived in my apartment house, and I believe he was in the
union which I was in.
Mr. Cohn. Was he active in the party at the same time?
Mr. Elitcher. I don't know, he was in the union.
Mr. Cohn. Was this the Edward Rothschild who worked for the
Government Printing Office?
Mr. Elitcher. I am sorry, sir, but Edward Rothschild, I am
sorry, there was a Rothschild but not the same person that
worked in the Government Printing Office, involved in the GPO.
Mr. Jones. Who was the Rothschild that you know, the one
that you know?
Mr. Elitcher. He was a Rothschild who worked in the
government and he lived in my apartment house, 247 Delaware
Avenue, Southwest.
Mr. Jones. How old was this Rothschild?
Mr. Elitcher. He was a short fellow.
Mr. Jones. What was his wife's name?
Mr. Elitcher. He got married I guess about 1948.
Mr. Jones. Would you describe her?
Mr. Elitcher. She was younger than he was, average
appearance.
Mr. Jones. What color was her hair?
Mr. Elitcher. I don't remember. I would know the name.
Mr. Cohn. Was it Esther?
Mr. Elitcher. I know her maiden name.
The Chairman. The testimony has been that Rothschild was a
member of the party and his wife was a member and she was an
officer in a Communist unit, and there was testimony that he
stole classified material from the GPO, code books and that
sort of thing, and I think, Roy, if you refresh this young
man's recollection of the address----
Mr. Elitcher. Let me clear up one thing, whether these
people are the same. When was this Rothschild that you are
referring to at the Government Printing Office?
Mr. Cohn. He was there a considerable period of time except
when he was in the navy.
Mr. Elitcher. It is not the same person, this fellow was a
lawyer, it is not the same man because I read about it in the
papers and I knew it was not the same person.
Mr. Cohn. Was radar or anything to do with radar or these
controlled devices ever discussed between you and Sobell?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir. Oh, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Did he express definite interest in that type of
work?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, he wasn't what has been called a radar
expert specifically, he was more of a control man, and control
devices, rather than a radar, he was an electronics man. He
worked at GE and he worked later on in Reeves after he left GE.
Mr. Cohn. As a matter of fact, it now occurs to me at
Reeves he was doing direct business with the Army Signal Corps
on radar devices.
Mr. Elitcher. At Monmouth, yes, he went down there
periodically.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know he had been going down there
periodically?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know who he stayed with when he went down
to Monmouth?
Mr. Elitcher. A fellow named Zuckerman, Ben Zuckerman.
Mr. Cohn. Who is Ben Zuckerman?
Mr. Elitcher. He was a classmate at City College.
Mr. Cohn. Did he work at Monmouth?
Mr. Elitcher. I guess he worked at Monmouth.
Mr. Cohn. Who else did he stay with?
Mr. Elitcher. He met classmates there.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know the names of any of those?
Mr. Elitcher. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Let me throw some at you.
Mr. Elitcher. Aaron Coleman. Yes, I recall that name, but I
don't know whether Sobell had spoken of him, and he met Coleman
at Reeves, actually.
Mr. Cohn. On how many occasions did you see Coleman at
Reeves?
Mr. Elitcher. Either once or twice.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not Coleman knew Sobell?
Mr. Elitcher. Oh, yes.
Mr. Cohn. There is no doubt of that?
Mr. Elitcher. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Did they visit with each other that you know of?
Mr. Elitcher. That I don't know. Sobell never mentioned it
and I don't know. I am sure he met him at Reeves, but I don't
know whether he met him outside, he has never spoken to me of
it.
Mr. Cohn. How about a man by the name of Harold Ducore?
Mr. Elitcher. No.
Mr. Cohn. I asked you about Carl Greenblum and you thought
that rang a bell.
Mr. Elitcher. It doesn't mean anything to me.
Mr. Cohn. A fellow named Bob Martin or Bernard Martin?
Mr. Elitcher. No.
Mr. Cohn. Sam Greenman?
Mr. Elitcher. No.
Mr. Cohn. Marcus Epstein, also known as Max Epstein?
Mr. Elitcher. No, that has a familiar ring but it wasn't
because I knew him.
Mr. Cohn. Sam Pomerantz?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How about Sam Pomerantz?
Mr. Elitcher. I think Pomerantz was a classmate, and in
fact I think perhaps Sam Pomerantz had come up to Reeves at one
time again on business, and I might have met him there, but
otherwise I hadn't run into him from school on.
Mr. Cohn. Was Sam Pomerantz one of the people Sobell
visited down at Monmouth?
Mr. Elitcher. Sobell never mentioned who he visited outside
of Zuckerman, and he stayed there.
Mr. Cohn. At Zuckerman's home?
Mr. Elitcher. He visited at Monmouth there, but he never
mentioned any associations there.
Mr. Cohn. Now let me ask you this, getting back to this, we
have the fact that Sobell and Rosenberg were at this espionage
ring and trying to expand it and get new people and they spoke
to you and they wanted to know if you could keep your eyes open
for some young engineers, who would be sympathetic and all of
that, is that right?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. And would some of those people--Let me put it to
you this way: Was it clear to you that Sobell and Rosenberg,
one of the things they would have been interested in was radar
and things along those lines?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir; definitely.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know they were doing that work down at
Monmouth, by the way?
Mr. Elitcher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. That was pretty well known among the professions
that the Signal Corps----
Mr. Elitcher. Any one working in light work would have
known this.
Mr. Cohn. What was Zuckerman's first name?
Mr. Elitcher. Ben Zuckerman.
Mr. Cohn. It wouldn't be Jack?
Mr. Elitcher. No.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know where he is now?
Mr. Elitcher. Zuckerman, I don't know, as far as I know he
is in Monmouth, New Jersey, and I haven't heard of him since,
since 1950.
Mr. Cohn. Was there anybody else at the Signal Corps who
was very friendly with Sobell?
Mr. Elitcher. I would say without knowing specifically any
classmate from the school he certainly would have been, but
either by design or otherwise didn't mention anybody that he
met at that point.
Mr. Cohn. Was this man Zuckerman a Communist?
Mr. Elitcher. My impression would be no, he was not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether he was or not?
Mr. Elitcher. No.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think he knew what Sobell was doing?
Mr. Elitcher. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Sobell didn't confide in you about that?
Mr. Elitcher. No, sir.
Mr. Jones. Do you know any Communists still working at
Monmouth?
Mr. Elitcher. No, I didn't know any before, no. I don't
know any. My associations with Monmouth was purely by just
talk, and I didn't know much about it, and I had never been
there.
Mr. Jones. Could you mention a few other names that might
occur to you whom you knew in Washington, and took part in the
activities with you down there?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, people in the navy branch were people
that I knew, and I don't believe any of them are working there
now. Do you want the names of them? They are in the records,
and I gave them.
The Chairman. Would you say that it would be a safe
assumption that Sobell and therefore Rosenberg also had rather
free access to secret material over at the Signal Corps through
their contacts over there?
Mr. Elitcher. I believe that Sobell would certainly have
had access to secret material, and perhaps not at Monmouth, but
access to that type of material through various channels.
The Chairman. Through his contacts at Monmouth?
Mr. Elitcher. Through his contacts, and through his work at
Reeves, and he did work on that project. I don't know about
secret material, that was difficult for people to get outside
of the work that you were specifically engaged in.
The Chairman. Do you know up to roughly what year Sobell
used to visit Zuckerman and others down at Monmouth?
Mr. Elitcher. Well, from 1947 I came to work in 1948 in New
York, and a short time after that, let us say from 1949 to
1950, those two years certainly.
The Chairman. Raise your right hand. In the matter now in
hearing before the committee, do you solemnly swear that you
will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you God?
Mr. Hutner. I do.
TESTIMONY OF EUGENE E. HUTNER (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
VICTOR RABINOWITZ)
The Chairman. Will you give the reporter your full name.
Mr. Hutner. Eugene E. Hutner.
The Chairman. Have you ever held any jobs with any
government agency, Mr. Hutner?
Mr. Hutner. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Which ones?
Mr. Hutner. I was down at the Arsenal in Bellaire--not
Bellaire. I have forgotten that name. Edgewood Arsenal.
The Chairman. And were you handling classified material
down there?
Mr. Hutner. Not to my knowledge, no.
The Chairman. Was there any classified material available
to you?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. What kind of work were you doing?
Mr. Hutner. I tested the threading of shells.
The Chairman. And what years did you work there?
Mr. Hutner. I was there during the period from June of 1941
until just before I went in the army, which was November 11,
1942.
The Chairman. Did you hold any government job before that?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. How long were you in the army?
Mr. Hutner. Forty months.
The Chairman. What kind of work were you doing in the army?
Mr. Hutner. I was a high-speed radio operator.
The Chairman. High-speed radio operator.
Mr. Hutner. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And how long were you in the army?
Mr. Hutner. Forty months.
The Chairman. And when you came out of the army where did
you go?
Mr. Hutner. I came back to New York, and I went to Teachers
College.
The Chairman. Teachers College?
Mr. Hutner. Columbia University, yes.
The Chairman. And did you graduate from Columbia?
Mr. Hutner. I got my master's in education, yes, sir.
The Chairman. And then you started teaching?
Mr. Hutner. I was teaching before that, as a substitute.
The Chairman. You never went back to do any government work
after that?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. And you are now teaching at Morris High
School?
Mr. Hutner. That is right.
The Chairman. Do you know or are you fairly well acquainted
with your sister-in-law, Vivian Pataki?
Mr. Hutner. Yes, I know Vivian.
The Chairman. Is she a Communist?
Mr. Hutner. I wouldn't know.
The Chairman. Well, did your wife before she was married to
you ever tell you that she was a Communist, that Vivian was?
Mr. Hutner. I would like to say it would be a confidential
relation between my wife and myself.
The Chairman. It wouldn't be before you were married. I am
asking you whether she told you before she was married to you
that your sister Vivian was a Communist.
Mr. Rabinowitz. May I consult for just a moment.
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Hutner. No, she never told me she was a Communist.
The Chairman. Did she ever tell you anything which led you
to believe her sister was a Communist?
Mr. Rabinowitz. All of this relates to the period before
marriage.
The Chairman. Either before marriage or statements which
she made to you in the presence of others, and we cannot ask
you about anything that occurred when only you and your wife
were present. We can ask, but you can assert a privilege and
not answer.
Mr. Hutner. No, not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any reason to believe that
your sister-in-law, Vivian Pataki, was a Communist?
Mr. Hutner. No, I had no reason.
The Chairman. Do you read the paper to the effect she was
accused of having acted as a go-between for Rosenberg and Perl?
Mr. Hutner. Yes, I read it in the papers.
The Chairman. And that didn't indicate to you at all she
might be a Communist?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. So as of today you have no reason whatsoever
to believe that Vivian was a Communist?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Do you think she is not a Communist?
Mr. Hutner. I have no way of knowing whether she is or not.
The Chairman. Is your wife a Communist?
[The witness consulted with his counsel.]
Mr. Hutner. Matters between my wife are confidential.
The Chairman. You refuse to answer?
Mr. Hutner. On the basis that matters between myself and my
wife are confidential.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any Communist meetings
with your wife?
Mr. Hutner. I have never attended any Communist meetings.
The Chairman. Were any ever held in your home, any
Communist meetings?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Did any Communist ever come to your home?
Mr. Hutner. Not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Did you ever join the Communist party?
Mr. Hutner. No, I never joined the Communist party.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever go to a Communist meeting?
Mr. Hutner. I answered that question and I said no.
The Chairman. Were you ever solicited to join the party?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Did your wife ever ask you to join the party?
Mr. Hutner. Matters between my wife and myself are
confidential.
The Chairman. Did she ever ask you to join the party before
you were married?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Did she ever ask you to join the party after
you were married in the presence of someone else?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Your testimony is you were never solicited to
join the Communist party or the Young Communist League, is that
correct?
Mr. Hutner. That is correct.
The Chairman. And that you never attended any Communist
meetings?
Mr. Hutner. That is right.
The Chairman. Never attended any meetings of the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Hutner. Never.
The Chairman. Do you think you could recognize a Communist
meeting in view of the fact you could not recognize your
sister-in-law, famous espionage agent, even being remotely
connected with the Communist party?
Mr. Hutner. That is a matter of opinion and I wouldn't
know.
The Chairman. As of this date under oath you say that
nothing ever occurred to give you any reason to believe that
your sister-in-law, Vivian Pataki, was a Communist?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Nothing of that nature?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. You never heard anything that would indicate
she might be a Communist?
Mr. Hutner. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever hear anything that might
indicate that she was an espionage agent?
Mr. Hunter. No.
The Chairman. That will be all. I may tell counsel that I
intend to submit this record to the attorney general and
request that this man be indicted for perjury.
You may step down and consider yourself under subpoena and
we will inform you that we are submitting this record to the
attorney general with a request that the case be presented to
the grand jury.
Colonel, will you raise your hand and be sworn. In this
matter now in hearing before the committee, do you solemnly
swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Col. Mills. I do.
TESTIMONY OF COL. JOHN V. MILLS
The Chairman. Can we have your full name?
Col. Mills. Colonel John V. Mills.
The Chairman. What position do you hold now?
Col. Mills. Commanding officer, Signal Corps, Intelligence
Agency.
The Chairman. How long a period of time have you held that
position?
Col. Mills. Two years today.
The Chairman. Colonel, did there come to your attention at
any time a document denominated AT-1104-52?
Col. Mills. I believe the document you have reference to
was ATI-1104.
The Chairman. Air Technical Intelligence.
Col. Mills. 1104.
The Chairman. You say it did come to your attention?
Col. Mills. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. About when?
Col. Mills. May I check my date?
The Chairman. Of course. You brought the document with you,
Colonel?
Col. Mills. No, sir.
The Chairman. You did not?
Col. Mills. No, sir. I frankly didn't know why I was
coming, sir, and so I just guessed at a few things that might
be pertinent.
Mr. Cohn. Can you refresh your recollection?
Col. Mills. My agency received that document on the 22nd of
September 1952.
Mr. Cohn. That was routed over from air force intelligence?
Col. Mills. Not directly to us, no.
Mr. Cohn. Through G-2?
Col. Mills. The way that comes to us is on the reading
panel at G-2, and my man would pick it off there and bring it
back to my agency.
Mr. Cohn. Could you give us very briefly how that works?
Col. Mills. Yes. The reading panel is a term just for a
long table with many documents on it, and which the various
technical intelligence agencies have representatives scanning
those documents for the particular information that they are
interested in. Some documents come in and G-2 will see them
first, one of their people, and because of the document
concerning telecommunication, they will mark it Signal Corps,
and that won't be placed on the table but will be placed at one
side for my man to pick it up to bring it back to me.
Mr. Cohn. Who was your man on the panel at that time?
Col. Mills. I would hesitate to answer that right now. I
know who is there today but back then I can't recall.
Mr. Cohn. Who is there today?
Col. Mills. Mr. Balian.
Mr. Cohn. You don't know the name of his predecessor?
Col. Mills. He might have been the one, but a year or so
ago--I can't recall.
Mr. Cohn. You could check that for us?
Col. Mills. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Then what happened with reference to this
particular document?
Col. Mills. Then that document brought back to my shop and
again it goes through another reading panel there where my
researchers who are broken down by various technical sections,
telephone, and radio and so forth, will pick it up and take it
back to their section for work, providing it is a document on
which they have a need. This particular document as I recall
was several pages, and it had many things in it that concerned
many sections.
The Chairman. Do you remember about how many pages,
Colonel?
Col. Mills. I would be guessing, sir, and I would say five
or six.
The Chairman. Do you think it was actually eight pages, and
the first five were typewriting and the last three drawings?
Col. Mills. I cannot recall that.
The Chairman. When did you see it last?
Col. Mills. I can't recall that, either. I saw it in
extract yesterday, but that was only the one particular
portion.
The Chairman. Just roughly how many months ago had you seen
the document? Was it three months or six months?
Col. Mills. Probably back in November or December of last
year.
The Chairman. Do you recall having seen the three pages of
drawings; would you remember that?
Col. Mills. No, sir; I don't recall that.
Mr. Cohn. Now, in any event, the document was brought to
your attention, is that right?
Col. Mills. The document was brought to my attention by a
Mr. Gerhart, through Captain Crashock, who was my top secret
control officer.
The Chairman. What was the substance of this document?
Col. Mills. The reason for bringing it to my attention, you
mean?
The Chairman. Well, why do you not tell us that, too?
Col. Mills. The reason for bringing it to my attention was
this particular section which had reference to microfilm having
been seen by a source in Parna.
The Chairman. Microfilm from where?
Col. Mills. Evans Signal Laboratory.
The Chairman. The Parna Laboratory is located where?
Col. Mills. East Germany.
The Chairman. Do you know the city?
Col. Mills. No, sir. It is spelled P-a-r-n-a, I believe.
Mr. Cohn. Who was the source of this statement?
Col. Mills. I don't know who was the source, the source was
not named, as I recall, in this document. The source was not
evaluated as I recall.
Mr. Cohn. Did you get any description of the source?
Col. Mills. Defectee.
Mr. Cohn. That is somebody who was a Communist over in the
East Zone?
Col. Mills. And may or may not be a Communist, but someone
who was in the other zone who has come back to the West Zone.
The Chairman. I notice it is difficult for you to come down
here not knowing what we may question you about and then be
questioned about something that you have not seen for eight or
ten months, but just to refresh your recollection, you say the
source was not evaluated and the information was not evaluated
and I find this statement, and apparently this is the
evaluation.
Col. Mills. Maybe I was misunderstood there. I didn't know
whether or not the statements had been evaluated, but the
source itself I didn't recall as having been evaluated.
The Chairman. Let me read this to you. I am not trying to
cross-examine you, but just to see if we can get together on
what was in this document. Here is what I believe is Air Corps'
evaluation of one phase of it:
The incident document (the scientist's report) indicates
that the defectee had seen an entire film based on Oak Ridge,
Tenn., the atomic energy location, while he was with Pirma
(name of the Russian laboratory) in the Russian zone. The
information he supplied concerning the film clearly indicates
that he actually had seen it. It contained some technical data
as well as some physical data.
This would seem to be an evaluation in which they say he
clearly saw the document, no doubt about it, and I was
wondering if you could make it any stronger than that.
Col. Mills. In the one that I recall, sir, I don't recall
that part.
The Chairman. That of course does not have to do with the
Signal Corps, but with atomic energy, but I assume the Signal
Corps made the film.
Col. Mills. I did not see this, and I don't recall seeing
this at all. The one that I saw stated that from the
information that this source was able to give, it was obvious
that he had had a close contact with something so that he was
able to talk with knowledge of the particular type of
equipment.
The Chairman. What you saw didn't indicate that it was the
specific document, but indicated that he did have access?
Col. Mills. He did have in his head knowledge of certain
types of equipment that he could only have learned by scanning
documents of some kind that had that information.
The Chairman. Documents, would you say, from our Signal
Corps?
Col. Mills. It might be, yes, sir.
The Chairman. I see.
Mr. Cohn. I think we will let you tell us chronologically.
The Chairman. Let me ask one question first: You had
nothing to do with the Signal Corps at the time of the alleged
theft of the documents, the sixty-seven documents?
Col. Mills. Well, sir, I have been in the Signal Corps all
of my life, but I had no knowledge.
The Chairman. And you were not the commanding officer?
Col. Mills. No, sir.
The Chairman. You would not be responsible for that
situation?
Col. Mills. No, sir.
The Chairman. Colonel, we have been talking about a
document which purports to be a report by the Signal Corps
intelligence of the Air Technical Intelligence. The information
we have indicates that this contains a number of pages of
typewritten material and a number of pages of drawings. There
is also, I understand, a cable, and other documents involving
this same subject, and I just wonder when you saw the documents
whether you saw the cable or whether you saw the original
report by air force intelligence.
Col. Mills. The one I had, sir, was a copy of an
intelligence report, of a portion that applied to
telecommunications.
The Chairman. Did it have any drawings attached to it?
Col. Mills. Not that I saw.
The Chairman. And this part that you saw was, would you say
it was a summary of the report which applied only to
telecommunications?
Col. Mills. The part with reference to this source which
had reference to certain types of radar equipment, but did not
have drawings. As I recall, it didn't make half a page as we
extracted it.
The Chairman. Well, this original report, and I may say I
don't have the original report before me, but I merely have a
summary of it, and the drawings here. I have what I think is
the verbatim evaluation, I guess you would call it, of this
defectee's information in so far as the film was concerned, and
now let me ask you this: Would that film have been produced by
the Signal Corps, do you think, or would you know?
Col. Mills. I wouldn't have any way of knowing.
The Chairman. It might have been produced or might not have
been produced?
Col. Mills. It might have been done by Signal Corps or by
some one else, at some other time.
The Chairman. I assume the Signal Corps does do some of the
photographic work for the Atomic Energy Commission?
Col. Mills. That I couldn't answer.
The Chairman. Let me just quote very briefly--I just think,
Colonel, it would be unfair to ask you to evaluate a report
before you have seen it and we are going into the record here.
It is important that you being head of the Signal Corps not to
make any over-evaluation or under-evaluation, and it is all a
matter of record.
I wonder if it would be unfair to ask the colonel to try to
testify on the subject until he has seen this report. I did not
want to go into this in too much detail, Colonel, until you
have seen it in its entirety, but let me give you this and have
some additional information:
The information is on microfilm of blueprints of documents
bearing the name of the Evans Signal Corps. He said that
materials had actually been built from the documents. He
indicated that the Russians could obtain any information that
they desired from Evans Signal Corps Laboratory. This microfilm
was seen by the defectee----
They are referring to the Oak Ridge microfilm.
while he was employed as a fee technician in a Russian
development laboratory known as Parna in East Germany. He was
employed there from January of 1949 until September of 1950.
Then there is considerable more here, but the thing that
impressed me a great deal, and you understand I have no way of
evaluating this except from the various material which is
coming in since there has been some publicity on this, but the
thing that impressed me was this evaluation by the Air Corps
Intelligence where they say the information he supplied
concerning the film clearly indicates that he actually had seen
it and it contains much technical data as well as some
physical.
Would you think, Colonel, would you think it is a safe
assumption, if you can answer this question, from this air
force intelligence report, a safe assumption that this defectee
had information which originated from an American source, for
which he should not have had?
Col. Mills. The indications are all there, sir, one of the
things that I would have liked to have had time to do, but I
say I wasn't sure what I was coming up here for, was to
determine whether the part of the report that I saw, and the
things that were mentioned there, might have had reference to
certain things that we had given on lend-lease or something of
that sort, to help a little more on its evaluation. But at the
time my main thought on this was to get it in the hands of
someone who would take the necessary security action, and I was
not so concerned with the equipment he was talking about, as I
was to get some action on the thing and see that something was
done about it.
The Chairman. I don't think we should ask you to go any
further on that until you have had a chance to study the entire
document and all of the reports on it. We have a report here
some place and I do not know whether it is reliable or not, but
it is an affidavit from an individual over in the Pentagon who
says that the investigation of this was ordered discontinued by
Col. Mills and the document was impounded in the safe of a Mr.
Gerhart. Now, as I say, I don't know, I have no way of
evaluating this affidavit, and it was just sent down to us, and
I would rather not give the name of the officer who signed it,
but could you tell us, number one, whether you ever did order
this investigation discontinued, and if so if you could shed
some light on that, or if you would rather wait until you check
over the files and see just what action you did take.
Col. Mills. I know the action that I took, sir, and I am
very familiar with that, if I can give that to you in
chronological order here. It will show what happened.
As I stated before, Captain Crashonk and Mr. Gerhart
brought this particular portion of the document to my
attention, and I ordered prepared an extract of that portion
that had reference to these radar equipments and the
microfilming, and I had a disposition form prepared to the
security officer of the Office of the Chief Signal Officer, and
in that referred it to him as something that required his
action. That was on the 25th of September.
The Chairman. Who would that security officer have been?
Col. Mills. I believe Major Jenista, and that was three
days after the document was received in our agency. About that
time I made a trip to Europe and I was gone about a month, and
on my return I asked about the action that had been taken and
my executive officer immediately started checking, and he came
back and I was not satisfied that it was going as fast as it
should, and I prepared another extract of that, another
disposition form, and this time addressed it to the deputy
chief signal officer.
The Chairman. Is that General O'Donnell?
Col. Mills. Yes, to the security officer, and I believe
that was done at the time but my memory may be faulty, because
General Back was out ill, and I think that was the reason for
not sending it to General Back at the time.
The Chairman. When was this?
Col. Mills. That follow-up was on the 21st of November, and
we called attention to the previous disposition form that had
been sent out, and the previous extract, and asked in this
particular one that we be advised of the action to be taken.
Now, my organization has nothing to do with that. We
referred it over there, and that is our channel.
The Chairman. It wasn't your function to conduct the
investigation?
Col. Mills. That is right.
The Chairman. But to refer it for the investigation.
Col. Mills. That is right, and then on the 9th of December
I got back what I term here an action copy on my disposition
form from the security officer, stating that action was being
taken to get this into proper channels and so forth. So I would
have nothing to do with holding a document up or anything, and
it was entirely out of my hands.
The Chairman. In other words, number one, you have no
command over the individuals who would conduct the
investigation, and all you can do is refer to them and say
``investigate this.''
Col. Mills. That is right, and then of course another thing
bearing on that was the actual date of this document, dating
back in June. We assume and hope that somebody was taking some
action prior to when I or my people got this.
Mr. Cohn. Did you hear anything after December 9?
Col. Mills. That would be hearsay, and I got nothing
official.
The Chairman. I have a suggestion, and I believe this is of
certainly sufficient importance to send one of our trusted
investigators to Europe.
We heard quite a bit of testimony that was extremely
disturbing and I would like to get your thought on it. The
testimony of the head of one of the sections over there was in
and testified that during the war there was no check on secret
material that came into the Signal Corps and went out, and he
said that anyone who had clearance could take it out and take
it to his apartment at will. Asked the reason for that, he said
it was because they were working sixteen or eighteen hours a
day and didn't have time to log secret material in and out. He
was asked what happened after the war ended, and he said then
they tightened up a bit, and the tightening up apparently
consisted of allowing any one with secrecy clearance to take
material to his home or his apartment regardless of whether
there was a safe in the apartment or what precautions should be
taken, and he said that was tightened up a little bit later,
until as of today that he testified they had some kind of a
pass system again and in one unit where he worked, fifteen out
of the twenty-five people there had passes which enabled them
to take material in and out at will, and no checking in. That
was the situation as of a few days ago. That was somewhat in
conflict with the testimony of the Commanding General Lawton,
who said that he did not think that that was the situation, or
should not be, and he said that they should not have the right
to take secret material to their homes unless they had a three-
combination safe, and the general was not the person who was
physically present to watch this going on.
I assume these other witnesses would have no reason to come
in here and lie about how that stuff was handled, and I
wondered if that had been brought to your attention and if you
have any comment on it.
Col. Mills. I can't speak for Fort Monmouth, but in
speaking of my own shop, that is not done. We have official
couriers or we certify a particular person in my shop that may
go to any one of the departments of the army, or navy, or other
agencies of the government and get documents and bring them
back to our place. The only people who have access after hours
to my place are the division chiefs. They must be checked in by
the navy who run a twenty-four-hour guard in our main navy
building where our shop is located. No one goes out of there
knowingly with a document.
The Chairman. You do not let them take it to their
apartments?
Col. Mills. No, sir; if they have work to do after hours,
it is done under supervision in the shop, and these days with
no overtime money, we don't do much of that.
The Chairman. I have got some difficulty just following the
chain of command out here in the various laboratories at Fort
Monmouth and Washington. What, if any jurisdiction, do you have
over Evans Laboratory, or any of these laboratories?
Col. Mills. I have none whatsoever.
The Chairman. You have no control?
Col. Mills. No. The only tie-in between myself and those
laboratories is that we get documents that we feel are of value
to the research and development work being done in the
laboratories.
The Chairman. And you have no responsibility for the other?
Col. Mills. We dispatch them through our regular channels
to those sources.
The Chairman. Here is something that we are very much
interested in, also. I understand that approximately two years
ago, or perhaps before you were in your present job, the Signal
Corps in Washington was requested to make a search for a
sizable number of top secret documents. They were sent a list
with the documents listed, and they made a search, and they
were unable to find fifty-seven of those documents. They looked
for certificates of destruction, and no certificates of
destruction were found. Then they checked for the log book or
the registry, top secret registry, which would give them some
indication of the content of the document, and they said that
the three registry books in which these documents would
normally be logged were all destroyed, with a statement that
they were destroyed by a major and another officer.
The testimony of the security officer, the former security
officer, the one in charge at that time, was that it was
completely unprecedented to destroy a registry book; that it
was never done. You could destroy the document if it was not
needed, but not the registry book.
A representative of the army was here and said that they
have been conducting a continuous search for the fifty-seven
documents, and he said some of them had been located. However,
when we went into it in some detail, he did not know whether
merely duplicate copies had been located or whether the copy
that had gone to the Signal Corps had been located or not, or
whether the copies had never gone to the Signal Corps.
The Signal Corps security officer, or the army
representative, said ``When we sent this questionnaire over to
the Signal Corps, it didn't mean that all of those documents
went to the Signal Corps, and some of them might never have
gone there.''
The Signal Corps officer, however, said that was not true,
and he said this was a list of documents to be charged to them.
So we asked the secretary of the army if he would not
supply for us the master log book and someone who could explain
it, which would show whether or not the fifty-seven top secret
documents actually had been charged out to the Signal Corps or
not.
Could you shed any light on that? If not, I wonder which of
your officers could do that.
Col. Mills. I might be able to give a little bit, sir. I
came to Washington, as I say, two years ago, and at the time,
and for some time prior to that, there was a board that had
been appointed by the chief signal officer that had as its
purpose, as I understand it, the drawing together of the loose
ends that came up at the end of World War II. It was called the
Ferry Board, for Lieutenant Colonel Ferry, who happened to be
president of the thing. This board started out, as I understand
it, as an inventory board to get together all of these top
secret documents, or the records of what had happened to them,
and so forth.
It took on, I believe, as a result of this missing fifty-
seven documents, the job of trying to run that down, as well.
The Chairman. Could I ask you this: Am I correct in my
information that this board was formed after some ten civilians
working in the Signal Corps had petitioned the commanding
officer, the security officer, to make such a search, and their
allegation being or their suspicion being that there was
espionage within the Signal Corps, and they thought that a
search would show that secret material had been missing?
Col. Mills. Well, that happened, sir, to be the agency that
I commanded that was involved in that. I can't answer your
question specifically, because I am not sure, but I believe
that board was in operation prior to that time, and it was
brought into the picture inasmuch as they were doing that kind
of work. They visited my agency and found no discrepancy in the
records at that time.
The Chairman. Where were those fifty-seven documents
missing from?
Col. Mills. I haven't any idea, and they weren't in the
Signal Corps Intelligence Agency, and we could account for
everything that was there the day I got there.
The Chairman. As far as the fifty-seven documents were
concerned, at this time you are not in a position to give us
any detailed information?
Col. Mills. Again, it would just be hearsay.
The Chairman. Again I do not know whether I am asking the
right individual because of your chain of command, which is
something that I cannot follow, to tell you the truth, but I
wonder if you could do this for us: I wonder if you could
assign someone to get the information as to who would be in
possession of the log book, that is, the master log book which
would show whether or not the fifty-seven ever went to the
Signal Corps?
Col. Mills. The person who would know the answer best on
that would be this Lieutenant Colonel Ferry, because he looked
at all of those books. Now, they are not all in one place. Some
of them are in the office there.
Mr. Rainville. I missed some of this, so maybe I just
didn't follow here, but I understood you to say when you came
in two years ago, that the Signal Corps had every item
accounted for.
Col. Mills. No, don't misunderstand me. I am not talking
for the Signal Corps. I am talking for the Signal Corps
Intelligence Agency.
Mr. Rainville. And that would include these fifty-seven
documents?
Col. Mills. I don't have any idea.
Mr. Rainville. But if it did include them, there would be a
place where they had gone; if they were gone you would know
where they had gone to?
Col. Mills. That is correct.
Mr. Rainville. And that is what Lieutenant Colonel Ferry
will know, whether those fifty-seven are in there?
Col. Mills. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Thank you very much, Colonel, for coming up.
The Chairman. Raise your right hand and be sworn.
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Maj. Gallagher. I do.
TESTIMONY OF MAJ. JAMES J. GALLAGHER
Mr. Cohn. Will you give your full name?
Major Gallagher. James J. Gallagher.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you stationed now, Major?
Maj. Gallagher. I am stationed with G-2, Department of the
Army, Pentagon, Washington.
Mr. Cohn. What is the nature of your duties?
Maj. Gallagher. I am in the Special Operations Branch of
the Security Division. My duties are to do whatever my
superiors request.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been stationed out at Monmouth?
Maj. Gallagher. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you had occasion to visit there?
Maj. Gallagher. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. About when?
Maj. Gallagher. During 1952 and 1953 until August of this
year.
Mr. Cohn. Can you tell us the number of security cases
involved at Monmouth?
Maj. Gallagher. I don't believe, Mr. Cohn, under my
understanding of the presidential directive of 1948, that I can
discuss the number of cases.
The Chairman. I understand the position will be that if
there is any information about the various cases or the number
of cases or the disposition of them, under the Truman black-out
order-the major did not sign that order and he is not
responsible for it--while I think it is ridiculous in the
extreme, we cannot order you to answer and put you in a
position of being either in contempt of the committee by
refusing, or subject to court martial if your superior officers
think you went too far.
The secretary can relieve you of the provisions of that
order, of course, the secretary of the army.
May I make this suggestion--and I promised I would get
through by four o'clock. How about the major discussing with
the staff whatever he thinks he can give them, and I think it
will relieve going through a lot of procedure.
[Whereupon, at 4:00 p.m., the hearing was recessed until
7:00 p.m. of the same day.]
evening session
The Chairman. Mr. Ullmann, you have been sworn, and you are
reminded your oath is still in effect.
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
TESTIMONY OF MARCEL Ullmann (RESUMED)
Mr. Cohn. Have you obtained counsel?
Mr. Ullmann. No, I have not.
Mr. Cohn. Have you consulted counsel?
Mr. Ullmann. I have.
Mr. Cohn. What counsel did you consult?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, I contacted attorneys, but there wasn't
enough time. One of them refused the case, one or two.
The Chairman. The question is: Who did you contact?
Mr. Ullmann. I contacted Rothbard, Harris & Oxfeld.
The Chairman. What is their address?
Mr. Ullmann. 744 Broad Street, Newark.
The Chairman. Newark, New Jersey?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did they turn down the case?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. What is the next firm?
Mr. Ullmann. Then I went to Koehler, Augenblick & Freedman,
14 Edison Place, Newark. Mr. Koehler seemed to be interested in
taking the case, but we couldn't get together, that is, I
contacted him several times during the day, and finally
arranged to see him in the afternoon, and had to leave; and I
tried to see him this morning, but I had to get in, and that is
that. I did call him during the day and said if necessary I
would try to contact him. And then I contacted the American
Civil Liberties Union, and I spoke to Mr. Foster and to Mr.
Levy there, and they suggested I contact a Mr. Casper, and I
spoke to him and he said he had a case today, and if I could
get to him during the afternoon, and I told him I had to be in
New York in the morning.
The Chairman. Do you want more time to get a lawyer? If you
want more time, you are entitled to more time.
Mr. Ullmann. I spent all day here, and so may I proceed;
and if it gets out of control, I will plead for more time.
The Chairman. Number one, you are entitled to more time if
you want it, and you are entitled to a lawyer. If you want to,
we will proceed with the questioning, and if the time comes
that you want an adjournment to get a lawyer, we will give you
that adjournment.
Mr. Ullmann. I appreciate that.
The Chairman. We asked you certain questions the other day,
which you refused to answer and you were ordered to answer
them. Are you prepared to answer them today, or do you still
refuse?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, may I ask you, sir, to repeat the
question?
The Chairman. Do you recall which questions you refused to
answer and wanted legal advice on?
Mr. Ullmann. I believe there were two, sir.
The Chairman. What were they?
Mr. Ullmann. I don't know. The last one, I know, was that
you asked me if I knew Dean Acheson, and I said----
The Chairman. Did you refuse to answer?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, I didn't know. At that point it wasn't a
refusal. I requested at that time----
The Chairman. You can change your answer, and I will re-ask
the question if you want me to.
Mr. Ullmann. I didn't refuse it. At that point I thought it
would be best to seek advice, if I recall.
The Chairman. Do you still want to seek advice on whether
or not you can answer?
Mr. Ullmann. If you will put the question to me.
The Chairman. The question is very simple. I asked you if
you knew Dean Acheson.
Mr. Ullmann. May I inquire, could you identify Dean
Acheson?
The Chairman. Do you know who Dean Acheson is?
Mr. Ullmann. I have heard of a Dean Acheson who was former
secretary of state.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Ullmann. Is that the Dean Acheson, sir?
The Chairman. Yes, that is the Dean Acheson.
Mr. Ullmann. I will say that I do not and I did not know
Dean Acheson.
The Chairman. You never had any contact with him, directly
or indirectly?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Why did you refuse to answer that the other
day, then, and why did you tell us that it would incriminate
you if you answered that?
Let me say this: While I have no admiration for Dean
Acheson, it is completely dishonest for you to invoke the Fifth
Amendment when you are asked if you know him, when you know you
don't know him. That makes you in contempt of this committee.
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir, but I did not refuse to answer that,
and I inquired whether I could consult counsel, and I believe
that is the record.
The Chairman. You say you did not refuse to answer?
Mr. Ullmann. I said I wanted to consult counsel before I
committed myself.
The Chairman. Are you a Communist as of today?
Mr. Ullmann. That, sir, I must respectfully decline to
answer on the grounds that a truthful answer may tend to
incriminate me.
The Chairman. Do you feel if you were to tell us the truth
about whether you are a Communist today, that might tend to
incriminate you?
Do you understand that you are entitled to the privilege of
the Fifth Amendment if you feel that a truthful answer would
tend to incriminate you, and you are not entitled to the
privilege if you feel that perjury would incriminate you? You
have got no right to come here and perjure yourself. So I now
ask you the simple question, and it seems to confuse you--the
question is: Do you feel that a truthful answer to that
question might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Ullmann. Sir, I am afraid, sir, that a truthful answer,
sir, may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. You understand that if you are not a member
of the Communist party today, you could simply say ``no,'' and
that would not incriminate you; you understand that, do you
not?
Mr. Ullmann. Well, I believe I understand you, sir.
The Chairman. Is that correct? Do you understand the fact
that if you are not a member of the Communist party today, then
you merely say ``no, I am not,'' and that truthful answer could
not incriminate you. If someone says to me, ``McCarthy, are you
a Communist?'' if I am not I say no, and I cannot be
incriminated. You are in the same status. I just wanted to know
if you understand that when I asked you this question. Do you
understand that?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir, I understand.
The Chairman. Have you engaged in espionage?
Mr. Ullmann. Sir, I must invoke the protection afforded to
me under the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. Then let me ask you this question: Within the
past five weeks, have you been closely associated with, had
contact with people whom you knew or had reason to believe were
either Communists or espionage agents?
Mr. Ullmann. Sir, I must decline to answer on the grounds
of the Fifth Amendment, sir, that a truthful answer may be
inclined to incriminate me.
The Chairman. You were asked the question the other day:
Did you know Owen Lattimore?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. I will ask you again: Did you know Owen
Lattimore?
Mr. Ullmann. I must again invoke the protection of the
Fifth Amendment, sir.
The Chairman. I want to tell you something, mister, that if
you did not know him, and if that can be proven, then you are
in contempt of this committee, and when you say you refuse to
tell us whether you knew him or not, you are indicting Mr.
Lattimore.
Again, while I have no respect for him, no man has a right
to come here before this committee and use the Fifth Amendment
to indict people. I just want you to know that if it can be
proven that you do not know him, then you are in contempt of
this committee and we will invoke contempt proceedings against
you.
With that knowledge in mind, I again ask you: Do you know
Owen Lattimore? You can change your answer if you like, or
stick to the same answer, I do not care. Do you understand if
you do not know him, you merely say ``No, I do not,'' and you
cannot be incriminated. Do you understand that, sir?
Mr. Ullmann. Do I understand, sir, that if I change my
answer----
The Chairman. You have a right to have your previous answer
stricken from the record.
Mr. Ullmann. Well, in that case, sir, no, to the best of my
knowledge I do not and never did know Owen Lattimore.
The Chairman. We will let you change those answers, but I
just wanted to advise you that from now on when you invoke the
Fifth Amendment, you only invoke it when you feel a truthful
answer will tend to incriminate you. You invoke it otherwise,
and I want to promise you that you will live to learn what the
Fifth Amendment means. Do you understand that?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All we want from you is the truth, and if you
feel the truth will convict you, you can refuse to answer.
Mr. Ullmann. Well, you see, sir, I have no means of
ascertaining how effective an answer of mine might be made, and
therefore to be sure that I do not jeopardize myself, I must
therefore cover myself by protection of the Fifth. There is no
intention not to cooperate, but I simply cannot jeopardize
myself, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever steal classified material and
turn it over to members of the Communist party?
Mr. Ullmann. On that, sir, I must avail myself of the
Fifth.
The Chairman. You understand, again, if you did not steal
material----
Mr. Ullmann. I beg your pardon?
The Chairman. If you did not steal such material, you can
simply say, ``No, I have not,'' and that would not incriminate
you.
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir, I understand that. However----
The Chairman. Do you feel that the truth might tend to
incriminate you? If you do, you are entitled to the privilege.
Do you feel that the truth might tend to incriminate you?
I may say, I think it would.
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir, I know it will. I beg a moment to
consider.
The Chairman. If you want a lawyer, we will adjourn so you
can have one. This is of great importance to you, too.
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir, I do know that.
The Chairman. Do you want me to re-ask that question?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the protection offered
by the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. You are entitled to avail yourself of it if
you feel a truthful answer would incriminate you.
Mr. Ullmann. A truthful answer may tend to incriminate me,
sir and I don't know.
The Chairman. Did you know Julius Rosenberg? If you did
not, just tell us ``no,'' and if you did and if you knew him in
some fashion that would involve you in criminal action, you are
entitled to refuse to answer. If you did not know him, all you
need to do is say ``no.''
Mr. Ullmann. I recognize that, sir, except that I do know,
after all, it so happens I am a television service man, and I
did watch the hearings, certain of the previous hearings on the
air, and I have read the papers.
The Chairman. Do you know Julius Rosenberg? I do not care
about your reading the papers. Did you know him? Did you know
Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Do you think if you told us the truth, it
might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Ullmann. It is possible, sir, I am afraid.
The Chairman. If you think it would tend to incriminate
you----
Mr. Ullmann. It may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Not ``may.'' The Constitution says ``might.''
\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Amendment V reads: ``No person shall be held to answer for a
capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or
indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or
naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War
or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offenses
to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in
any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall
private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you feel it might?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you turn secret material over to Julius
Rosenberg?
Mr. Ullmann. I must again avail myself of the Fifth.
The Chairman. Did you attend Communist party meetings?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Do you refuse to answer? Do you refuse to
answer on the ground of self-incrimination?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How old are you now?
Mr. Ullmann. I am forty-seven.
The Chairman. Are you married?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How old is your wife?
Mr. Ullmann. I think she is thirty-six, sir.
The Chairman. How long have you been married, roughly?
Mr. Ullmann. Twelve or thirteen years.
The Chairman. Is this your first wife?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You have never been married before?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. Is your wife a Communist?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth Amendment,
sir.
The Chairman. Was your wife a Communist when you married
her?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth Amendment,
sir.
The Chairman. You mean, when you say you must avail
yourself of the Fifth, that you are refusing to answer?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Is that right?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. On the ground of self-incrimination?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Were you an espionage agent when you were
handling secret material over at the Army Signal Corps?
Mr. Ullmann. I must decline to answer on the grounds that a
truthful answer may tend to incriminate me, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever pass secret material to members
of the Communist party when you were working at the Signal
Corps?
Mr. Ullmann. I must decline to answer, sir, on the grounds
stated.
The Chairman. The Fifth Amendment?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Before you married your wife, where did you
live?
Mr. Ullmann. I lived in Brooklyn.
The Chairman. Where is that?
Mr. Ullmann. Flatbush.
The Chairman. And the address?
Mr. Ullmann. 1414 Avenue R.
The Chairman. Who lived with you?
Mr. Ullmann. I lived with my mother and brother.
The Chairman. No one else?
Mr. Ullmann. My dad was alive at the time, yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever room with anyone other than
members of your family?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever room with any members of the
Communist party?
Mr. Ullmann. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever check into a hotel room with
someone whom you knew as a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Now, it is a fact that on at least--and I
emphasize ``at least''--four different occasions, you checked
into a hotel room and spent the night or the weekend with
individuals whom you knew to be Communist espionage agents;
that is correct, is it not?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth Amendment,
sir.
The Chairman. You mean if you tell us the truth on that,
that might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you not check into hotel rooms with
espionage agents for the purpose of passing on to them secret
material from the Signal Corps laboratories?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. I have nothing further of this witness.
Mr. Cohn. Were you head of a chapter of the United Public
Workers of America union?
Mr. Ullmann. Yes, sir; that is, a local, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you hold that position at the direction of
the Communist party?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man in that union by the name of
Yamins, Hyam G. Yamins, Y-a-m-i-n-s?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Was he a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the protection under
the Fifth.
The Chairman. You understand if Yamins is not a member--was
Yamins known to you as a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth, sir.
The Chairman. Since you have no lawyer here, let me tell
you again, if we discover that Yamins was not known to you as a
member of the Communist party, I intend to have you cited for
contempt. I am not going to have you Communists play around
with the Fifth Amendment. It is a simple question: Did you know
Yamins was a member of the Communist party? If you had no
knowledge he was a member of the Communist party, simply say
``no,'' and it cannot incriminate you.
Mr. Ullmann. It can incriminate me.
The Chairman. Not if he was not, if you know he was not;
and if you know he was a member, then you have got the right to
refuse. If Yamins was a member of the Communist party and known
to you as such, or known to you as engaged in espionage, you
have a right to refuse to answer. You cannot involve an
innocent man by this refusal.
Mr. Ullmann. You have brought out certain questions which I
believe are not factual, and apparently I don't know what
anyone else may say that may counter my word, and therefore,
since I can't be sure, all I can do is avail myself of the
protection under the Fifth, sir, because I can't be sure of
anything, sir.
The Chairman. You mean that you are availing yourself of
the Fifth Amendment because you are afraid someone might lie
about you?
Mr. Ullmann. Possibly. I have no means----
The Chairman. You are not entitled to the privilege----
Mr. Ullmann. I am afraid that I might be incriminated, and
therefore I must avail myself of the Fifth, because anything I
may say may be a witness against me, I don't know, sir.
The Chairman. You are not entitled to any privilege,
because you say someone might lie about you.
Mr. Ullmann. I don't know whether they will lie.
The Chairman. You are only entitled to the Fifth Amendment
privilege--listen to me now--you are only entitled to the Fifth
Amendment privilege if the truth might send you to jail. Do you
understand that? It might result ultimately in your going to
jail.
The question is: Was Yamins known to you as a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Ullmann. I must avail myself of the Fifth.
The Chairman. If he was, you are entitled to refuse. Pardon
me for interrupting. I just want to let you know, again, that
we are going to make sure this Fifth Amendment privilege is not
abused, and if we find that you had no knowledge that Yamins
was a member of the Communist party, and if Yamins can produce
proof that he was not a member of the Communist party, then you
are going to be cited for contempt.
Mr. Ullmann. If he can present proof, how does that reflect
on me, and how do I know whether or not he may have been, and
how can I answer that, sir?
The Chairman. If you have no knowledge he was a member, you
merely say ``no,'' and it is very simple. I asked you a simple
question: If you have any knowledge that Yamins was a member of
the Communist party. And if you have such knowledge, then you
can refuse to answer. If you do not have such knowledge then
you must answer the question.
You may step down. Let the record show the witness sat mute
and refused to answer, and we will cite him for contempt.
Mr. Ullmann. I was thinking, sir.
The Chairman. You may step down. You will consider yourself
under subpoena, and we will notify you when you are to
reappear.
The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand and be sworn?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Zuckerman. I do.
TESTIMONY OF BENJAMIN ZUCKERMAN
Mr. Cohn. Will you give your full name, please?
Mr. Zuckerman. Benjamin Zuckerman, Z-u-c-k-e-r-m-a-n.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you reside, Mr. Zuckerman?
Mr. Zuckerman. 1302 Turner Avenue, Wanamassa, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. What is your occupation at the present time?
Mr. Zuckerman. I am an electronic engineer.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you employed?
Mr. Zuckerman. Video Products Corporation, Red Bank, New
Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time have you been
there?
Mr. Zuckerman. A year and a half.
Mr. Cohn. Do they do any government work?
Mr. Zuckerman. They do. I think they have now one very
small government contract.
Mr. Cohn. From what department?
Mr. Zuckerman. I believe it is from the Signal Corps.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what type of project is that?
Mr. Zuckerman. That is a power unit.
Mr. Cohn. Involving radar?
Mr. Zuckerman. No. It is an unclassified project.
Mr. Cohn. A power unit?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this: Where were you working
before the year and a half, prior to that time?
Mr. Zuckerman. I was working at the Rome Air Development
Center, in Rome, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. On the air force payroll?
Mr. Zuckerman. I was.
Mr. Cohn. As a civilian?
Mr. Zuckerman. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. For how long were you at Rome?
Mr. Zuckerman. I was at Rome for three months, I believe.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you prior to that?
Mr. Zuckerman. I was down at Watson Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. With the air force?
Mr. Zuckerman. Before they moved to Rome.
Mr. Cohn. And where were you prior to that?
Mr. Zuckerman. Prior to that, I was inspector with the air
force, and I was stationed at the General Electric Company in
Syracuse, New York.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever work for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, sir, I did.
Mr. Cohn. When?
Mr. Zuckerman. I worked for the Signal Corps from--well,
from November of 1940 until the time that----
Mr. Cohn. The Watson Laboratory?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, until the time that the air force
established itself as a separate unit, and they took our group
and we shifted over to the air force.
Mr. Cohn. When would you say that was?
Mr. Zuckerman. I imagine that was around 1945, and I was an
inspector all of this time.
The Chairman. I think your dates are wrong. The air force
did not become a separate group in 1945. I think it was 1947,
was it not?
Mr. Zuckerman. It couldn't have been, because I came down
to Watson Laboratories----
The Chairman. Just to refresh your recollection, I did not
get into the Senate until 1947, and I know I voted for the
National Security Act, which established the air force as a
separate entity.
Mr. Zuckerman. If you can refresh my memory, when was the
war over with Japan?
The Chairman. V-J Day was in September of 1945; and V-E Day
was in the spring of 1945.
Mr. Zuckerman. In September of 1945, I know as inspectors
in Syracuse, we were working out of a different office, and it
was an air force office. The air force might not have been a
separate entity yet.
Mr. Cohn. When did you go to New Jersey in the 40's?
Mr. Zuckerman. I went to New Jersey, it was shortly after
the end of the war, and I imagine a couple of months.
Mr. Cohn. In 1945?
Mr. Zuckerman. 1945 or 1946.
Mr. Cohn. How long did you stay there?
Mr. Zuckerman. I stayed there until I moved to Rome, which
was about one year and nine months ago, about.
Mr. Cohn. About 1945 to sometime in 1951, or late '51 or
early '52?
Mr. Zuckerman. About that.
Mr. Cohn. At any time that you worked for the air force or
the Signal Corps, did you have access to classified material?
Mr. Zuckerman. I did, when I was working for the air force;
and when I was working for the Signal Corps, I am quite sure I
was cleared for confidential material, but as an inspector we
inspected production items, and most all production items were
not classified once they went into production.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this: What college did you attend?
Mr. Zuckerman. CCNY.
Mr. Cohn. What year did you graduate?
Mr. Zuckerman. In 1938.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man by the name of Morton Sobell?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, I did.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you first meet him?
Mr. Zuckerman. I first met him in school.
Mr. Cohn. At City College?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Was he in your class?
Mr. Zuckerman. He was in a number of my classes.
Mr. Cohn. How well did you know him?
Mr. Zuckerman. I knew him fairly well at City College.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know him socially?
Mr. Zuckerman. I didn't know him socially.
Mr. Cohn. Just from seeing him around class?
Mr. Zuckerman. Just in class, and in discussing technical
topics, why, a number of the fellows would discuss them, and I
often discussed technical subjects with him.
Mr. Cohn. Who would you say was in that clique with you and
Sobell?
Mr. Zuckerman. I wasn't in a clique with Sobell. I
discussed technical subjects with him.
Mr. Cohn. Who else participated in these subjects?
Mr. Zuckerman. Most of the members of the class.
Mr. Cohn. Weren't there any in particular?
Mr. Zuckerman. I know one fellow who I went all through
school with, a fellow by the name of Hellman.
Mr. Cohn. What was his first name?
Mr. Zuckerman. Henry Hellman.
Mr. Cohn. Anybody else?
Mr. Zuckerman. He was my closest associate.
Mr. Cohn. Did he know Sobell well?
Mr. Zuckerman. He knew him about as well as I did.
Mr. Cohn. Has he ever worked for the government?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, Hellman never has worked for the
government.
Mr. Cohn. Where is he now?
Mr. Zuckerman. He works for Lummus Company.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that?
Mr. Zuckerman. In New York City. I think they build oil
refineries.
Mr. Cohn. Now, who else do you associate with Sobell in
college days?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, I remember a man by the name of
Breitzer, B-r-e-i-t-z-e-r.
Mr. Cohn. He works out at Monmouth, does he not?
Mr. Zuckerman. I lost sight of Breitzer after I graduated,
and I don't know where he works.
The Chairman. May I suggest the record show that the Sobell
you are referring to is the Sobell who has been convicted of
espionage and sentenced to thirty years. He was part of the
Rosenberg spy ring. You understand that is the Sobell that we
are talking about?
Mr. Zuckerman. Oh, yes, of course,
Mr. Cohn. Anybody else you associate with Sobell?
Mr. Zuckerman. With Sobell? When I said Breitzer, I am very
sorry, because I associate him more with me.
Mr. Cohn. Who do you associate with Sobell?
Mr. Zuckerman. I associate a man by the name of Sussman.
Mr. Cohn. Nathan Sussman?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, sir. And I kind of remember him with
Sobell at school. Well, it is pretty hard to remember right
now. He and Rosenberg must have been chummy, but I can't
remember him very well.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Rosenberg?
Mr. Zuckerman. He was in about one or two of my classes.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know him?
Mr. Zuckerman. If I saw him I knew him, and I never had
anything to do with him.
Mr. Cohn. Did you associate him with Sobell?
Mr. Zuckerman. It is hard to say now. Of course, he must
have been associating with Sobell, but I can't recollect away
back.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Sobell was a Communist?
Mr. Zuckerman. No; I knew he had radical tendencies, the
man had a reputation, but I didn't know he was a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. You knew him, and you had discussions with him,
and all of that, and wasn't it quite clear to you that he held
Communistic views?
Mr. Zuckerman. We didn't discuss political matters.
Mr. Cohn. Never?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, I never did.
Mr. Cohn. You never have?
Mr. Zuckerman. I never discussed political matters with
him.
Mr. Cohn. Your sworn testimony is you never discussed
political matters with Morton Sobell?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss communism with him?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, I never discussed communism.
Mr. Cohn. If anybody says you did and that he was present
at such a discussion, that person is not telling the truth?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, why----
Mr. Cohn. That person is not telling the truth?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes.
The Chairman. I should tell you for your protection, since
you have no lawyer, that we have considerable evidence to the
effect that you and Sobell did discuss communism repeatedly,
and I am not trying to tell you that you are not telling the
truth and they are. I am just telling you this for your
protection.
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, let me put it this way----
The Chairman. You can govern yourself accordingly.
Mr. Zuckerman. It is pretty hard for me to remember a way
back, but so far as I know, I can't recollect any discussions
at the moment that were of enough importance for me to remember
them now.
Mr. Cohn. You did have the impression that he had pretty
radical views, is that right?
Mr. Zuckerman. He was known to have radical views, sure.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever take you to a meeting of the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Zuckerman. He never did.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever take you to any meeting?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, he never did.
Mr. Cohn. You never went to any meeting?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, absolutely not.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever ask you to go to any meeting?
Mr. Zuckerman. He never did.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever ask you to join the Young Communist
League?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, he never did.
Mr. Cohn. Or the Communist party?
Mr. Zuckerman. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did your association with Sobell end when you
left college?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, it did not.
Mr. Cohn. By the way, when did you first get the impression
Sobell had these very radical views?
Mr. Zuckerman. I can't pinpoint it, but I imagine when I
was a sophomore, I think was the time he was in my class, and
he was pretty loud, and people kind of said that it was well
known that he was pretty radical. There were a lot of radical
boys at schools in those days, and some of them were known
definitely as Communists, and others with just radical
tendencies.
The Chairman. When, if ever, did you first have a suspicion
Sobell was a Communist?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, probably around my sophomore year, and
to tell you the truth, I didn't particularly think about those
things, and I didn't look at a person and ask myself whether
this man is a Communist or not. There were certain students
that were in the forefront of various radical activities, and
some of them were Communists and others were not.
Now, I don't know which ones were and which ones were not,
but I do remember that Sobell was involved in that radical
activity.
The Chairman. When did you first--we are just trying to get
the truth and the facts.
Mr. Zuckerman. I am trying to give it to you. It is
fourteen or fifteen years now, and it is pretty difficult.
The Chairman. You are here today to give us some
information about Sobell, and we hoped you might have some, and
some of his friends.
Mr. Zuckerman. I am trying to the best of my ability, if I
can.
The Chairman. I am just asking you--and this isn't a trick
question or anything like that--I am just asking you, when did
you first have reason to believe he was a Communist?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, I probably could have had reason to
believe he might be a Communist in my sophomore year. That is
about the best way I can answer that question.
The Chairman. When were you pretty well convinced he was a
Communist?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, I was never pretty well convinced he
was a Communist, and as a matter of fact in his later years he
became very quiet in school. You see, he was immersed
completely in technical work, and you never saw him associated
with those movements that you did in the earlier years at
school, and so if somebody would have asked me by the time I
was graduating whether I thought Sobell was a Communist, I
would have said no.
The Chairman. Did you ever decide in your own mind that
Sobell perhaps was a Communist?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, if somebody told me that he was a
Communist----
The Chairman. I am just asking you if the time ever came
when you, yourself, decided in your own mind that he was
perhaps a Communist?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, when they brought him in.
The Chairman. When he was tried and convicted?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Well, before that had you ever decided he
might be a Communist?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, he might have been, yes, but to
pinpoint a man as a Communist is a rather definite thing.
The Chairman. I am just asking you, not whether he was; I
am asking you when, if ever, you in your own mind first
decided, ``I think this man may be a Communist''?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, as I say, in his sophomore year, my
sophomore year, probably at that time if I had thought about
it--and I really didn't think about those things too much in
those days--I could have decided.
The Chairman. Did you keep up your social contact with him
after you left school?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, suppose I give you the extent of my
association with him after I left school. I want to give you
the information, and I gave it to the FBI already, so I might
as well go right into it.
When I left school, I went to the University of Michigan to
take postgraduate work, and I roomed with Aaron Coleman out
there, and we both were taking advanced degrees; and after
being there for about two months, I got an offer of a job down
in Washington in the government, and I went and took the job.
After I got down there, why, I stayed at the YMCA, and
there I met some members of my graduating class, Stanley Rich,
Max Elitcher, William Danziger, and Edward Hillman, who wasn't
a member of my graduating class.
Mr. Cohn. Was this in Washington, D.C.?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What were those names again?
Mr. Zuckerman. Stanley Rich, and William Danziger, and Max
Elitcher, and then there was Edward Hillman.
Mr. Cohn. Did Hillman ever work for the government?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes. If you will permit me, I will go into
that.
And there was a Frank Hashmall there, H-a-s-h-m-a-l-l, and
he wasn't from City College. All of those boys were working in
the Bureau of Ordnance, and all received jobs at the same time
I did, approximately, except for Hashmall. He was at the
Federal Power Commission.
After we had been at the Y for a few days, Mr. Rich, it
was, that suggested that we find better living quarters, and he
rented a large house, and I agreed to live there with them. And
after we had been at this house for about a month or so, about
a month, maybe even less, Morton Sobell got a job at the Bureau
of Ordnance, and he came down, and he came down and lived in
that house too.
Mr. Cohn. This is Sobell?
Mr. Zuckerman. I stayed at the house for probably another
two months, but I didn't particularly care for it.
Mr. Cohn. Who was living with you?
Mr. Zuckerman. All of those boys.
Mr. Cohn. And Elitcher?
Mr. Zuckerman. That is right. And shortly after, Mrs.
Danziger came down, and Mrs. Rich came down, too. Well, I
didn't care for it very much, and I left after a couple of
months, and I found my own room.
Mr. Cohn. Before you left, before we leave that point, were
all or any of the persons you have named Communists?
Mr. Zuckerman. To my knowledge, I didn't know of anyone
there who was a Communist. Now, of the boys that were there, if
somebody had suggested that perhaps Sobell might have been, I
wouldn't have disputed him very much, and I thought that that
would be a possibility; and I would also have thought that it
would be possible for Rich to have been a Communist, from their
reputations at school. The others, however--and I know now that
I have been wrong--namely, Elitcher and Danziger, I didn't have
the slightest idea that they were Communists.
The Chairman. You know now that they were, do you not?
Mr. Zuckerman. I know that Elitcher became a Communist
sometime later, as he testified in court, and he was not a
Communist at that time.
The Chairman. He joined the party, but he was not a party
member? He was a Communist but he was not a party member?
Mr. Zuckerman. I doubt he was a Communist at that time. As
a matter of fact, I was very sure of it, because from what I
knew of him at school, he never seemed to have any opinion
about anything.
The Chairman. At any event, without spending too much time
on it, it developed later that all of those who lived with you
were members of the Communist party; is that right?
Mr. Zuckerman. I really don't know. I don't know if
Danziger is a Communist, and I don't know if Hashmall is.
The Chairman. How about Danziger? There is no question in
your mind about Danziger?
Mr. Zuckerman. Danziger, I have no idea.
Mr. Cohn. Danziger testified at the Rosenberg trial.
Mr. Zuckerman. I don't know what he said exactly, and I
know Elitcher said he was a Communist at the trial, but I don't
know about Danziger.
The Chairman. Wasn't Hashmall a leader of the Communist
party?
Mr. Zuckerman. I knew practically nothing about him.
The Chairman. In Cincinnati, Ohio?
Mr. Zuckerman. He was kind of a shadowy figure, and I
hardly ever spoke to him, and he stayed in another room. I
roomed with Hillman.
Mr. Carr. Could you describe Mr. Hashmall?
Mr. Zuckerman. Surely.
Mr. Carr. What did he look like?
Mr. Zuckerman. He was rather heavy set.
Mr. Carr. Dark hair?
Mr. Zuckerman. I can't remember his hair anymore, but he
was probably my height, and maybe a little smaller but he was
broad, and I think he had a fairly muscular build; and one
thing I do remember about him, he had rosy cheeks.
In one conversation I had reason to suspect that Mrs.
Danziger may have been addicted to those views.
Mr. Carr. How about Hillman?
Mr. Zuckerman. Hillman; I don't think he was ever a
Communist.
Mr. Carr. How about Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, you can't be sure about anything, but
if I can be sure about anything, I am sure Aaron Coleman was
not a Communist.
Mr. Carr. Did he tell you about going to Communist League
meetings?
Mr. Zuckerman. That came as a complete surprise to me; I
saw it in the paper, and I never dreamed that.
The Chairman. When did you see in the paper that he had
attended Young Communist League meetings?
Mr. Zuckerman. It was today or yesterday.
The Chairman. I have been reading the papers carefully, and
I saw no reference to Coleman.
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, I know who Coleman is, and he is the
marine officer who you questioned, and the previous day in the
local newspapers the marine officer was Coleman.
The Chairman. The story referred to a man who had attended
Young Communist League meetings being a marine officer, and you
recognized him as Coleman?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, I know that is Coleman, and I know he
was suspended for taking out documents, and it is known all
over the place.
Mr. Cohn. Was this in 1940?
Mr. Zuckerman. When I lived in Washington? I lived there in
1938.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know that any Communist meetings were
being held in the vicinity or the house, or any people there
were attending any?
Mr. Zuckerman. There was no Communist meetings held in that
house while I was there.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know if any of your roommates or people
living in the house were attending Communist meetings?
Mr. Zuckerman. I couldn't know, and I spent some evenings
at home with them, and other evenings I went out.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever asked to join the Communist party?
Mr. Zuckerman. Never.
Mr. Cohn. You were never asked to go to a Communist
meeting?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. They did not ask you?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you working then?
Mr. Zuckerman. In the Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Department.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what happened after you left there?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, after I left there, I took the job as
an inspector in the Brooklyn Signal Corps procurement district.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see Julius Rosenberg there?
Mr. Zuckerman. I saw him in the office a couple of times,
but I never spoke to Rosenberg, and I didn't care for
Rosenberg, and he was a poor student in school and he was
always shooting his mouth off, and I was never interested in
poor students anyway.
Mr. Cohn. When did you last see Frank Hashmall?
Mr. Zuckerman. When I left the house there, and I never saw
him again.
Mr. Cohn. You left the house after a couple of months, is
that right?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And you went up to Brooklyn?
Mr. Zuckerman. Oh, no. I lived in Virginia for about
another year and a half while I worked in the Bureau of
Ordnance.
Mr. Cohn. During the year and a half, did you see any of
these people, Sobell----
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, I saw Hillman, and I saw Elitcher, and
I saw Sobell, and I used to play handball with Hillman and
Elitcher fairly regularly down at the ``Y,'' and on a couple of
occasions I went up to Sobell's apartment where he and Elitcher
lived, and I came up to listen to his audio system that he had,
and I was interested in audio work and he had something he was
very proud of. I went up and listened to it on a number of
occasions. I used to go down to the Library of Congress every
once in a while, and listen to a concert, and I would see
Sobell there. I saw Sobell in Washington, there is no question
about that, but I didn't see him very much, because I saw
Elitcher more than I saw Sobell. I used to play handball an
awful lot with Elitcher.
Mr. Cohn. When you went up to Brooklyn, did you maintain
contact with any of these people?
Mr. Zuckerman. I did not.
Mr. Cohn. When did you see Sobell next after you left
Washington?
Mr. Zuckerman. After I left there, I was working as an
inspector, and I was sent out to Syracuse. And in about 1943, I
imagine, I had occasion to make a trip to Schenectady. Before
that time I knew that Sobell worked at General Electric Company
at Schenectady, because a GE engineer came down once and we
were talking about various things, and he asked me what school
I went to, and I told him CCNY, and he asked me if I knew
Sobell. I said yes, I did, and he said, ``Well, he went to
CCNY, and he is working in our Marine and Aeronautics
Division,'' and he spoke very highly of him as a very good
engineer.
When I went up to Schenectady that time, I gave Sobell a
call, and I went up to see him, and I spent about an hour with
him, and we talked a little bit. I went up to his room, and
then that was the end of that. Then I----
Mr. Cohn. Who was the person who told you about Sobell
being up there?
Mr. Zuckerman. I believe he was a fellow by the name of
Black, who----
Mr. Cohn. What was his first name?
Mr. Zuckerman. That is hard for me to remember that. In the
first place, he wasn't an engineer that I saw all of the time.
He came down from Schenectady. We were having trouble with the
unit. But I remember his last name because his brother worked
at Syracuse, and his name was Black, too.
The Chairman. What was his brother's first name?
Mr. Zuckerman. I can't recall that.
The Chairman. Do you recall where he lived?
Mr. Zuckerman. I wasn't friendly with the man.
The Chairman. We have got to follow the sequence. Someone
named Black came to you and said Sobell, whom you considered at
that time to be a Communist, was up at Schenectady, and you
went there and contacted Sobell and spent an hour with him.
Now, will you tell us what you were doing in Schenectady at
that time?
Mr. Zuckerman. I guess I didn't make that clear. I was sent
to Schenectady on official business at the time.
The Chairman. Who sent you?
Mr. Zuckerman. The United States government.
The Chairman. Who in the United States government?
Mr. Zuckerman. My superior.
The Chairman. Who was that?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, I believe it was Captain Kroner at the
time.
The Chairman. What was the official business?
Mr. Zuckerman. The official business was inspection of some
item, and I can't remember any more.
The Chairman. At what plant?
Mr. Zuckerman. General Electric Company in Schenectady.
The Chairman. You were sent over to inspect something, is
that right?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes.
The Chairman. What did the inspection consist of?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, I am afraid I can't remember that any
more, I went on so many trips.
The Chairman. You do not recall what you inspected?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, but the records are all there, I am sure
of that. I can't remember it.
The Chairman. How much time did you spend on the
inspection?
Mr. Zuckerman. I spent all day.
The Chairman. In the evening, you went over to Sobell's?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes. I called him up at the plant, and then
he suggested I drop over, and I dropped over.
The Chairman. You went over to his apartment that night?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, sir, I did, and he had a room.
The Chairman. Did you have dinner together?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, we did not.
The Chairman. Did you stay there overnight?
Mr. Zuckerman. No. I did not.
The Chairman. Where did you stay?
Mr. Zuckerman. I stayed at the YMCA.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Cohn. Was anybody else present?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, just us.
Mr. Cohn. Did he discuss communism?
Mr. Zuckerman. No. As a matter of fact, if you asked me at
that time if I thought he was a Communist, I would tell you I
was sure he wasn't.
Mr. Cohn. You thought he was when you were at the end of
the sophomore year.
Mr. Zuckerman. I thought it was possible he was, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. But when you went to see him at General Electric,
you thought he wasn't?
Mr. Zuckerman. There was quite a change in him, and he had
matured quite a bit. He used to be quite a rough sort of a
fellow, and very dogmatic about everything, and he was quite an
exhibitionist. But he seemed to mellow down, and he was quite
successful. It happens to a lot of guys at school. They come
out and they make a little bit of a success, and they forget
about whatever radical ideas they did have at school.
Mr. Cohn. When he heard you were working for the Signal
Corps, did he ask whether or not you had run across Julius
Rosenberg?
Mr. Zuckerman. No.
Mr. Cohn. He did not?
Mr. Zuckerman. No. We didn't talk about Rosenberg at all.
He was telling me about some girl he had in Washington, and he
couldn't make up his mind to get married or not to, and things
like that, and the audio amplifiers.
Mr. Jones. Who was the girl?
Mr. Zuckerman. I imagine it is the woman he finally
married. She was someone in the Bureau of Standards. She was a
scientist of some sort.
Mr. Cohn. What was her first name?
Mr. Zuckerman. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. She was previously married to a man named
Clarence Darrow Gurovitch?
Mr. Zuckerman. I don't even know if it was the same girl,
but I assume it was. We always talked about various things, and
he told me he was very lucky to work at General Electric
Company, and he was working with all of the eminent people, and
he had offers of jobs elsewhere that would pay him twice as
much but he wanted to stay there because he thought it was a
privilege to work for the people he was working for.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Professor Yamins?
Mr. Zuckerman. Hyam Yamins? I know of him.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you meet him?
Mr. Zuckerman. I never met him personally, no, but I know
who he is. I have seen him. He was in a rather high position,
and you know who those people are.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this: After this meeting with
Sobell----
Mr. Zuckerman. There is one other thing. Sobell also told
me at the time that he wasn't arguing with people quite as
much, and he used to be very argumentative. And this sort of
thing led me to believe that he had mellowed down quite a bit,
as I mentioned.
Mr. Cohn. Now, did Sobell ask you what kind of work you
were doing?
Mr. Zuckerman. No.
Mr. Cohn. Not at all?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, sir. I just told him I was doing
inspection work.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ask you what you were doing up at
Schenectady?
Mr. Zuckerman. I told him I came up on a job, and he
probably asked me, and I told him.
Mr. Cohn. When did you see Sobell next?
Mr. Zuckerman. The next time I saw Sobell was down here at
Watson Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. About when?
Mr. Zuckerman. Let me see. Well, I can't be sure of the
dates, and the FBI has them more accurately. They have the
accurate dates. But I think it was around '47, or thereabouts,
or some part of 1947, and he came down and I didn't know he was
there, and I happened to walk into the cafeteria with Mr.
Bookbinder, and I saw him sitting there. So I naturally walked
over and said hello.
Mr. Cohn. Had Mr. Bookbinder known him previously?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, Mr. Bookbinder knew him. As a matter of
fact, the way I found out that Bookbinder--I knew Bookbinder in
Syracuse when I was working there.
The Chairman. Tell us what happened then?
Mr. Zuckerman. I was once telling Bookbinder about--did you
want me to answer that?
The Chairman. I want you to give us a complete story of
your contact with Sobell, and try and keep it down. It is nine
o'clock now. Try to keep it down from here on in.
Mr. Zuckerman. I thought you wanted me to talk about
Bookbinder.
Mr. Cohn. You and Bookbinder walked into the cafeteria, and
he told you he came down there and he was working for the
Reeves Company, and they had a project with the Army Signal
Corps at Monmouth?
Mr. Zuckerman. No. It was with the Watson Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. And he came down to see some people and he had to
stay overnight?
Mr. Zuckerman. And I invited him over to my house, to stay
over at my house that night, and he did.
Mr. Cohn. Who else was at your house?
Mr. Zuckerman. Bookbinder came over, and I believe
Bookbinder came over and I can't be sure, and they argued a lot
about color photography. They are both interested in that. And
I think Sobell went over to Bookbinder's house to hear his
audio amplifier system, and it wasn't really Bookbinder's, it
was his cousin's he lived with; it was Bookbinder's cousin's
system, that Bookbinder lived with at the time.
The Chairman. How many times did Sobell come down and stay
with you?
Mr. Zuckerman. I believe it was twice, and it may have been
three times. It is hard for me to remember now.
The Chairman. Then you were a pretty good friend of Sobell
if he came and lived with you.
Mr. Zuckerman. I was friendly with him, sure.
The Chairman. You were very friendly when he roomed with
you?
Mr. Zuckerman. I wasn't a social friend, but here was an
engineer who was an eminent engineer, and I was kind of proud
to have him down there, to tell the truth.
The Chairman. What do you call a social friend? If a man
comes over and stays with you, how close must he get to be
social?
Mr. Zuckerman. I had him over at my house, and he slept
over, and I was happy to have him. Let us put it that way.
The Chairman. Did you have one room?
Mr. Zuckerman. If he lived in the same town----
The Chairman. What did you have, one room?
Mr. Zuckerman. I have a four-room house.
The Chairman. Were you married then?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes. I have two children.
The Chairman. When were you married?
Mr. Zuckerman. I was married in 1946, April.
The Chairman. And he came over and stayed in your house?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, one night.
The Chairman. Did you know he was an espionage agent at
that time?
Mr. Zuckerman. Definitely not.
The Chairman. You know now he was?
Mr. Zuckerman. Oh, yes, of course I know now, to my sorrow.
The Chairman. Do you know he was an espionage agent at the
time he stayed in your house?
Mr. Zuckerman. I sure do.
The Chairman. Do you know now he was interested in the type
of work you were doing, for espionage purposes at that time?
You know that now, do you not?
Mr. Zuckerman. I don't know what he was interested in for
espionage purposes, and I don't know what kind of espionage
work he did.
The Chairman. You were handling secret material?
Mr. Zuckerman. I was handling secret material, that is
right.
The Chairman. And you of course now know that espionage
agents would be interested in that secret material?
Mr. Zuckerman. He could have been, sure.
The Chairman. You claim you never knew that he or any of
these other Communists with whom you lived were Communists
until after you had broken off your connection with them?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, the statement puts it a little
stronger than it is. As I say, I knew he could have been a
Communist, and I knew he had radical tendencies, but I didn't
know if he was a member of the Communist party.
The Chairman. Did you ever give him any classified
material?
Mr. Zuckerman. Oh, no.
The Chairman. Did he ever ask for any?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, we didn't discuss any of my work or
anything.
The Chairman. He never discussed communism with you?
Mr. Zuckerman. No.
The Chairman. He never discussed any classified work with
you?
Mr. Zuckerman. No.
The Chairman. I may say for your benefit that your
testimony does not impress me at all. Here you have got an
espionage agent who comes and lives in your house, and he is
such a good friend he lives in your house; and you have the
material, the type of material which he wants. He wants
material, secret material, and he is a Communist spy. And you
say that he never discussed any of it with you, and he never
asked you for any, and he never discusses communism.
Mr. Zuckerman. He didn't discuss a thing like that over at
my house.
The Chairman. What did he discuss, the weather?
Mr. Zuckerman. He discussed his family, that he was
becoming very proud of, and the new car he was going to buy.
And he told my wife he knew how to cook eggs better than she
could. And we went to sleep early.
The Chairman. You seem to be a very intelligent young man,
and if I am associating with a Communist spy and we are trying
to get the facts on a spy ring, and if I came and told you that
this Communist agent was such a close friend of mine that he
came over and stayed at my house, not once or twice but three
times, and if I told you I was handling secret material but I
said, ``We never discussed and he never asked me for any secret
material and never mentioned anything about communism, and we
discussed how we cooked eggs, and we discussed color
photography,'' wouldn't you think that I was either the
damndest liar you ever heard or that I was a case for a mental
institution?
Mr. Zuckerman. Now, one moment. I saw him four times in
some eight years. Now, that doesn't stamp him as a close friend
of mine. And each time I saw him, it was a matter of
circumstance, and I didn't go to seek him out.
The Chairman. Did you meet him in the cafeteria each time
he came down to Watson Laboratory?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, I did.
Mr. Cohn. You never knew he was coming in advance?
Mr. Zuckerman. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. How many times was he down there and you did not
see him in the cafeteria?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, I don't know, but he was down at one
time for a week.
Mr. Cohn. Where did he stay then?
Mr. Zuckerman. I don't know where he stayed, and I invited
him over but he said that he was going back to the city every
day, and he seemed very ill at ease at the time.
Mr. Cohn. When was this?
Mr. Zuckerman. That was after the last time he stayed at my
house.
Mr. Cohn. When was that, about what year?
Mr. Zuckerman. It was close to 1950, around that time.
After that week he spent down there, I never saw him again.
Mr. Cohn. Who else did he associate with when he was down
at Watson?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, he went on business, and he had
business with Leslie Cornell, the project engineer on the work
he was doing.
Mr. Cohn. Who else did he associate with socially, that you
know of?
Mr. Zuckerman. So far as I know, he didn't know anybody
else socially, except myself and Bookbinder.
Mr. Cohn. Weren't there any other classmates down there?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, there were some classmates. There was
Jerome Freedman----
Mr. Cohn. Did he see Freedman down there?
Mr. Zuckerman. He might have, I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Was he a friend of Freedman?
Mr. Zuckerman. I don't think he was, and Freedman was in
Washington. I doubt whether Freedman ever saw him after he got
out of school.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever stay overnight at anyone's house
besides yours?
Mr. Zuckerman. If he did, I don't know about it.
The Chairman. Were you working at Evans at the time?
Mr. Zuckerman. I never worked at Evans.
The Chairman. What signal lab were you working at?
Mr. Zuckerman. At Watson. It was an air force lab.
The Chairman. Watson, at the time that Sobell was staying
with you?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, that is where he came. He came to
Watson.
The Chairman. Knowing now that Sobell has been convicted,
and knowing of all of the evidence of his Communist espionage
activities, do you think that at the time he was visiting the
signal lab and living with you at the house, that he was then
engaged in espionage activities in attempting to get secrets
from the Monmouth Laboratories? What is your thought?
Mr. Zuckerman. I wouldn't doubt that he was trying to,
sure, but I know damned well he did not ask me for anything,
and I don't know what went on in his mind. Maybe he was afraid
I would turn him in and maybe considered me poor material. I
don't know what the score is, and a spy doesn't go around
telling everybody he is a spy, and he doesn't only associate
with people like that.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever apply for a pass to remove any
classified material from Watson Laboratory?
Mr. Zuckerman. I can't remember now. I may have taken some
classified material up to a conference we had in Boston, but I
can't remember whether I mailed it up there or whether I
carried it with me.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever apply for a pass to take any
classified material home?
Mr. Zuckerman. Oh, no, I never took any classified material
home.
Mr. Cohn. You never took out any from Watson Laboratory?
Mr. Zuckerman. I never took any home.
Mr. Cohn. You never applied for a pass to take any
classified material home?
Mr. Zuckerman. I can't remember ever applying for a pass to
take any classified material home.
The Chairman. Now, just a moment. Did you ever take any
classified material out of the laboratories to your home?
Mr. Zuckerman. I can't remember ever taking any now.
The Chairman. Was it your testimony that you did not?
Mr. Zuckerman. Pardon me?
The Chairman. Is it your testimony that you did not?
Mr. Zuckerman. So far as I can remember, I did not. I never
took anything home.
Mr. Cohn. You never took any material home?
Mr. Zuckerman. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever take any material home from the
laboratory?
Mr. Zuckerman. I took material home, sure. I took books out
of the library, and I took plenty of unclassified stuff.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever take any papers you were working
with home?
Mr. Zuckerman. I never did any homework.
Mr. Cohn. You never did any; is that right?
Mr. Zuckerman. No. When I got out of there, my work ceased.
Mr. Cohn. There wasn't one occasion all of the time you
were there that you ever did any homework?
Mr. Zuckerman. Except some books that I had from the
library, that is all. No, I didn't work at home.
The Chairman. Did you associate with Coleman?
Mr. Zuckerman. Well, very little in New Jersey, and I saw
him on several occasions, but our association was not very
strong.
Mr. Cohn. Did Coleman know Sobell?
Mr. Zuckerman. Of course he must have known Sobell. He was
in the same class.
The Chairman. I am not sure if I understood your testimony
before. Did Coleman live in this house with you? He did not
live in this house where the other people were?
Mr. Zuckerman. No. He was in Michigan when I was in
Washington.
The Chairman. Did he ever discuss with you the fact that
his apartment had been raided and they picked up some forty-
three secret documents?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, he never discussed it with me, but
everybody knew about it, and everybody around the lab knew
about it.
The Chairman. Did you think Coleman was a Communist then?
Mr. Zuckerman. No. I don't think he was ever a Communist.
The Chairman. Why do you think he was stealing the secret
documents from the lab?
Mr. Zuckerman. I think he was just an eager beaver that was
just so eager about his work that he just wanted to work
twenty-four hours a day.
The Chairman. You think Coleman is a good, high-class
fellow?
Mr. Zuckerman. I certainly do.
The Chairman. Do you think he was high-class as you thought
Sobell was when you were inviting him to your home?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, they are not the same. Sobell is in a
different field from Coleman. They play in different ballparks.
The Chairman. You thought Sobell was a high-class fellow,
and you invited him to your home.
Mr. Zuckerman. A high-class engineer.
The Chairman. A high-class fellow?
Mr. Zuckerman. He was a high-class engineer.
The Chairman. Now you distinguish. Was he a high-class
gentleman?
Mr. Zuckerman. I didn't have too much respect for Sobell as
a man, but as an engineer I had an awful lot of respect for
him.
Mr. Rainville. You were willing to bring him into your home
and with your children?
Mr. Zuckerman. I do not have to be in love with everybody
that I associate with.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think it was a proper thing to have a man
you believed to be a Communist----
Mr. Zuckerman. I didn't believe him to be a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. It was 1948, or 1949, or one of those periods,
when you thought he wasn't a Communist?
Mr. Zuckerman. I thought as far as I was concerned, he was
working for Reeves on classified material, and he had been
cleared by the FBI.
Mr. Cohn. He was cleared by the FBI?
Mr. Zuckerman. He must have been if he was working for
Reeves on classified material, and the FBI has much more
resources than I do, and that very fact at that time was enough
to clear anybody.
The Chairman. Can I interrupt you now just for one final
question. There is a period of time when you were in school you
thought he was a Communist, and then there was a period when
you thought he was not, and then there was a period of time
when you thought he was a Communist.
Mr. Zuckerman. Now, wait a minute.
The Chairman. When you start to tell us--just a moment, we
will give you a chance to clear it up, and I want to hear it.
This is a fantastic picture.
All right, first you thought he was a Communist, and that
was over how many years?
Mr. Zuckerman. About two years.
The Chairman. Then you thought he was not a Communist over
how many years?
Mr. Zuckerman. From there on out.
The Chairman. From there on out?
Mr. Zuckerman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. When did you next think he might be a
Communist?
Mr. Zuckerman. I never thought about it. I saw it in the
newspaper.
The Chairman. I see. Did you not tell us a minute ago that
when he was living with you in Washington, you thought he was a
Communist then?
Mr. Zuckerman. I didn't think he was a Communist then, no,
and I didn't think he was a Communist when he was living in
Washington.
The Chairman. You did not?
Mr. Zuckerman. If I said it, I was in error.
Mr. Jones. Did Sobell visit you when you were at the
University of Michigan?
Mr. Zuckerman. No.
Mr. Jones. Did he ever write to you?
Mr. Zuckerman. No.
Mr. Jones. Did he ever write to you while you were in
Washington and he was away?
Mr. Zuckerman. I never received any.
Mr. Jones. The only contact that you had was four times in
eight years?
Mr. Zuckerman. I never wrote to Sobell.
Mr. Jones. Outside of that, there was no association
whatsoever?
Mr. Zuckerman. None whatsoever.
Mr. Cohn. I want to ask you this: During the year and a
half you have been with this company, Video Products, is this
government contract on which they are working the only one?
Mr. Zuckerman. They had another contract when I first came
down.
Mr. Cohn. Did that involve any classified material?
Mr. Zuckerman. No, it was a push-button tuner, and I worked
on that.
Mr. Cohn. You may step down. We will let you know if we
want you.
The Chairman. We will want you back, and I am going to have
counsel hand you a subpoena. We will tell you when we want you
back.
Mr. Zuckerman. Is that a subpoena?
The Chairman. We will have counsel hand you a subpoena so
that you will know that you are under subpoena, and we will
tell you when we want you back. You will consider yourself
under subpoena until we call you.
I think that you should know that your testimony is in
great conflict with other sworn testimony here, and if you want
to examine your testimony and make any corrections, we will
allow you to do that.
The Chairman. Mr. Bookbinder, would you stand and be sworn?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Bookbinder. I do.
TESTIMONY OF BENJAMIN BOOKBINDER
Mr. Cohn. Are you Mr. Bookbinder?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, I am.
Mr. Cohn. Benjamin Bookbinder?
Mr. Bookbinder. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Bookbinder, where are you employed now?
Mr. Bookbinder. I am employed at the Signal Corps
Engineering Laboratories at Belmar, New Jersey, and the Evans
Signal Laboratory of Signal Corps Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. How long have you been employed at Evans?
Mr. Bookbinder. I have been there since the early part of
1951.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have a security clearance?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, I do.
Mr. Cohn. Up to what?
Mr. Bookbinder. Secret.
Mr. Cohn. Through Secret?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Are you doing any work on anything connected with
radar?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Classified work?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When did you say you went with Evans?
Mr. Bookbinder. I went to Evans early in January of 1951.
Mr. Cohn. And before that where did you work?
Mr. Bookbinder. At the Watson Laboratories, air force
installation.
Mr. Cohn. You were doing classified work there, too?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. The same type of work?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Generally the same?
Mr. Bookbinder. Generally, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Radar, and so on?
Mr. Bookbinder. Associated with that sort of work.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you at Watson?
Mr. Bookbinder. Approximately six years.
Mr. Cohn. Six years?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you before you went to Watson?
Mr. Bookbinder. I was at the Newark Signal Corps Inspection
Agency.
Mr. Cohn. How long were you there?
Mr. Bookbinder. About three years.
Mr. Cohn. That takes us back to 1941.
Mr. Bookbinder. It brings us back to 1942; and prior to
that I was back at Fort Monmouth, or what was then called the
Signal Corps Radar Laboratories, and I was there for a short
time. If we start back going the other way, I started out
there, and then I was transferred to the inspection agency for
the convenience of the government. They split the organization
and sent a group over.
Mr. Cohn. What college did you attend?
Mr. Bookbinder. New York University.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Morton Sobell?
Mr. Bookbinder. I knew him as a child.
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Bookbinder. I knew him as a child.
Mr. Cohn. As a child?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Which was the child?
Mr. Bookbinder. Both of us.
Mr. Cohn. Both of you were children?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When did you last see Mr. Sobell?
Mr. Bookbinder. I saw him briefly in 1949.
Mr. Cohn. How old were you then?
Mr. Bookbinder. I wasn't a child then, and I didn't know
him then, and we crossed paths.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you cross paths?
Mr. Bookbinder. At Watson Laboratories. He came there on
business.
Mr. Cohn. Just run into him in the lab?
Mr. Bookbinder. In the cafeteria.
Mr. Cohn. There was a conversation with him?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And you exchanged greetings?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How long would you say you talked to him on that
occasion?
Mr. Bookbinder. During the period of time of our lunch.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see him on any other occasion? Let us
start off with this childhood acquaintance. Did you live in the
same neighborhood?
Mr. Bookbinder. We were neighbors in the same apartment
house.
Mr. Cohn. Where was that?
Mr. Bookbinder. This was in the Bronx, on Honeywell Avenue
in the Bronx.
Mr. Cohn. How old were you and how old was he?
Mr. Bookbinder. Roughly eleven or twelve years old.
Mr. Cohn. How long a period of time did that childhood
fraternizing take place?
Mr. Bookbinder. It was on the order of two or possibly
three years, or something in that order, and I don't remember.
Mr. Cohn. Did you lose all contact with him until this
time?
Mr. Bookbinder. Completely.
Mr. Cohn. And you never saw him from the time you and
Sobell were about the same age?
Mr. Bookbinder. I believe so, and I am not sure of this. I
believe, if I recall, we never went to the same grade classes,
and I think he was a little younger than I was.
Mr. Cohn. And then you lost contact completely until that
chance meeting in the cafeteria out at Watson, is that right?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, there was another chance meeting prior
to that, about six years prior to that.
Mr. Cohn. Where was that?
Mr. Bookbinder. This was in Schenectady, and he was working
for the General Electric Company and I was stationed there as
part of my duties with the inspection agency. I was stationed
there for about a period of seven months, and during that
period that was the first time I ran into him from the time of
our childhood, and we met in the street accidentally, and I
never saw him more than that one time.
Mr. Cohn. Just talked to him a few minutes and that was
that?
Mr. Bookbinder. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. And the next time you saw him was in 1948?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, and then 1949.
Mr. Cohn. You saw him again in 1949, is that right?
Mr. Bookbinder. Two chance meetings at Watson Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. At the cafeteria?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How long would you say you talked to him?
Mr. Bookbinder. I talked with him, well as I say, the
period of our lunch period.
Mr. Cohn. On both occasions?
Mr. Bookbinder. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. That was all?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see him on any other occasion?
Mr. Bookbinder. Well, to fill in the story completely,
sir----
Mr. Cohn. I think we should do that.
Mr. Bookbinder. And I intend to do this completely. On
those two occasions when he visited Watson Laboratories, as a
result of our lunchtime conversations, he visited my home for
about an hour on each occasion, for a specific purpose. In the
first case it was since we had gotten into a discussion about
high fidelity audio equipment, and I had an interest in this
myself, and we had some of this equipment at home. He expressed
a strong desire to hear this equipment, and there was supposed
to be something exceptional, and I extended an invitation to
him to drop over after work to listen to the equipment. That
was the sum total of his visit at that time.
On the next occasion, which was about a year later----
The Chairman. In 1950?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, this is 1949.
The Chairman. The first time was 1948?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes. And on the next occasion, in 1949,
again there was a chance meeting at the cafeteria, and he had
some Kodachrome slides in his pocket which he seemed to be
quite proud of, and I had an interest in photography, and he
was showing me these slides of pictures he had taken on a
recent vacation. And he was beaming with fatherly pride over
these pictures, and I couldn't see them very well, and we
decided we didn't have very much time to peruse those pictures
at the time, so again I suggested that he might drop over to
the house so I could put them in my projector and take a better
look at them. And this was again the sum total of the visit.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have any discussion with him about
anything other than that?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know he was a Communist?
Mr. Bookbinder. Absolutely not, and had I known this, I am
sure that course would have been quite different.
The Chairman. The last time you saw him was in 1949?
Mr. Bookbinder. That is right.
The Chairman. And your testimony is you have only seen him
on three occasions since you saw him when he was about eleven
years old, and on those occasions it was twice in the cafeteria
and once for an hour at your home?
Mr. Bookbinder. I coupled these occasions together. Once in
Schenectady, and twice in the cafeteria at Watson, which were
coupled with a visit to my home.
The Chairman. Both times you met him in the cafeteria, you
had lunch with him, and later in the evening he would come over
to your home?
Mr. Bookbinder. Not later in the evening, but immediately
after work, for an hour or so.
The Chairman. That would be later in the evening.
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You had lunch with him in the cafeteria?
Mr. Bookbinder. Well, we crossed each other in the
cafeteria.
The Chairman. You had lunch in the cafeteria?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Was that it?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And then you had dinner at your home?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. When would he come to your home? After you
got through work?
Mr. Bookbinder. Right after work.
The Chairman. That would be the evening?
Mr. Bookbinder. Well, the early evening, late afternoon; we
quit about five o'clock.
The Chairman. Did he ever stay for dinner?
Mr. Bookbinder. I don't recall that, sir.
The Chairman. Do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, sir, I do.
The Chairman. Did you consider Coleman to be a member of
the Communist party?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you consider Sobell to be a member of the
Communist party?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir, I had no basis for knowing
anything like that.
The Chairman. When did you first think Sobell was a member
of the Communist party?
Mr. Bookbinder. When I read about it in the newspapers.
The Chairman. You now know he was an espionage agent at the
time he visited in your home?
Mr. Bookbinder. That is right, sir.
The Chairman. Being an espionage agent, and knowing that
you were handling secret material, did he, to your knowledge,
attempt directly or indirectly to get any of the information
from those secret documents?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir, our discussions were completely of
other matters.
The Chairman. Did he ever talk about communism?
Mr. Bookbinder. With him, sir?
The Chairman. Did he ever talk about communism?
Mr. Bookbinder. If he had, sir, that would have been a
tipoff to me.
The Chairman. He did not?
Mr. Bookbinder. No.
The Chairman. At the time he was coming down to the Watson
Laboratories, what do you think he was there for?
Mr. Bookbinder. He was there on business with the
laboratories; that is what he told me.
The Chairman. What business?
Mr. Bookbinder. Specifically, I wasn't concerned with the
work that he came down for, but he told me that he was working
for Reeves Instrument Company, and he was there on some work
related to the contract that company had with Watson
Laboratories.
The Chairman. Were you ever solicited to join the Communist
party or the Young Communist League?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. No one ever asked you to join?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. Where did you go to school?
Mr. Bookbinder. New York University.
The Chairman. NYU?
Mr. Bookbinder. That is right.
The Chairman. Did your wife ever belong to the Communist
party?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any Communist meetings?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever remove any secret or
confidential or restricted material from the laboratory?
Mr. Bookbinder. When authorized, on going on a trip, when I
had to attend a meeting, say, for a specific purpose, and
specifically authorized.
The Chairman. Did you ever take any home to your apartment?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you say you had a car pool with Coleman?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. Were you in a car pool with Coleman?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever share a car with Coleman?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever ride to work with him?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir, not that I recall.
The Chairman. Did you ever ride to work with anyone who
also went to work with Coleman?
Mr. Bookbinder. I have a practice of traveling to and from
work by myself.
The Chairman. Did you ever have a car pool with anyone?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever ride with Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Bookbinder. I don't know the gentleman, and I never
did.
The Chairman. Or Sobell?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. In other words, you know what I mean by car
pool?
Mr. Bookbinder. Sharing rides, yes, sir.
The Chairman. And you never were in one of those car pools?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never lived with Coleman?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never lived with Zuckerman?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes, I did for a short while, sir.
The Chairman. Where did you live with Zuckerman?
Mr. Bookbinder. When I first came to Watson Laboratories,
both he and I--he came to work about the same time at Watson
Laboratories, and for a brief time we shared an apartment
together, in Long Branch, New Jersey.
The Chairman. In what year was that?
Mr. Bookbinder. That was, I believe, the latter part of
1945.
The Chairman. Did anyone else have any apartment with you?
Mr. Bookbinder. Yes. Daniel Waxler.
The Chairman. Did he work for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Bookbinder. Well, this I can't answer. At that time he
worked for the air force, sir, and he worked for the air force
and I did.
The Chairman. Did you think that Zuckerman was a Communist
then, or have you ever since then had any reason to think he
was a Communist?
Mr. Bookbinder. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know that Sobell used to live with
Zuckerman, also?
Mr. Bookbinder. I found this out later on, sir.
The Chairman. How did you find that out?
Mr. Bookbinder. Well, when Zuckerman was suspended and he
was presented with charges of association, he acquainted me
with the background of his story. I wasn't familiar with the
details of this before, except possibly a passing comment of
having lived with some boys in Washington before, but I don't
recall that directly.
The Chairman. Mr. Bookbinder, I hope you understand that
the mere fact you are called here is no indication that the
committee feels that you are guilty of any misconduct of any
kind. We have had very serious charges of espionage, and
stealing of secret documents from the laboratory, and whenever
the name of anyone comes up, we just automatically call him in
and ask him some questions. The fact that the examination may
appear to be a little rough to you does not mean that we think
that you are guilty of anything, and our function is not to
clear or to convict, but merely to try to get the whole
picture.
Now, the members of the press will not be told that you
were here, and the only way they will know that is if you tell
them. If, when you leave here, you find some member of the
press out in the hallway, I assume they will recognize you, and
if they ask you what your name is, it is completely up to you
to tell them if you care to, or you can tell them ``yes'' or
``no.''
Mr. Bookbinder. Thank you, sir.
The Chairman. I do not think we will want you any further.
If we do, we will let you know.
Mr. Bookbinder. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 9:30 p.m., the hearing was recessed until
10:00 a.m., Friday, October 16, 1953.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--During a recess of this executive session,
Senator McCarthy informed the press that a witness had broken
down and cried after ``some rather vigorous cross-examination
by Roy Cohn.'' The senator added, ``I have just received word
that the witness admits that he was lying the first time and
now wants to tell the truth.'' Describing this the ``most
important development'' in his Fort Monmouth investigation, he
asked reporters--who had seen the ashen-faced witness led from
the closed hearing--not to identify him. Despite this appeal,
several newspapers named Carl Greenblum as the witness.
In November, after someone painted a hammer and sickle on
his house, Greenblum offered his own version of events to the
press, saying ``It's true that I broke down and they took me to
another room and brought in a doctor and nurse,'' but
explaining that the death of his mother two days earlier had
left him emotionally unprepared to be questioned. ``A few
minutes later I sent word that I wanted to go back and tell my
story from the beginning. That may have been interpreted to
mean that I had been lying, previously, but that certainly was
not the case.'' Fired from his job at Fort Monmouth, Greenblum
sued the government. In 1958 a federal district court ordered
him reinstated on the grounds that the army had failed to give
adequate reason for his dismissal.
Maj. Gen. Kirke B. Lawton (1894-1979), Maj. Gen. George I.
Back, Maj. Jenista, Col. Ferry, John Pernice, Karl Gerhard
(1915-1989), Carl Greenblum (1916-1997) and Markus Epstein
(1913-1987) did not testify in public.]
----------
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met at 10:30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in
room 29 of the Federal Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
(chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Francis Carr,
staff director; G. David Schine, chief consultant; Daniel G.
Buckley, assistant counsel; Harold Rainville, administrative
assistant to Senator Dirksen; and Robert Jones, assistant to
Senator Potter.
Present also: John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
army.
The Chairman. We have a practice of swearing all witnesses.
I will ask you to stand.
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Gen. Lawton. I do.
Gen. Back. I do.
Maj. Jenista. I do.
Col. Ferry. I do.
The Chairman. At times I may direct a question to you,
General, and you may feel that one of the young men you brought
with you may be more competent to answer. And you likewise,
General Lawton. Feel free to make this as informal as you want
to.
General, I was hurriedly checking through this document.
TESTIMONY OF MAJOR GENERAL KIRKE B. LAWTON,
COMMANDANT, FORT MONMOUTH, NEW JERSEY; MAJOR
GENERAL GEORGE I. BACK, CHIEF SIGNAL OFFICER;
MAJOR JENISTA, SECURITY OFFICER, OFFICE OF CHIEF
SIGNAL OFFICER; COLONEL FERRY; JOHN PERNICE, CHIEF
LEGAL DIVISION, FORT MONMOUTH; AND KARL GERHARD,
CHIEF, SPECIAL PROJECTS ANALYSIS BRANCH,
FORT MONMOUTH
Gen. Lawton. If you call it ``1004,'' we all know what it
is.
The Chairman. 1004. And I find an evaluation made some four
months after the date of the original document. I understand
there was an evaluation that came with the original document. I
wonder if we have that here with us.
Gen. Back. Senator, there was no evaluation that came with
the original document. The evaluation was made by my own
engineers, that is, in the office of the chief signal officer.
The Chairman. Do you have that evaluation with you?
Gen. Back. I have just notes on the evaluation here. I
could explain what the evaluation is.
The Chairman. I would like very much to have the
evaluation. There was a written evaluation attached to this
document originally, other than the one of November 8th. The
original evaluation was entered into the record yesterday, and
I think that should not have been in the record, incidentally,
because I believe that is still classified or secret.
Gen. Lawton. That is paragraph nine.
Gen. Back. Paragraph nine? Well, that is in the document.
We were just going over this document, Mr. Cohn and we find
there is apparently missing the evaluation which we entered
into the record the other day.
Gen. Lawton. Would that have been paragraph nine of that
document there? I wasn't here. I don't know.
The Chairman. I will read it to you. This is from the
evaluation, one phase of it:
The instant document indicates that the defectee had seen
an entire film based on Oak Ridge, Tennessee, the atomic energy
location, while he was with PIRNA in the Russian Zone. The
information he supplied concerning the film clearly indicates
that he actually had seen it. It contained some technical data
as well as some physical.
That is in complete contradiction to the evaluation made by
Charles Walton. I just wondered where your original of this is.
I would like to get that entire evaluation if we could.
Gen. Back. I can't identify that evaluation.
The Chairman. When we can get it over there, some of you
should be able to find it.
Gen. Back. Was this, may I ask, an air force evaluation?
The Chairman. This is apparently an air force evaluation.
It is an evaluation that went through your department, General.
Gen. Back. It went through the Signal Corps?
The Chairman. Yes; and was attached to this document. Why
would that disappear?
General Lawton. May I explain this? The air force and the
navy, in these types of intelligence reports, send them around
to our Signal Corps Intelligence Agency. They look them over.
They may find nothing. But in this case, as I understand it,
they did find this paragraph nine. I am now talking about 1004.
And the men who looked it over said ``I think this is something
we should know about,'' and he showed it to Colonel Mills.
The Chairman. This is not an evaluation.
Gen. Lawton. No, that is just a statement by this man,
which you read me the other night.
The Chairman. Do any of you know whether there was any
evaluation of this document in writing?
Gen. Back. I have no knowledge of that evaluation.
The Chairman. We have just got to have that. This is not
much value if there has been removed from this the evaluation.
Who can find out about that? Who removed it?
I imagine, General, you would like to know if someone
removed this.
Gen. Back. Yes, sir, I certainly would. I have never seen
that evaluation, to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Have you?
Maj. Jenista. I have not, not in those words.
The Chairman. Did you see any kind of an evaluation? Was
there no evaluation made?
Gen. Back. There was an evaluation made by my own office.
The Chairman. We would like to see that, General.
Gen. Back. I can give it to you here.
The Chairman. There is no reason, General, why we should
not have the thing verbatim. This thing is so important that we
have got to put our cards completely on the table, so that you
will know what the committee is doing, and I think likewise we
have got to have all the information from you.
This is an evaluation of 4 December 1952?
Gen. Back. That is correct, sir.
The Chairman. Was there no evaluation before that time?
Gen. Back. That is the only evaluation of my office that I
know of, and that constitutes the action when the report was
sent to the assistant chief of staff, G-2.
The Chairman. I note here in 4 December '53, you request
that an investigation be conducted. Was that investigation
conducted?
Gen. Back. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Who conducted it?
Gen. Back. We requested G-2 to conduct the investigation,
and G-2 in turn requested the FBI to make an investigation.
The Chairman. And have you received a report yet on that
investigation?
Gen. Back. Yes, sir, we received a report from G-2. The
report indicated that an investigation had been conducted, that
it was turned over to the FBI, that the FBI discontinued the
investigation following receipt of a report in March of 1953,
that the air force had found that the officer who made the
original interrogation, or at least that agency in Europe, had
recommended that no further action be taken, for the reason
that the original defector, who had testified on the matter,
was resorting to fabrication, largely fabrication if not
entirely fabrication, and it was recommended that no further
action be taken.
The Chairman. In other words, after they received this
report which you have here, they discontinued the
investigation?
Gen. Back. That was the report. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. The FBI would not discontinue, of its own
accord, after they had been asked to start an investigation.
Who ordered them to discontinue? If I know the workings of the
FBI, they would not discontinue an investigation of this
importance after an order had been received to make such an
investigation from the government. The question is: Who called
it off?
Gen. Back. It is my understanding that the FBI discontinued
the investigation on receipt of the recommendation of the air
force. To be more specific, it was discontinued by the FBI on a
recommendation of the air force, which advised that the
defector----
The Chairman. Let us get the record straight. The FBI did
not discontinue. The FBI discontinued when they were asked to
discontinue by the air force.
Gen. Back. That is right.
The Chairman. Let us have the record straight. It was not
the decision of the FBI.
General, can you explain how this evaluation has
disappeared from your office and no one knows about it?
The instant document indicates that the defectee had seen
an entire film based on Oak Ridge, Tennessee, the Atomic Energy
location, while he was with PIRNA in the Russian Zone. The
information he supplied concerning the film clearly indicates
that he actually had seen it. It contained some technical data
as well as some physical.
After having gone through this and decided that he supplied
the information, so that he had clearly seen it, why would they
call off the investigation? That is number one. And number two,
who has removed this from your file?
Gen. Back. I can't answer that question, but I certainly
will find out, if it has been removed from the file.
The Chairman. Do you think that after you have this type of
evaluation by an apparently responsible agency, an
investigation should be called off? Do you not think this is of
tremendous importance?
Gen. Back. I certainly do, and we were very much concerned
about it.
The Chairman. Regardless of what some officer over in
Germany says.
Gen. Back. Yes, sir. We were very much concerned about it.
The Chairman. Do you know the name of the officer who
interrogated this man and recommended that it be called off?
Gen. Back. Well, all I know is that the report, the
original report, was signed by, I believe, Captain Ryan. You
are looking at it there.
The Chairman. George Ryan?
Gen. Back. Correct.
The Chairman. Do you know where he is located now?
Gen. Back. No, sir, I do not.
The Chairman. Does anyone know?
Gen. Lawton. He would be an air force man, because this is
an air force report.
The Chairman. I hate to impose on you gentlemen constantly
to come down here. You have got very important work to do. But
with this lack of knowledge, I am just going to have to have
you come back. I want this entire file. I want to know where
the men are who interviewed the people. Certainly you can
assign that, General, to one of your subordinates. Otherwise,
for you to come over here and have us ask you question after
question and to have you say you do not know--I am not trying
to lecture you, but you have had knowledge of the fact that we
consider this of great importance, for days now, and you knew
you were coming over here to answer questions about it. I find
now that first you hand me part of the file, and your aide back
there has the rest of it in his grip. Unless I ask for it, I do
not get it. We are trying to keep you fully informed. We have
the legal counsel to the army here. We tell him everything that
goes on. We just cannot work with you gentlemen unless you do
the same. I cannot have some gentleman behind you with part of
the file, not giving it to us.
Do you have any more of this file back there?
Gen. Back. No, sir.
The Chairman. This is all that any of you have? Is that
correct?
Let me ask you: I am going to start from one end and go to
the other. Are any of you aware of any other documents? I wish
the two gentlemen back there would stand up and be sworn also.
In this matter now in hearing before this committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Pernice. I do.
Mr. Gerhard. I do.
The Chairman. The first gentleman is Major Jenista, on the
extreme left, the security officer, and then General Back, the
chief of the Signal Corps. Is that right?
Gen. Back. Chief signal officer. I might say Major Jenista
is the security officer, office of the chief signal officer.
The Chairman. And General Lawton, the commanding officer,
Fort Monmouth.
Gen. Back. That is correct.
The Chairman. And Colonel Ferry, who was formerly on the
board that examined certain of these papers.
Col. Ferry. That is correct.
The Chairman. And the gentleman behind you?
Gen. Back. John Pernice P-e-r-n-i-c-e. He is head of the
legal division, office of the chief signal officer.
The Chairman. And your title is what?
Mr. Pernice. Chief of legal division, Office of the Chief
Signal Officer.
The Chairman. And your name and title?
Mr. Gerhard. Gerhard, G-e-r-h-a-r-d.
The Chairman. Your first name?
Mr. Gerhard. Karl, K-a-r-l.
The Chairman. And you said your title was what?
Mr. Gerhard. Chief of the Special Projects Analysis Branch.
The Chairman. You have had this document in your safe for
some time, Mr. Gerhard?
Mr. Gerhard. I had it in my safe, in a safe which I shared
with other people, for some time.
The Chairman. I wonder if you would take a look at the
document which the general hands me and see if that is the only
thing that you had in your safe. Just come around here and take
a look at it. I am particularly interested in knowing whether
there was an evaluation attached to it.
Mr. Cohn. How about the reply that went from Monmouth back
to G-2, General, after the investigation was conducted?
Gen. Lawton. I don't think it went back. We got the letter
from General Back at Fort Monmouth on the 11th of December of
'52.
Mr. Cohn. This letter dated the 4th of December, '52,
right?
Gen. Back. No, I think that letter is addressed to G-2,
isn't it?
Gen. Lawton. That left the chief's office on the 8th of
December. I got it on the 11th and they gave us this paragraph
nine.
Mr. Cohn. This is entitled ``Possible Espionage
Activities.''
Maj. Jenista. Is that the record of Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Cohn. That is to the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2,
from the office of the Chief Signal Officer.
Maj. Jenista. That is right.
Gen. Lawton. I didn't get that, then.
Mr. Cohn. Anyway, on December 11th, you received a part of
this bearing on Evans Signal Laboratory and were asked to
conduct an investigation to determine whether or not any of the
numbers or information jibed with stuff you had there. And as
it says in this document, to check out the statement that this
man made that it would be possible to obtain anything they
wanted from Evans Signal Laboratory. Now, you caused an
investigation to be made. Right?
Gen. Lawton. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. There was a report drawn up with regard to that
investigation?
Gen. Lawton. Either we made the report, or it is identical
with the one that the chief signal officer sent to G-2. That is
what I saw in my office when I looked it over. But I can tell
you in substance what we did.
The Chairman. Where is that report?
Gen. Lawton. In Monmouth. It is in substance----
The Chairman. I do not want the substance. General, we told
you yesterday to bring this stuff back.
Gen. Lawton. I don't think I have got a report.
Maj. Jenista. Let me clarify this. We gave you notice by
endorsement, which I believe you have, telling you what we are
doing. ``We are bringing this matter to your attention.'' From
there you took it over. The other investigative agencies had
the information from the chief's office. And you never
submitted a report, as such, to us, because we subsequently to
that had sent you another endorsement, which I believe you have
there, Senator, acquainting him with the situation as we got
it.
Mr. Cohn. You mean attached to this? Here is the point: On
this question of evaluation, whether some of it was fabricated,
how reliable this man was, and all of that, the thing which you
rely on for discontinuing an investigation really says no more
about the fabrication angle than the original document does,
because as you will note in the course of the original
document, there are a couple of sentences in there saying that
this man in order to build up his importance and all that has
undoubtedly fabricated a good part of this, and so on and so
forth. So the subsequent I don't think changes the picture. It
just does not add anything new. I am wondering if something
wasn't done to check out some of this information. In other
words, this man makes very specific reference to certain types
of equipment and certain objects up at Evans Signal Laboratory.
Do any of those objects exist? We don't expect complete
accuracy, but is there any substance to any of these things he
mentions?
Gen. Back. Your question is as to whether or not any of the
equipment he described there is Signal Corps equipment or army
equipment?
Mr. Cohn. That is right.
Gen. Back. That is what I had intended to start with. As
indicated in the memorandum to G-2, when this document was
received in the Signal Corps Intelligence Agency, it was quite
apparent from paragraph nine that it was a very serious matter,
if the statement were true. Immediately that paper was sent to
my own office. But because of the very general description of
the equipment, it took us some time to try to connect the
statements made here with any possible signal corps equipment,
or for that matter air force or navy equipment.
Mr. Cohn. Now, was any connection found?
Gen. Back. No, sir. The only thing we could say is: well,
it might have been. Because the description of the equipment
itself is at variance with our own equipment.
Mr. Cohn. How seriously at variance? This man is not a
scientist, in other words. This man is a mechanic, a
technician. He comes in, and it is as though I went into a
laboratory of some kind. I might be able to come out and give a
general description of some of the things I saw, but I
certainly wouldn't be able to give anything that is completely
accurate from a scientific standpoint. On the other hand, I am
just wondering whether or not the evaluation was just made out
of whole cloth, and whether you have any equipment similar to
this in any way? In other words, could he have been talking
about anything that did exist?
Gen. Back. It is possible that he could have.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't they go down this item by item? I would
like to know what the result was, item by item.
Gen. Back. I think that is contained in that statement you
have there.
Mr. Cohn. I don't think the result of your investigation is
contained here. In other words, he says something about a radar
in the 3 cm band adaptable to airborne, shipborne, and ground
usage, utilizing a scope of some kind mentioned here, having a
power output of 3.51 cw may be the SCR 537, which may be
correct as to frequency and so on. This is unclassified since
1945. That might not mean a darn thing. They might have had
this thing back in '42 or '43. You see the situation. You had
Rosenberg then working out of this laboratory at Monmouth.
These people are in one business, and that is espionage. We
have had testimony from one of the members of that ring that
one of their primary objects was radar, and very specifically
that Morton Sobell was very much concerned with radar up at the
Signal Corps and Signal Corps installations, people doing
contract work with the Signal Corps, and that that was one of
the principal objects of this espionage ring, which we know
operated successfully and transmitted considerable material. So
there is just no doubt that they would transmit it. And the
fact that some of this was unclassified in '46 or '45 as to
these particular items does not mean a darn thing. Because
Rosenberg was out there in '42 and '43, and Vivian Glassman was
there in '42 and '43, and so was Joel Bauer. That is probably
when they took this. I do not know if people are still out
there.
It certainly does appear from this that certain things do
check out, although not in enough detail to show that the man
probably knew generally what he was talking about, although he
was off on certain things.
The Chairman. Let us take this paragraph 9(s). It speaks of
a radar in the Som band for Airborne operation as an aiming
device, a power device, and power output of .05 to 1.5 kw,
saying that it ``may be any of the following: DPW-1, which is a
Signal Corps set classified confidential since December 1947.''
Now, I gather from this that he described something which
Robert Miller, Colonel of the Signal Corps, says might be a
Signal Corps set. It is classified. Is that correct?
Gen. Back. That is correct.
The Chairman. So that you have established that this
defectee did describe accurately a Signal Corps set classified
``confidential.'' The question is: Is there anything to
discredit that, that you know of?
Gen. Back. Senator, I don't think that we felt at any time
that he described the confidential set accurately. I think we
said that it may have been.
The Chairman. All right. You say it may have been this
confidential set. What happened since then to convince you that
it was not? Do you have any report showing it was not this set?
Gen. Back. No, sir, we have no report.
The Chairman. Then can you tell me why the investigation
was discontinued? Can any of you tell me why the investigation
was discontinued?
Major Jenista. Well, they were investigating the facts that
this defectee or defector had given them. They had no other
information except what he disclosed. And if he disclosed that,
we go on those facts and try to find out if such a set does
exist, if it is a Signal Corps set.
The Chairman. All right. Let us stop there.
We find that this defectee, who had never been in the
United States, never should have had any access to something
out at Fort Monmouth labeled ``confidential,'' is over in the
eastern area of Germany. We find that he, without any aid from
any of your people here that you knew of, described accurately
a Signal Corps set which was classified confidential. Is there
any way that you can account for that, unless he got that
information from your Signal Corps laboratory?
Maj. Jenista. Well, there were planes brought down in
Russia. There were probably other means of that information
getting out, maybe by hearsay.
Mr. Cohn. There may be other ways the information might
have gotten to the Russians, but there is no other way this man
could have known about it. I mean, that is a method, not a
result.
The Chairman. Here is something manufactured in 1947,
Major. Now, none of our planes were shot down carrying that
equipment after 1947. It was manufactured, classified
confidential. And you find that a man over in East Berlin
describes it in detail. Just forgetting all of the other items,
the film at Oak Ridge, can any of you tell me why you
discontinued investigating this unless you had some report
subsequently to indicate a satisfactory explanation?
Maj. Jenista. We didn't discontinue it, Senator. The
investigation was discontinued according to information which
we related to you. As far as the subsequent things that went
on, I am sure they went on in Fort Monmouth constantly, as to
what possibilities there were to run this thing down. It
doesn't cease just because someone else stops the
investigation.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this. The general may be able
to answer it.
Quoting from paragraph three:
It is requested that an investigation be conducted to
confirm or disprove the statements in reference to Evans Signal
Laboratory, that any information desired from there could be
obtained, and determine how Evans Signal Corps Laboratories
blueprints may have gotten to Germany.
Number four, and I call your attention to this:
It is further requested that this office be kept informed
of the program of this investigation.
My question now is: Were reports ever submitted
periodically in accord with this order?
Maj. Jenista. I can say this went to the assistant chief of
staff, G-2, and I believe the interim was something like three
to four months, and there were no periodic reports.
The Chairman. Were any reports submitted?
Maj. Jenista. Not to my knowledge, no; no periodic reports
The Chairman. In other words, there were no investigative
reports submitted?
Maj. Jenista. To my knowledge, no, not periodic reports.
The Chairman. In March or April, the FBI was called off by
the air force. Now, do you know whether or not in this four-
month period the FBI, G-2, anyone, submitted any report of
their investigation?
Maj. Jenista. It didn't come to our office. If there was,
it may have been to the assistant chief of staff, G-2.
The Chairman. Where did this originate?
Maj. Jenista. This is our paper, from our office.
Gen. Back. My office.
The Chairman. So that while you requested this
investigation, you got no report at all as to the result of the
investigation?
Gen. Back. No, sir, the only report I received was the
report in which they said----
The Chairman [continuing]. That the air force called it
off.
Gen. Back. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How could the air force call off an
investigation that you ordered started? Did they supersede you?
How could they call this off? You ordered the investigation.
Maj. Jenista. We asked for it.
The Chairman. When you ask for it, it is the same as an
order, is it not? I understand when a general asks his
subordinates, it is the same as an order. Isn't it?
Will you tell me how they could call this off on you?
Gen. Back. As a matter of fact, I think we accepted the
fact that when the report came back, after G-2 had gotten into
this, after the FBI had gotten into it--the report came back
from the original source to disregard the former report; that
it was largely fabrication. Of course, that did not stop our
investigation at Fort Monmouth.
The Chairman. Well, have you investigated any further? Have
you gone over the interrogation of this man? What is the name
of this defectee?
Gen. Back. I think it just gave a source number. I don't
recall seeing his name.
The Chairman. Have not any of you sent a man over there to
interview him?
Gen. Back. No, sir.
The Chairman. You say you were satisfied this was
fabrication. Can you tell me how he could fabricate a complete
description of a classified Signal Corps set? How could he
fabricate that?
Gen. Back. Senator, he did not give an accurate description
of any set that we have. We simply were trying to give G-2 a
lead to be helpful as to what set it might be.
The Chairman. He describes a radar set, and you say this
may be a Signal Corps set classified confidential since
September 1947. Now, did not anyone ever check his work to find
out whether this was a description of the Signal Corps set?
Whoever made this out must have done some preliminary checking,
must have decided this was a Signal Corps set.
Col. Ferry. Senator, we know the Russians have some radar
sets that so closely resemble ours that a non-technical person
could not tell them apart.
The Chairman. How would he know the name Evans Signal
Laboratory?
Col. Ferry. That isn't classified.
Mr. Cohn. I know, but how would he know it? Let's be
practical about it. My experience has been along the lines of
investigating and espionage and all that. This thing just rings
true in a lot of respects. How is a fellow twenty-two or
twenty-three years over there, a technician who worked in the
laboratory over there, going to know about the Evans Signal
Laboratory? It is possible he did. But it is also another
strong evidence that he knows what he is talking about. I never
heard of the Evans Signal Laboratory.
Gen. Back. Could I reply to that?
Mr. Cohn. Sure.
Gen. Back. It is a fact, of course, that a great deal of
the original Signal Corps equipment was developed at Evans
Laboratory at Fort Monmouth, and that a considerable amount of
that equipment developed at Evans was shipped to Russia under
Lend-Lease.
Mr. Cohn. Was all of this equipment shipped to Russia under
Lend-Lease, the equipment this man talks about?
Gen. Back. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Well, I think you are back where you started
from. Of course, he says he saw a microfilm of blueprints, and
that, of course, would be a length to which they would not go
if they had the equipment, number one. Number two, some of it
involves a period when we were not shipping to Russia. Number
three, he mentioned the Evans Signal Corps Laboratory. And
number four, you have the evaluation of that film. Number five,
you have the fact that Rosenberg and this group were working
out there, and now we have the affirmative testimony that they
were in radar espionage.
I wanted to say this, Senator, before I forget. One thing I
would appreciate if you would agree with me on is this. I think
we should get the classification of these things before they
were unclassified. In other words, this was unclassified in '46
or '45. I would like to know when Rosenberg was working there
and Glassman and Joel Barr and Levitsky and the others. What
was it classified in '42, and what in '43, as to each of these
pieces of equipment?
Gen. Back. I may be wrong about this. And certainly the
committee knows more probably, from its hearings than I do. But
a check of the record indicated that Rosenberg was with the
inspection division.
Mr. Cohn. He was.
Gen. Back. But not the Evans Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. But he went down there to inspect.
Gen. Back. He might make visits there, yes.
Mr. Cohn. He did. And you have to bear in mind that this
man was a full-time Communist espionage agent. So was Vivian
Glassman. So was Joel Barr. He is in Russia today. He was
stealing stuff every place he could get his hands on it.
Finally, just before the arrests started, he went over to
Poland, and he is over in the Soviet Union now. Vivian
Glassman, the last she was in here, the last thing that
happened with her, was that after Rosenberg was arrested, '51
or whenever it was, she was given a whole bundle of cash by the
Russians and started going around with forged passports and a
bundle of cash trying to get William Perl and these other
espionage agents out of the country. She was working down at
Monmouth Laboratory. A sister, who claimed the Fifth Amendment,
Levitsky, who claimed the Fifth Amendment, and Ullmann, were
working down there. These people were in the business of
espionage. And I might say it is inconceivable that they were
not, in addition to the affirmative testimony that they were.
And I think here it would be awfully interesting to know what
was the classification when these people were working there.
Number two, did any of these people have access to any
equipment similar to this?
And then, of course, step number three is: Are people
recommended by these people still working there or associated
in any way with this?
Gen. Lawton. Senator, you read off the atomic thing to me
Thursday night. That I will remember. Then at the conclusion
you started reading, and then I started making notes. And that
was the time you gave me the number 1004. And the dope you gave
me on 1004, I found in paragraph nine.
Therefore, in my search, I presumed that when I found
paragraph nine, and we came up here with it, I had everything.
Does this paper, 1004, say anything about this atomic film?
Mr. Cohn. Yes. It doesn't give the evaluation of it.
Gen. Lawton. We wouldn't evaluate that thing. That goes to
atomic energy.
The Chairman. General, did you ever have an investigation
conducted, and if so did you ever obtain a report, on 1004?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir. On the 11th of December, 1952, we
received a request from the chief signal officer to make an
investigation, or at least he gave us the dope and told us to
investigate. Our G-2 people then called in the FBI from their
regional office. I don't think you want to mention his name,
but we know who he is.
Mr. Cohn. Was this from the Newark office?
Gen. Lawton. Yes.
The Chairman. Then what happened?
Gen. Lawton. And then Andy Reid, one of the civilian
investigators, who has been there I think since 1940--Andy
Reid, R-e-i-d; I have known him since 1920, a very good man at
this business--went down to the Evans Laboratory, got all the
job sheets on the microfilm. He tried to tie this thing in with
Coleman. And he couldn't find any job sheet, an official one
living there, that someone might have walked in and had it done
in our shop, making it look like it was official business. Now,
if they tried to do it undercover, he would have had to have
one of the operators of the microfilm in cahoots with him.
Because nobody can have a photostat or a microfilm made of
classified material without having it recorded.
The Chairman. Oh, wait, General. Let us stick to the facts.
You say no one could have any microfilm made of the classified
material without its being recorded.
The testimony is, the sworn testimony of the heads of
departments down there, that people could take secret material
at will, take it home to their apartments, and when they had
that material in their apartments, and if they were Communist
spies, and if they made a microfilm, they would not come back
the next day and say, ``General, here is a recording of it.''
So let us keep to facts.
Gen. Lawton. I am not saying that you could not take that
stuff out from the microfilm. I am sure it could be done by
people half as smart as these people are.
The Chairman. I am not sure if you follow me. The testimony
of your men down there, people now heading departments, was
that they can take secret material at will, take it home, and
bring it back when they see fit; that of twenty-five branch
headquarters, fifteen have passes which allow them to take out
any classified material they care to. That is their sworn
testimony.
I think we should have the record clear, when you say no
one could microfilm it without having it recorded, that if they
could take it home, they can do it without any recording.
Gen. Lawton. They could in those days, yes.
The other thing he did was to go to Mr. Slattery, who is
the civilian executive for the Evans Laboratory, to see if he
could tie in any kind of work with these other people we had
under surveillance down there. That brought him no good leads.
They did other little things, but those were the two major
things, trying to find jobs these people worked on in
microfilming, and the FBI came in on the espionage.
The Chairman. When you assigned people to conduct this
investigation, did they come in and tell you what they found,
or did they give you a written report?
Gen. Lawton. He has a written report down there of the job
sheets of the microfilm, two pages of it.
The Chairman. In other words, does he have a report of
investigation?
Gen. Lawton. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. A report back to you?
Gen. Lawton. Well, it wasn't a formal report to me. All I
have got are these sheets of the microfilm jobs and the other
jobs where he was trying to tie in these people.
The Chairman. It means nothing to me when you say you have
a job sheet.
My question is this. You assigned some officer the task of
determining whether or not the information this defectee gave
was true. Did he ever report back to you? Did he say, ``We
think he did see it, for this reason,'' or, ``We think he did
not, for this reason''? I am curious to know whether you have
such a report.
Gen. Lawton. I do not believe there is, there, typed in the
file.
The Chairman. In other words, there is no written report.
Gen. Lawton. That is right.
The Chairman. How was the report given to you? Verbally?
Gen. Lawton. Verbally, yes.
The Chairman. What did he say? That this defectee, he felt,
was not telling the truth, or that he was?
Gen. Lawton. He said nothing about the defectee. He said
with all the efforts they had made, they could get no leads on
how things were getting out of the Evans Laboratory to Russia.
The Chairman. Now we are getting somewhere. So his
investigation concerned itself solely with trying to find out
how the material was getting over to Russia?
Gen. Lawton. Yes. And we presumed it was. We were willing
to presume there was a leak. You have to presume there is a
leak going on down there today. It is a vulnerable spot, and I
am sure that we have always considered those spots, as well as
some others; that there was this possibility. And never do we
overlook it. I don't care anything about the credibility of
this witness. It is a lead. It might be a bum one, but you have
to chase them all down.
The Chairman. General, let me ask you: Did you ever get a
written report of any kind? Did you ever get a written report
as a result of the investigation of these facts, other than
what you gave us, these four lines?
Gen. Back. No, sir.
The Chairman. Do you know who in the air force ordered the
FBI to discontinue the investigation?
Gen. Back. No, sir, I do not.
The Chairman. Do you not think this investigation should be
reinstituted? Is it not rather unusual for someone in the Air
Corps to order discontinuing of an investigation which you
started?
Gen. Back. Well, we certainly could do so.
The Chairman. I am not trying to tell you how to run your
business. I am just wondering if you do not think, in view of
the fact that you have nothing here to justify this
discontinuance except a statement by Charles Walton, which is
directly contrary to the original evaluation--in view of that,
I am just wondering whether someone should not check and find
out why this discontinuance was, what happened over the thirty-
month period to completely change the evaluation. At one time
they say information supplied in the film clearly indicates
that he has actually seen it. I assume that was the Signal
Corps film at Oak Ridge.
Gen. Lawton. Not necessarily. The Oak Ridge people have
their own photographic department.
The Chairman. But regardless of who took the film.
Gen. Lawton. I just wanted to correct that.
The Chairman. Do you not think you should go into this
again? Or do you think you should let it lie?
Gen. Back. Well, you have a document there that I haven't
seen. May I ask again, Senator, whose evaluation that was the
one you just read?
The Chairman. Air force, I assume. Air force intelligence,
I assume. It seems ridiculous, General, that I should have the
evaluation and you should not have it.
Gen. Back. I am surprised.
The Chairman. Is it your thought that no evaluation of this
was made by the air force or anyone until the one of 5 June? In
other words, no evaluation was made by anyone until December.
That is six months later. And then someone from over in Europe
sends over a notation saying, ``Disregard it.''
Gen. Back. Well, I will answer the question by saying I
have no knowledge of anybody making an evaluation in the air
force or any other place based on any reports that we have
received. And I stated before that those are the only other
reports we have received.
Gen. Lawton. May I clear up a date? I have a note here that
Colonel Mills did not receive the document 1004 until the 25th
of September, 1952.
Gen. Back. That is correct.
Gen. Lawton. Now, this thing was made in Germany on the 5th
of June 1952, by the air force. And again I say they bicycled
it around, but it hit our shop 25 September. This man, Gerhard,
grabbed it, gave it to Mills, notified the chief signal
officer, and he got his people to work. I wasn't notified until
the 11th of December on paper, but there were telephone
conversations between Monmouth and his technical division in
Washington to make up this report of the 4th of December to the
sir gorce. So that between the 25th of September and the 4th of
December, when the evaluation was made by the chief signal
officer, they were working on it. Now, that is two months and
about three days.
Mr. Cohn. General, what did Mr. Reid think of all this? He
is the one you mentioned.
Gen. Lawton. He is discouraged because he can't find a lead
from something like that. I think both Reid and I and G-2 are
satisfied things can leave that laboratory. There are four
thousand people----
Mr. Cohn. What did he think specifically of these reports?
Gen. Lawton. He has never said. He did show me, on the 31st
of March, the fact that somebody had said that the informant
had withdrawn his statement. But that doesn't make Reid or I
believe that there still isn't danger at Fort Monmouth.
The Chairman. I read a story in the Herald Tribune this
morning to the effect that the air force over in Germany said
there never was such a report, never was such an individual,
that they never heard of him, that there could not have been
such an individual.
Gen. Lawton. May I suggest a defense for the air force? If
you should ask our own G-2, they would deny they over heard of
it. That is the policy. To a reporter, you deny that it even
exists.
Mr. Cohn. We have been getting a lot of G-2 policies in
here.
The Chairman. May I say that is rather unusual. You see,
the committee has a witness here that there is such a document.
The press has been told there is such a document. If the air
force and G-2 want to publicly brand this committee as liars,
they will have trouble. If they want to say ``no comment,''
that is one thing, but for them to come out in Berlin and have
a policy of saying this is something else. Let me read this to
you.
Gen. Lawton. I read it.
The Chairman. It seems to me clearly an attempt to brand
the committee as liars. And you say that is the policy,
apparently.
Gen. Lawton. Well, in the army I was almost tried once
because I indicated I had a safe with some classified material
in it. They said I couldn't even say I had a safe with
classified material.
The Chairman. I can understand why they would have a rule
saying ``no comment.''
General, can you get in touch with the air force and ask
them for their evaluation?
Gen. Back. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And if you could, also, would you find out
from them who in the air force could come over and tell us who
called it off, why they made the decision, why they
countermanded your order without consulting you? You were the
man who had asked for it, not the air force. I would like to
know who outranked you on that, whether it is some captain over
there.
Gen. Back. I should like to say here, Senator, that I think
the endorsement that came to the Signal Corps, in all fairness
to the air force, said, ``It is recommended that the case be
closed unless you state otherwise,'' or words to that effect. I
think it is unfair to state that they, on their own, did it. I
think if there is blame attached, it is attached to the chief
signal officer.
Mr. Rainville. I just wanted to say one thing. And as I
said to you earlier, we get brash once in a while. You are very
magnanimously saying, ``If there is responsibility, it is
mine.'' Well, that is esprit de corps, and it is commendable in
that the superior officer takes any responsibility that there
is. But I do not want you to forget that this is a spy
investigation. This is something where there is culpability.
There must be a conviction. There is weakness. There must be a
correction. Your taking the responsibility doesn't solve
anything.
Gen. Back. That is correct.
Mr. Rainville. The only thing it can solve is in saying,
``It is a fault; we will correct it.'' I will agree, and I
think it is nice of you to say it isn't that department's
fault, but it is yours. But if there is a fault, may not that
fault be part of the same conspiracy? You see, we can't assume
that the army is any more free of subversive elements. We know
we have some of our FBI men in the Communist party. We can only
assume they are doing the same thing; and the army,
particularly the Signal Corps, would naturally be a target for
that.
So while I feel very kindly toward your statement that,
``We are letting them off the hook,'' we don't want it as an
answer and can't take it as an answer, because we must find out
how they got off the hook. Was it an accident? Is this whole
thing now being forgotten because it was mishandled? Like a
fumble in football, ``Forget it; next time we get the ball, we
will dash through with it''? I don't think we can treat it that
way. I think, we have to take the gloves off a little bit; not
the committee with you or you with the committee; I think all
of us together. Maybe it is impossible for the Army at this
stage, the secretary's office, or anybody else, to unwind the
thing now. Maybe it is necessary for some outside influence to
come in.
So that in a case of this kind, you will say, ``I would
like to take the blame, but I can't take the blame, because it
doesn't end there. My resignation would not end it.'' Because
there is a situation.
Gen. Back. Yes, sir.
Well, I didn't mean to imply, though, that we had dropped
the investigation in so far as this particular incident is
concerned. At Fort Monmouth they are still trying to find out
if there is any connection between the incident reported in
Germany and the Evans Laboratory.
Mr. Rainville. But there are no reports of any kind that
indicate that you have done that. I mean, you have a two-page
report where a man did some investigating. There is no
conclusion. It is like my child bringing home his arithmetic. I
can discuss the arithmetic problem with him, but if he doesn't
do it, he gets a zero on the problem the next day. I can
explain the whole reason why, show him all the theories, but if
he goes out and plays baseball before he gets to finishing the
problem, he still gets zero.
Gen. Lawton. But you make him study that night until he
gets a passing grade. We are still working on this type of
thing, never overlooking the fact that we got no leads by 31
March.
Mr. Rainville. But now we are well into 1953. We have
passed March. And here we without anything that you can show is
a progress report.
Gen. Lawton. That is right. I can give you a negative
progress report.
Mr. Rainville. Well, but you haven't given a negative
progress report on this particular document, which you have had
for quite sometime.
The Chairman. May I say, Harold, in fairness to General
Lawton, his task has been to try to find the leak. To assume
from this report there was a leak was a safe assumption for him
to make even if it were a false assumption. So he was operating
on the basis that this was true, and he was looking for the
leak. And the fact that he could not find that leak would not
indict him, because it is trying to find a very important
espionage agent.
Mr. Rainville. That part I agree with.
The Chairman. I think the principal fault is in not having
run this thing down from other standpoints.
I have got a suggestion. I think we have been wasting a lot
of time bandying this back and forth. We will get nowhere.
There is a man over in Europe who is either lying, or, if he is
telling the truth, we have got a very serious espionage set-up
out here in the Signal Corps, or did have. There is no reason
in the world why he shouldn't be re-interviewed by people whom
we thoroughly trust.
My suggestion, if it would meet with the approval of you
gentlemen, is that General Lawton pick a man, and I will let
one of my staff go along, and General Back might want to pick a
man and we could send two or three men over to interview this
man in detail. I think that is the only way we can arrive at
any conclusion.
As Harold, here, has indicated, if there is an espionage
ring, then it can extend to the man who ordered this
investigation called off. It is very unusual to have it called
off. I do not think you people would be satisfied with our
sending one man over. You might feel our staff would be a bit
biased. We would not be satisfied to take a report from someone
we knew nothing about. I know you have men down there you
absolutely trust. What do yo think about that suggestion?
Gen. Back. Yes, sir. I think that would be an excellent
idea.
Could I make one statement, however? When this report came
back, it came back to us from G-2, which is the investigative
agency in so far as the army is concerned. And I would like to
again say that G-2 elicited the services of the FBI. Now, when
G-2 recommends that a case be closed, the investigative agency
of the army, after having collaborated with the FBI, I wouldn't
be inclined to override them and say, ``Well, you people don't
know what you are doing.''
The Chairman. I had General Partridge before me the other
day, General, and asked him what he knew about communism, and
he said he knew nothing, absolutely nothing, never read any
book on communism and knew nothing about it. I asked him if he
knew anything about the espionage movement in the United
States, different shifts in the party line, and he told me he
knew nothing about it.
As I told him, while he might be a fine family man, an
outstanding field commander, I would have no confidence in him.
I think he is such a nice fellow that he doesn't realize there
is sin in the world. I am not saying that publicly. That is
just within this room.
I am not trying to restrict this to one man from your
department. You might want to send more.
Gen. Back. Could I make one suggestion, that inasmuch as
investigative matters in so far as the army is concerned are a
G-2 function, I should like to recommend that that be
considered.
The Chairman. I think that G-2 ought perhaps to send
someone along.
Mr. Cohn. They can send anyone they want. I have this idea,
Senator. General Lawton mentioned this Mr. Reid who conducted
this investigation. What is his title?
Gen. Lawton. I don't know. He is in the G-2 office, and he
has been there the longest, and he is the best investigator I
have got. He is chief agent of G-2.
Mr. Cohn. If you will authorize him, why not send Mr. Reid
over?
The Chairman. Mr. Reid and one of our men.
Gen. Lawton. And over there he can pick up the engineers of
the Signal Corps.
Mr Cohn. I will take him sight unseen. That is good enough
for us.
The Chairman. Let us let Mr. Reid and one of our men go,
and if the general wants to send someone along, that is all
right.
Gen. Back. Again, if there is no objection, I would like to
communicate with G-2.
May I point out that the man that General Lawton has is
part of his post-complement Signal Corps, really, whereas G-2
would be interested, I think, in sending one of their
investigators.
The Chairman. I can see no objection, and I can see a lot
of advantages in having a man from G-2 there. Could your man
leave tomorrow, General?
Gen. Lawton. As far as I know.
The Chairman. We have had conflicting evidence, all from
apparently reliable sources, on the fifty-seven documents. I
wonder if you could give us some picture on that?
Col. Ferry. I think so, sir. What specifically would you
like to know?
The Chairman. I would just like to know how many have been
found, just roughly the picture.
Col. Ferry. May I give you a brief outline of the history
of this thing?
The Chairman. I think we can start out with the fact that
the fifty-seven documents were reported lost originally and
then reported found later. Give us as much background as you
think is necessary.
Col. Ferry. I am afraid this is a misinterpretation.
Gen. Lawton. Use the term ``unaccounted for'' instead of
``lost.''
Col. Ferry. Apparently unaccounted for, rather than lost,
sir.
The Chairman. Very well,
Col. Ferry. In April of 1951, a list of seventy-four
documents were entered in the top secret registers of the
office of the chief signal officer.
The Chairman. Seventy-four, did you say?
Col. Ferry. A list of seventy-four, yes, sir. It was sent
to the Central Intelligence Agency, with the request that they
examine their records to determine whether these documents were
in their possession or not.
Shortly after this, within a matter of less than a month, I
would say, an answer was received from the alternate top secret
control officer of the Signal Corps Intelligence Agency,
stating the accounting for eighteen of these documents, and
stating that he had no record of the remaining fifty-six.
I believe that this is the basis for the alleged loss; that
is, the story of the alleged loss, of fifty-six documents. Now,
the number fifty-seven has been mentioned. I have no idea where
the fifty-seven rather than fifty-six comes in.
The Chairman. Were all seventy-four ever actually logged
out to the Signal Corps?
Col. Ferry. To the agency, sir?
The Chairman. Yes.
Gen. Lawton. Tell him what happened to the fifty-six.
Col. Ferry. Of these fifty-six, they were all eventually
located in various divisions and branches of the office of the
chief signal officer, by certificates of destruction covering
these documents, or evidence that they had been downgraded by
proper authority and were no longer proper subjects for the top
secret accounting.
The Chairman. Regardless or whether they were downgraded or
not, did you locate all fifty-six?
Col. Ferry. Sir, there was no requirement to locate those
documents which had been downgraded.
The Chairman. Well, if they were downgraded to secret,
would you not want to know where they were?
Col. Ferry. The secret documents are handled differently
from the top secret documents, sir. Once a document ceases to
be top secret, it is no longer the subject of detailed
accounting. It is still required to be covered by a receipt
system when it goes from one installation to another.
The Chairman. So that some of them were downgraded to
secret, and as to those you do not know whether they were
located or not.
Col. Ferry. That is true, sir. I don't know whether they
exist or not.
The Chairman. Do you know how many were downgraded?
Col. Ferry. I can't give you the exact figures on that no,
sir.
The Chairman. That would be rather important. That would be
a very clever way for someone to cover up the theft. If a top
secret document is missing, then you would proceed to downgrade
it, and no one would even look for it anymore, would you not
think so?
Col. Ferry. This seems reasonable sir. But it might help if
I gave you something about the nature of these documents.
I can't say offhand which of the seventy-four were the
fifty-six, but I can give you a breakdown of the seventy-four
documents which includes the fifty-six, would that be
satisfactory?
The Chairman. Go ahead.
Col. Ferry. Fifty of these documents were concerned with
the American and British efforts in defense against the cross
channel rockets in 1943 and '44. And, incidentally, these
documents were downgraded in 1945. Five of them were lists of
equipment.
The Chairman. Do you know to what extent they were
downgraded? Secret? Confidential?
Col. Ferry. Generally, to confidential or lower, sir. It
depended upon the subject of the individual document beyond
that. Do I make myself clear on that?
The Chairman. Yes.
Col. Ferry. Five of them were lists of equipment, which
were classified only because they were identified with a
specific project or because they included equipment which was
classified at the time. All of those have been downgraded. Five
of them were descriptions of targets for aerial bombardment of
Germany. As soon as the allied forces went into Germany and
reached these targets with the ground forces, there was no
longer any requirement for the classification, and they were
downgraded.
Four of them were instructional material that dealt with,
again, specific operations, and were classified because the
operation was identified. Once the operation took place, again,
these documents were downgraded.
The Chairman. You have sixty-four now.
Col. Ferry. I am reciting seventy-four all together, sir.
Three of them dealt with economic conditions in foreign
countries, matters of industrial practices and that sort of
thing.
The Chairman. Why would they have been classified top
secret?
Col. Ferry. There has been quite some question about that.
There is a great tendency to over-classify, feeling that
security considerations are paramount on many things where
actually they are not. These undoubtedly were at least of
questionable appropriateness in the top secret classification.
The Chairman. And the others?
Col. Ferry. Three of them dealt with radio services in the
Red Army in 1943. One of these, I think, was an original
document furnished to us by the Russian Mission here at the
time. One was a translation of the same document. And the third
one was a correction of some of the text in the translation of
the original.
The Chairman. All those you have mentioned so far were
downgraded?
Col. Ferry. Some of the fifty documents, sir, that dealt
with this cross-channel bomb, or cross-channel rocket, may not
have been downgraded to unclassified.
The Chairman. Do you know if they were downgraded before,
or after, they disappeared, allegedly disappeared?
Col. Ferry. Sir, the first allegation that they had
disappeared was made to my knowledge in l951. It came to my
attention in January of 1952.
The Chairman. You do not know whether they were downgraded
before they supposedly disappeared, or after? I am not talking
about the allegation that they had disappeared.
Col. Ferry. There was never any allegation that they had
disappeared, sir, to my knowledge. They were downgraded in
1945. I can assure you of that.
The Chairman. Some of them? Or all of them? All that were
downgraded were downgraded in '45; is that it?
Col. Ferry. Of the fifty that we were discussing just now,
yes, sir.
The Chairman. How about the others?
Col. Ferry. Some of the others were downgraded at later
dates.
The Chairman. Not knowing whether the ones that were
downgraded disappeared or not, you have no way of knowing
whether they were downgraded before their disappearance? In
other words, you have not followed down anything that was
downgraded? You have not run them down? In other words, if you
discovered that something was downgraded from top secret, it is
not longer your function to find that document. Your function
was to find the top secret documents. Is that right?
Col. Ferry. May I point out, sir, that in a great many of
these cases, we found that the document had been downgraded
when we actually located it. The document had been downgraded,
retired to the Federal records depository.
The Chairman. Some of the documents that you discovered
were downgraded you never saw, never found physically; is that
right?
Col. Ferry. That is true, sir.
The Chairman. So you would not know whether those were
downgraded before they disappeared, if they disappeared, or
afterward, assuming they had disappeared?
Col. Ferry. If we assume that they had disappeared, sir, we
wouldn't know whether they were downgraded before or not. That
is true.
The Chairman. As of now, you do not know whether they have
disappeared or not, because it was not your function to find
them, if you discovered they were downgraded?
Col. Ferry. It was our function, sir, to investigate the
matter of apparently missing top secret documents.
The Chairman. I am just asking you a simple question. I am
not trying to tangle you up with anything that is difficult.
Col. Ferry. I understand, sir.
The Chairman. Let us take document no. 27 in that case. I
know those are not the accurate numbers. It was originally top
secret. It dealt with something having to do with our invasion
of Normandy. After the war was over, that could have been
downgraded to restricted, or no classification at all. So if
you found that document no. 27 had been downgraded, to either
secret, confidential, or restricted, or declassified
completely, you did not worry about that any more. You were
only concerned with those that were still classified top
secret. Is that right?
Col. Ferry. Substantially, yes, sir.
The Chairman. So that as far as some of these documents
were concerned, when you found they had been downgraded, you
did not search through for them any further.
Col. Ferry. That is true, sir.
The Chairman. So that you would not know whether they were
destroyed under the regular regulation of the army, whether
they were stolen, whether they were misplaced, or what
happened?
Col. Ferry. That is true, sir.
The Chairman. You would not know how many of the seventy-
four were still unaccounted for. I should not use the term
``accounted for.'' You would not know how many of the seventy-
four there were that you never physically located. When I say
that, I mean either located physically or found a certificate
of destruction.
Col. Ferry. I can't say that offhand, no, sir.
The Chairman. You were going through the seventy-four. You
have four more to go.
Col. Ferry. Two of those are Signal Corps instruction for
articular operations which were downgraded as soon as the
operation was completed. One was a downgrading authority for an
earlier document. And one was a set of instructions for certain
personnel concerned with the transmission of messages.
The Chairman. You do not know offhand how many of the
seventy-four were downgraded? Or would you know?
Col. Ferry. No, sir, I don't know.
The Chairman. I assume you have that information some
place, have you not?
Col. Ferry. Not with me, no, sir.
The Chairman. Well, we will have to ask you to come back
again. We are trying to run these down. That is one of the
things that Senator Dirksen asked us specifically to do, locate
the documents, or establish them as lost. I would like to know,
you see, how many of the seventy-four are still listed as top
secret. There is no reason why you should not bring that
information along, is there?
Col. Ferry. You want to know how many of the seventy-four
are currently top secret?
The Chairman. Yes. How many have been downgraded.
Col. Ferry. Very well, sir.
The Chairman. Now, let me ask you this. Which specific
agency reported the fifty-six unaccounted for in their agency?
Col. Ferry. The Signal Corps Intelligence Agency, sir.
The Chairman. Signal Corps intelligence. Now, did you or
anyone examine the log book or the records to find out whether
all seventy-four had actually been logged out to Signal Corps
intelligence?
Col. Ferry. It wasn't necessary to do that, sir. We knew
without examining that particular log that many of them had not
ever been in the hands of the Signal Corps Intelligence Agency.
The Chairman. I would like to know how many of the fifty-
seven went to the Signal Corps Intelligence Agency, of the
fifty-six.
Col. Ferry. Of the fifty-six, sir, none of them actually
ever reached the Signal Corps Intelligence Agency.
The Chairman. How did you find that out?
Col. Ferry. I don't quite understand your question, sir.
The Chairman. How could you find out what agency they went
to unless you examined the log book, or the registry, call it
what you may?
Col. Ferry. We did examine the log book of the top secret
control officer of the office of the chief signal officer, who
was the only agency from which the Signal Corps Intelligence
Agency was authorized to receive these documents at that time.
The Chairman. So you examined the log book of----
Col. Ferry. Of the top secret control officer of the office
of the chief signal officer.
The Chairman. Would that log book show whether or not a top
secret document had been logged out to Signal Corps
intelligence?
Col. Ferry. That is right, sir.
The Chairman. And how many of the fifty-six were actually
logged out to Signal Corps intelligence?
Col. Ferry. None of them, sir,
The Chairman. None of them. You said you did examine the
log book. You found none were logged out. I thought you said
none had to be logged out.
Col. Ferry. We were speaking of two different log books.
You were speaking of the log book of Signal Corps Intelligence
Agency, which is one set of records. I told you I hadn't
examined that one with this particular purpose in mind. Then I
told you that I had examined the log books of the top secret
control office of the office of the Chief Signal Officer.
The Chairman. Just to get this clearly in mind: If the
Signal Corps intelligence got any top secret documents, in all
cases that would be registered in the log book of the top
secret control office of the Chief Signal Officer?
Col. Ferry. At the time that the report of the fifty-six
was made, yes, sir.
The Chairman. At the time the report was made. At the time
the documents were in existence?
Col. Ferry. At the time the documents were in existence,
sir, the Signal Corps Intelligence Agency was not.
The Chairman. These documents, I assume, were dated all the
way from 1943 up to the late '40's?
Col. Ferry. Certainly no later than December of 1947, sir.
The Chairman. When would you say the earliest date would be
just roughly?
Col. Ferry. The earliest date would have been in April of
'43, sir.
The Chairman. Now, from '43 to '47, if a top secret
document went to Signal Corps intelligence----
Col. Ferry. Excuse me, sir, Signal Corps Intelligence
Agency came into existence in 1949.
The Chairman. And then Signal Corps intelligence could not
have received the document prior to that time?
Col. Ferry. That is right.
The Chairman. Was it operating under some other name?
Col. Ferry. There was an earlier organization performing
the same function.
The Chairman. That earlier organization came into existence
when?
Col. Ferry. Well, through a series of organizational
changes.
The Chairman. There always was an organization doing the
same job?
Col. Ferry. That is right, sir.
The Chairman. I am not concerned about the change in name.
I know we changed the names of many offices with the
Reorganization Act. Let us just think about this function.
Now, from '43 to '47, if that office received top secret
material, would that material in all cases be logged out from
the top secret control office of the Chief Signal Officer?
Col. Ferry. That is right, sir, unless it were a type of
document requiring specific handling through the instruction of
the originating office. That is to say, the answer to your
question is ``yes,'' sir.
The Chairman. Now, did you find in the log book, some
place, the number of each of those top secret documents that
were sent to any agency? Let us be specific. Let us take a top
secret document. Let us give it an arbitrary number, number 27.
Let us say someone says, ``A copy of this should go to X
department, and a copy should go to Y department, and a copy to
A, to B, to C.''
Col. Ferry. Right, sir.
The Chairman. I assume there is some log book in which you
log one copy out to X, one copy to Y, one to Z, and on down the
line?
Col. Ferry. Right, sir.
The Chairman. Have you checked with each one of these
fifty-six? Number one, have you gotten the number that were
logged out and the agency to which they were logged?
Col. Ferry. Right.
The Chairman. And you have either accounted for each one,
physically, to all these departments, or you have found it was
downgraded, in which case you would not have to account for it;
it would be handled in a different fashion?
Col. Ferry. Right.
The Chairman. Do you have a report to that effect, saying
``document no. 27, so many copies logged to such and such a
department''?
Col. Ferry. We have the log books, in which all the entries
are closed, sir. The log books cover approximately thirty
thousand documents.
The Chairman. Were you not appointed to run down the fifty-
six specifically?
Col. Ferry. We were appointed to investigate apparently
missing top secret documents. This turned up. The fifty-six
appeared at one time to be in that category, yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you submit to anyone a report saying,
``Here is an accounting of the fifty-six: Document number 1.
Document number 1 was logged out to this department, this
department, and this department. It was downgraded. Document
number 2 is still top secret. It was logged out to departments
A, B, and C. We have located all three copies.'' Or, ``We have
found certificates of destruction''?
In other words, have you taken each one and given a report
as to where it was logged out, the number, and the disposition?
Col. Ferry. No, sir, we have stated briefly the accounting
for it, downgraded by such and such an authority, destroyed,
certificate of destruction dated such and such a date, or on
hand.
The Chairman. Let me interrupt you right there. You say,
``destroyed, certificate of destruction, such and such a
date.'' Let us say you found the certificate of destruction in
B department. That would not mean much unless you went back to
the log book and said, ``Now, none were logged out to any other
department,'' or, ``We have a certificate of destruction for
department A, B, and C.'' Unless your report said that, the man
would find it valueless.
Col. Ferry. That is right. We made sure that we had
accounting for each copy, by copy number. All top secret
documents are issued by copy numbers.
TESTIMONY OF CARL GREENBLUM (RESUMED)
The Chairman. Mr. Greenblum, you are informed that you are
still under oath. I may say that I am very sorry that we had to
call you. I understand that your mother died just a couple of
days ago. However, a matter of considerable importance came up,
a matter of importance to you and to the committee's
investigation, and we decided that we had no choice but to call
you back.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Greenblum, you were questioned before the
committee on October 12th. Do you recall that?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. And on that day, on page 470 of the record--for
the benefit of Mr. Rainville and Mr. Jones, you are employed
out at Fort Monmouth now?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you work there?
Mr. Greenblum. At Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. Will you keep your voice up.
Mr. Greenblum. At Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. What type work do you do at Evans Signal
Laboratory?
Mr. Greenblum. I am an electronics engineer.
Mr. Cohn. Now, do you have a security clearance?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Up to what?
Mr. Greenblum. Up to secret.
Mr. Cohn. Now, you testified as follows on October 12th,
and I am reading from page 470:
Mr. Schine. You also knew Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenblum. The same way.
Mr. Schine. You saw him after you left college on a number
of occasions?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Schine. Will you give us the occasions?
Mr. Greenblum. Rosenberg was employed at the Signal Corps
Inspection Agency, and I think I saw him on one or two
occasions at the office there.
Now, on page 476, you were asked:
Mr. Schine. When you met Rosenberg, what was the nature of
your conversation with him, when you ran into him when he was
an inspector at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. Just practically nodding heads. I never knew
him more than to acknowledge him.
Mr. Schine. Did you know any of his friends at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
Mr. Schine. Do you know any of the names of the people with
whom he associated at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir, I don't. My relationship was merely
a nodding of the head.
And so on and so forth.
Now, we have had testimony here that during the time
Rosenberg was the Signal Corps inspector----
The Chairman. Could I interrupt?
Do you question the fact that that is your testimony as
given the other day? That was the testimony as you gave it? You
recognize that?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, we have had testimony here from another
witness under oath to the effect that you had a very close
association with Rosenberg, that as a matter of fact at one
time you rode to work with him in a car for a period of two
months.
Do you care to make any comment on that?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't recall that at all.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Joseph Levitsky?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Cohn. Joseph Levitsky has testified here under oath
that you and he and Julius Rosenberg were very closely
associated, that for a period of two months you and he and a
man named Markus Epstein--Do you know a man by the name of
Markus Epstein?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You do?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. The testimony was that you and he and Markus
Epstein and Julius Rosenberg rode back and forth to work
together for a period of two months.
Mr. Greenblum. I don't recall that at all, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You say you don't recall that at all?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Of course, that is in direct conflict with the
testimony given this committee. Would it be conceivable that
you rode back and forth in a car with Julius Rosenberg every
day for two months and would not recall that?
The Chairman. Do I understand it is still your testimony
that you did not share in this car pool with Julius Rosenberg,
Markus Epstein, and Joseph Levitsky? Is that your testimony?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't recall that all. I really don't
recall that at all.
The Chairman. Well, if you had shared in a car pool with
them, you would remember that, wouldn't you? If you rode back
and forth over a period of two months with a man who was
subsequently executed for espionage, that certainly would not
slip your mind?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, I will tell you, Senator, I do not
recall that incident at all. And to me, Rosenberg, even before
this other business came up, was somebody who I just did not
like the looks of. I hadn't liked his looks in school, and I
had never had anything to do with him.
The Chairman. Did you share a car pool with anyone?
Mr. Cohn. Going from Philadelphia to Camden?
Mr. Greenblum. Oh, from Philadelphia to Camden?
Mr. Cohn. Well, now, we are not asking you here to discover
what route the car took, or anything like that. The question
is: Were you in a car pool with Julius Rosenberg, Levitsky, and
Epstein? You see the three of them were Communists and
traitors. It is very important that we know that.
Mr. Greenblum. I don't recall going from Camden to
Philadelphia with Rosenberg and Levitsky. But I do remember
going with Epstein. He had a car.
Mr. Cohn. Who else was in the car?
Mr. Greenblum. And Levitsky.
Mr. Cohn. How about Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenblum. Now, Rosenberg I don't recall. And I will
tell you who I do think was in that car. It could have been Al
Walker. There was a man by the name of Al Walker. Now, we lived
in Philadelphia in an apartment. There was Walker, myself and
Epstein. Now, Levitsky lived in another apartment, by himself,
during this period.
The Chairman. Did you know that Levitsky and Epstein were
Communists at that time?
Mr. Greenblum. No, not at all.
Mr. Cohn. When did you find out Levitsky was a Communist?
Mr. Greenblum. I actually--this fellow--I have gone over
this in my mind for two days now, and he has been deceptive
over the years, and until he refused to answer your question
the other day, I did not know for an absolute fact. I did not
know for an absolute fact.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't know for an absolute fact. When did
you first suspect that he was a Communist, have reasonable
grounds to believe that he was a Communist? You were very
closely associated with him.
Mr. Greenblum. There was a period of years in which he
never spoke politics at all. Up until about 1945, I never heard
him talk about politics. And this other thing about Epstein----
Mr. Cohn. Now, wait a minute. I want to get this. There was
a period when he did not talk politics. Let us talk about the
period when he did talk politics. I want to know when you first
had reasonable grounds to believe that Levitsky was a believer
in communism, a Communist sympathizer.
Mr. Greenblum. Well, he spoke current events, I never heard
him speak Marxist principles.
The Chairman. When you rode with Levitsky and Epstein and a
fourth man, did you discuss communism?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, bear in mind we have had some testimony here
from Mr. Levitsky.
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Estimate for us as best you can when you first
suspected, believed, that your friend Levitsky was a Communist
or a Communist sympathizer?
Mr. Greenblum. I didn't exactly know what he was up to.
Mr. Cohn. Well, when did you suspect that he was a
Communist?
Mr. Greenblum. Somewhere in the period from 1946 to '48.
Mr. Cohn. Not before that?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What did you think he was before that? Did you
think he was conservative in his views?
Mr. Greenblum. No, he wasn't conservative in his views.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you think he was a Communist before 1946?
Now, this man was an intimate friend of yours. Please be frank
with us.
Mr. Greenblum. Yes. I am trying to. Will you repeat the
question again, sir?
[The question was read by the reporter.]
Mr. Greenblum. No, I wouldn't say a Communist. This is an
important distinction I want to make.
Mr. Cohn. All right.
Mr. Greenblum. You hear a lot of people express all kinds
of ideas without--He never asked me to go to a meeting.
Mr. Cohn. Now, I don't care whether he asked you to go to a
meeting. This man was a good friend of yours. You heard him
express ideas. Now, when did you first know he was sympathetic
toward communism?
Mr. Greenblum. I knew that he was a radical of some
variety, that he had very liberal opinions. And I knew that all
through the time that I knew him.
Mr. Cohn. Would you say you knew he was a radical of
varieties all the time you knew him?
Mr. Greenblum. Of varieties. I don't know exactly. I think
there is an important thing, here----
Mr. Cohn. You knew he was a radical of varieties all the
time you knew him. In spite of that fact, you recommended him
for a position with the Signal Corps in a highly sensitive
spot, did you not?
Mr. Greenblum. I recommended him for a position?
Mr. Cohn. That is right. You were one of his references for
employment with the U.S. Signal Corps in Evans Laboratory.
Isn't that a fact?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't remember that.
Mr. Cohn. Sir?
While you are thinking about that, let me ask you this.
Knowing he was a radical, and having taken your dates of 1946
to 1948, when you thought he was a Communist, I would like to
know why, holding a highly sensitive position in the Evans
Signal Laboratory as late as within the last year, you have
entertained Levitsky at your home?
Mr. Greenblum. I have heard the man express radical
opinions. I am not even certain that these are the right words.
And I think that there is another point here, that this fellow,
from 1948 on never mentioned a word, never spoke politics or
mentioned a word of it. And I would like to recite how many
times he was at my house, and never a word from him.
Mr. Cohn. Just before we get to that, on this question of
your being a reference for him in your obtaining his position
at Evans, are you the Carl Greenblum who resided at 274
Stockton Street, Brooklyn?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. There is no doubt about that.
The next thing I would like to establish: Has he been in
your home within the last year?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
Mr. Cohn. When was he last in your home?
Mr. Greenblum. I believe he was in my house in July of
1952.
Mr. Cohn. July of 1952, the summer before last. When was he
there before that?
Mr. Greenblum. I think two years earlier.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this, Mr. Greenblum: Is it your
conception that somebody working on highly classified radar
material at Evans Signal Laboratory should entertain a
Communist?
Mr. Greenblum. I didn't know him actually to be a
Communist.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this, now, as far as Julius
Rosenberg is concerned. Our information is that you went to
Signal Corps School with Julius Rosenberg and in a very small
class. Isn't that true?
Mr. Greenblum. I was in his section? I don't recall him
there. Wait. I recall him at the school.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Greenblum----
Mr. Greenblum. Wait a minute. There was a man by the name
of Calabro, I was with, in a small section.
Mr. Cohn. I am not asking about Calabro. I am asking about
Rosenberg. You have got to be frank.
Mr. Greenblum. I am going to be frank. I will tell you
everything I know. There were thirty people in the school. I
may have nodded my head to him there.
Mr. Cohn. Was Julius Rosenberg one of those thirty people?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, he was.
Mr. Cohn. Couldn't you have told us that when you were here
the other day?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, I will tell you. When I was here the
other day, I said on one or two occasions when I was down at
the Signal Corps School, there, all I did was nod my head at
the man the same as I did up in the other place. I never had
anything do with him.
Mr. Cohn. Do you deny to us, under oath, that you were in
this car pool from Philadelphia to Camden with Rosenberg,
Levitsky----
Mr. Greenblum. I don't deny this, because I don't recall
this at all.
Mr. Cohn. Now, if you didn't like Rosenberg and were so
sure you didn't like him and just nodded to him once or twice,
is it conceivable that you could have ridden back and forth to
work from Philadelphia every day in this period and have no
recollection of it?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't have any recollection of it. I just
don't have any recollection of it.
The Chairman. May I say for your information: Either Mr.
Levitsky was perjuring himself, or you have perjured yourself.
Mr. Greenblum. I don't recall it.
The Chairman. Let me finish, please.
Mr. Greenblum. I am sorry.
The Chairman. You are both under oath. He said for two
months, day after day, you rode in the same car. He refused to
say whether or not you had discussed espionage, refused to say
whether or not you had discussed communism. Vivian Glassman
refused to state whether or not you were a member of the
Communist party. There was a great deal of evidence about you.
I don't know whether Levitsky is lying, or you are. One of you
is.
Let me finish. I am giving you this information so that you
can consult a lawyer. One of you is lying. One of you is
deliberately lying. There is no question about that. I am
referring this to the attorney general, with the request that
they conduct a complete investigation to determine who the
perjurer is and have him indicted. I don't know whether they
will determine that you were lying or Levitsky was.
Mr. Greenblum. Which question?
The Chairman. I am giving you this information so that you
can take whatever steps are necessary to protect yourself. They
may decide that you are telling absolutely the truth, and that
Levitsky was trying to involve you. I don't know. But it is a
matter of such great importance that this will be submitted to
attorney general instantly.
Mr. Cohn. I want to ask you this, sir. You say you knew Mr.
Epstein. Did you know Epstein was a Communist?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Where is Epstein now?
Mr. Greenblum. I think he lives somewhere in Long Island.
Mr. Cohn. When did you see him last?
Mr. Greenblum. Can I ask another question? Just what is
this statement, Senator? I mean, just what is the perjury here?
The Chairman. You testified the other day that you had only
seen Rosenberg once or twice, that you only had a nodding
acquaintance with him, that you didn't like him. The testimony
of Levitsky is that you rode with him for two months at least
in a car pool from Philadelphia to Camden, that you and
Rosenberg were close, that all four of you were good friends.
Now, I know that one of you must be lying, you see.
Mr. Greenblum. That is right.
The Chairman. I do not know that you are. As far as I know,
you may be the most truthful fellow in the world. The point is
that somebody is guilty of perjury, and we intend to have the
man who was guilty of perjury prosecuted. I merely inform you
of this so that you may take whatever steps you want to take to
get a lawyer or anything else,
Mr. Cohn. Okay, Mr. Greenblum. We will excuse you.
Mr. Greenblum. I would like to make some statement here,
which I think is important, about all of this.
Mr. Cohn. Sure,
Mr. Greenblum. I think this is quite important. If one
recites the whole story of my association with Levitsky, I
think that the conclusion that you come to is not only that he
was quite secretive about being a member of the Communists. He
never, during the entire period that I knew him, he never asked
me to go to a meeting. He never in any way showed action, some
positive action, aside from--well, aside from something that
you might conceivably--and this is far from it--in speech, ever
indicate that he was a Communist, a member of the Communist
party. Now, he cultivated both myself and my friends. And I can
give you a large number of these people, of which Mark Epstein
is one. Now, what he ever told Mark Epstein, I don't know. He
actually went into business with Mark Epstein. And the
conclusion that you come to over the years, I mean, trying to
cultivate this friendship, was that this man was more than a
Communist, that he was actually trying to get information. And
this is the reason that he had a large number of friends, both
of the group that I knew and people he knew in his own plant,
and a lot of other people.
Mr. Cohn. When did you come to the conclusion that he was
trying to get information from intimate friends?
Mr. Greenblum. I didn't know for sure, but around 1948 I
spoke to Lou Antell, one of the people, and we--Well, wait a
minute. When did I come to the conclusion? I want to amend that
statement. I didn't come to the conclusion that he was partly
in the business of getting information until the day before
yesterday, when I read the article. And I went all through
this. This is when I came to this conclusion. All along, as far
as I was concerned, he went all out of his way to be very, very
friendly. I mean, he invited people over to his house. And
there, there was never any discussion. There were no
discussions which you could say were Communist. The man never
asked for information from me. All of these things didn't add
up to him being to me an actual Communist party member,
Mr. Cohn. What facts now, looking back, lead you to believe
it?
Mr. Greenblum. There are a lot of facts, when I look back,
which, coming together, lead to this conclusion.
Mr. Cohn. Now, look. You were in here the other day, and
you gave testimony concerning your relationship with Rosenberg.
Now, frankly, we took it at face value. We didn't know anything
about it.
Mr. Greenblum. Well.
Mr. Cohn. Let me finish, here. You will feel better about
it. We had this man, Levitsky, and we had some other witnesses.
Mr. Greenblum. Other witnesses?
Mr. Cohn. Now, wait a minute. Levitsky is a well-known
Communist. He is a Fifth Amendment case as to a lot of things.
It so happened he was willing to answer questions about his
associations and contacts, although he would not answer
questions about his Communist activities. Now, he stated very
freely and in some detail associations of himself, Epstein,
yourself, and Rosenberg. He fully declined on all questions
concerning Communist party membership. We take out his
application, Levitsky's, virtually an admitted Communist, and
we take out the Fifth Amendment case on communism and take out
his application, and you are one of his references.
We asked him when he saw you last. He said, ``A couple of
months ago.'' He was going out to your house to pay visits to
you, and so forth.
You are working at Evans Laboratory with secret clearance.
You can understand the position that puts us in. It is a matter
of very great concern.
Now, let me say this. You have nothing to be afraid of if
you tell the truth here. Don't be upset about it, and don't be
nervous about it. One thing we want from you is the truth and
the whole truth. We don't want to pull facts out of you one by
one here. We want all the facts. And if you give us all the
facts within your possession, that is all we want. You have
nothing to be concerned about.
I want to make a suggestion. On top of this, you have had a
tragedy in your family. And we are certainly concerned about
necessity of pulling you in here. Why don't you go out and have
lunch and think this whole thing over, think it over carefully,
your relations with Rosenberg, with Levitsky, from top to
bottom from the time you met them until now, and then come in
here this afternoon, come in after lunch, in an hour or an hour
and a half.
Mr. Greenblum. Can't we continue here? I would like to get
this whole thing over.
The Chairman. Just a minute. I think it would be better if
you went home for a couple of days and came in again. You have
not been completely frank with us. Do not get excited. I can
understand how a witness who was working in a job like you are
working in may hesitate in giving all of his associations with
Rosenberg, even though he, himself, is completely innocent.
Just let me finish, please.
Mr. Greenblum. I am terribly sorry, sir.
The Chairman. I can understand your trying to hide from the
committee some of your associations with Levitsky after you
discover he is an espionage agent. There is only one thing you
can do now, and that is to come in and very freely and very
frankly give us all the information you have. You are giving us
more information today, you see, than you did the other day.
The other day you said you had never met Rosenberg except once
or twice. Now we discover that you went to a small school with
him, of thirty people. We know either Levitsky was deliberately
lying about you--And he might well be doing that. All
indications are that he has been in espionage work and is a top
Communist. He may have some grievance against you, I don't
know.
I am going to order you to go on home and come back here
either this afternoon or next week. When do you want to come
back?
Mr. Greenblum. This afternoon.
The Chairman. All right. What time?
Suppose you come back at three o'clock this afternoon. You
may step down and come back at three o'clock this afternoon.
Did you hear me, sir? You may leave and come back at three
o'clock this afternoon or if you prefer coming back next week,
you may do that.
Will someone show the young man to the door?
The Chairman. I believe the general had a statement to
make.
TESTIMONY OF GENERAL KIRKE B. LAWTON (RESUMED)
Gen. Lawton. It has been brought out in this investigation
that there were about fifteen people at the Evans Lab who had
authority to take classified material to their homes or on
official business on trips. It was a standing pass. As of 15
October of this year, we have rescinded that, and now no one
can take anything away from the laboratories without a specific
authority. Or let me say this: can take it away from any
classified place at Fort Monmouth without specific authority of
four individuals. One of them is myself. Let's make it ``the
commanding general of Fort Monmouth,'' because I might not be
there tomorrow. And the commanding general of the Signal Corps
School, the commanding officer, and it happens to be a colonel,
of the Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories, and the
commanding officer of the Electronic Warfare Section. There is
one exception. Students may take restricted material to their
quarters, provided they have a trunk locker or suitable locker
to put it in while they are not actually in possession of it.
The Chairman. The commanding general of Fort Monmouth, the
commanding general of the Signal Corps School, and who else?
Gen. Lawton. The commanding general of the Signal Corps
Engineering Laboratory and the commanding officer, Electronic
Warfare Center.
The Chairman. I think, General, that is certainly
excellent.
We have been disturbed beyond words by this thing, most of
which was in existence long before you got there, and I think
there has been considerable improvement since you got there. I
was tremendously disturbed by the evidence that during the war
time there was no logging in or out of any secret material. It
was just in or out at will.
Gen. Lawton. May I add, for the protection of those fifteen
that now have it, that there is no reflection on them. It is
just a general tightening up in areas where the evidence shows
it has to be tighter.
The Chairman. This applies not only to the headquarters
where the fifteen were located?
Gen. Lawton. The whole post.
The Chairman. I do not want to embarrass you, but may I ask
you the question: Why in the devil was this not done earlier?
Gen. Lawton. I knew this, but before this investigation I
had confidence in those fifteen people. I still have, but this
is just another degree of security, stronger security,
The Chairman. I realize one of the handicaps you have which
the committee does not have, and that is that you have no
authority at all to call a man in and put him under oath. If
you call him in, he can lie to you from hell to breakfast, and
you can not do anything about it.
TESTIMONY OF CARL GREENBLUM (RESUMED)
Mr. Greenblum. I am all right now, and I want you to excuse
me. I want to start afresh, and I want to explain the very
natural circumstances of coming here and trying to hide an
association with Levitsky, who I know to be a Communist. I know
him to be a Communist, because he told me he was a Communist.
Supposing you ask me questions, in a developed way, if you
like, and I will try to tell the story. You see, I have nothing
to hide, have never done anything. But I know these people, and
there was a foolish association there, and I think I can make
clear both the people and what they told me and some of their
associates.
Mr. Cohn. That is fine. We want you to sit back and relax.
All we want from you is the truth and you will be fully
protected, and that is the best thing in the world for you.
Suppose you start at the beginning and tell us everything
from top to bottom, and then if we have any questions at the
end we will ask them.
The Chairman. In connection with Rosenberg, Levitsky,
everything.
Mr. Greenblum. Okay. I will start out from school.
I met Rosenberg there, and never cared very much for him.
And I will tell you why, completely. As a boy, I joined the
Young People's Socialist League in the neighborhood in which I
lived. And briefly, I was a member of the Socialist party. And
I pretty much, in those days, despised the Communists. And so,
when I went to school, in my class there was a fellow by the
name of Sevitsky, who was being influenced by Rosenberg. And at
that time I more or less tried to present the Socialist point
of view.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, Rosenberg was pulling to the
Communist side, and you were pulling to the Socialist side?
Mr. Greenblum. This is essentially it. So that there was a
natural animosity. And this is the reason, in school, there, I
would guess, that nobody ever tried to approach me in any way.
I know they had a club there. I am digressing at the moment. We
can come back to that if you are interested.
When we went to work, I went to work for the Signal Corps
Inspection Agency in July of 1940. And shortly thereafter, I
met Levitsky. I don't know exactly where. But when we went down
to Camden--wait a minute. In that same summer, in August of
1940, we went down to Fort Monmouth for a training program. And
as I told you previously, I don't recall with any clarity
Rosenberg. I know he was there, but, again, it was a head-
shaking business, and that was it. I haven't seen him in the
intervening period. Now, I next met Levitsky down in Camden.
And I roomed as I said before, with Epstein and Walker. And
there were quite a few single fellows down there at the time,
so that we went out together, and so on. And Levitsky was a
kind of a personable person, was then and has been all along,
an ingratiating kind of guy, and always seemed to go out of his
way to do things for you and be pleasant, and he was quite
interesting. I found him interesting. Let's put it this way.
And after I left Camden, I went up to New York and worked
around several of the plants, and he went to Baltimore.
Somewhere he went to Baltimore there, and he was discharged.
And I don't recall exactly the circumstance why he was
discharged from the job. But when he related the story to me,
he talked about some kind of impropriety. He said they were
slightly anti-Semitic. And I felt that he had been done an
injustice with this anti-Semitic business.
Let's see. After he was discharged, he went to work at
Federal. As a matter of fact, at the time of that story, he was
worried about what he was going to do, and I was at Federal and
said, ``They need engineers mostly,'' and he asked me to name a
few places, and one of those that I mentioned was Federal. I
was not at the laboratory. I was not at Federal Laboratory,
which was at New York. I was at the factory. But he went to
work, and that was a kind of sensitive spot, you might say.
During this period, or slightly thereafter, he married this
girl from Philadelphia, and I went down with Mark Epstein and
another man, who he knew, in Baltimore, and whom I suspected
was also discharged, though I don't know this for a fact. And
his wife was a woman named Laura. This is what I remember. He
went up to New York for GE. And that was the last I ever heard
of him.
The next I recall--I associated almost continuously over a
period of time with Levitsky, and I met a couple over at his
house, a couple by the name of Fred and Ceil. I don't recall
their last names at the moment. Fred and Ceil. And I believe
that at this point--this is what I believe--I believe that at
this point he joined the Communist party. This is what I
believe. Although he didn't mention this to me until sometime
later. And I knew they were up to something, but also I had a
large group of friends, the most important of which was
Epstein. And then I knew Antell and Walker, and I can give you
all the names of all the people I knew, and who went up to his
house.
Later on, during this period, maybe in '47, they talked
about going into some kind of business. And I was interested
for awhile, but I dropped out. He subsequently went into
business with Epstein. He stayed in business with him for about
a year, and then Epstein dropped out. He continued with the
third man. The third man had come from Federal, the name of the
man I don't recall. They took some kind of store in Flatbush in
New York.
At this time, Lou Antell, who I had meanwhile become quite
friendly with--this is about '47 or '48--I had a discussion
with, and he mentioned this Communist business, but the way he
looked at it was a little bit different. I more or less, you
might say, countenanced it. That is, I shrugged my shoulders at
it. And he actually suggested that we stop seeing him. I think
I said I thought it was a good idea. What I did do thereafter
was merely, instead of seeing him two or three weeks, four or
five weeks, something like that--from the period of 1948 to
1952, I saw him exactly five times. I can go into detail on
each one of the occasions that I saw him.
As a matter of fact, he never met my wife until a wedding
party was given. I courted my wife for a few months, and when
he came to the wedding party he came not through me but through
meeting one of the people who I knew at the party. And I can
give you the names of all of the people who were at this
wedding party, and who I had been friendly with when I had been
going to the Levitskys. That is, there were whole periods in
which I didn't see him. There would be three, four, or five
months.
Oh, I neglected to say something else before. During the
time that this Fred and Ceil were there, there was another
couple at this house who I also suspected to be part of the
same ring. A man's name was Leo, and I don't recall the woman's
name. I just don't recall. I saw them one more time, and this
was after the wedding party. Joe was pretty friendly, and he
said, ``Why don't you come to visit with us?'' And he gave us a
dinner. This was some three or four months after the wedding.
We went over to his house, and we ate there. And as a matter of
fact, I think we slept there. He didn't talk politics. Those
five visits that we had, he didn't talk any of these things,
and I didn't talk about them. Meanwhile, this situation, the
political situation, the times had changed, and this was not
the thing to talk about.
After dinner, at this same dinner, this couple, Leo and so
on, came over, and they stayed for a while, and then they went
home.
The next time I saw him, he came to our house, which was
about--let me consult for a moment--let's see. The wedding was
in '49, and this was early in--we went to his house somewhere
around February or March in '50, and he came down to our house
somewhere in the summer of '50.
The next time we saw them was in '52. The way we saw them
was in the following circumstances. We didn't invite them. We
had more or less decided that we wouldn't have anything more to
do with these people. We were slow coming to a realization that
this was not the thing to do, but we just didn't invite them. I
talked this thing over with my wife. And in '52, he dropped in
by car, saying that he had been visiting down somewhere along
the Jersey coast, and this was on the way up, and he was going
to just see us.
I saw him on one other occasion. That was at the IRE
meeting. This was in '51. I ran into him. And this is a
circumstance which I think is very, very important. I met him
at the IRE meeting, and we went out to lunch. When we went out
to lunch the Rosenberg case was just about coming up, there,
and I said to him, ``Say, you didn't have anything to do with
this business did you?'' And he said, ``No, but there, but for
the grace of God, go I.'' That is what he said.
And on the '52 meeting, I think he repeated this, ``There,
but for the grace of God, go I'' again. That was the final time
I saw him. In the five meetings that we had, since I came down
to the labs, we never discussed our work. We never discussed my
work there.
Mr. Cohn. How about prior to those five meetings? Did you
ever discuss your work?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, as I said, during the years from 1945
to '48, at his house, he would never say just exactly what he
was doing. He would never say those things. But I get the
impression now, looking back, that they were just listening to
details. That is, the different fellows work in different
places. Al Walker worked up in an aircraft factory, and Mark
Epstein worked in several different small concerns, and Lou
Antell was an inspector in one of the plants, and I was an
inspector.
Oh, this may be of some interest. The first time that I met
this fellow Fred, I was introduced to him by Levitsky. When
Levitsky introduced me to him, he said, ``He is an inspector at
one of the large electric plants.'' I was at Western Electric
then, and he expressed some interest. He seemed to express some
interest in this kind of thing.
Now, there is one other thing. Somewhere in the period of
'46 to '48, Joe Levitsky invited me--we made an appointment to
go to dinner at some midtown restaurant, and when we got there
it turned out that there were three other couples who had been
invited. And in looking back, I think that this was a time
where maybe Levitsky was letting somebody take a look at him.
Because these people sat at dinner. They scarcely talked to me.
As a matter of fact, it was a very, very grim kind of setting.
And some of the people looked familiar. There were three
couples, I think. And I believe this fellow--what is the name
of this fellow who was indicted for perjury?
Mr. Cohn. Perl?
Mr. Greenblum. I believe he was at this group. I had known
him very, very casually at college.
Mr. Cohn. Who else was there that night?
Mr. Greenblum. That night? I can't remember the other
pictures. I can't remember.
Mr. Cohn. Were they introduced to you by name?
Mr. Greenblum. No. Well, maybe they were. I don't recall
their names, But I remember it being very grim. They just sat
and ate, and they just got up and left.
Mr. Cohn. And looking back on that, you feel as though you
were asked there that night so that they could look you over
with a possible view toward asking you to come in with them?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes. This is what I think,
Mr. Cohn. Go ahead. Is there anything else you want to tell
us?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, I can give you all of the names of all
of the people. I wish you would ask all of the questions.
Mr. Cohn. Did Levitsky ever ask you to come in with them?
Mr. Greenblum. No. No, here is the reason why, I think. He
and I were friendly. He had told me he joined the party. But I
believe that in that group there was somebody who knew of me
from the college days, you see, and therefore I was suspect. In
other words, this is what I think.
Mr. Cohn. Did Levitsky ever hint around to any of the other
people?
Mr. Greenblum. Hint around to the other people?
Mr. Cohn. Or hint around to you? Or did any of the other
people ever hint around to you, concerning helping them out in
any way?
Mr. Greenblum. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did Levitsky ever say or do anything indicating
to you that he had been taking information, that these people
had been taking information?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
Mr. Cohn. Is there anybody up at Monmouth now who is
associated with Levitsky who you met on any of these occasions?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where is Antell?
Mr. Greenblum. He still works for the Signal Corps.
Mr. Cohn. Where does he work for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Greenblum. He works for the Signal Corps Inspection
Agency in New York.
Mr. Cohn. When did you last see him?
Mr. Greenblum. I saw him, I guess, five or six months ago.
I dropped him.
Mr. Cohn. Can you recall for us who was at this meeting
with Levitsky and Perl and yourself?
Mr. Greenblum. If you show me pictures, I think I could
recall, looking from a picture.
Mr. Cohn. You say you were there, your wife, and Levitsky
Mr. Greenblum. No, it wasn't my wife; maybe some girl I was
with at the time. I don't even recall which girl it was.
Mr. Cohn. Who was Perl with?
Mr. Greenblum. I think he was there with his wife.
Mr. Cohn. You don't remember any of the names, or any of
the first names?
Mr. Greenblum. I remember nothing,
Mr. Cohn. Then there was another couple?
Mr. Greenblum. There were three couples outside of myself
that I remember.
Mr. Cohn. Do you remember either of the other two?
Mr. Greenblum. No. Now, I am going to make a guess.
Somewhere during the time when I was inspector at Western
Electric, one of their plants, I ran into a man who I briefly
knew at school; that is, again, casually. His name was Nathan--
--
Mr. Cohn. Sussman?
Mr. Greenblum [continuing]. Sussman. Now, I don't recall if
this was the man. But I remember Nathan Sussman as also trying
to influence Sevitsky.
Mr. Cohn. What about Sevitsky? Where did he end up?
Mr. Greenblum. I never saw him but once after school, and I
don't know what happened to him.
Mr. Cohn. When was that once?
Mr. Greenblum. This was--I remember the date. I had been
married before. And this was just after the marriage was
annulled. Let me think for a moment. Let's see, I was twenty-
one years old when I got married.
That would be about eight years ago.
Mr. Cohn. What was he doing there?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't recall. I met him on the subway, on
the East Side, and we had been more or less friendly. In school
he had been in my squad. And we were just talking, and he
remembered that we had once been caught kind of close. And I
said ``yes.''
Mr. Cohn. What was his first name?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't know. Can you give me some of the
names?
Mr. Cohn. What class was Sevitsky in?
Mr. Greenblum. I think he graduated the same time I did.
February '39.
Mr. Cohn. '39?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What degree did he get?
Mr. Greenblum. I think he was an electronics engineer.
Mr. Cohn. What was Antell's first name?
Mr. Greenblum. Louis.
Mr. Cohn. Was it Morris Sevitsky?
Mr. Greenblum. Morris.
Mr. Cohn. You don't know whether he was working for the
government or not?
Mr. Greenblum. No. I am just guessing now, from the
conversation we had, I think he was talking about going into
teaching. But I never knew him to work for the government
anywhere.
Mr. Cohn. He was talking about going into teaching?
Mr. Greenblum. He spoke about he had just gotten married.
Mr. Cohn. Who else did you meet in the company of Levitsky?
How about this man Leo?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't remember his name. I can describe
him to you.
Mr. Cohn. Did he work for the government?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
Mr. Cohn. What did he do?
Mr. Greenblum. As I recall, he was running some kind of a
candy store somewhere.
Mr. Cohn. Was he a Communist?
Mr. Greenblum. I never heard that he was; the same as this
fellow Fred and Ceil. But I suspect that he was.
Mr. Cohn. How about this man Fred? What was his last name?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't recall.
Mr. Cohn. What was he doing for a living?
Mr. Greenblum. He was going to school to be a mechanical
engineer, and somewhere in that period he became a mechanical
engineer, and he went to work, somewhere in New Jersey, around
'47 or '48.
Mr. Cohn. What school did he go to?
Mr. Greenblum. At night, at that time. I don't recall. It
may have been Cooper Union. As a matter of fact, when I first
met him, Joe introduced him as somebody who he had known in the
Cooper Union days, something like this. And it was my
impression.
Mr. Cohn. How about Levitsky's association with Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenblum. After I saw him down in the Signal Corps
School there, I don't know whether he actually ever associated
with him.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever mention Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenblum. I think he mentioned him briefly in some
casual way, but I never saw him.
Mr. Cohn. How about Morton Sobell?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did Levitsky know Sobell?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't think so. He may have.
Wait a minute. He may have known him. If he knew this group
with Perl, I would suspect, and I am just suspicioning now,
that he would.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you about this dinner when you had
Perl out there. Where was this held?
Mr. Greenblum. This was held, I think, in a French
restaurant on 34th Street.
Mr. Cohn. In Manhattan?
Mr. Greenblum. I would remember the name if I saw it.
Mr. Cohn. In Manhattan?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You say these three couples came, and they said
almost nothing?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Didn't you ask Levitsky about that?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes. I think he made some casual comment.
The whole thing that sticks out at the meeting is that they
seemed to be so grim about things. And later, the five times
that I saw Levitsky, from 1948 to the last time, he also seemed
grim and shaken.
Mr. Cohn. You said there was some period when Levitsky said
something to you about not seeing him? Did I understand that
correctly?
Mr. Greenblum. No. Not when I went to Antell, I spoke to
Antell, and he thought it would be a good idea, since he felt
that things didn't sound right there.
Mr. Cohn. Oh, I see. Antell thought it would be a good
thing.
Mr. Greenblum. Antell thought it would be a good thing. And
I agreed with him. Instead of breaking off completely.
Mr. Cohn. Who was closer to Levitsky? You, or Antell?
Mr. Greenblum. Oh, I was closer to Levitsky.
Mr. Cohn. Was Antell ever with Levitsky when you were not
there?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't think so. He may have been.
Mr. Cohn. Did Levitsky ever approach Antell on anything?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't know, I don't think so. I think the
guy he may have worked on was Epstein, who he saw as much as he
saw me.
Mr. Cohn. Where is Epstein now?
Mr. Greenblum. He works for a small company here in New
York.
Mr. Cohn. Was Epstein a Communist?
Mr. Greenblum. No. No, he had no inclination whatsoever.
Mr. Cohn. But you think that he probably was one of the
people Levitsky would have worked on?
Mr. Greenblum. He would have worked on him. I think he
would have worked on Al Walker, but Al would have had no part
of this.
Mr. Cohn. Where is Al Walker now?
Mr. Greenblum. He has his own business somewhere.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that?
Mr. Greenblum. Somewhere on Long Island.
Mr. Cohn. What kind of business?
Mr. Greenblum. They make machine parts, do a little
electronics work for the government.
Mr. Cohn. What is his first name?
Mr. Greenblum. Alfred, Alfred Conard.
Mr. Cohn. And Epstein's name is Markus Epstein?
Mr. Greenblum. Markus Epstein.
Mr. Cohn. What is the best location you could give us for
Epstein?
Mr. Greenblum. Wait a minute, I have got his address.
Mr. Cohn. How about this car pool situation Levitsky told
us about?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't recall that at all. I mean, I may
have been in it. I jut don't recall. I think it is 137-53
Francis Lewis Boulevard, Rosedale. I have some of these other
addresses, if you like.
Mr. Cohn. Could you give us the other addresses?
Mr. Greenblum. Lou Antell is 1936 79th Street. There were a
whole group of my friends, who also occasionally came to
Levitsky.
Mr. Cohn. How long is it since you have seen Epstein?
Mr. Greenblum. Epstein? Several years.
Mr. Cohn. You were pretty sure he was not a Communist?
Mr. Greenblum. I was pretty sure.
Mr. Cohn. What I am getting at is this: Is he the kind of
man you could call in and ask to come in, or do you think it
would be necessary to serve him?
Mr. Greenblum. You could just call up.
Mr. Cohn. And do you know what Walker's address was?
Mr. Greenblum. 2 Spring Lane, Hicksville.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Vivian Glassman when she was out
there?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
Can I make a statement? I didn't come to work for Fort
Monmouth until December of 1948.
There was another girl, talking about people; one time Jo
introduced me to a girl whose name was Sylvia. I don't recall
her last name.
Mr. Cohn. Was she a Communist?
Mr. Greenblum. I think so. I think her family was
Communist, too.
Mr. Cohn. When did he introduce you to her?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, it is somewhere between '46 and '48.
Mr. Cohn. Where?
Mr. Greenblum. He gave me her phone number, I think.
Mr. Cohn. Just a social visit?
Mr. Greenblum. This was just social.
Mr. Cohn. Would you have kept her phone number, by any
chance?
Mr. Greenblum. I have had this thing over the years. I will
tell you what I do recall about her, later on. I just took her
out there once.
Mr. Schine. Mr. Greenblum, you probably have in your desk
or in your drawers somewhere some old address books.
Mr. Greenblum. This is it.
Mr. Schine. This is the only record?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, I may have others.
Mr. Schine. Would you take a look? And possibly they will
be able to refresh your memory, and you will be able to give us
some more of the names and some more facts. It would be of
great help to us.
Mr. Greenblum. Can I ask a question?
The Chairman. Yes, certainly.
Mr. Greenblum. I am a little bit concerned about my own
treatment. It won't make any difference. I will tell you the
whole, and nothing but, anyway.
There is one other man who may be involved with this, who
works at the laboratory now.
The Chairman. What is his name?
Mr. Greenblum. Now, this is just a suspicion. I know this
guy very well, and I will remember the name. I just had a
temporary mental block.
I seem to recall that he may have known Levitsky in the
early days. Leon Miller.
Mr. Cohn. Does he work out at Evans?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes. I will say this. This is just a
suspicion. But if he has nothing to hide, he can come in and
say.
The Chairman. And you need not worry about giving us your
suspicions, because no one will get hurt unless they have
something to hide.
[Whereupon, at 1:30 p.m., a recess was taken until 3:30
p.m.]
TESTIMONY OF CARL GREENBLUM (RESUMED)
The Chairman. Mr. Greenblum, Mr. Carr will proceed until
Mr. Cohn comes back.
We were discussing Julius Rosenberg, I believe, at the time
we took the recess. You were giving us some help on that. Will
you just give us as best you can all the contacts you had with
him, how many times you saw him around the Signal Corps, who he
contacted, how well you knew him, and go right through the
whole picture, if you will?
Then if you can refresh your memory on this car pool that
ran from Philadelphia to Camden, as to who was in that, that
would be very helpful, too.
Mr. Greenblum. I originally saw Rosenberg at school. There
I think I have described what our relations were. Now, in the
Signal Corps----
The Chairman. Let me interrupt as you go along. Were you in
the same class with him?
Mr. Greenblum. I was February '39; and I don't know what
class he was in.
The Chairman. I mean, was he in the same classroom with
you?
Mr. Greenblum. I think I had several classes with him
during the course of the four and a half years that I stayed
there. Towards the latter two years, I would say.
The Chairman. Did you know Ethel Rosenberg also?
Mr. Greenblum. I met her once.
The Chairman. Was that in school also?
Mr. Greenblum. No, at Fort Monmouth when they went down to
school, there was one occasion when she was with him, standing
with a group of people, and I walked by and stopped for a
moment.
The Chairman. I just noticed from the list that you were in
Rosenberg's class in 1939. What does BE stand for? Bachelor of
electrical engineering? There were all told I would say twenty
people in that class. Did you get to know him at all well while
you were in that class?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
The Chairman. Now, Rosenberg held a number of jobs in the
Signal Corps when he was stationed in New York. He also did
some inspection of classified material down at the secret
laboratories at Monmouth. Did you have any contact with him
when he was doing that work?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, let's see. He was at Emerson, I think.
And in the course of my duties--I was on a separate project. I
was a coordinator of a job which was among six companies, one
of whom was Emerson. And I think I visited each one of these
companies, and I visited Emerson either two or three times, I
don't recall exactly. And on one of these occasions I saw him
in the office of the chief inspector there, Ben Yelson.
The Chairman. Did you have a chance to see him down there?
Mr. Greenblum. I spoke to him for a moment or two.
The Chairman. Leaving that testimony for a moment or two,
the testimony has been that Sobell, who since has been
convicted of espionage and is now in jail, came down to the
Signal Corps Laboratories at Fort Monmouth and would stay
overnight, stay over weekends, with no apparent reason for
being there. By hindsight, now, we know that he was doing his
espionage work.
Could you shed any light on Sobell, who he associated with
down there, who he contacted?
Mr. Greenblum. I wasn't there during this period, Senator.
I have gotten it from hearsay that he contacted a man by the
name of Zuckerman and also Coleman.
The Chairman. That is Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes. And he saw Bookbinder.
The Chairman. Did you ever see him in the presence of
Coleman, see the two of them together?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
The Chairman. This is the same Aaron Coleman in whose
apartment was found the forty-three secret documents?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
The Chairman. This car pool was awfully important. I wish
you would think about that. It seems to me that knowing
Rosenberg, he having been executed for espionage since then, it
should ring a very definite bell in your mind if, as Levitsky
has testified, you rode in this car pool over a period of about
two months. His testimony was this, and I can see no reason why
he would bear animosity at a time when he and you were good
friends and he visited at your house. He took the Fifth
Amendment on a great number of matters, but when asked about
this car pool he said, yes, you and he and Markus Epstein and
Julius Rosenberg were in this car pool for about six months.
And on close cross examination, he said he thought you had
participated in it for about two months. Now, you told us this
morning that you didn't, that you were in that car pool with
Levitsky and Epstein, but you thought the fourth man was
Walker. It is, of course, possible that the other witness was
mistaken, but it is very important that you now go into that,
because I want to tell you that we will investigate all phases
of that, and sooner or later we will know whether or not you
and Rosenberg rode in that car pool. I have the impression you
are trying to be completely frank with us, and I would like to
have you search your mind and let us hear about that.
Mr. Greenblum. I can't recall who that was. It is my
impression that it was Walker. And I suggested to Mr. Cohn that
Mr. Epstein be queried on this. It was his car, and he and
Walker could shed some light on this.
The Chairman. We have subpoenaed Epstein already, since
this forenoon's testimony.
Is there anything else you know about Rosenberg?
Mr. Greenblum. I think this represents all of the times
that I saw him; at school, at Fort Monmouth, and, as I say, I
think once at Emerson.
The Chairman. Before we turn this over to Mr. Carr, I would
like to make a request of you that you do this: that you try
and search your memory and see if you cannot recall who the
other six people were at that top secret meeting here in New
York at the restaurant, the one attended by Perl. In connection
with that, the staff will give you the pictures of some of the
alleged members of the Rosenberg spy ring. That might be of
some help to you.
Mr. Greenblum. Senator, I would like to say that this was
at a restaurant. It was a dinner.
The Chairman. Yes, But you are quite firmly convinced this
that was a dinner attended by espionage agents, with the
exception of yourself?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, I don't know them to be espionage
agents.
The Chairman. That is your thought?
Mr. Greenblum. My thought is that those people were members
of this Rosenberg clique.
The Chairman. And you think they brought you in to look you
over and determine whether or not they could safely invite you
into the ring?
Mr. Greenblum. That is what I suspect.
The Chairman. Now, just one other question.
This fellow, Miller, whom you mentioned this morning: could
you give us some more information about him, who his associates
were, anything you know about him?
Mr. Greenblum. Early in the Signal Corps days, my
impression was that he was friendly to some extent with
Levitsky.
The Chairman. And associated with Levitsky. How about
Sobell? Did you know anything about his activities, either
personally or by hearsay?
Mr. Greenblum. Well, Sobell I met at the Reeves Instrument
Company, I think in 1949. It may have been '50. I am not sure.
And this was the first time I had seen him since I had seen him
casually at school. And I saw him in a room with several other
engineers, one of whom was Perry Seay, with whom I had
business. And when noontime came around, it was the custom of
the engineers in this little group to go out to lunch, and the
man I was with, Mr. Seay, took me along with the group. This
was my only meeting with Sobell. I may have seen him again at
Reeves, but this was just in that room.
Mr. Jones. Do you know of any other persons employed out
there at Monmouth other than Seay and Miller whom you had met
previously, either at the party where William Perl was present
or on any other engagement?
Mr. Greenblum. Wait a minute. I mentioned to Mr. Cohn that
another man, by the name of Barr, may have been one of the
members at that dinner party.
Mr. Jones. B-a-r-r?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What is his first name?
Mr. Greenblum. Joel.
Mr. Jones. Is he a CCNY graduate?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What class was he in?
Mr. Greenblum. I think he was in the same class.
Mr. Jones. 1939?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Jones. What is he doing today?
Mr. Greenblum. I don't know. I never saw him since that
time.
Mr. Carr. What gives you the impression that he may have
been one of them? You had seen him at school?
Mr. Greenblum. I had seen him at school. And then seeing
him at this meeting--that is the basis of my impression.
Mr. Carr. That is the last time you have seen Barr? At this
meeting?
Mr. Greenblum. I am not absolutely sure it was Barr.
Mr. Carr. If it was Barr, that is the last time you have
seen Barr?
Mr. Greenblum. Yes.
Mr. Carr. And you have heard nothing from Barr as of that
time? If that was him, that is the last you have heard of him?
When I say ``heard of him''--you have heard nothing by way of
talk or anything else?
Mr. Greenblum. No.
Mr. Carr. How well did you know Barr at school?
Mr. Greenblum. Almost not at all.
Mr. Carr. Just perhaps to speak to? Just somebody that was
around the school?
Mr. Greenblum. Somebody that was around. He may have been
in one or two of my classes, but I never associated in any way
with him.
The Chairman. Mr. Greenblum, there are just a vast amount
of items I want to go into with you. We have called Mr. Epstein
who was in the car pool. He is here now, with another witness.
It is now a quarter of four.
Gen. Lawton, I wonder if you could make Mr. Greenblum
available to advise with the staff on this. We want to get
pictures of various people in the Rosenberg spy ring and let
him go over those, sit down with the staff and go into the
details, the names and places. I know you will want much of
that material. That may take some time. I think it is very
important that no one down at the plant know that he is doing
that, at all. Because it is not a very tame crowd he has been
with.
Mr. Greenblum, Mr. Juliana wants to talk to you about some
of these other matters, and we are going to call Mr. Epstein
now.
Mr. Greenblum. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Mr. Epstein, will you raise your right hand
and be sworn?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Epstein. I do.
The Chairman. You may sit right down there. Mr. Epstein,
your first name is--?
TESTIMONY OF MARKUS EPSTEIN
Mr. Epstein. Markus, M-a-r-k-u-s.
The Chairman. And where are you working now?
Mr. Epstein. Empire Devices.
The Chairman. Does that organization do any classified work
for the government?
Mr. Epstein. Yes, we do,
The Chairman. Secret work?
Mr. Epstein. We haven't had a secret contract in the four
years I have been there.
The Chairman. Some confidential work?
Mr. Epstein. I don't think we have even had confidential
but I am not positive.
The Chairman. Do all the employees of the plant have
clearance?
Mr. Epstein. I don't know, except very recently we did bid
on a secret contract, and shortly after that a large majority
of the employees filled out new security questionnaires.
The Chairman. When did you last work in the Signal Corps?
Mr. Epstein. When?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Epstein. I left in January '46.
The Chairman. Sometime ago I understand you used to drive
your car from Philadelphia to Camden. You had what was known as
a car pool.
Mr. Epstein. From Philadelphia to Camden was a daily trip.
From Camden to New York was a weekend trip.
The Chairman. And you were working in Camden at that time?
Mr. Epstein. That is correct.
The Chairman. Was that Signal Corps work?
Mr. Epstein. Yes.
The Chairman. And who else was in that car pool?
Mr. Epstein. Well, that is a little complicated. I can't
answer it that simply. Let us say that I remember saying that I
drove the only car. That isn't correct. Al Walker had a car,
too. However, now that I recall this thing, now that I went
over it, what probably happened was that his car was loaned out
and was out of business for a while, so essentially I would say
I did 95 percent of all the driving.
There were only five people in the car, or six maybe.
However, there were more than six people who actually were
driven from Philadelphia, because there were changes being
made.
The Chairman. Could you search your memory and give us the
names of those who rode from time to time with you?
Mr. Epstein. That is easy. Well, myself, of course; Al
Walker; Joseph Levitsky; Carl Greenblum; Leonard DiSesa, D-i S-
e-s-a; Iz Hodes, H-o-d-e-s.
The Chairman. I did not get that spelling.
Mr. Epstein. Hodes, H-o-d-e-s. And Cem Mogavero.
The Chairman. Would you spell that?
Mr. Epstein. M-o-g-a-v-e-r-o.
The Chairman. And his first name was what?
Mr. Epstein. I think it was C-e-m-i-l-l-o, but ``Cem'' was
used so often. And Louis Grandizio. The best I can do is spell
it the way it sounds. And Julius Rosenberg was in it, too.
The Chairman. That is the Julius Rosenberg who was
subsequently executed?
Mr. Epstein. Yes. I think I have covered everyone.
The Chairman. Al Walker, Joseph Levitsky, Carl Greenblum,
Leonard DiSesa, Iz Hodes, Cem Mogavero, Louis Grandizio, and
Julius Rosenberg. Now, you drove every day. And you would
normally have how many? Four, five, or six?
Mr. Epstein. Yes.
The Chairman. Would you generally have six people?
Mr. Epstein. Well, what I tried to say was that I never had
more than six.
The Chairman. What would your normal load be? Five?
Mr. Epstein. I imagine so.
The Chairman. Would you know how many times Levitsky and
Rosenberg rode in the car at the same time, roughly?
Mr. Epstein. Well, I would say only so long as Rosenberg
was ever in the car. And I picture that to be over a three-
months span.
The Chairman. Over a three-months span. Was he working at
Camden also?
Mr. Epstein. We were all at Camden, at RCA.
The Chairman. And he would ride about every day when he was
working at Camden?
Mr. Epstein. With one exception. He worked at RCA longer
than three months, I believe, but he lived only in
Philadelphia, I believe, for about three months with us, and
that is why he would have only been in the car for a three-
months span.
The Chairman. During that three-months period, would you
say he rode about six days a week?
Mr. Epstein. Well, we didn't work on Saturday.
The Chairman. I see. Five days a week.
Mr. Epstein. Yes.
The Chairman. Did he ever make any of these New York trips
in the car?
Mr. Epstein. I believe you could say 95 percent of the
weekends, probably a hundred.
The Chairman. I am curious to know how many times over that
three-month period, Levitsky was also in the car. Would you say
he was in there every day, too? I may say Levitsky has
testified that he did ride in the car and Rosenberg was in it.
Mr. Epstein. Well, you are pinning me down. I am not very
clear. Ordinarily, as things would stand, I would say it would
be true, but I am a little hazy. For convenience maybe
somebody--you see, we were not the only group. There were at
least thirty people or forty. Everyone lived--well, practically
everyone. And so for convenience, there may have been shifts or
alternations. But you could consider it as being full time I
suppose.
Mr. Rainville. But when these fellows didn't ride with you,
they did ride with someone else that day?
Mr. Epstein. Probably. Iz Hodes was the only one who stayed
in Philadelphia. Well, he stayed a few times.
The Chairman. How about Carl Greenblum? Would you say he
was in there practically every day also?
Mr. Epstein. That is correct. Except--wait a minute--I
would like to point out that I think while Rosenberg was in the
car, Greenblum was definitely not in the car, because he took
his place in the apartment.
The Chairman. In other words, you think Rosenberg took
Greenblum's place in the car?
Mr. Epstein. Yes.
The Chairman. When did you last see Rosenberg?
Mr. Epstein. I believe that would be somewhere in '43,
because I know definitely I paid a visit to Emerson Radio for
some information.
The Chairman. That is right. I don't want the details.
Roughly, '43?
Mr. Epstein. For that brief visit.
The Chairman. I don't want the details, just when you think
you last saw him.
Mr. Epstein. I could be wrong by a year.
The Chairman. How about Carl Greenblum? When did you last
see him?
Mr. Epstein. I went over that, and I guess I can tell you.
It turned out that I saw him just prior to the announcement of
Rosenberg's----
The Chairman. I am going to ask you to be very cautious in
this, because we happen to know definitely the time, the day,
the method of the last contact with Greenblum. You are under
oath so I want you to tell us when you last contacted him. That
means either by telephone, through a third party, or
personally. I am just giving you some advice.
Mr. Epstein. Fair enough.
The Chairman. Either refuse to answer, or tell us exactly.
Mr Epstein. Since you know exactly, then all I have to do
is tell you approximately.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Epstein. When the FBI interrogated me, they thought it
might be some valid thing. I told them it was warm. It turned
out it was 1950. I looked up the records. And I saw him just
prior to the announcement in the newspapers about Julius
Rosenberg.
The Chairman. Did you have any contact, either directly or
otherwise, with Greenblum in the last three weeks?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. Are you sure?
Mr. Epstein. I am absolutely positive.
The Chairman. You have not talked to him at all?
Mr. Epstein. No. I have mentioned to the wife that we do
owe him a visit, as odd as it may be, but we never made it.
The Chairman. Did he not send a message to you, narrowing
it down, within the last two weeks?
I am going to ask you this again.
Did you have any contact of any kind? By ``contact,'' I
want you to interpret that broadly, either that he got a
message to you, that he phoned you, wrote you a letter, in any
way got in contact with you. I will narrow this down, so that
there is no question as far as memory is concerned. Was it
within the last two and a half weeks?
Mr. Epstein. Definitely no.
The Chairman. And no contact with him through his wife or
anyone else?
Mr. Epstein. Absolutely no.
The Chairman. Did you know that his mother had died a
couple of days ago?
Mr. Epstein. No, I did not.
Mr. Jones. And you say you were planning to repay a visit
to the Greenblums?
Mr. Epstein. Repay? I wouldn't say ``repay.'' After all,
the fellow has had two children since I saw him last. I haven't
seen any of them.
The Chairman. Is it your testimony that to your knowledge
Rosenberg never rode in the same car with Greenblum?
Mr. Epstein. I would say that has to be correct, since
Rosenberg got into this apartment. That means that Greenblum
left the apartment. And if Greenblum left the apartment, he
left it because he was no longer in Camden or Philadelphia.
The Chairman. In other words, you say that Greenblum took
over Rosenberg's apartment? Or vice versa?
Mr. Epstein. There was a specific apartment which I
occupied, probably full time. That is, through the course of
anyone being in this particular apartment, I was there at all
times. And there were only three people in at any one time.
The Chairman. What was it? A three-room apartment? A two-
room apartment?
Mr. Epstein. With two bedrooms, I believe, and some sort of
a living room.
The Chairman. And Rosenberg stayed in the apartment?
Mr. Epstein. Now, I know Levitsky was in the apartment, and
Al Walker was in the apartment, myself, Iz Hodes. It was
myself, Al Walker, Iz Hodes, Levitsky and Greenblum. That is
five people that were there, only three of which were there at
any one time.
The Chairman. You mean there was only room for three at any
one time?
Mr. Epstein. That is correct.
The Chairman. And when one moved out, someone else moved
in?
Mr. Epstein. No, when one moved out, he left the area. So
that is why I can feel pretty sure in saying that Rosenberg and
Greenblum could not have occupied the car at the same time.
The Chairman. Now, could Greenblum have lived in the
apartment for a while?
Mr. Epstein. Yes, he was there for a short time.
The Chairman. About how long?
Mr. Epstein. Maybe only a two-month period.
The Chairman. Could it have been only two weeks?
Mr. Epstein. He was there more than two weeks. Closer to
two months. Let's put it that way.
The Chairman. Would the apartment house have----
Mr. Epstein. Some record of it?
The Chairman. Some record of that?
Mr. Epstein. I wouldn't know.
The Chairman. There were rent controls at that time, were
there not?
Mr. Epstein. I beg pardon?
The Chairman. There were rent controls at that time?
Mr. Epstein. No. I don't think we had rent controls until
after '41. This was in December '40 and early in '41.
The Chairman. In any event, the apartment house keeper
should have a record of all of his tenants, I assume, so we
should have a record of that. We will have no trouble in
finding that information. But it is your testimony that
Rosenberg lived in the apartment for about how many months?
Mr. Epstein. I would say three; plus or minus two months
maybe.
The Chairman. And while he was living there, you were
living there. And who was the third one?
Mr. Epstein. Al Walker was there at that particular time.
The Chairman. Al Walker, yourself, and Rosenberg lived
there at the same time.
Mr. Epstein. The reason I say that----
The Chairman. I am not asking you what your reason is. Time
is short. I am just trying to get the facts.
Mr. Epstein. Okay.
The Chairman. You can tell us about that later on. You can
tell us positively, now, that you, Walker, Rosenberg lived
together in the apartment approximately at the same time.
Mr. Epstein. That is right, because the apartment ended
with us together. We left together.
The Chairman. What was the address? Do you know the
address? Do you know the name?
Mr. Epstein. It was an apartment house area. It could have
been Spruce Street. But they all sound alike.
The Chairman. How many years did you live there?
Mr. Epstein. I think about five months, December to June,
five or six months.
The Chairman. Do you know who the owner of the apartment
was?
Mr. Epstein. No. I can tell you that the woman was alone.
Whether she had been married at any one time, I don't know. The
only information I can add is that an older woman ran that
apartment, and I don't know whether she lost her husband or was
ever married at all.
The Chairman. Do you know what her name was?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. You do not know her name and do not have any
idea where it was except that you think it was Spruce Street?
Mr. Epstein. If necessary we might drive down there, and I
probably might be able to find it.
The Chairman. I might say that is rather unusual. You do
not seem to be of below average intelligence. I think any man
in this room can tell you where he has been living over the
past number of years.
Mr. Epstein. Isn't this about thirteen or fourteen years
ago?
The Chairman. What year was it?
Mr. Epstein. I said 1940-41.
The Chairman. Now, did Greenblum live with you?
Mr. Epstein. Yes.
The Chairman. How long did he live with you?
Mr. Epstein. Well, I judge it to be about two months.
The Chairman. Who else was living with you while he was
living with you?
Mr. Epstein. Iz Hodes was there.
The Chairman. Pardon?
Mr. Epstein. I think Iz Hodes was the other one.
The Chairman. And when Hodes left, who took Hodes' place?
Mr. Epstein. Who actually replaced Hodes?
The Chairman. Yes,
Mr. Epstein. Possibly Levitsky, but I can't say.
The Chairman. And when Greenblum left, who replaced him?
Mr. Epstein. I think Rosenberg must have replaced him. I am
not very clear on that.
The Chairman. Did you consider Rosenberg a Communist at
that time?
Mr. Epstein. I had no consideration of such a matter at
all. I mean, I can't recall any possible incident that I would
have antagonized him in that connection or anything in any way,
shape or form.
Mr. Cohn. Did you consider Mr. Levitsky to be a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. No, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Epstein, we had better tell you something.
You are under oath. You understand that. You are under penalty
of perjury.
Mr. Epstein. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. We had Mr. Greenblum here too. He came in one day
and he told us some things. Mr. Greenblum came back today and
after thinking things over, he has told us everything. He has
told us a long story. And as a result of that he has told
everything concerning Levitsky and Rosenberg and everything
else and made it very clear that you knew very well that
Levitsky was a Communist. Now, Mr. Greenblum assumed that you
would be friendly and anxious to tell the truth. That is why we
called you in without a subpoena. I just want to tell you this.
You had better be completely truthful with this committee. We
have had Levitsky in at length. We have had Greenblum in twice,
and he has been cooperative with the committee now. We have the
whole picture and the whole story. There is only one way you
can get in any difficulty, and that is by not telling the
truth.
Mr. Epstein. That is fair enough.
The Chairman. At this point I may say, Mr. Epstein, that it
isn't my job here to decide who is lying. At this point I can
tell you that either you are perjuring yourself or Mr.
Greenblum perjured himself after he broke down and said, ``I am
going to tell everything.''
Mr. Epstein. Now, wait a minute. In other words, there is a
conflict between anything I have told so far and somebody
else's story?
The Chairman. A big conflict.
Mr. Cohn. It is your sworn testimony that you never
believed that Levitsky was a Communist?
The Chairman. While you are thinking that over, did not
Levitsky actually tell you, in the presence of Greenblum, a
number of times that he was a Communist, and he made no secret
of that when he lived with you and was your roommate, that he
very freely told you he was a member of the Communist party,
said he believed in it, and created the impression he was
completely honest about it? Did he not do it frequently, not
only with you alone but in the presence of Greenblum?
Mr. Epstein. I don't believe he ever made such a statement
that I ever heard.
Mr. Cohn. Did you believe that Levitsky was a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. I didn't. I didn't believe he was.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't think he was?
Mr. Epstein. No.
Mr. Cohn. He never said anything to lead you to believe
that he was a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. He may have said a few things, but I didn't
believe that that made him a Communist. Let's put it that way.
Mr. Cohn. What were the few things he said?
Mr. Epstein. I couldn't possibly think of any particular
incident. Maybe I can think up a few. I could say that if you
wanted to make some interpretations of some of his remarks you
might say he was Communistic. But you asked me did I think he
was and I said ``no.'' And I never heard him say anything
definitely. That is, he never made a statement that I heard
that said, ``Yes, I am a Communist.''
The Chairman. Wait, now. Let us not be childish about this.
I am going to ask you this again, so that there can be no
defense later on in some subsequent legal proceeding that you
did not understand this.
We are not asking you whether he said, ``Yes, I am a
Communist.'' We are not asking for any specific language. The
question is: Did he, in his conversations with you, make it
clear to any normal person--and you are not dumb at all--that
he was a Communist? I do not mean necessarily a dues-paying
member, but a Communist. You know whether he did or not. You
roomed with him. You lived with him.
Mr. Epstein. Yes, and I saw him a number of times after
that.
The Chairman. Now, will you think that over and tell us?
Again, for your protection, so that you can not claim later
that you were trapped into something by any clever cross
examination, we have the sworn testimony now of someone who
claims to be a friend of yours that both you and he knew
without any doubt that Levitsky was a Communist.
Mr. Epstein. You would have to define exactly what you mean
by knowing that he is or was a Communist.
The Chairman. What is your idea of a Communist? We will
take your definition.
Mr. Epstein. One who is definitely a member of the
Communist party at this day and age.
The Chairman. What do you mean by a ``definite member''?
Mr. Epstein. I don't know. I guess they have some cards or
some signature, or the man actually comes into some meeting. I
don't know.
The Chairman. Well, let us broaden that a bit, then. We
will not refer to any card. Let us define a man who is
sympathetic to the Communist cause, feels friendly toward it.
That is a pretty broad definition.
Mr. Epstein. That is quite broad.
The Chairman. Well, we will use that broad definition.
Using that definition, did you not know he was a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. I still don't see how I can say ``yes,'' just
because there were some remarks.
The Chairman. Did you think he was, or was not?
Mr. Epstein. Let us say that I do not think anyone is a
Communist unless I know that he is.
The Chairman. Well, did you think he was? If I am living
with you, and if I am talking politics, you will think I am a
Republican, you will think I am a Democrat, you will think I am
a Socialist. You will have your own opinion. You need not see
my registration slip.
The question is: Did you think this man was a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. I think the only way I could answer a question
like that is by saying that I don't think a man is a Communist
unless I know that he is.
The Chairman. Did you think that he was a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. No, I don't think so.
The Chairman. You did not think so?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. Nothing led you to believe he was?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. When did you first know he was a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. I didn't know that he was.
The Chairman. You never have learned it?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. You never have had any reason to believe that
he was?
Mr. Epstein. That is right.
The Chairman. Did you think that your roommate, Rosenberg,
was a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. Did you at any time know he was engaged in
espionage?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. You had no reason to believe that he was?
Mr. Epstein. That is right.
The Chairman. When did you first learn that Rosenberg was
an espionage agent?
Mr. Epstein. I was on vacation up in the Adirondacks, and I
bumped into someone from the city who said, ``What do you know?
Did you read about it in the press?''
I said, ``No, we don't read papers up here.'' So we got a
paper and read it.
The Chairman. You mean it was only after Rosenberg was
arrested?
Mr. Epstein. That is correct.
The Chairman. All right. Did you ever remove any classified
material from the signal laboratory?
Mr. Epstein. Did I?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Epstein. Of course not.
The Chairman. You have never removed any?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. What clearance did you have? Secret
clearance?
Mr. Epstein. When? Now?
The Chairman. When you were at the laboratory, what
clearance did you have?
Mr. Epstein. Well, you used the word ``laboratory.'' We
were never at the laboratory.
The Chairman. When you were in the Signal Corps?
Mr. Epstein. Yes.
The Chairman. You had secret clearance?
Mr. Epstein. I don't know what clearance I had when I was
with the Signal Corps.
The Chairman. Do you know what kind of a pass you had?
Mr. Epstein. We had a pass that allowed us to get into the
manufacturers' plants.
The Chairman. How many cameras did you have at the
apartment?
Mr. Epstein. Cem Mogavero, I believe, had the only camera.
The Chairman. The only camera? Only one camera?
Mr. Epstein. That is as far as I know. At least that is the
camera that we used to take some pictures, I remember.
The Chairman. How about Rosenberg?
Mr. Epstein. I don't know.
The Chairman. You do not know that he had a camera?
Mr. Epstein. I don't know.
The Chairman. Did you ever see a Minox?
Mr. Epstein. I beg pardon?
The Chairman. Did you ever see a Minox camera?
Mr. Epstein. No. I am not familiar with the camera, even.
The Chairman. Well, if I described that as a camera about
as large as my finger, smaller than that, did you ever see a
camera like that?
Mr. Epstein. No, I never did.
The Chairman. And you never had any reason to believe that
either Rosenberg or Greenblum or Levitsky or any of them were
members of the Communist party?
Mr. Epstein. That is correct.
The Chairman. You never attended Communist meetings?
Mr. Epstein. I? No.
The Chairman. Were you ever solicited to attend a meeting
of the Communist party or the Young Communist League?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever pay any money to the Communist
party?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever see any classified material
around the apartment?
Mr. Epstein. There was no such thing as classified material
in that apartment.
The Chairman. I just asked you: Did you ever see any
classified material around the apartment?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. And since then, how many of your roommates
did you discover were members of the Communist party?
Mr. Epstein. Evidently only one.
The Chairman. That is the only one you would reasonably
believe was a member of the Communist party, or a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think Rosenberg was guilty as charged?
Mr. Epstein. I don't know what to believe, really.
Mr. Cohn. Are you satisfied he was guilty as charged?
Mr. Epstein. I am reasonably satisfied, but the man said he
was not guilty when he died. That leaves me some doubt as to
something or other.
Mr. Cohn. That leaves you some doubt; is that right?
Mr. Epstein. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of William Perl?
Mr. Epstein. No.
Mr. Cohn. William Mutterperl?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. Did you room with Zuckerman?
Mr. Epstein. No, I don't recognize that name.
The Chairman. You didn't know a Mr. Zuckerman?
Mr. Epstein. No, I don't recognize that name.
The Chairman. Do you know Mr. Coleman?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. You never knew Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Epstein. I think someone mentioned that he is one of
the fellows who was suspended, I believe.
The Chairman. The question is: Did you know him personally?
Mr. Epstein. No. I never heard the name before.
Mr. Cohn. I just want to get the question very clearly on
the record: Your sworn testimony is that you did not believe
Levitsky was a Communist and you did not believe Rosenberg was
a Communist at any time.
Mr. Epstein. With the modification that I believe he was,
because I know that he left the Signal Corps by their request,
due to being a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. This was Rosenberg?
Mr. Epstein. Rosenberg.
Mr. Cohn. But as far as Levitsky is concerned, you have
never believed him to be a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. That is right.
The Chairman. Did you know Vivian Glassman?
Mr. Epstein. Come again?
The Chairman. Did you know Vivian Glassman?
Mr. Epstein. I guess not. Is that a man?
The Chairman. No, that is a woman.
Mr. Epstein. We have a Glassman in our neighborhood. Not
Vivian, though.
Mr. Jones. Is her name Eleanor?
Mr. Epstein. No.
Mr. Rainville. Do you know Vivian Pataki?
Mr. Epstein. No.
Mr. Rainville. Eleanor Hutnek?
Mr. Epstein. No.
The Chairman. You may step down. I again want to tell you,
just so that you cannot claim ignorance of the fact, at some
future legal proceeding, and I want to make it very clear to
you that your evidence is in direct contradiction to other
evidence we have had. It is not my function to decide who is
lying, or who is perjuring himself.
Your evidence will be given to the Justice Department with
the request that there be an indictment for perjury either of
you or of the other individuals who have testified counter to
what you have testified to.
If you want to go home and think this over and come back
and correct any of your testimony, we will consider allowing
you to do it.
Mr. Epstein. It is very simple. I have nothing to correct.
The Chairman. All right. You may leave.
Mr. Cohn. You were asked whether you, yourself, were ever a
Communist?
Mr. Epstein. I think I was; I don't recall. You mean in
this testimony? I think you asked me.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever a Communist?
Mr. Epstein. No.
Mr. Cohn. In any way, manner, shape, or form?
Mr. Epstein. Not even the remotest.
The Chairman. Did you sign any Communist petitions?
Mr. Epstein. None.
The Chairman. You may leave.
Mr. Cohn. Can we get your full name, please?
STATEMENT OF LEO M. MILLER
Mr. Miller. Leo M. Miller.
Mr. Cohn. Where are you employed, Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. At the Evans Signal Laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time have you been
there?
Mr. Miller. I have been there since January of 1950,
January 22nd, I believe.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you before that?
Mr. Miller. I was employed at the Watson Laboratories, part
of the air materiel command of the air force.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what clearance do you have now?
Mr. Miller. At the present time, I have interim top secret,
I believe. It is either interim or final; I am not sure.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Joseph Levitsky?
Mr. Miller. Joe Levitsky? Yes.
Mr. Cohn. I see. When did you first meet him?
Mr. Miller. Joe Levitsky worked for the Signal Corps
Inspection Agency. I believe I first met him either in 1941 or
'42, around that time. I don't remember precisely the time. I
was working at this place, too, incidentally. There were quite
a few engineers working there.
Mr Cohn. And how well did you get to know Levitsky?
Mr. Miller. Well, let's see. Not well enough to follow him,
in a sense, when he left that job, or when I left that job. I
never heard of him since then. When we by chance happened to
run into each other, perhaps on the same job--what we were,
incidentally, was Signal Corps inspectors. As a result, I might
wind up in a plant, and somebody would be there.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever see him socially?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Cohn. You were never in anyone's home when he was
present?
Mr. Miller. To the best of my knowledge, I can't ever
remember being in someone's home where he was.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Carl Greenblum?
Mr. Miller. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. How well do you know him?
Mr. Miller. Somewhat better than I know Levitsky.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been at Greenblum's home?
Mr. Miller. As far as I know, I never have been to
Greenblum's home, so I certainly didn't see him there. I know
Carl very well, because we went out on a common job together.
We stayed together in Kansas City for about six months.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever with Levitsky in the company of
Greenblum? Were the three of you ever together?
Mr. Miller. I imagine so. I don't know for sure.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know that Levitsky was a Communist?
Mr. Miller. No, I didn't.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever suspect that?
Mr. Miller. I didn't.
Mr. Cohn. He never said anything that put you on notice in
any way?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know a man by the name of Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Miller. He worked at the Watson Laboratories where I
worked.
Mr. Cohn. Had you ever met him?
Mr. Miller. I have passed him in the hallway and knew who
he was, but I never met him.
Mr. Cohn. What college are you a graduate of?
Mr. Miller. Cooper Union.
Mr. Cohn. When did you graduate from Cooper Union?
Mr. Miller. 1940.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Ullmann at Cooper Union?
Mr. Miller. I didn't even know he was a Cooper Union man.
Mr. Cohn. And you don't recall him from the Watson
Laboratory, other than knowing he was around?
Mr. Miller. That is right. I never heard of him. In a
sense, I knew he existed as Marcel Ullmann who took care of
foreign equipment at the laboratories. I first became aware of
him when I heard he was fired.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Bob Martin?
Mr. Miller. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know him well?
Mr. Miller. Quite well in a sense. I have attended social
gatherings where Bob was present. I had some business with him
at Watson Laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever belong to the United Public Workers
of America?
Mr. Miller. No, I never did.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you work prior to going with Watson
Laboratories?
Mr. Miller. I worked for the Plant Engineering Agency in
Philadelphia for approximately nine months. That was in about
1944.
Mr. Cohn. Now, were you ever asked to go to a Communist
meeting?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Cohn. You were never asked to go to a Communist
meeting?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever asked to go to a Communist
gathering of any kind?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend one?
Mr. Miller. No, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever asked to join the Communist party?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever know anyone whom you believed to be
a Communist?
Mr. Miller. I don't know of anyone that I know that I had
thought was a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. You can say that without any reservation
whatsoever, that there is no one you have known that you
thought was a Communist?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Or who you now think was a Communist or is a
Communist?
Mr. Miller. Well, as a Signal Corps inspector, I had seen
Julius Rosenberg, so I might say that I now know he was a
Communist.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Rosenberg?
Mr. Miller. Rosenberg, for one period of time, was an
assistant of mine in the plant. He was sent in as one of the
engineers in the plant. I had about forty people there.
Rosenberg was one of them for some months.
Mr. Cohn. Where was this?
Mr. Miller. This was at the Emerson Radio Company.
Mr. Cohn. Now, did you know whether or not Rosenberg was
stealing any classified information or any material from
Emerson Electric?
Mr. Miller. I certainly did not know of any such thing.
Mr. Cohn. Were there any such things as proximity fuses
around there?
Mr. Miller. Well, I was the inspector in charge, and one
day I was told to furnish two inspectors for a special job. I
furnished these two inspectors, and I believed they worked on
the proximity fuse. I didn't, myself.
Mr. Cohn. Who were those two inspectors?
Mr. Miller. Frankly, I don't even recall their names. They
were very low grade inspectors. All they did was to go through
routine operations under the direction of an engineer from the
agency procuring the fuses.
Mr. Cohn. How big is the proximity fuse?
Mr. Miller. I happen to know a bit about it, incidentally,
and I will tell you why.
Mr. Cohn. You are way ahead of me.
Mr. Miller. I happened to be in charge of the jamming
section, the Countermeasures Branch, and we have activities in
relation to that. I can't tell you any more than that. I don't
know all types, but I would say it is approximately about that
high off the table [indicating], perhaps about so, maybe five
inches high, and they would be of different sizes, depending
upon the calibers of shells they go into.
Mr. Cohn. About five inches high, you say?
Mr. Miller. Yes, about that.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, it would be possible for somebody
to put it in a brief case, or something like that?
Mr. Miller. I would certainly imagine so.
Mr. Cohn. Now, do you know if Rosenberg had access to any
proximity fuse?
Mr. Miller. During the time that I was in the plant,
Rosenberg never had any clearance for that project, and he
would never have had any access during the time I was there.
Incidentally, I was transferred out of the plant, and I
understand Rosenberg stayed there afterwards.
Mr. Cohn. About when was this, did you say?
Mr. Miller. Let me think about it now. Around 1943.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this: Is there anyone up at
Monmouth now who was in this group of forty along with
Rosenberg?
Mr. Miller. No, I don't think there is anybody there. Most
of the people, incidentally, were what one would call low level
talent. They were people who were simply given jobs along the
production line and told to do a routine operation on just a
few pieces of equipment.
Mr. Cohn. Was there anybody at Emerson who is at Monmouth?
Mr. Miller. I don't know of anybody who is at Monmouth from
there.
Mr. Cohn. Anybody who was at Monmouth?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have any reason to believe Rosenberg was
a Communist?
Mr. Miller. No, I didn't.
Mr. Cohn. When he was under your supervision?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Cohn. As a matter of fact, he was suspended back in
'45.
Mr. Miller. In '45? That was after the time that I had----
In '45 I had left the inspection agency by approximately a
year and a half, and I didn't know anything about it.
Mr. Cohn. You say you do recall one occasion on which there
was work being done on these proximity fuses?
Mr. Miller. The only thing I recall was assigning two
people to the job.
Mr. Cohn. And you do not recall who they were?
Mr. Miller. No. As a matter of fact, these two people--I
think they were both girls, if I remember correctly--had
absolutely no technical background. Their only function was to
perform in a very routine fashion certain very specified
motions and tests, which I am sure they didn't have the vaguest
notion about. I don't think they knew what they were doing.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Vivian Glassman?
Mr. Miller. No, I have never heard the name before.
Mr. Cohn. Rosenberg might have had access to the proximity
fuse about which you did not know? Is that right?
Mr. Miller. I can't believe during the time I was there he
had access to it, because the project was extremely well
guarded, and I can't understand how he could have been allowed
entrance into the place, or anyone for that matter. At the
time, incidentally, I did not know what a proximity fuse was
myself. I learned that since.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see Rosenberg again after that?
Mr. Miller. I never saw Rosenberg after that.
Just a moment. Let me think about that for a minute.
After the time that I left Emerson, I was temporarily
inspector in charge in another plant, and I believe I recall a
call from Rosenberg asking me for some technical advice on a
job that he had. At that time he, I understand, was no longer
at Emerson, too. I am not absolutely certain of this. I am
trying to recall it, and I wanted to be accurate.
Mr. Cohn. When was that?
Mr. Miller. I think it must have been in the latter part of
'43 or the very early part of '44. I remember, strangely
enough, the technical question, but I don't remember the date.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Morton Sobell?
Mr. Miller. No, I never did. I never saw Sobell.
Mr. Cohn. Is there anyone in addition to Rosenberg you can
tell us about that you knew or later found out to be a
Communist?
Mr. Miller. I can't think of anyone.
Mr. Jones. How well do you know William Perl?
Mr. Miller. I never heard of William Perl other than in the
newspaper.
Mr. Jones. You said you lived in Kansas City for six
months?
Mr. Miller. With Carl Greenblum.
Mr. Jones. What were you doing out there?
Mr. Miller. We were both inspectors for the Newark Signal
Corps Inspection Agency.
Mr. Jones. What year was that?
Mr. Miller. That must have been in the latter part of '41
or the early part of '42.
Mr. Jones. Who else lived with you out there then?
Mr. Miller. Just the two of us. We were the only two people
assigned to this particular job.
Mr. Jones. And when you returned from Kansas City, where
did you go?
Mr. Miller. I went off to other jobs, very numerous ones, I
don't remember which, precisely. And he went other ways. He
went to other jobs. You see, the kind of jobs we had might last
anywhere from a day to a month to six months. Perhaps I might
say in a place as long as a year. There were so many job
assignments you would keep hopping around. You would get to see
a lot of people and not see them again.
Mr. Jones. Do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Miller. Yes, I know Aaron Coleman,
Mr. Jones. How well do you know Aaron Coleman?
Mr. Miller. Well, let's say the date is indistinct because
I knew of Aaron Coleman much before the time I met him. In my
job at Watson Laboratories, I was a radar engineer. Aaron
Coleman conceived a particular project dealing with radar which
was well known, in a sense, in the field. The fact that this
project was at the Signal Corps, and they were coordinating
meetings occasionally, and I had heard that Aaron Coleman was
say, the father of this thing. And when I went to work for the
Signal Corps, I met Aaron Coleman at people's homes, various
little gatherings around the area, and I saw Aaron Coleman
there.
Mr. Jones. What homes did you say?
Mr. Miller. What homes? I didn't say. I met him at Jerome
Corwin's about twice, I would say.
Mr. Jones. Did Corwin ever introduce you to a Markus
Epstein?
Mr. Miller. Corwin never introduced me to anybody.
Mr. Jones. Did you ever hear of Markus Epstein?
Mr. Miller. No. I never heard of Markus Epstein. When I met
Coleman it was always due to the fact that he happened to be
invited to some place I happened to be invited to.
Mr. Jones. How about Benjamin Zuckerman?
Mr. Miller. Benjamin Zuckerman I know quite well.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you meet him?
Mr. Miller. He was my assistant at Watson Laboratories. I
started in Watson Laboratories, as I mentioned, in 1945,
Benjamin Zuckerman, I think, came in there in about '46 or '47;
'46 possibly.
Mr. Cohn. When did you see him last?
Mr. Miller. I haven't seen him since I testified for him at
his hearing, to the effect that he was no Communist as far as I
knew.
Mr. Cohn. When did you testify at this loyalty hearing?
Mr. Miller. It must have been well over a year ago. It was
in New York City. I don't know. You possibly would know the
date better than I do, by some record or other.
Mr. Cohn. I have nothing further. We will let you know if
we want you in again. We probably will not. Thanks very much
for coming in.
[Whereupon, at 5:17 p.m., a recess was taken until 10:30
a.m., Saturday, October 17, 1953.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--Following this hearing, Senator McCarthy
told reporters that a witness had been informed that he had
been heard to remark, ``I was in the Rosenberg spy ring, and
but for the grace of God there go I,'' after which he had taken
the Fifth Amendment. The Chicago Tribune quoted the senator as
saying, ``Obviously, this witness took the protection of the
5th amendment only after he learned that we had evidence of his
espionage acts. There is a clear case of contempt against him,
which will be submitted to the Senate.'' No contempt charges
were filed against the witness, Joseph Levitsky (1913-1978),
who later testified in a public hearing on November 24, 1953.
Alfred C. Walker and Louis Antell (1912-1995) did not appear in
public session.]
----------
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met at 10:30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in
room 29 of the Federal Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
(chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Francis Carr,
staff director; G. David Schine, chief consultant; Daniel G.
Buckley, assistant counsel; Harold Rainville, administrative
assistant to Senator Dirksen; and Robert Jones, research
assistant to Senator Potter.
Present also: John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
Department of the Army.
The Chairman. Mr. Walker, will you raise your right hand?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Walker. I do.
The Chairman. Mr. Walker, will you give your full name to
the reporter?
TESTIMONY OF ALFRED C. WALKER
Mr. Walker. Alfred C. Walker.
The Chairman. And over what period of time did you work for
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Walker. I believe it was July of 1944 to, I think, July
of '46. No, I am wrong. July of 1940 to about July of 1944.
The Chairman. '40 to '44, about.
Mr. Walker. Yes.
The Chairman. Then did you quit, or were you discharged?
Mr. Walker. I quit to go into the navy.
The Chairman. And in what branch of the navy did you serve?
Mr. Walker. Well, I was an airborne radio-radar officer.
The Chairman. In what type planes?
Mr. Walker. Well, I wasn't in any plane. I was assigned to
bases. A good bit of the time I was in the navy was taken up
with training. That was about a year. I was assigned to
Norfolk, a training squadron there, and I went to Puerto Rico
for a month and came back to the Naval Research Laboratories,
and I was there for about seven months and then discharged.
The Chairman. Working in radar all that time?
Mr. Walker. No, I wasn't working in radar during that time.
As a matter of fact, I got training in radio and radar, and I
taught it, but in the research lab I wrote patents for a while.
The Chairman. Anyway, you worked from '40 to '44 in the
Signal Corps Laboratory, went into the navy, came back, and did
you say you worked in the Signal Corps when you came back?
Mr. Walker. No, after I got out of the navy I worked for
several firms. I worked, first of all, for Republic Aviation,
as an electrical engineer. From there I went to either Hillyer
Engineering Company, or Hillyer Instrument Company, in New York
City.
The Chairman. Where are you working as of now?
Mr. Walker. I have my own company.
The Chairman. What is the name of that company?
Mr. Walker. Control Electronics Company, Incorporated,
The Chairman. Do you do work for the government now?
Mr. Walker. Yes.
The Chairman. Classified work?
Mr. Walker. Yes.
The Chairman. What classification? How high? As high as
secret?
Mr. Walker. No. Our facilities are only cleared for
confidential. I have a secret clearance.
The Chairman. And where did you go to school?
Mr. Walker. At Pratt Institute.
The Chairman. You graduated when?
Mr. Walker. In 1940.
The Chairman. Will you tell us of any connections you had
with Julius Rosenberg at any time?
Mr. Walker. Yes. I lived in an apartment with him and a
couple of other fellows in Philadelphia.
The Chairman. Who were the other fellows?
Mr. Walker. There was Markus Epstein, Joe Levitsky, Iz
Hodes.
The Chairman. Iz Hodes did you say?
Mr. Walker. Yes. And there were other people. As they would
get transferred, there would be some others that would come and
go. There was a fellow whose name was Grandizio. And did I say
Joe Levitsky?
The Chairman. You were working where? In Camden at that
time?
Mr. Walker. Yes. I was assigned to RCA in Camden.
The Chairman. And was Rosenberg working at Camden also?
Mr. Walker. Yes.
The Chairman. Did you have a car at that time?
Mr. Walker. I had a car. I got it in March of '41. I had it
some time during that period, yes.
The Chairman. There was gas rationing at that time, of
course, so I assume you had the usual car pool going to work
and coming from work?
Mr. Walker. Yes.
The Chairman. Who was in your car pool?
Mr. Walker. Well, the people previously mentioned in the
apartment, and I think a fellow named Mogavero would meet us
for breakfast.
The Chairman. How do you spell that?
Mr. Walker. M-o-g-something like that a-v-e-r-o.
The Chairman. What was his first name?
Mr. Walker. I think an abbreviation of it is ``Cem.'' That
is all I seem to remember.
The Chairman. I think we got his name yesterday. Was
Rosenberg in the car pool?
Mr. Walker. I can't specifically remember actually driving
back and forth to work with him. The only remembrance I have is
that usually we used Epstein's car.
The Chairman. And you do not recall whether Rosenberg rode
to work or not?
Mr. Walker. No. I have thought about that. I can't recall
that definitely. He undoubtedly did on occasions.
The Chairman. Did Carl Greenblum ride back and forth?
Mr. Walker. Well, I believe so.
The Chairman. Did Greenblum room in the house while you
were there?
Mr. Walker. Yes.
The Chairman. And were Rosenberg and Greenblum ever living
in the apartment at the same time?
Mr. Walker. Yes. As I remember, yes.
The Chairman. You would not know how long, I suppose?
Mr. Walker. Well, I can only estimate that I was there
something in the neighborhood of six months or less. And I
think they were all there before I came, all that group.
The Chairman. How many did the apartment accommodate? How
many people?
Mr. Walker. There were five, as I remember.
The Chairman. What was the address of the apartment?
Mr. Walker. Well, I remember it being something like Spruce
near 21st Street.
The Chairman. You would not remember the address at all?
Mr. Walker. No, I wouldn't.
The Chairman. How large an apartment? Could you describe
it?
Mr. Walker. Well, it had several floors. I know they had
some roomers below us, on the floor below us. I would think
perhaps three floors.
The Chairman. Do you know the name of the person who owned
the apartment?
Mr. Walker. No, I do not. I know the rent was paid to a
woman, but that is all.
The Chairman. Have you since then learned that any of the
men who roomed in that apartment with you were members of the
Communist party?
Mr. Walker. No, with the exception of Rosenberg.
The Chairman. Pardon?
Mr. Walker. I say, with the exception of Rosenberg.
The Chairman. Did you know Rosenberg was a Communist at
that time?
Mr. Walker. No, I did not.
The Chairman. Did he ever discuss communism?
Mr. Walker. No. I have no recollection of a discussion of
communism.
The Chairman. Did you know Levitsky quite well?
Mr. Walker. Just from living there, and then after that
meeting him occasionally.
The Chairman. When have you last seen Levitsky?
Mr. Walker. I think it was about three years ago, at the
annual convention of the Institute of Radio Engineers.
The Chairman. Are you married now?
Mr. Walker. Yes, I am.
The Chairman. Do you have a family?
Mr. Walker. Two children.
The Chairman. When was Levitsky at your home last?
Mr. Walker. He has never been at my home.
The Chairman. Did you know Sobell?
Mr. Walker. No, I do not, or did not.
The Chairman. When did you last see Rosenberg?
Mr. Walker. He was inspector in charge at Jefferson Travis
in, I believe, '43; and I was assigned to take the job over
from him.
And during that time, he was there about two weeks, one or
two weeks, at the same time I was. And then after that he went
to Emerson, and I think I saw him once there. It was on
business.
The Chairman. What was the last time, the year, about?
Mr. Walker. I think it was about '43.
The Chairman. Did you know he was engaging in espionage?
Mr. Walker. No, I did not.
The Chairman. You say you never knew that Joe Levitsky was
a Communist?
Mr. Walker. No.
The Chairman. Never discussed communism with him?
Mr. Walker. No.
The Chairman. You were a pretty close friend of Levitsky's,
were you?
Mr. Walker. Not particularly. I got to know all these
fellows fairly well. I got to know Joe and Mark probably better
than the others there.
The Chairman. Did you know Mrs. Levitsky?
Mr. Walker. Yes. After Joe got married, I think I was over
to his place once or twice.
The Chairman. Has he been to your home?
Mr. Walker. No.
The Chairman. And you say you never had any reason to think
he was a Communist?
Mr. Walker. No, no reason to think that.
The Chairman. I may say that is in direct conflict with
other evidence we have received. The other evidence is to the
effect that you and the other people in the apartment knew he
was a Communist, that he discussed his communism repeatedly,
and never covered up the fact that he was a Communist.
Mr. Walker. No. There were conversations, not particularly
about communism.
The Chairman. Your testimony is that you never knew
Rosenberg was a Communist, never had any reason to believe that
he was?
Mr. Walker. That is correct.
The Chairman. And you said you lived with him how long?
About six months?
Mr. Walker. Six months or less, yes.
The Chairman. And did he ride in your car in this car pool,
or in somebody else's car?
Mr. Walker. Usually I believe Epstein's car was used. Mine
was used some of the time. It may be that he rode in either of
them. I don't particularly remember his going back and forth to
work with us.
The Chairman. Did you know Epstein was a Communist?
Mr. Walker. I have no knowledge of that.
The Chairman. In other words, you had no reason to believe
that any of these individuals you roomed with where Communists?
Mr. Walker. No. I mean, none of them ever stated that they
were. None of them ever advocated it. There were conversations
involving Levitsky and Rosenberg. I know, for instance, that
they apparently were pretty familiar with the economic set-up
in Russia. There was never any advocacy of a Communistic
government.
The Chairman. I think for your protection, so that you will
know, the testimony we have already taken under oath has been
that you and the other people who were rooming with Levitsky
all had every reason to know he was a Communist, that he never
denied it, that he discussed it freely, and that you all knew
he was a Communist. That would indicate that somebody here is
not telling the truth. I am telling you this for your
protection. Your testimony is that you never had any reason to
believe that Levitsky was a Communist?
Mr. Walker. I never had any----
The Chairman. Did you think he was a Communist?
Mr. Walker. No. I never thought that he was a Communist. I
thought that he was interested in all the social----
The Chairman. That is all right. I just asked you if you
thought he was a Communist, and your answer is ``no.''
Mr. Walker. If I thought at the time he was a Communist, I
wouldn't have associated with him.
The Chairman. May I say we have had a sizable number of the
men in here who were living with Rosenberg, living with
Levitsky, at the time they were engaged in espionage, at the
time they were trying to recruit espionage agents. You all were
handling classified material. And we have the evidence to show
that this entire group living together knew about the Communist
activities of these men. I may say, just so you will know how
to govern your actions, in case you intend to get a lawyer, I
intend, of course, to submit all this testimony to the attorney
general with the recommendation to try to find out who is lying
and submit it to the grand jury for indictments. There is no
reason why we should have to bring in the associates of
Rosenberg and Levitsky and try and pull the truth out of them
like you would pull teeth. I am not saying you are not telling
the truth. I don't know. I know either you are not telling the
truth, or the other witnesses are not. It is not up to me to
decide who is lying. I will let the attorney general conduct an
investigation and let the grand jury do it.
I may say it is extremely unusual to find a man of your
apparent mentality--you seem to be certainly average, if not
above average, in intelligence--would live with espionage
agents, live with Communists, have a car pool with them, and
have no idea at all that they were Communists. That is not up
to me to make a determination on, however.
If you want to, before we excuse you from the stand,
refresh your recollection and tell us anything about your
association with Rosenberg further, we would be glad to hear
it.
Mr. Walker. I had no association with Rosenberg.
The Chairman. Or Levitsky. Or your knowledge of them. You
know that we are trying to investigate the Communists and the
espionage agents in the Signal Corps. You lived with part of
the Rosenberg spy ring at the time they were operating. If you
have any information that you want to give us, good. If not, I
am through asking questions.
Mr. Walker. Well, I would like to clarify it. At the time I
definitely did not think that either of the men were
Communists. I know that there were conversations concerning
Russia and the social situation there, the government there,
but there was no admission or suggestion by either of the
gentlemen that he was a Communist.
The Chairman. Did you ever go to a Communist meeting?
Mr. Walker. No. I never went to one.
The Chairman. Did you ever go to a meeting of the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Walker. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever join the Communist party?
Mr. Walker. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever contribute any money to the
Communist party?
Mr. Walker. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever belong to any organizations
which were then or have since been listed by the attorney
general as fronts for the Communist party?
Mr. Walker. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever know anyone, or do you now know
anyone, in the Signal Corps or any other branch of the
government, who you have any reason to believe is or was a
Communist?
Mr. Walker. No.
Mr. Cohn. When did you see Levitsky last?
Mr. Walker. I believe it was about three years ago, in a
meeting of the Institute of Radio Engineers; that is to say,
their convention in the Grand Central Palace, their exhibit.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see Morton Sobell there?
Mr. Walker. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever go out socially with Levitsky?
Mr. Walker. When I was transferred back to New York, on one
or two occasions, I think some of the same group in the Signal
Corps would go out to dinner once or twice.
Mr. Cohn. When was this, exactly? Fix it as best you can.
Mr. Walker. Well, I was in the New York area in--I was
there part of '42, '43, and half of '44.
Mr. Cohn. Now, who went out on these two social occasions?
Who was present?
Mr. Walker. I can only remember having dinner with Joe
Levitsky, Mark Epstein, and myself.
Mr. Cohn. Who else?
Mr. Walker. That is all I can remember. I think that is all
that were there.
Mr. Cohn. You never knew Levitsky was a Communist, or
anything like that?
Mr. Walker. No, I did not.
Mr. Carr. Mr. Walker, we have been led to believe that you
would tell everything you could about your association with
Levitsky, that you would like not to hold back on anything in
connection with Levitsky. Was Levitsky interested in what you
were doing, the kind of work you were doing?
Mr. Walker. No, at RCA Camden, he was doing the same thing
we were all doing. That was not classified work, as I remember.
Mr. Carr. When did you see him, between the time that you
were at Camden and the time that you last saw him? Were there
any other times in between?
Mr. Walker. Oh, yes. I think I was to his house on two
occasions. They were strictly social and business.
Mr. Carr. When were these occasions?
Mr. Walker. One occasion was shortly after he got married.
He had a little party.
Mr. Carr. What year, roughly? Do you recall?
Mr. Walker. It was probably the early part of '44.
Mr. Carr. Where were you working at that time?
Mr. Walker. Well, I don't know where I was working exactly,
when I saw him, but I was at Jefferson Travis in New York City
in '44, and I do not believe the work there was classified,
that I was in charge of. Previously to that, in the New York
area, I was out at a radio company, and they had some radio
marine transmitters, which I do not believe were classified.
Previous to that, I was inspecting at the Radio Receptor
Company. I don't know if the material there was classified or
not. It was a communication transmitter and receiver. But at no
time do I recall that Levitsky questioned me technically about
the work.
Mr. Carr. Then there was one other time you mentioned that
you had seen him, either at your house or his house.
Mr. Walker. He was never at my house. There was a time--
this was after I had got out of the service, and I had always
had the idea of starting in business, which I later did, and I
suggested that a group of engineers get together and discuss
possibly developing some product. And we had a meeting there
for that purpose. And we may have had two meetings, discussing
at that time that I wanted to develop a converter for home use,
and there was some discussion about that. I think Mark Epstein
was there and Carl Greenblum, and I think Greenblum did some of
the work on that, and it was later dropped, and that was about
the end of it.
Mr. Carr. Did Levitskv at any time approach you in any
fashion which, looking back now at all of your associations
with him, would lead you to believe that he was setting you up
to become a member of this apparatus?
Mr. Walker. No. I had very infrequent contact with him, and
I had no thought like that that entered my head.
Mr. Carr. No thought entered your head. But looking back at
it now, do you think that such a thought may have entered his
head?
Mr. Walker. No. Well, I don't see any reason for that,
because, as I say, our meetings were very infrequent. He never
made any particular attempt to get in touch with me. And I
don't recall any particular discussion of any technical part of
my work.
The Chairman. I may say, Mr. Walker, if you change your
mind and decide to give us the information which the other
witnesses have indicated you have, you may contact Mr. Cohn.
Mr. Walker. I would be very glad to give you anything.
Mr. Rainville. May I ask you a question before you leave?
Who actually paid the rent? Did you pay individually, or did
one fellow collect and pay it?
Mr. Walker. As I remember, one fellow collected and paid
it, and I can only recall one occasion. I have a picture of
Mark Epstein paying it on one occasion.
Mr. Rainville. Who was the one who generally paid it?
Mr. Walker. I can't recall a detail like that.
Mr. Rainville. You don't remember anybody dunning you for
the rent when you slipped up a couple of days without giving it
to them? Can you remember how much you paid?
Mr. Walker. No. A very nominal amount. I don't think it
amounted to more than about six dollars a week, something like
that.
Mr. Rainville. Of course, that was trivial, and you
wouldn't remember who you paid it to, probably. There was one
other thing. You said the five people you named as rooming
there, and later you acknowledged that Greenblum was the sixth
one----
Mr. Walker. That made six?
Mr. Rainville. That made six.
Mr. Walker. It does make six, yes.
Mr. Rainville. You said Levitsky, Epstein, Hodes, and
Grandizio in addition to Rosenberg. That is five, and plus
yourself is six, and Carl Greenblum would be seven. So that
would be six persons besides yourself.
Mr. Walker. I don't think it would be seven. Would you
repeat that, please?
Mr. Rainville. Well, you repeat it.
Mr. Walker. All right. Mark Epstein, Joe Levitsky, Julius
Rosenberg, Iz Hodes, and Grandizio--yes, that is true. All I
can think of is that they were sort of coming and going. I
don't seem to recall Iz Hodes, there all the time. Grandizio
may have left and roomed with Mogavero.
Mr. Rainville. The ones that would be floating in and out,
then, would be Hodes and Grandizio, but the others were the
regulars?
Mr. Walker. I think Joe Levitsky took a room because he
wanted to learn the piano. He took a room and rented a piano at
one time.
Mr. Rainville. But the others were the regulars who lived
there?
Mr. Walker. That is right.
Mr. Rainville. Then you later said all who roomed there
were in the car pool.
Mr. Walker. I know Grandizio and Mogavero would meet us and
have breakfast and drive in. I don't specifically remember
Hodes driving in with us, although I don't specifically
remember him not.
Mr. Rainville. Then why did you later say that you could
not remember Rosenberg in the pool?
Mr. Walker. I also don't specifically remember actually
driving in with Rosenberg.
Mr. Rainville. But you said that all of the fellows who
lived in the house did drive in in the car pool, and then you
said you don't remember Rosenberg in it.
Mr. Walker. As far as I know, as far as I can remember. I
can't remember anybody particularly not riding in. I just can't
remember. In other words, there were about six people in the
car, I guess, and I just don't remember exactly who was in the
car during these rides back and forth. I have thought about
that, and I haven't been able to recollect it.
Mr. Cohn. What was your home address, Mr. Walker?
Mr. Walker. 2 Spring Lane, Levittown, New York.
The Chairman. Just one question before you leave. How many
beds were in the apartment?
Mr. Walker. I don't remember. There was a sort of a cot in
one of the bedrooms, and then I think there were three
bedrooms, and I don't know if anyone slept in any daybed or
not. I don't know.
The Chairman. Three beds?
Mr. Walker. Oh, no. There were more than three beds.
The Chairman. I am asking you a simple question. Do you
know how many beds were in the apartment?
Mr. Walker. I don't know how many beds were in the
apartment.
The Chairman. You don't need to give me any speech. Who
slept with Rosenberg?
Mr. Walker. I don't think anybody slept in the same bed
with him.
The Chairman. The evidence we have had so far is contrary
to that. Do you know who slept with Rosenberg?
Mr. Walker. I know I slept alone. I know Rosenberg slept in
the same bedroom that I did.
The Chairman. Did you sleep in the same bedroom with
Rosenberg?
Mr. Walker. Yes.
The Chairman. How many months?
Mr. Walker. Six or less.
The Chairman. And did Levitsky sleep in the same bedroom?
Mr. Walker. I don't remember him being in there. I don't
know.
The Chairman. And before you leave, your final testimony is
that you had no reason at any time to believe that Levitsky or
Rosenberg or anyone else you roomed with were either Communists
or espionage agents, and at no time did you ever think that
they were either Communists or espionage agents, and nothing
they said to you or told you indicated to you they were
Communists or espionage agents. Is that your testimony? If it
is not, we will break it down in separate questions and let you
clarify it.
Mr. Walker. Well, nothing that they said----
Mr. Cohn. Don't fence about this, now. Did you think
Levitsky was a Communist, or didn't you? I don't mean: did you
see a party card? You lived with the man, and knew him. Did you
think he was a Communist?
Mr. Walker. I did not think he was a Communist.
The Chairman. Just one question, I want to tie this down.
There was nothing that occurred in the apartment or any other
time in your association with those roommates of yours--that
includes Levitsky and Rosenberg--to cause you to think that
they were or might be Communists or espionage agents, either?
Mr. Walker. Well----
The Chairman. ``Yes'' or ``no''?
Mr. Walker. I can't answer yes or no.
The Chairman. All right. Then answer it as best you can.
Use your own language.
Mr. Walker. I will say that nothing they ever said or did
while I was there led me to believe they were espionage agents,
and I did not believe they were Communists. As to what I
thought they might be, all I can say is that on reflection,
there were a number of conversations there involving Russia and
the Russian government and social system which, just from their
interest, could make me think that possibly they were. But that
is as far as the indication could be.
The Chairman. Did you think at the time you were living
with them that they were Communists?
Mr. Walker. No. I did not.
The Chairman. You may leave.
If you get a lawyer, he will have the right to examine the
executive session testimony.
Mr. Walker. Did you say I have the right to see this?
The Chairman. You have the right to see it, or your lawyer
has the right to see it.
Mr. Walker. Simply by applying?
The Chairman. Yes. Just contact Mr. Cohn or Mr. Carr or
anybody on the staff. The transcript will not be sent to you.
The rules of the committee are that the executive session
testimony will not be sent out. You can come in either to New
York or Washington and examine the testimony in as much detail
as you care to, or if you have a lawyer he can come in and
examine the testimony. I would strongly advise you to get
yourself a lawyer.
Mr. Walker. Well, I am sorry you think that.
The Chairman. It is not my job to decide. I know that
somebody is guilty of perjury. Whether it is you or the other
witnesses, I do not know. I think this. If I were on the grand
jury--and this will come before them--I would decide that a man
of your intelligence knew he was living with Communists. I do
not think you can be as dumb as you try to make out.
Mr. Walker. I am not dumb. This is twelve years ago.
The Chairman. I do not want to hear anything further.
If you decide to come back and give us any further
information, we will be glad to hear it.
Mr. Cohn. The witness is Joseph Levitsky, and counsel is
Louis Boudin.
Now, Mr. Levitsky, you know you are still under oath.
FURTHER TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH LEVITSKY (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS
COUNSEL, LEONARD B. BOUDIN)
Mr. Boudin. Could I make a request of the committee? Two
things. First, if a client of mine is desired for a committee
hearing, I would like to have more notice than eleven-thirty at
night the night before, because it is very hard for me to put
aside all my commitments and my other problems and come down
here that quickly.
Secondly, Mr. Levitsky wishes to make a statement relating
to the jurisdiction of the committee, and it is a brief one. If
you will permit him to read it, we can state our jurisdictional
grounds.
Mr. Cohn. On the first point, before the chairman rules on
the second one, the committee staff was attempting to reach you
all yesterday afternoon and evening. I realize you are busy, to
all the activities dumped in your lap by this committee, but we
did try to reach you, and we are all back here on Saturday
because an urgent situation has arisen. There is a direct
conflict in testimony which we have to resolve.
The Chairman. Under the rules of the committee, statements
must be submitted twenty-four hours in advance. However, in
view of the fact that the witness was not called until
yesterday, he could not have had the statement ready twenty-
four hours in advance. Therefore, we will waive the rule.
Mr. Cohn. Since it is in writing, why do we not enter it in
the record.
Mr. Levitsky. I wish to make the following statement as to
the jurisdiction of the committee:
I object to the entire inquiry on the following grounds:
(1) As appears from my prior examination and the newspaper
reports, this committee is conducting a criminal investigation,
not a legislative inquiry.
(2) It is attempting to entrap and seek evidence to
prosecute me for perjury and other crimes on the basis of the
testimony of other witnesses whose names and testimony it has
not disclosed to me.
Mr. Boudin. Now I think we can adopt your suggestion and,
if you want to save time, simply put this in as if the witness
had testified.
The Chairman. First, could I ask you: Who wrote the
statement for you?
Mr. Boudin. I prepared this for the witness, Senator. It is
a statement of legal grounds. I am not going to argue, because
I know you do not want to hear argument.
The Chairman. Your objection to the jurisdiction of the
committee, of course, is overruled.
Mr. Boudin. And it is understood that the full statement is
to appear in the record as if we had testified?
The Chairman. Mr. Reporter, this will be given you, and the
entire statement will be inserted, the same as if Mr. Levitsky
read it.
Mr. Levitsky. (3) It has directed me to appear here upon
short notice without an adequate opportunity to prepare for
examination upon the serious criminal matters which have been
the subject of the committee's statements to the press.
(4) The committee's jurisdiction is limited by the
Legislative Reorganization Act and does not include an inquiry
into espionage, or an examination of non-governmental personnel
with respect to events which occurred a decade ago.
(5) Since I have previously been examined exhaustively by
Senator McCarthy and two assistants, and the committee already
has my answers, none of its questions of today can be pertinent
to the legislative process or to any matter legitimately under
inquiry here.
I therefore rely upon my constitutional privilege under the
Fifth Amendment not to be a witness against myself and upon all
the other constitutional and legal grounds applicable to the
five points made by me.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Levitsky, I want to go back to this period
you told us about, when you were in Philadelphia living with
Julius Rosenberg and Carl Greenblum. Were Rosenberg and
Greenblum living in the apartment at the same time?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth in answer to that question.
Mr. Boudin. I say that because of the committee's
statements which were made in the press with respect to
conflicts in testimony between witnesses--and evidently this is
one intended by the committee--the witness can properly assert
the privilege even if the same questions are repeated. And it
may also be understood--I don't like to take the time again; I
am pretty experienced here--that where we do state an objection
we are relying not only on the privilege but on all the other
grounds, although I understand the committee's position is that
it will only recognize the privilege.
Mr. Cohn. Will you tell us the names of individuals in the
car pool from Camden to Philadelphia, Mr. Levitsky?
Mr. Levitsky. Will you wait just a second, please?
Mr. Boudin. I want to check and see whether we covered that
before.
Mr. Levitsky. I decline to answer the question, on all the
grounds previously stated.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, I suggest the only valid ground
would be the Fifth Amendment. In this case an identical
question was asked the witness the other day, and he has waived
his privilege, and I would ask you to direct him to answer this
question.
Mr. Boudin. Can I see the testimony which contains the
identical question?
The Chairman. You will be directed to answer that question
on which you previously waived your privilege.
Mr. Levitsky. There were Markus Epstein and Carl Greenblum.
Mr. Cohn. Who else?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the privilege of the Fifth Amendment
in answering that question.
The Chairman. What was the question again?
Mr. Cohn. Whether there were any other people in the car
pool besides Epstein and Greenblum. Would you direct an answer
Mr. Chairman?
The Chairman. The chair will direct you to answer, and
order you to answer, in that you have already waived any
privilege.
Mr. Boudin. May I just indicate the witness was not asked
before who else was in the car pool.
Mr. Cohn. He was asked for all the individuals in the car
pool. As you well know, the question does not have to be
identical, if there is a waiver as to that area.
Mr. Boudin. In view, as I say, of the statements made, that
there is a conflict in testimony between this witness and the
others----
The Chairman. Mr. Boudin, time is limited. I would rather
hear from the witness. You may instruct him.
You understand, Mr. Levitsky, that you are ordered to
answer the question asked you by counsel. And I would suggest,
so that there could be no possible question about what you are
asking, Roy, that you re-ask the question.
Mr. Cohn. Name the other individuals in the car pool.
Mr. Levitsky. I refuse to answer the question on the basis
of all the previous reasons given.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer the question. I
assume you still refuse?
Mr. Levitsky. I decline.
The Chairman. May I ask you another question now? It is
somewhat repetitious, but just to have the record completely
clear: Name all of the people who were in this car pool with
you.
Mr. Levitsky. I decline to answer, for the same reason.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to answer, again. I
assume you still decline. Is that correct?
Mr. Levitsky. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Was there a couple by the name of Fred and Ceil
who were present at your home on any occasion?
Mr. Levitsky. I decline to answer, on the basis of the
Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Levitsky, is it fact that you took Carl
Greenblum to a restaurant at 34th Street in New York and
introduced him to William Perl and Joel Barr and sought to
induce him to join an espionage ring?
Mr. Levitsky. I refuse to answer the question, on the basis
of the privilege of the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Have you engaged in espionage against the United
States?
Mr. Levitsky. I previously answered that question.
Mr. Cohn. You are asked that question again.
Mr. Levitsky. The answer is still the same. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you attempt to induce Carl Greenblum to join
an espionage ring?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment in reply to that
question.
Mr. Cohn. Did you take Carl Greenblum to a restaurant to
meet William Perl and Joel Barr for the purpose of having them
look him over prior to inviting him into this espionage ring?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment in reply to that
question.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ask anybody to engage in espionage with
you?
Mr. Levitsky. I decline to answer the question, on the
basis of all the reasons previously stated, including the
privilege.
The Chairman. You will be directed to answer that.
So that counsel will understand the reason for this, in the
opinion of the chair he has waived his privilege when he stated
that he did not engage in espionage. Soliciting someone to
engage in espionage with him would be engaging in espionage.
And when you waive the privilege, as I believe you stated,
Roy, so well, a number of times, you waive not only as to the
specific question but as to the general area. And the chair's
position is that he has waived the privilege as to the general
area of espionage activities on his part.
You are therefore ordered to answer the question which
counsel has asked you.
Mr. Boudin. The chair does not desire to hear from counsel?
The Chairman. No, I would rather not. I have gone into this
in great detail.
Mr. Levitsky. I respectfully decline to answer that
question, on the same grounds previously given. I claim the
privilege.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man named Morris Sevitsky, S-e-v-i-
t-s-k-y?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the privilege under the Fifth
Amendment in refusing to answer the question.
Mr. Boudin. Can it be understood if the witness says, ``I
decline to answer that,'' he declines on all the grounds,
including the privilege?
The Chairman. In other words, when he says, ``I refuse to
answer on the grounds previously stated,'' he means he is
refusing to answer, number one, on the ground that a truthful
answer might tend to incriminate him; number two, that he
questions the jurisdiction of the committee.
Mr. Boudin. And all the other grounds stated in the written
statement.
The Chairman. And all the grounds stated in the written
statement.
Mr. Boudin. Thank you very much, Senator.
Mr. Cohn. After Julius Rosenberg was arrested for
espionage, were you asked by anyone whether you had been
involved with him, and did you reply, ``Yes, and but for the
grace of God there go I''?
Mr. Levitsky. I refuse to answer the question, on the basis
of the Fifth Amendment.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer that question. And
again the chair's reason is that you have waived the privilege.
Mr. Levitsky. I respectfully decline to answer the
question.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss classified information in
government laboratories with Carl Greenblum, and Lou Antell,
and Alfred Walker?
Mr. Levitsky. I decline to answer the question, on the
basis of the same reasons as previously given.
The Chairman. Just one other question. Did you ever admit
to anyone that you had been or were engaging in espionage?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment in reply to that
question.
The Chairman. You are again ordered to answer that. I
assume you still refuse?
Mr. Boudin. Just a second.
[Mr. Boudin confers with Mr. Levitsky.]
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment in reply to that
question.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever engaged in a conspiracy to commit
espionage?
Mr. Levitsky. I plead the Fifth Amendment in refusing to
answer the question.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer the question.
Mr. Levitsky. I respectfully decline.
The Chairman. That will be all. You will consider yourself
under subpoena.
And I think in fairness to the witness, he should know that
we will ask that he be cited for contempt. There will be some
lapse of time on that. The citation can not occur until after
the first of the year. It takes a Senate vote on that. But I
think you should know that that will be the position of the
chair, and I think maybe it will be the position of the other
senators, too.
Mr. Boudin. May I ask whether there are any other senators
present?
The Chairman. No. There is the administrative assistant to
Senator Dirksen, Mr. Rainville, and the assistant to Senator
Potter, Robert Jones.
Mr. Boudin. And may I also ask whether the transcript of
this hearing and of the prior one will be available to me?
The Chairman. Yes, they definitely will be available to
you.
Mr. Boudin. Can they be purchased by us?
The Chairman. No, the rule of the committee is that we
cannot send out executive testimony. However, it will all be
available. Is your office in New York, or Washington?
Mr. Boudin. New York.
The Chairman. It will be available down here, then.
You can come in at any time you want to and spend as much
time as you want to going over the transcript.
Just contact any of the members.
And in view of the seriousness of this, I assume you will
want to make notes from the transcript.
Mr. Boudin. I would like to. We have not had the advantage
of it for today's hearing.
Good day, sir.
The Chairman. Mr. Antell, will you raise your right hand
and be sworn?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Antell. I do.
Mr. Cohn. May we have your name, please?
TESTIMONY OF LOUIS ANTELL
Mr. Antell. Louis Antell.
Mr. Cohn. A-n-t-e-l-l?
Mr. Antell. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Is it L-e-w or L-o-u?
Mr. Antell. L-o-u.
Mr. Cohn. And where do you live?
Mr. Antell. 1936 79th Street, Jackson Heights, Long Island.
Mr. Cohn. 1936 79th Street where?
Mr. Antell. Jackson Heights, Long Island.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you work now?
Mr. Antell. I work for the Signal Corps Supply Agency at 70
East 10th Street.
Mr. Cohn. How long have you been working there, Mr. Antell?
Mr. Antell. Well, it was formerly the procurement agency.
The names have changed. But I have been with the same
organization since 1940.
Mr. Cohn. Always on the supply and procurement end; is that
right?
Mr. Antell. Always with the same group, the inspection
group, which was part of procurement. And it has gone through
various name changes throughout the years.
Mr. Cohn. Where have you been stationed?
Mr. Antell. I have been out in the field mostly, because my
work is inspection work.
Mr. Cohn. Now, have you ever had any access to classified
material?
Mr. Antell. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You are cleared for that, I assume?
Mr. Antell. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Carl Greenblum?
Mr. Antell. I do.
Mr. Cohn. You know him rather well?
Mr. Antell. Yes, I do.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Joseph Levitsky?
Mr. Antell. I do.
Mr. Cohn. You just saw him walking out of here?
Mr. Antell. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you first know him?
Mr. Antell. I remember in the early days, in 1940, the
fellows used to accumulate in the office until they had
assignments. And that is when I can first remember Levitsky.
Because he had a bald head, and I was losing my hair, and was a
little conscious of it, too. So it sort of remained in my mind.
That is how I remember seeing Joe first. But I didn't know him
by name there.
Mr. Cohn. Did Julius Rosenberg ever ``accumulate'' in any
of those gatherings?
Mr. Antell. Well, we used to meet on Saturday mornings. You
see, we used to have a session. A group of fellows would get
together, because there wasn't much work on Saturday mornings.
Mr. Cohn. Was Rosenberg ever among that group?
Mr. Antell. I don't remember. I think he was. But it is too
far back.
Mr. Cohn. Where was this?
Mr. Antell. This was in the New York Port of Embarkation.
Mr. Cohn. Now, who do you remember as having been in that
group?
Mr. Antell. Oh, we had hundreds of inspectors. The first
time, my office hired a hundred inspectors.
Mr. Cohn. Who do you remember as being the clique in that
Saturday morning accumulation?
Mr. Antell. Oh, in the Saturday morning group? There are so
many. Most of the names have since----
Mr. Cohn. Would you recall any of them?
Mr. Antell. Oh, Handelsman, Jerry Friedman, Charlie
Stanton, were some of the fellows I had a little more to do
with.
Mr. Cohn. Did you come to know Levitsky better on any
occasion?
Mr. Antell. Well, the next time I remember meeting him by
name was either late 1940 or some time in '41. This is what
happened. I was given a roving assignment out in RCA Camden.
What I mean by a ``roving assignment'' is that it is something
which is a short assignment. This was a two-day assignment, as
I remember. And I was sent along with two other fellows, and we
went along together, the three of us, to do this assignment.
It also happens that we had a resident group at RCA. But
our office was so set up that we had different sections, a
miscellaneous section, a radio section, a wire section.
So if we had an order, a miscellaneous section order, which
this order was, we would send an inspector there. That was the
procedure at that time. So I went with these two fellows to
RCA. And it so happens it was a two-day assignment. And as I
remember, these fellows knew some of the inspectors there. So
that evening we went out to dinner together. That is the first
I could remember, when I was actually in their company.
Mr. Cohn. Who went out to dinner?
Mr. Antell. Well, the fellows came with--one fellow's name
was Grandizio.
Mr. Cohn. And Levitsky?
Mr. Antell. Well, the two fellows I came down with--one's
name was Grandizio and the other fellow's name was Hodes. And I
think Levitsky was there, and I think Greenblum was there. I
think there were a few other fellows, too. There must have been
a party of nearly eight.
Mr. Cohn. What is next?
Mr. Antell. Then I don't remember seeing him until a few
years later.
Mr. Cohn. Under what circumstances?
Mr. Antell. Through Greenblum. I think I saw Greenblum in
the interim, but the next time I remember seeing Greemblum was,
I think, in 1944. I mean where I actually had any conversation
with him. Sometime in 1944. And I remember the date because we
were coming over on a ferry, and he was working over at
Federal, and I was stationed at the Jersey City plant. I met
him on the ferry, and we were talking about vacations. So he
said he was going up to this place. We got talking about
vacations, and I was looking for a place to go. So I went up
there. And I think we were sort of a week on a phase, but we
had a period where we overlapped.
Mr. Cohn. Was Levitsky there?
Mr. Antell. No.
Mr. Cohn. Would you tell me about Levitsky, please?
Mr. Antell. When I next saw him?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Antell. I didn't see him again until I became
acquainted with Greenblum. Because Greenblum knew him better
than I knew him.
I can't remember, except that I knew Greenblum would
occasionally make an appointment to see Joe, and sometimes it
was over to his house for an evening, and we would meet there.
Mr. Cohn. Who was present?
Mr. Antell. Sometimes it would be three of us. Sometimes
there would be others.
Mr. Cohn. Who were the three? Greenblum, Levitsky, and
yourself?
Mr. Antell. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Who were some of the others?
Mr. Antell. Well, I think at one time Hodes was up there,
and another time I think Mark Epstein was up there. And I think
also he had a friend by the name of, I think, Sol Gogol, or
something.
Mr. Cohn. Sol--? I didn't get that last name.
Mr. Antell. Gogol.
Mr. Cohn. G-o-g-o-l?
Mr. Antell. I am not sure even of the name.
Mr. Cohn. Where did this fellow work?
Mr. Antell. I think he worked for Lummus, L-u-m-m-u-s.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that?
Mr. Antell. They are in New York. I don't know where they
are located today, but they were once at Lexington Avenue, 420.
I once worked for them, and that is why it stuck in my
mind.
Mr. Cohn. Anybody else?
Mr. Antell. Over at his house?
Mr. Cohn. Yes. Or meeting in his company.
Mr. Antell. Fellows?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Antell. I can't recall anybody else. No, I can't recall
anybody else. I must have been over to his house about a half
dozen times. On other occasions-this was over a period of
years, so this spacing wasn't so-you know, just on occasion.
Occasionally, we would come out to Brighton Beach and would
gather there. Maybe ten or twenty fellows would just chew the
fat and spend the day at the beach, because on a hot summer day
it was the usual thing to do. Especially, you know, when you
are unmarried, and you are looking for a place to go.
Mr. Cohn. That is all right. Now, when was the next time
you recall seeing Levitsky?
Mr. Antell. Well, those were the few occasions. I think on
one or two occasions, we might have gone to concerts together
with Carl Greenblum.
Mr. Cohn. And who else would have been present on any of
those occasions?
Mr. Antell. I don't remember any of the others.
Mr. Cohn. You do not recall anybody else being present?
Mr. Antell. No. They might have been, but I don't remember.
Mr. Cohn. You have no recollection of it?
Mr. Antell. No.
Mr. Cohn. Now, when is the last time you saw Levitsky?
Mr. Antell. Well, we had a get-together. I think Carl
Greenblum was getting married. And it has been the practice----
Mr. Cohn. I want to save a little time. We don't need all
this.
Mr. Antell. It has been a little practice for the fellows
to make up a little party. So it was at the Chanticleer. That
is a restaurant in New Jersey somewhere.
Mr. Cohn. Who else was present on that occasion?
Mr. Antell. Carl was there, and maybe at least ten
different fellows.
Mr. Cohn. Levitsky, yourself, who else?
Mr. Antell. A fellow by the name of Lou Gibson.
Mr. Cohn. Al Walker?
Mr. Antell. Al Walker? I don't remember.
Mr. Cohn. Epstein?
Mr. Antell. Epstein was probably there, but I don't
remember him clearly.
Mr. Cohn. Hodes?
Mr. Antell. Hodes? I don't think he was there. I don't
think so.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this. Did you know that Levitsky
was a Communist?
Mr. Antell. No, I didn't know he was a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever think he was a Communist?
Mr. Antell. Well, he had, you know, what you might call
liberal ideas, and there was a possibility, but I never knew
that he associated with Communists.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ever discuss your work for the government
with you?
Mr. Antell. No.
Mr. Cohn. You say there was just a possibility. Did that
disturb you?
Mr. Antell. Well, it did. And I didn't become friendly with
him.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever go to Greenblum and say you thought
it was important for you and Greenblum to keep away from
Levitsky?
Mr. Antell. Well, no. Because I didn't know that he was a
Communist, and I didn't think enough of it at the time.
Mr. Cohn. Your testimony is that you never discussed with
Greenblum the idea of having less to do with Levitsky?
Mr. Antell. I can't remember any such, no.
The Chairman. I was interested in the statement you made
when counsel asked you whether or not you thought he was a
Communist, and you said he had liberal ideas.
Mr. Antell. Yes.
The Chairman. Is your definition of communism something
that is liberal?
Mr. Antell. Well, the only thing is this. No, not exactly.
But some people have more information than others, and you very
often find Communists are better informed. They do more
reading, perhaps. They are more interested. The average fellow
who isn't interested won't express himself the same way.
However, you do find many people who are not Communists, and
yet they have a deep interest in politics.
The Chairman. By ``liberal,'' ideas, did you mean Communist
ideas?
Mr. Antell. Well, no, not particularly.
The Chairman. Then your testimony is that at no time did
you feel that Levitsky might be a Communist?
Mr. Antell. Well, I wouldn't say that. I mean, you know,
you never know exactly about people. There was some doubt in my
mind. There wasn't enough for me really to-where I could say
that he was.
The Chairman. I am not asking you whether you could say
that he was. Did you think that he was?
Mr. Antell. Well, let me put it this way. There was some
doubt in my mind of what his actual position was.
The Chairman. In other words, there was some doubt in your
mind as to whether he was a Communist or not?
Mr. Antell. Yes, there was some doubt.
The Chairman. When did you first have that doubt?
Mr. Antell. Well, I can't remember.
The Chairman. It is rather important. You are handling
secret material. You should have some degree of intelligence in
identifying espionage agents and Communists. Either that or you
should not have top secret clearance. When did you start to
think he was a Communist? He was a good friend of yours.
Mr. Antell. He wasn't a good friend of mine.
The Chairman. All right. When did you first think he might
be a Communist. When was there first this doubt in your mind as
to whether he was a Communist? I mean roughly. I know you can
not give us the date and the particular time. But in 1946 was
there a doubt in your mind?
Mr. Antell. Well, the doubt was really in his favor, that
he wasn't.
The Chairman. The doubt was in his favor?
Mr. Antell. Yes, that he wasn't. Because I never saw him
with people that were Communists, or there weren't any
indications to me that would prove he was a Communist.
The Chairman. I do not understand a doubt about his being
Communist being in his favor. You mean by that that you thought
he was not a Communist?
Mr. Antell. Well, as I said, there was a small amount of
doubt, but not enough to really move me.
Mr. Rainville. May I suggest that you rephrase the
question: when did he begin to doubt that he was a Communist?
The Chairman. Yes, let us put it that way. When did you
begin to doubt that he was a Communist?
I am afraid that is not a fair question, because he said he
didn't think he was a Communist.
When did you first have this doubt about whether he was a
Communist? Would you say 1946?
Mr. Antell. I can't pinpoint it.
The Chairman. Well, was it while Levitsky was working for
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Antell. I didn't see him while he was working for the
Signal Corps again, until some time perhaps in 19----
The Chairman. Did you know him while he was working for the
Signal Corps?
Mr. Antell. I only met him really that one time, at this
place in RCA.
The Chairman. All right. You knew he was working for the
Signal Corps, did you?
Mr. Antell. Yes.
The Chairman. At that time----
Mr. Antell. At that time.
The Chairman. Wait until I have finished.
Mr. Antell. Excuse me.
The Chairman. At that time, did you have a doubt as to
whether he was a Communist?
Mr. Antell. No, at that time I didn't think he was.
The Chairman. Did you have that doubt at that time?
Mr. Antell. No.
The Chairman. Well, when did the doubt first arise? What
caused that doubt to arise?
Mr. Antell. Well, just from the way perhaps he expressed
himself.
The Chairman. Did he express himself about communism?
Mr. Antell. No, not about communism. He was perhaps a
little more acquainted with these things. And generally you
find the Communists are the ones that are better informed. That
is, they do more reading. They are more interested in it.
Therefore, they have more information.
The Chairman. He never told you he was a Communist?
Mr. Antell. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever decide you should break off your
contacts with him, because you thought he was a Communist?
Mr. Antell. Well, I used to see him as little as possible.
Because, as I said, he was an acquaintance of mine. And I knew
him through Greenblum.
The Chairman. Now, you understand my question. I don't need
a speech from you. The question is: Did you ever decide to
break off your contacts with him because you thought he was a
Communist?
Mr. Antell. Well, as I said, there was some doubt in my
mind what his position was.
The Chairman. Did you decide to break off your contact with
him because of that doubt?
Mr. Antell. As I said, I only would see him infrequently.
The Chairman. Did you decide to break off your contacts
because of that doubt?
You know whether you decided to break off your contacts
with this man because you had a doubt as to whether he was a
Communist. Just tell us.
Mr. Antell. I didn't feel he was really a Communist. There
was that doubt, but you might have that doubt about many
people.
The Chairman. The number of times you saw him had nothing
to do with this doubt in your mind about his being a Communist.
Was that right?
Mr. Antell. Well, you see----
The Chairman. Did the number of times you saw him have
anything to do with this doubt that was in your mind? Yes, or
no?
Mr. Antell. Well, no, because----
The Chairman. I do not care about the ``because.'' Your
answer is ``no''?
Mr. Antell. You see, I never made an appointment to see him
myself. I would always see him through Greenblum.
The Chairman. Was the number of times you saw him in any
way influenced by this doubt which you spoke of about his being
a Communist?
Mr. Antell. I just let it lay, because I didn't think it
was significant. Because I had no real assurance. I mean, you
might have a doubt about some people. But I just couldn't----
The Chairman. I am going to keep asking you questions until
you answer. It is a very simple question.
Mr. Antell. Well, knowing him, I mean, I never had any more
information what his position was than when I first doubted
him.
The Chairman. You understand my question?
Mr. Antell. Yes.
The Chairman. I asked you whether the number of times you
saw him was in any way influenced by this doubt about his being
a Communist.
Mr. Antell. Oh, I see.
The Chairman. Yes, or no.
Mr. Antell. Well, can I say it this way, Senator----
The Chairman. You can say it ``yes,'' or ``no.'' I have
been listening to your speeches long enough. Did you see him
more, or less, because of this doubt?
Mr. Antell. I saw him less.
The Chairman. You saw him less because of it?
Mr. Antell. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. In other words, you did keep from seeing him
because you thought he might be a Communist?
Mr. Antell. Yes. There was a small element of doubt.
The Chairman. All right. Did you ever go to anyone else and
say, ``It would be better to see Levitsky less''? Did you?
Mr. Antell. Well, I saw him so infrequently.
The Chairman. Listen to me, now. Did you ever go to
anyone----
Mr. Antell. No, sir, I----
The Chairman. Did you ever go to anyone----
Mr. Antell. What do you mean by going to anyone? I am
sorry. I don't know what you mean.
The Chairman. Unless you be quiet until I finish asking
these questions, I am going to hold you in contempt of the
committee. We have a lot of testimony about you, and you are
going to tell us the truth or have your case submitted to a
grand jury.
I asked you a simple question. Did you ever go to anyone
and suggest to them that they see Levitsky less because you
thought Levitsky was a Communist?
Mr. Antell. No, sir.
The Chairman. You are sure of that?
Mr. Antell. I don't remember it.
The Chairman. And Levitsky never told you he was a
Communist?
Mr. Antell. No, sir.
The Chairman. You are sure of that?
Mr. Antell. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right.
This will be submitted to the attorney general, with the
request that it be submitted to the grand jury for an
indictment for perjury. Because we have the evidence here, the
sworn testimony, that Levitsky very freely told you he was a
Communist, discussed communism with you.
Mr. Antell. Oh, my God.
The Chairman. That you went to one of your friends and you
and this friend discussed whether or not you should not break
off seeing Levitsky because he was a Communist.
Now, you have not forgotten that?
Mr. Antell. I am sorry. The whole thing is very strange.
The Chairman. It is very strange. You may step down.
If you change your mind and come in and decide to tell us
the truth, you may. That is all. You may leave.
[Whereupon, at 12:00 noon, the committee recessed, pending
the call of the chair.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--Senator McCarthy told reporters that a
witness at this executive session had revealed that he had been
solicited to send classified radar data through the mails to a
scientist working in another branch of the government, which
the senator defined as a ``clear violation of the Espionage
Act.'' The scientist who had solicited the material, Aaron H.
Coleman, later became laboratory chief at Fort Monmouth. In
1946, after military intelligence found forty-eight documents
at his residence, Coleman had been reprimanded, suspended for
ten days, and allowed to return to his duties. Suspended again
in 1953 when the subcommittee launched its probe, he was
reinstated in 1958 by court order.
Aaron Coleman testified in public sessions on December 8
and 9, 1953. Fred Joseph Kitty (1918-1988) testified in public
on December 8. Jack Okun did not testify publicly
During this session, the subcommittee also interrogated
Barry S. Bernstein, whose testimony was later published in
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Army Signal Corps--
Subversion and Espionage, 83rd Congress, 1st sess. (Washington,
D.C.; Government Printing Office, 1954), Part I, October 22,
1953.]
----------
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Fort Monmouth, NJ.
The subcommittee met at 11:15 a.m., pursuant to recess, in
Building 302, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, Senator Joseph R.
McCarthy (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Francis Carr,
staff director; Harold Rainville, administrative assistant to
Senator Dirksen; and Robert Jones, research assistant to
Senator Potter.
Present also: John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
Department of the Army; and Maj. Gen. Kirk B. Lawton.
The Chairman. Will you stand and be sworn? In this matter
now in hearing before the committee, do you solemnly swear to
tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so
help you God?
Mr. Kitty. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Can we have your full name, please?
TESTIMONY OF FRED JOSEPH KITTY (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, O.
JOHN ROGGE)
Mr. Kitty. Fred Joseph Kitty, K-i-t-t-y.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Reporter, would you note for the record that
Mr. Kitty is represented by O. John Rogge?
Now, Mr. Kitty, was there a time when you were employed by
the United States Signal Corps?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, sir, there was.
Mr. Cohn. And when was that?
Mr. Kitty. Between July 1942 and September 1945.
Mr. Cohn. And where were you stationed?
Mr. Kitty. Camp Evans.
Mr. Cohn. Camp Evans?
Mr. Kitty. The signal laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. Down here at the laboratory. Did you have a
clearance at that time?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, I think I did.
Mr. Cohn. And would you deal with classified material?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, I think I would.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go after you left the Signal Corps
Mr. Kitty. I went to the Bendix Radio Division of Bendix
Aviation Corporation.
Mr. Cohn. Were they doing any government work there?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, sir, they were.
Mr. Cohn. Classified?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Where did you go from there?
Mr. Kitty. I went to the General Instrument Corporation,
Elizabeth, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. About when?
Mr. Kitty. June 1952.
Mr. Cohn. And where are you employed now?
Mr. Kitty. General Instrument Company.
Mr. Cohn. You are still employed there. Do they do any
government work?
Mr. Kitty. They do some, but I have no clearance now. I
have no access to it and don't know the extent of it.
Mr. Cohn. You have been indicted in the district court of
the district of Maryland for making a false statement on your
employment application with Bendix; is that right? In that you
failed to disclose membership in the International Workers
Order, the IWO?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, sir, that is right.
Mr. Cohn. It is here as the International Workers
Organization.
Mr. Rogge. That is the way they have it on the indictment,
but I think they mean the International Workers Order.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Kitty, were you a member of the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, sir, I was.
Mr. Cohn. And when were you a member of the Young Communist
League?
Mr. Kitty. Between 1938 and 1941.
Mr. Cohn. Between '38 and '41. I see.
Now, where were you a member of the Young Communist League?
Mr. Kitty. I was a member first at the Young Communist
League Club in the lower East Side of Manhattan, called the
Stuyvesant Club, and thereafter I transferred to a group we had
at the college I was attending, which was Cooper Union.
Mr. Cohn. Now, who do you recall having been in this
Stuyvesant Club with you?
Mr. Kitty. The Stuyvesant Club? Actually, I don't recall
too many people. Let me explain something.
Mr. Cohn. Sure.
Mr. Kitty. I have been through a great deal of questioning
by the FBI on these matters. At the time I was questioned, I
answered the questions as fully as I could remember them. Now,
subsequent to that time, in various discussions I have had,
especially in view of the fact that I was indicted, I did a lot
of thinking about who were members there, and I do recall one
or two names.
Mr. Cohn. Could we have those?
Mr. Kitty. Well, I recall there was a fellow named Tuli
Dare.
Mr. Cohn. Could you spell that for us?
Mr. Kitty. I think it is D-a-r-e; T-u-l-i. I guess. I
honestly don't recall any of the other names, Mr. Cohn.
Mr. Cohn. What happened to Dare? Did you ever see him after
that?
Mr. Kitty. No. I didn't know him very well.
Mr. Cohn. You don't know where he is at this time?
Mr. Kitty. No, I had nothing to do with him.
Mr. Cohn. How about at Cooper Union?
Mr. Kitty. At Cooper Union, Hy Sigman was a pretty close
friend of mine. We worked together.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell that?
Mr. Kitty. S-i-g-m-a-n.
Mr. Cohn. Where did he go after that?
Mr. Kitty. He went to work for the Delaware Water Supply
Project, at Ellenville, New York.
Mr. Cohn. Was that a government project?
Mr. Kitty. No. Well, I think it was a City of New York
project.
Mr. Cohn. And where did he go after that?
Mr. Kitty. I believe he went to work for the army, the Army
Engineer Corps.
Mr. Cohn. For the Army Engineer Corps. And how long did he
work for the Army Engineer Corps?
Mr. Kitty. This I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know where he was stationed when he was
with the army?
Mr. Kitty. I think in the Caribbean.
Mr. Cohn. What was his first name?
Mr. Kitty. Hyman.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know what he does now?
Mr. Kitty. I saw him once after the war. I believe he was
working for Electric Bond and Share at the time, although I
won't swear to it. He was working for one of the large civil
engineering companies in New York.
Mr. Cohn. Now, do you recall anybody else in the YCL at
Cooper Union besides Sigman?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, there was Reno King.
Mr. Cohn. What was that first name?
Mr. Kitty. Reno. R-e-n-o.
Mr. Cohn. Reno King.
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What happened to him afterward?
Mr. Kitty. I think he went to work during the war teaching
at some school. I saw him once or twice after the war at
meetings of the Tau Beta Pi society.
Mr. Cohn. Now, you were telling us what happened to him
afterward.
Mr. Kitty. I believe he went to work teaching at the School
of Marine Engineering.
Mr. Cohn. Marine Engineering?
Mr. Kitty. Yes. I don't recall the name of the school.
Mr. Cohn. Was that a government school?
Mr. Kitty. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Did you hear anything about him after that?
Mr. Kitty. No; I saw him once or twice at these Tau Beta Pi
dinners.
Mr. Cohn. That was the Cooper Union Chapter?
Mr. Kitty. Of Tau Beta Pi, yes.
Mr. Cohn. All right, sir.
Mr. Kitty. And I have never seen or heard from him after
that.
Mr. Cohn. Now, who else?
Mr. Kitty. There was Bob Schumacher, who was president of
the group at the time I was a member.
Mr. Cohn. What happened to him?
Mr. Kitty. He went into the army. The way I found out about
that, oddly enough, is that I read about a divorce case he was
involved in in the newspaper. He apparently was in the
Phillippines and was sued for divorce.
Mr. Cohn. Was he in the military?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, he was an officer in the United States
Army.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know what he did when he got out of the
army?
Mr. Kitty. No, I don't. I met him once--I don't know
whether during the war or right after the war--in a movie. I
was with my wife, and he was with this fellow Berton, who was
also in the YCL at Cooper Union.
Mr. Cohn. What was his first name?
Mr. Kitty. Dave.
Mr. Cohn. B-u-r-t-o-n?
Mr. Kitty. I think it is B-e-r-t-o-n.
Mr. Cohn. What happened to him after the war?
Mr. Kitty. I don't know. I think he flunked out of school.
I didn't know him in class. He was in a different class than I.
Mr. Cohn. Who else can you recall?
Mr. Kitty. There was Bob, Dave Berton, Reno King, Hy
Sigman. It was a rather small group.
I am not trying to be evasive here. We went to night school
and we met very spasmodically about once a month. And the
groups were very small. A lot of the guys that were members, I
never saw. They just didn't come to meetings. I think there
might have been between ten and twenty meetings. Sigman and I,
of course, were rather close friends at the time.
Mr. Cohn. Sigman is the one who went with the army
engineers?
Mr. Kitty. That is right. And Sigman and Schumacher were in
the same class.
Berton I remember because at one time he led the group.
There was a girl there from the art school, whose name I
don't remember. And I can't honestly recall any more right now,
Mr. Cohn.
Mr. Cohn. Very well. Let me ask you this. Did you know
Marcel Ullmann at all at Cooper Union?
Mr. Kitty. No--Oh, there was a Marcel something--I don't
know whether his last name was Ullmann--no, Marcel Scherr. The
first name rang a bell. The last name didn't.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't know Marcel Ullmann at Cooper Union?
Mr. Kitty. No.
Mr. Cohn. He was probably before your time. Alfred Sarant?
Did you know him there?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Was he in this Young Communist League?
Mr. Kitty. No, he wasn't in the group I was in.
Subsequently he told me he had been in the YCL.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Sarant was a Communist?
Mr. Kitty. When I met him? No.
Mr. Cohn. Who was Sarant very friendly with at Cooper
Union?
Mr. Kitty. He apparently was very friendly with Harvey
Sachs.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell that?
Mr. Kitty. S-a-c-h-s.
Mr. Cohn. What has happened with Harvey Sachs?
Mr. Kitty. May I explain how I met Sarant? I was on the
school newspaper at the time, and he was active in the Fencing
Club and used to come down to the offices of the school
newspaper. And when I went to work at Camp Evans for Coleman's
group----
Mr. Cohn. Aaron Coleman's?
Mr. Kitty. Yes--Harvey Sachs was in the group. He was a
field engineer at Westinghouse in Sunbury at the time. I was
renting a small house in Belmar at the time and had a spare
room. When he came back, in the summer of '43, we rented him a
room.
Mr. Cohn. Harvey S-a-c-h-s?
Mr. Kitty. That is right. Now, Harvey apparently was a
classmate of Sarant's. I don't know this for sure, but he
apparently knew Sarant. I didn't know Harvey at Cooper Union.
He was in the day school, too. But he mentioned to me on one
occasion, I think, that he knew Sarant, and I think he might
have mentioned the fact that Sarant worked at the Signal Corps
here at Monmouth. That is the extent of my knowledge about
Sarant.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know what Sachs did after he left for
Signal Corps?
Mr. Kitty. Yes. He was drafted into the navy. I think it
was in '44. And when he came out, he didn't go back to work for
the government, but he started in a small business in Belmar
with a fellow named Joe Risner.
Mr. Cohn. R-i-s-n-e-r.
Mr. Kitty. Yes. And I think they were on Tenth Avenue in
Belmar, right near the railroad station. And they were making
television kits for RCA under RCA license.
Mr. Cohn. Is he still there?
Mr. Kitty. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Was he a Communist?
Mr. Kitty. I have never attended any meetings with him, Mr.
Cohn, but the impression I had was that he had been a member of
the YCL. I just wanted to make it clear; I didn't attend any
meetings of this group.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Sarant down here?
Mr. Kitty. No.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Sachs down here?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Was Sachs friendly with Coleman?
Mr. Kitty. He and Coleman were very friendly. I was
friendly with Coleman, too.
Mr. Cohn. Did you meet Coleman for the first time down
here?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Joseph Levitsky?
Mr. Kitty. No.
Mr. Cohn. Now, when did you first meet Coleman? Down here?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. That would be in 1943?
Mr. Kitty. '42.
Mr. Cohn. 1942. And where was Coleman working then?
Mr. Kitty. He was working at Camp Evans.
Mr. Cohn. In what section?
Mr. Kitty. When I first came, I honestly don't know the
section. There were an awful lot of people there. And I think
when I came to work he was in Bermuda. He wasn't around. Ted
Engberg was running the department.
Mr. Cohn. Then you got to know Coleman fairly well?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, fairly well.
Mr. Cohn. Did there come a time when Coleman left to go to
the marine corps?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. About when was that?
Mr. Kitty. It was early in '44.
Mr. Cohn. You had known him about a year or a year and a
half or two years?
Mr. Kitty. A little closer to a year. I didn't get to meet
him until several months.
Mr. Cohn. Had you known him rather well?
Mr. Kitty. Pretty well, yes.
Mr. Cohn. Who else would you say was in that clique?
Mr. Kitty. We lived together with a couple of other guys.
There was Jack Okun and Charlie Grossman. They shared rented
rooms over in a place in Neptune with a Mrs. Fraze. They all
lived together.
Mr. Cohn. That is Okun, Coleman----
Mr. Kitty. And Grossman.
Mr. Cohn. What was Grossman's first name?
Mr. Kitty. Charlie.
Mr. Cohn. And Murray Miller was there; right?
Mr. Kitty. I think Murray moved in when Charlie went to the
army.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell ``Fraze''?
Mr. Kitty. I think it is F-r-a-z-e.
Mr. Cohn. This was down here; right?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, this was in Neptune, New Jersey.
Mr. Cohn. Now, would you visit over at the place, and all
that?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. You were very friendly?
Mr. Kitty. Quite friendly.
Mr. Cohn. Then in 1944, Coleman left and went into the
marines?
Mr. Kitty. Right.
Mr. Cohn. Now, let me ask you this: Did there ever come a
time when Coleman asked you to send him any information from
Evans Laboratory?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, there was a time.
Mr. Cohn. Was that information classified?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, it was.
Mr. Cohn. What was the classification? Do you recall?
Mr. Kitty. The classification, I would say, was in the bulk
restricted and possibly there was some confidential material
there, too.
Mr. Cohn. Did that involve radar?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. It did involve radar. Now, what, generally
speaking? What particular phases of radar? I don't want to
violate the classification--as a matter of fact, I think I will
violate the classification. Can you tell us exactly?
Mr. Kitty. Yes. When I worked for Coleman, he was in charge
of a group called the Air Force Equipment Group, and at one
time it involved only the 270 equipment.
Mr. Cohn. 270?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, SCR-270. That was the original army long-
range early warning equipment. The way Evans was organized at
the time, they had a new equipment group, and Coleman was
running what was called the Contract Engineering Group.
Mr. Cohn. I want to interrupt you for just one second.
Within the time you knew Coleman at Evans, did he ever do any
work on SCR-257?
Mr. Kitty. That number rings no bells in my memory.
Mr. Cohn. I won't interrupt you. I will come back to that.
Mr. Kitty. Well, I worked with Coleman in this air force
group. I worked for him. And the plan at Evans at that time was
that they had a new equipment group which ran the things
through development contracts. And personnel would be sent over
from the production group over to the development group to
follow the equipment, and then come back into the production
group when the production contract was let. I was sent over on
the project called the TPS-1, which was one of a group of
lightweight early warning equipments which the army was
developing for landing operations.
Then, after the job got into production, which was at
Western Electric, I was transferred back into Coleman's group.
At that time, there were a lot more sets, a lot more projects.
And the marine corps got involved in this. They wanted the TPS-
1's, but the equipment wasn't satisfactory enough for them, so
they, I think, told Western Electric or Bell Lab that they
wanted the new equipment developed which incorporated all the
good things in the TPS-1 and some more things. It was called
the TPS-1-B.
Now, the army had no direct cognizance of the TPS-1-B, but
representatives of Camp Evans worked on what was called the
steering committee, and Major or Colonel DeWitt was a member of
the committee, and I would attend these meetings with him as
his technical aide. The TPS-1-B was scheduled to go to the
marine corps, and it was about this equipment that I sent
Coleman information.
Mr. Cohn. The TPS-1?
Mr. Kitty. The TPS-1.
Mr. Cohn. Now, when did he ask you for that information?
Mr. Kitty. I would like to explain something. And I am not
trying to be evasive here.
Mr. Cohn. That is all right.
Mr. Kitty. When I was first questioned about this thing, I
honestly did not recall this, until letters that I had written
were shown to me.
Mr. Cohn. This is by the FBI?
Mr. Kitty. By the FBI, yes. And from looking at the dates
of the letters, now, I know when it was. I think it was June
1944.
Mr. Cohn. Did those letters contain drawings?
Mr. Kitty. I might have sketched some. I don't recall the
letter. I don't recall the letter clearly.
Mr. Cohn. Having refreshed your recollection, can you
reconstruct the circumstances under which you sent this to
Coleman?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Excuse me. I assume you did not initiate this. He
asked you to send it; is that right?
Mr. Kitty. To the best of my recollection, that is correct.
He may have asked me personally on one of his visits here, he
may have asked me through Jack Okun, and he may have sent me a
letter directly. I don't recall. But as I recall it, he wanted
this information because he was scheduled to go out to the
Pacific as a marine officer with radar groups, and he wanted
advance information so that he could set up maintenance things
or know something about the equipment.
Mr. Cohn. That is what was told to you. Right?
Mr. Kitty. To the best of my recollection, Mr. Cohn.
Mr. Cohn. And, of course, you would have no way of knowing
what his actual purpose was?
Mr. Kitty. I would have no way of knowing. As far as I was
concerned, my understanding was that that was what he was going
to do with the information.
The Chairman. Was the information which you gave him
restricted solely to equipment which the marine corps was
scheduled to get, or did it involve other aspects of radar?
Mr. Kitty. To the best of my recollection, Senator, it was
restricted to equipment the marines were scheduled to get.
The Chairman. Did the marines actually get that equipment
later?
Mr. Kitty. The TPS-l-B, yes, sir. It became standard
equipment in the Pacific.
Mr. Cohn. Go ahead. We interrupted you. You said either
through Okun or----
Mr. Kitty. It seems to me I not only wrote him a letter but
also gave Okun something to send to him. What it was, I don't
recall. Now, to the best of my recollection, Okun and he had
been roommates, and Okun was sending him information.
Mr. Cohn. Where was Okun working at that time?
Mr. Kitty. Camp Evans.
Mr. Cohn. And was he working in the same section you were?
Mr. Kitty. Yes. He was an administrative employee.
The Chairman. Could I interrupt again?
You gave some material to Okun and you sent some directly
to Coleman?
Mr. Kitty. Yes. I say, Senator, I believe I gave material
to him.
Mr. Cohn. Over how long a period of time did this continue?
Mr. Kitty. This may sound strange to you, but it was, I
think, just one or two letters.
Mr. Cohn. Did they all involve this one project?
Mr. Kitty. Any information I sent him did. He asked me for
some other information, which I refused to send.
Mr. Cohn. What other information did he ask you for?
Mr. Kitty. This is a rather involved thing. I was sent down
from Camp Evans to be Signal Corps representatives in Baltimore
at Westinghouse on a project known as the 784. The 784 is a
light weight version of the 584, which is the standard army
antiaircraft radar. And again I don't know whether he asked me
through the medium of a letter or whether Okun asked me to get
him an instruction book on the 584.
And now I am going back a number of years. To the best of
my recollection, I told Okun, I said, ``For God's sake, tell
him to get it through channels.'' I did not send that
information.
Mr. Cohn. That was classified, too? Correct?
Mr. Kitty. I think it was classified restricted.
Mr. Cohn. And you just made up your mind you were not going
to send him any more information; that if he legitimately
needed it, he could get it through his own outfit through
channels?
Mr. Kitty. To the best of my information, that is the
position I took.
Mr. Cohn. And you were just not going to send him any?
Mr. Kitty. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever have any further conversations with
Coleman or Okun about this information?
Mr. Kitty. Never any further conversation.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see Coleman after he came back?
Mr. Kitty. No. I had forgotten about it.
Mr. Cohn. I see. You never got hold of him and said, ``What
was this all about?''
Mr. Kitty. No. As far as I was concerned, I had sent him
the information for his marine corps use, and I decided later
on it was a pretty dumb thing to do.
Mr. Cohn. And that was the last you heard of the thing
until the FBI questioned you; is that right?
Mr. Kitty. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. When did the FBI question you the first time
about this?
Mr. Kitty. In '51.
Mr. Cohn. That was about two years ago. Right?
Mr. Kitty. A little over two years ago.
Mr. Cohn. And did they show you letters, or this one
letter, with some sketches, which you had sent to Coleman,
giving him some of this?
Mr. Kitty. They did.
Mr. Cohn. And that refreshed your recollection on it?
Mr. Kitty. It certainly did.
Mr. Cohn. And you gave the FBI as much information as you
could?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Is that right?
Mr. Kitty. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Did you furnish the information with any other
information concerning the removal of classified material?
Mr. Kitty. No.
Mr. Cohn. This was the only incident involving it?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this. Did you know that Coleman
was a Communist?
Mr. Kitty. No, I did not. And to be perfectly honest with
you, I don't know that now.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss communism with him?
Mr. Kitty. No, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Just something where you had nothing to do on one
way or the other; is that right?
Mr. Kitty. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Were you suspicious by virtue of his association
with say, Harvey Sachs?
Mr. Kitty. No. As far as I knew, Harvey had left the thing,
too. And, as a matter of fact, the only conversation that I
ever recall hearing was an argument about the second front. And
it seemed to me that I didn't say anything particularly in the
argument. I just listened. And there was some disagreement, and
it seemed to me that Coleman took the side opposing it.
Mr. Cohn. Whom was the argument with?
Mr. Kitty. I think it was Harvey.
Mr. Cohn. Did you say Sachs was out of it at that time?
Mr. Kitty. Out of what? The YCL?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Kitty. To the best of my knowledge he was.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know if Sachs ever went on and joined the
Communist party?
Mr. Kitty. I don't know that.
Mr. Cohn. When did you leave the YCL?
Mr. Kitty. I left in 1941.
Mr. Cohn. Just became fed up with the thing?
Mr. Kitty. Oh, I got a job, and I was married, with a child
on the way, and was interested in other things, and I can't say
that I was overly enthusiastic about the whole program to begin
with.
Mr. Cohn. I want to ask you: While you were working with
Coleman and from your knowledge of the work he did here, did he
ever do any work on SCR-527 or 627?
Mr. Kitty. Oh, yes. That was in our group.
Mr. Cohn. He did work on that?
Mr. Kitty. He was boss of the group that it was in. The
project engineer on that was Ralph Board.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell his name?
Mr. Kitty. Board B-o-a-r-d.
Mr. Cohn. What was Coleman's relationship to these
projects?
Mr. Kitty. He was boss of the whole section.
Mr. Cohn. When was this?
Mr. Kitty. '43.
Mr. Cohn. This was in 1943. What was the classification of
those sets? Do you recall?
Mr. Kitty. Most of those sets were restricted. Once they
got put in production, they were restricted.
Mr. Cohn. What were they before they were put in
production?
Mr. Kitty. Usually confidential, when they would have a
development contract.
Mr. Cohn. Now, how about SCR-537?
Mr. Kitty. It doesn't ring any bell, sir.
Mr. Cohn. How about PPN-10?
Mr. Kitty. By the nomenclature, that would be something
that wouldn't be in our section.
Mr. Cohn. APG-30?
Mr. Kitty. That wouldn't be in our section, with that
nomenclature.
Mr. Cohn. UPM-4?
Mr. Kitty. My recollection is that nomenclature like that
would designate IFF equipment. I am not sure, though. We might
have had some dealings with it, but it would be right across
the hall.
Mr. Cohn. Whose section would that have been in?
Mr. Kitty. Bernie Strouse's, S-t-r-o-u-s-e.
Mr. Cohn. How about APB-10?
Mr. Kitty. No.
Mr. Cohn. APN-57?
Mr. Kitty. No.
Mr. Cohn. DPW-1?
Mr. Kitty. No.
Mr. Cohn. CPN-E?
Mr. Kitty. CPN-5?
Mr. Cohn. Did Coleman have anything to do with that?
Mr. Kitty. Number 5 wrong.
Mr. Cohn. It looks like 3.
Mr. Kitty. CPN? Or CPS, Mr. Cohn?
The Chairman. That is CPN-3 and DPW-1.
Mr. Kitty. No. CPN--``N'' would mean navigation equipment,
and there was only one navigation set in the group at that
time, and that was MPN-1. And when they made a transportable
version of it, they called it, I think, a CPN something or
other.
The Chairman. Could I interrupt, Roy?
Whose section would DPW-1 be in?
Mr. Kitty. I don't know, sir.
The Chairman. This is described as a Signal Corps set
classified confidential, manufactured in 1947.
Mr. Kitty. I wouldn't know that, sir.
The Chairman. If we described it as follows, a radar--I
will let you read it. This is the description of it.
I wonder if that would help you tell us what section it
would be in?
Mr. Kitty. I am sorry. No.
The Chairman. You would not know?
Mr. Kitty. No, I would not know.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Kitty, were these SCR sets 527 and 627 some
of the main projects?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Would that be one of the main projects Coleman
was concerned with at that time?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Was any of the information you sent him
concerning the 527 or 627? And use your recollection as
refreshed by what the FBI showed you.
Mr. Kitty. I don't think I remember anything in the letters
that had anything to do with the 527. But let me say this in
all frankness. I might have.
The Chairman. When did you start work on the 527 and 627?
Mr. Kitty. That was one of the early sets, sir, a large
set, five trucks to it.
Mr. Cohn. Does the classification work roughly so that it
will be high and it will go down as it goes into various steps
of wider dissemination until the point where it is actually
produced and sent out?
Mr. Kitty. I would say so, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And your recollection is that it was classified
at the time?
Mr. Kitty. I would say so, sir.
The Chairman. Could I interrupt? In other words, following
Roy's question here, let me ask the general. Is this roughly
the picture? At the time of the inception of what appears to be
a new idea, it is normally classified very highly. As you
progress with it, as Roy has said, the classification may drop
down a little?
Gen. Lawton. Yes. And you try to keep it at least
restricted or confidential on the battlefield, until you know
the enemy has captured some of the equipment intact. And then
it goes to zero.
The Chairman. The reason, I assume, for the high
classification originally is that if the enemy got the plans in
an early stage they could catch up to it.
Gen. Lawton. Then they would be even with us. That is
right. And it takes about five years from a new concept until
you get the stuff on the battlefield. So you are that much
ahead of them if you can keep it quiet.
The Chairman. So if they do not get it until we get it on
the battlefield, they are that much behind.
Mr. Cohn. I don't have anything more to ask. You know what
we have covered, here, Mr. Kitty. Is there anything that we
haven't covered that would be of value to us, you think?
Mr. Kitty. Well, only that I saw Coleman several times
after the war.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this. First, when did you last
work in the Signal Corps lab?
Mr. Kitty. 1945.
The Chairman. And you left there voluntarily?
Mr. Kitty. Yes.
The Chairman. And went to work where?
Mr. Kitty. At Bendix in Baltimore.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any reason to think that
Coleman might be a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Kitty. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. You did not live with him yourself?
Mr. Kitty. No, I never did.
The Chairman. Did you know the Rosenbergs?
Mr. Kitty. I met Julius.
The Chairman. How well did you know him?
[Witness shakes head negatively.]
Mr. Cohn. Where did you meet him?
Mr. Kitty. Shall I elaborate on this?
Mr. Cohn. Sure.
Mr. Kitty. This fellow, Sigman, was a friend of mine. I
won't say he was a chum, but Rosenberg and he were born on the
same street.
Mr. Cohn. What was Sigman's first name ?
Mr. Kitty. Hy.
Mr. Cohn. Hyman Sigman, S-i-g-m-a-n?
Mr. Kitty. Yes. We worked on an NYA project in Woodhaven,
Long Island. There was a fellow working there by the name of
Pegarsky, who was apparently a good friend of Julius
Rosenberg's. And, of course, we were only part-time employees,
but sometimes our scheduled workdays coincided. We used to ride
back to Manhattan on the train together. And sometimes in the
conversations Julius Rosenberg would get into the conversation.
Mr. Cohn. And what was Pegarsky's first name?
Mr. Kitty. Marcus.
Mr. Cohn. Where did Pegarsky work?
Mr. Kitty. He worked with us at NYA.
Mr. Cohn. National Youth Administration?
Mr. Kitty. National Youth Administration.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know that Pagarsky was a Communist?
Mr. Kitty. Oh, I was pretty sure he was a member of the
YCL.
Mr. Cohn. Where did Pegarsky go after NYA?
Mr. Kitty. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. Pegarsky was one of Rosenberg's references for
employment at the Signal Corps, Senator.
The Chairman. We have some information--I do not know
whether it is accurate or not--to the effect that you attended
meetings which were apparently Communist meetings, not closed
meetings at all, as late as 1943 or early '44. As I say, I
don't have any information that they were closed meetings, but
they apparently were Communist meetings. Could you tell us in
addition about that?
Mr. Kitty. There is another thing in my conversation with
the FBI that I didn't recall. But subsequent to that, I do
recall that some time during a stay with my mother, I went to
the movies once, and she asked me to pick her up at an address
on Second Avenue, and I got there, and there was somebody
speaking. He was speaking about foreign policy. I think he was
talking about Teheran. That would date the thing, whenever the
Teheran agreement was made. It was immediately thereafter. I
don't know whether that would be '43 or '44. But I do recall on
one occasion picking my mother up there and driving her home.
The Chairman. And you didn't go to attend the meeting
yourself?
Mr. Kitty. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. And that apparently was a Communist meeting,
I gather. I do not want to go into your mother's activities,
but just in so far as this meeting was concerned.
Mr. Kitty. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Just one question. Is your mother living now?
Mr. Kitty. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Now, that is the only Communist meeting that
you are aware of having attended after you left the YCL?
Mr. Kitty. That is right, sir.
The Chairman. What other information did you give the FBI
other than what you gave us here today? Anything about atomic
work or anything like that?
Mr. Kitty. No, sir.
The Chairman. Can you think of anything you gave them that
you did not give us here today?
Mr. Kitty. Well, that is a very difficult question to
answer, because my period of questioning with the FBI was
certainly longer than an hour, which we have spent here. And I
am certain there is other information. They asked me about
many, many more people than you have. They covered many, many
areas. And in my security hearing, which lasted a complete day,
there was a lot more ground covered, too.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this. And not referring to
what you knew at the time, but using hindsight, knowing what
you know today, do you think it is a safe assumption to say
that the Rosenberg spy ring was operating within or extended
into the Signal Corps. I am not talking about any definite
proof you have, but just from the general knowledge you have,
from the associations, knowing about Rosenberg, knowing about
these men, and taking into consideration the information which
has been made available since you knew them, would you say it
is a safe assumption that the Rosenberg ring did extend into
the Signal Corps?
Mr. Kitty. In view of the fact that Sobell, whom I didn't
know, incidentally, was apparently convicted, was a member of
this ring, and he was certainly involved in electronic work, in
view of the fact that Sarant apparently is missing, I would say
that based on hindsight, apparently something was going on.
The Chairman. I think that is all.
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Okun. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Okun, of course, you have testified before
the committee before. We called you back today because some
things we feel were not disclosed in the course of the
testimony. Let me ask you right now: Did you ever transmit or
have any part in the transmittal of any classified information
to persons not working for the army Signal Corps?
TESTIMONY OF JACK OKUN (RESUMED)
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You did not?
Mr. Okun. I did not, sir. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever send Aaron Coleman any classified
information concerning any radar projects?
Mr. Okun. I never sent him any classified information. I
did send him some unclassified drawings of an antenna, a 270
antenna. But it wasn't classified.
Mr. Cohn. Related to what set?
Mr. Okun. 270, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Set 270. Is that the only thing you ever sent
him?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever transmit to him any material which
was given to you by Fred Kitty?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You never sent Coleman any material which was
given to you by Kitty to send to Coleman?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did Kitty ever give you anything to send Coleman?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. May I interrupt? Did Kitty ever give you any
classified material?
Mr. Okun. Well, we worked in the same section, sir. We may
have passed classified information between us.
Mr. Cohn. We are not talking about anything in the regular
course of your business in the section. We are talking about
material that has been sent to Coleman.
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now, what did you send Coleman?
Mr. Okun. I sent him mechanical drawings of the antenna
structure, SCR-270, which was declassified.
Mr. Cohn. Is that the only thing you ever sent him?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. On how many occasions did you send him such
material?
Mr. Okun. I believe just one, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did he ask you for it?
Mr. Okun. Yes, he did.
Mr. Cohn. Under what circumstances?
Mr. Okun. He wrote me a letter from the South Pacific
saying that he was a radar officer with 270 equipment and asked
me whether I could locate some mechanical drawings for the
antenna structure to help him erect the antenna, and I did.
Mr. Cohn. And that was one letter?
Mr. Okun. I believe so, sir. It might have been two, but I
don't think so.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever have any discussion with Kitty about
material being sent to Coleman?
Mr. Okun. I don't believe so, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Are you very sure of this?
Mr. Okun. To the best of my knowledge, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been questioned by the FBI about
it?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir, I was. I gave them the very same story.
Mr. Cohn. All right. Did they suggest to you that their
information was that you had taken material which Kitty had
given to you and sent it on to Coleman involving SCR-527, SCR-
627, and other projects?
Mr. Okun. They didn't mention any equipments, but they
asked me whether Mr. Kitty had given me any material to send to
Mr. Coleman, and I said, ``no, sir.''
Mr. Cohn. When did you terminate your service with the
Signal Corps?
Mr. Okun. I was transferred from the Signal Corps to the
air force in 1945.
Mr. Cohn. That was the Watson Laboratory?
Mr. Okun. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. When did you leave the Watson Laboratory?
Mr. Okun. 1950, sir--no, excuse me. 1952, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You were suspended at one time for loyalty and
security reasons. Is that right?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir. And I was reinstated afterward.
Mr. Cohn. You were reinstated, and you voluntarily resigned
in 1950?
Mr. Okun. In 1952.
Mr. Cohn. I see. You were in there until last year?
Mr. Okun. Excuse me. 1951, sir. I have been out for two
years.
Mr. Cohn. Now, you told us before the grounds of the
suspension were your activities in a Communist-dominated union.
Is that right?
Mr. Okun. I gave you my association with the union, yes,
sir.
Mr. Cohn. Was there anything else?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Letters of charges were served upon you. What
were the charges?
Mr. Okun. The charges were that I had been a member of the
executive committee of this United Public Workers Union, and as
such had associated with two individuals, and the course of the
hearing disclosed that I was not a member of the executive
committee, and as such didn't have any close association with
these individuals, other than employment and union activities.
The Chairman. Who were the two individuals?
Mr. Okun. Mr. Ullmann and Mr. Sockel.
Mr. Cohn. That is Albert Sockel and Marcel Ullmann?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know that Ullmann was a Communist?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any reason to believe he
was a Communist?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. When did you first learn that Ullmann was a
Communist?
Mr. Okun. I didn't know he was a Communist after I heard
that he had been suspended. I heard that he had been suspended
from the laboratories, and at that point my meager association
with him ceased completely.
The Chairman. Where do you work now, sir?
Mr. Okun. Track Telephone Division, sir.
The Chairman. We went into that last time. Do they have any
government contracts over there?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir, air force, Signal Corps, and navy.
The Chairman. Are any of them classified?
Mr. Okun. After you asked that question, I found two of our
navy contracts may be classified.
The Chairman. Do you do any work on that?
Mr. Okun. The ones we are working on now are all
unclassified.
The Chairman. And there are two that might be coming up
from the navy that might be classified?
Mr. Okun. I think they are restricted. I have no definite
information on that.
The Chairman. Did you live with Coleman?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir, I did.
The Chairman. I think we went into this the other day, so
at the risk of being repetitious, I am going to ask you again.
Did Rosenberg ever live in the same apartment with you?
Mr. Okun. No, sir. I never heard of Rosenberg in all my
association with Coleman.
The Chairman. And Sobell?
Mr. Okun. No, sir. The same holds for Mr. Sobell.
The Chairman. Did you know whether or not Coleman was
contacting Sobell?
Mr. Okun. I seriously doubt it. To the best of my
knowledge, I would say definitely no.
The Chairman. You personally never met Sobell?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know Greenblum?
Mr. Okun. Carl Greenblum?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir, I did in the last couple of years, I
think I met him.
The Chairman. Did you share the car pool with Greenblum?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not. Excuse me, sir. I had left
the air force, I think, when Mr. Greenblum was working for the
Signal Corps. I never had any work directly with him at all.
The Chairman. And your testimony is that the only time you
ever sent any classified material to anyone outside the
laboratory was when you sent the drawings for the aerial for
SCR-270 to Coleman?
Mr. Okun. They were not classified, sir.
The Chairman. I know.
Mr. Okun. I mean, the only time I sent any documents, it
was those for the antenna structure of the 270.
The Chairman. And you say you never sent any classified
material to anyone outside of the Signal Corps?
Mr. Okun. That is right, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Classified or unclassified, were you authorized
to take Signal Corps documents and send them to somebody not
working for the Signal Corps?
The Chairman. I may say, Mr. Cohn, that if it was not
classified, there would be no restriction.
Then your testimony--and I may say this is in conflict with
other testimony we have had--is that you never sent any
classified material to anyone outside of the Signal Corps?
Mr. Okun. That is correct, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know of anyone who was sending
classified material outside the Signal Corps?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Did you know that Kitty was sending
classified material to Coleman?
Mr. Okun. I did not know that, no, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know that Coleman had asked Kitty for
material?
Mr. Okun. I don't believe I do.
Mr. Cohn. Do you have any doubt about it?
Mr. Okun. Well, this happened a long time ago. He might
conceivably have mentioned it to me, but I don't have any
recollection of it.
The Chairman. Now, when you were living with Coleman, did
you know that he was removing classified papers from the Signal
Corps and keeping them in the apartment?
Mr. Okun. I didn't know that, Senator. I knew that he had
documents he was working with. He worked very hard on his
subjects, and he took them home with him. I assumed he was
doing his Signal Corps duties.
The Chairman. You lived with him in 1946?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you live with him when the apartment was
raided by army security?
Mr. Okun. Senator, the apartment was not raided. He had
been called and asked whether he would let them search it.
The Chairman. Were you there when he was called and asked
if they could search it?
Mr. Okun. No, he told me that. He told me he had given
permission to search the apartment.
The Chairman. You seem to shy off at the word ``raided.''
When the army security men go over and make a complete search
of the apartment and find forty-three classified documents, to
me that means ``raided.'' You seem both today and the other day
to be going out of your way trying to cover up for this man
Coleman.
Mr. Okun. No, sir. I do not want to cover up anything.
The Chairman. The question is: Do you know that he had
forty-three secret documents?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I didn't know the classification of any
of them. I knew he was working on material----
The Chairman. Did you know he had secret documents in the
apartment?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Did you know he had taken the documents from
the marine corps, documents marked ``secret,'' had taken them
away from the marine corps without authority, and had them in
his apartment?
Mr. Okun. I did not know he had any classified documents,
as such. I assumed he had permission for the documents he had.
The Chairman. Was there a typewriter in the apartment?
Mr. Okun. No, sir there was no typewriter in the apartment.
The Chairman. I may tell you that Coleman has testified
there was and that he copied some of those documents.
Mr. Okun. I never saw a typewriter in the apartment, sir.
The Chairman. How big was that apartment?
Mr. Okun. It was two and a half room apartment.
The Chairman. Now, if there was a typewriter there,
wouldn't you know it?
Mr. Okun. Mr. Coleman is not a typist. I don't know what he
would have a typewriter for.
The Chairman. I am not asking you if he was a typist. If he
had a typewriter there, would you know it?
Mr. Okun. I believe I would, yes,
The Chairman. When Coleman testified there was, would you
say he is lying?
Mr. Okun. I would say I didn't know of it.
The Chairman. How many cameras in the apartment?
Mr. Okun. We didn't have any cameras, sir.
The Chairman. Are you sure of that?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. That, again, is contrary to the other
testimony.
Mr. Okun. I can't help it.
The Chairman. You never saw any cameras there?
Mr. Okun. I never saw any, sir.
The Chairman. And you say you never saw anything classified
``secret''?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. You perhaps could shed some light on this for
us.
Mr. Okun. I would like to, sir.
The Chairman. Coleman and others have testified that he
removed that material over a period of months, that he had the
marine corps secret documents in the room at all times in 1946
until it was raided. Do you think it was hidden some place? Is
that the reason you didn't see it?
Mr. Okun. No, sir. I was not a technical man. Mr. Coleman
was a technical man. I worked at Watson Laboratories. He was
very careful, talking about his work, and I didn't want to
interfere with his activities. I had no concern with it. I
stayed away from it.
The Chairman. Who else lived in the apartment?
Mr. Okun. Nobody lived in the apartment but us.
The Chairman. Just the two of you lived together?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir--This other chap, Mr. Sachs I think,
stayed with us for a few months.
Mr. Cohn. Was that Harvey Sachs?
Mr. Okun. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When was this?
Mr. Okun. I don't recall exactly, but it was before Mr.
Coleman left for the service in '44.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Sachs was a Communist?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever talk politics with Sachs?
Mr. Okun. We did have occasions to discuss a few instances.
The Chairman. Did he ever ask you to join either the
Communist Party or the YCL?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, he never did.
The Chairman. Did he ever ask you to attend any Communist
meetings with him?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. And during all this time you had no suspicion
that Sachs was a Communist?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, I never did.
The Chairman. He never admitted he was a Communist?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know Levitsky?
Mr. Okun. I never heard of the name, sir.
The Chairman. Sobell?
Mr. Okun. I have heard of Sobell yes, sir.
The Chairman. Rosenberg?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Julius Rosenberg?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never knew him?
Mr. Okun. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did Coleman ever talk about his acquaintance
with Rosenberg?
Mr. Okun. No, sir, he never did.
Mr. Cohn. I have nothing further.
The Chairman. I think that is all.
May I again tell you for your protection that your
testimony is contrary to the testimony we have received. I am
just telling you for your own protection, so that you will know
this, as a courtesy to you as a witness and so that you can
decide what, if anything, you want to do about it.
Your testimony is contrary to that of other witnesses who
have testified.
Mr. Okun. I am sorry, sir.
The Chairman. Either they have been perjuring themselves,
or you have been. We intend to submit all this testimony to the
Justice Department. It is up to them to present it to the grand
jury and have the grand jury decide who is lying. Somebody has
been lying, in a very serious matter here.
We have the testimony that you solicited classified
material from other employees in the Signal Corps, that you
were sending it to people outside the Signal Corps.
Mr. Okun. That is not so, sir.
The Chairman. Either they are perjuring themselves in
regard to you, which is a very serious crime, or you were
perjuring yourself. It isn't up to me or to anybody in this
room to decide who is guilty of perjury, but when someone is,
we send it to the Justice Department.
I would say this: If you, after refreshing your
recollection, discover that you made any mistakes here in your
testimony and want to change it, contact counsel, and if he is
convinced that you were honest about that, he will let you
change your testimony.
Mr. Okun. Very well, sir.
The Chairman. You understand this is not any blanket offer
to let you purge yourself of perjury at any time in the future,
but we know when witnesses come in here they have difficulty
remembering what happened two or three years ago, and when they
go home and think about it we try to lean over backwards to
accommodate them.
That will be all.
Mr. Okun. Thank you, sir.
The Chairman. I believe Mr. Coleman has been sworn, has he
not?
You are reminded, Mr. Coleman, that you are still under
oath.
Mr. Coleman, when you were not an employee of the Signal
Corps, did you ever receive classified material from anyone in
the Signal Corps?
TESTIMONY OF AARON COLEMAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, RICHARD
F. GREEN) (RESUMED)
Mr. Coleman. I believe I received information from Mr.
Okun.
The Chairman. I see. And the nature of that information was
what?
Mr. Coleman. The nature of the information was in
connection with the antenna system of the SCR-270 radar.
The Chairman. Did you receive any material on SCR-527?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember receiving any such
information. I may have.
The Chairman. Would you have had any occasion in your work
to have requested information on SCR-527?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so, but I don't remember.
The Chairman. Well, now, is it your testimony that you did
not receive any material from anyone except from Okun?
Mr. Cohn. On 270.
Mr. Coleman. Well, I would like to, if you will permit me-I
would like to elaborate.
The Chairman. Certainly.
Mr. Coleman. I was questioned a few years ago about whether
or not I received any information from Mr. Kitty, and I
honestly gave the answer that I didn't remember. I said I may
have, or I may not have. I went back to try to search my
records to see if I had any record or any indication that I
might have received any information from Mr. Kitty, and I
couldn't find anything. And I honestly don't remember.
The Chairman. Did you have correspondence with Kitty when
you were out of the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. When I was in the marine corps, I believe I
received a few letters from Mr. Kitty.
Then Chairman. Did you write to him?
Mr. Coleman. I think I did, yes.
The Chairman. Did you write and ask for classified
material?
Mr. Coleman. I honestly do not recall. I don't remember.
The Chairman. You know something about the rules covering
secret material. If you wrote to him and asked him for secret
material or classified material, that would be something which
normally would stick in your mind, wouldn't it?
Mr. Coleman. Well, I do remember asking Mr. Okun for
information about the SCR-270.
Mr. Cohn. Was that classified at the time?
Mr. Coleman. I don't really know. I think it was either
restricted or confidential, but I am not sure. It was in that
category.
The Chairman. Did anyone in the Justice Department ever
inform you that they felt they had a complete espionage case
against you and the only reason you could not be prosecuted was
because of the statute of limitations?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, they didn't.
The Chairman. Did you know they were investigating you from
the standpoint of presenting the material to the grand jury?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you know that the army intercepted secret
material which was being sent you, material which you had
requested?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. This is the first time you have heard that?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You were never questioned about material
which army intelligence took out of the mail?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. You were never questioned about it?
Mr. Coleman. The only questioning that I remember was in
connection with Mr. Kitty.
The Chairman. I see. And then would you say the only
material which you ever got from the Signal Corps, when you
yourself were working for the Signal Corps, was material having
to do with the antenna on SCR-270?
Mr. Coleman. As I said before, I am sure in connection with
the material as to the SCR-270 antenna, but I am not sure
whether I received information of any other type. I mean, my
memory--I really have tried to search my memory about this
after I was last questioned by the FBI. I tried to see perhaps
if I had any letters from Kitty that I might have saved, and I
didn't find any.
The Chairman. Did you ever work on SCR-527?
Mr. Coleman. When I was in the Signal Corps, it was one of
the radars which I was in charge of.
The Chairman. How about SCR-627?
Mr. Coleman. That also, I believe.
The Chairman. And did you ever take any classified material
in regard to either SCR 527 or 627 out of the Signal Corps lab?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember. I don't know.
The Chairman. You don't remember. Did you work on DPW 1?
Mr. Coleman. DPW 1? No, sir, I don't think so.
The Chairman. I am not a technician, so I will have some
difficulty describing this to you, but as I read the
description here it says: ``a radar in the sonic band for
airborne operation as an aiming device with a power output of
.05 to 1.5 kw.'' That is the description of the DPW 1 as I have
it here.
With your memory refreshed, would you say you ever worked
on that?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I don't think so.
The Chairman. Do you know who the head of the department
would be in which DPW 1 was being worked on?
Mr. Coleman. It sounds to me like something that would be
in the Navigation and Beacon Section of the Radar Branch, but I
am not sure.
The Chairman. Did you take any classified material in
regard to this particular radar equipment away from the Signal
Corps lab?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my knowledge, I don't know.
The Chairman. When your apartment was raided by army
intelligence, did they pick up any material covering DPW 1?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so, Senator, but I would like to
mention, as we agreed last time, that I don't think it is fair
to say the apartment was raided.
The Chairman. Whether we call it ``raided'' or not, we know
they were tipped off that you were removing secret material,
that you were keeping it in your apartment, that they came over
and demanded to be allowed to search the apartment, which they
did. You may not call it being raided. We will call it
``searched the apartment.'' At the time they searched the
apartment, did they find any material covering DPW 1, if you
know?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so.
The Chairman. Did they give you a list of material which
they found?
Mr. Coleman. I believe they did.
The Chairman. Do you have that?
Mr. Coleman. I have it but not here with me.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to produce that, then.
Where do you live? In New York?
Mr. Coleman. No, I live in Long Branch, here.
The Chairman. And you are working, I assume?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I am not working.
The Chairman. I would like to have that, Roy. I don't want
to run these witnesses back and forth to New York
unnecessarily.
Then we will ask you to produce that after lunch. The
lieutenant will arrange to have a car take you over.
Gen. Lawton. Would you expand the question to all
documents? Because I think there is some controversy. Some were
unclassified.
The Chairman. All they took.
Mr. Cohn. I don't know if the senator asked this, but what
was the classification of 527 and 627 when you first saw them?
Mr. Coleman. I believe it was confidential, but I am not
sure.
Mr. Cohn. In other words, you think when it first hit you,
when first you saw anything having to do with it, it was
confidential; is that right?
Mr. Coleman. I think so, but I am not sure.
The Chairman. Could I ask you this question: Was the
material which you received on SCR-270 from Okun classified?
Mr. Coleman. I think so. I think it was restricted or
confidential, but I am not sure.
The Chairman. Now, did you keep a record of the classified
material which you removed from the Signal Corps and kept in
your
Mr. Coleman. The only record that I have was that copy
which was given to me, that I referred to before.
The Chairman. The one which was given to you by army
intelligence?
Mr. Coleman. That is right.
The Chairman. Now, didn't you keep a record yourself of the
secret material which was removed, or the classified material?
Mr. Coleman. No. The material was removed, and it was
checked in my presence, and a list was made and a copy was
given to me.
The Chairman. No, I am talking about the time you removed
the material from the Signal Corps lab and took it to your
apartment. Did you at that time make any record of your having
removed it?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so, sir.
The Chairman. Didn't you sign some kind of a pass saying,
``I am taking such and such a document away''?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir. I removed it with the authorization
of a whiz pass.
The Chairman. And you signed that pass yourself?
Mr. Coleman. As well as my supervisor; that is right.
The Chairman. And did you keep a copy of that pass?
Mr. Coleman. I may have kept a copy of that pass for a
while, but I don't have it now.
The Chairman. So that anyone searching the Signal Corps
records would find a record of all the material you removed; is
that correct?
Mr. Coleman. Well, if you will permit me to explain, I
think there was more than one copy of a whiz pass made. One
copy was given to the guard, one copy was for the individual,
and one copy went to either the supply officer or the security
officer. So there should be a record.
The Chairman. Who was the head of your department at the
time you removed this material?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Yamins.
The Chairman. One of the witnesses--I am not sure whether
it was Mr. Yamins or not--who is in a position to know, has
testified that during the war years there was no record kept of
classified material which was removed by the individuals who
had security clearance. He said that there was no pass to check
it in, no pass to check it out. He said that the employees
could freely take the material home to study it or do whatever
they wanted to with it--or not do whatever they wanted with it
but they could freely take it home with them to their
apartments to study if they cared to. We asked him why that
procedure was followed, and he said, ``We were working sixteen
to eighteen hours a day and didn't have time to worry about
passes; all the people with passes had clearance, and we
depended upon their judgment.'' You tell us now that this was
not true, that you couldn't take material unless you signed the
pass and your superior officer signed a pass. I am just
wondering which one of you is mistaken or----
Mr. Coleman. I was referring to the period in 1946, after
the war.
The Chairman. I see.
Mr. Coleman. I do not know what the procedure was in 1944
and '45, since I wasn't at the laboratories.
The Chairman. You were there in '43?
Mr. Coleman. I was there in '43. And I don't remember what
the procedure was.
The Chairman. Did you remove material in '43, classified
material?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I took material home to work on it.
The Chairman. And did you sign a pass to take that material
home?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember, Senator.
The Chairman. You don't remember signing any pass. What was
the classification of that material? How high, and how low?
Mr. Coleman. I think it was confidential and restricted.
The Chairman. Any secret material?
Mr. Coleman. I am not sure. I don't think so, but I am not
sure, I remember one piece of material I was working on for
several months. That sticks in my mind, because it was a single
job. I think that was confidential, but I am not sure. It was
an instruction book.
The Chairman. Your testimony today is that you have no
knowledge at this time whatsoever of having received classified
material from anyone except Okun, and that the material you
received from him was restricted to information on SCR-270; is
that correct?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir. I would like to elaborate on that; to
the best of my knowledge, I received information from Mr. Okun
which may have been restricted and confidential. This is as
best I can remember. As I said before, I do not know, I do not
remember, whether I received information from Mr. Kitty. Since
I did have correspondence with him, I may have received
information from him. So I do not remember. I cannot say
definitely one way or the other.
The Chairman. Then let us see if I have this correctly in
mind. Your testimony is that you do not remember having gotten
anything from Kitty; is that correct? You say you do not
remember having received any classified material from Kitty
while you were not working in the Signal Corps lab?
Mr. Coleman. I mean I don't have any recollection of the
situation. I think it is possible that I did, but I don't
remember. I cannot say definitely one way or the other.
The Chairman. My question is: Do you remember having
received any?
Mr. Coleman. No, I don't remember.
Mr. Cohn. You would recall if you received classified
material, would you not, on 527 and 627?
Mr. Coleman. Well, if you will permit me, I would just like
to make one explanation. When I went into the marine corps I
spent two months at a radar school at Camp Lejeune. And I
studied, I believe, about ten different radars; some of them
for the first time, and others I had known about at the
laboratories.
Mr. Cohn. The question is this, Mr. Coleman. If you had
asked someone working at Evans Lab to send you classified
material which he had no right to and which you had no right to
receive, you would remember that, would you not?
Mr. Coleman. I believe that I, having a secret clearance,
had a right to see that material if it was on my job. So I
didn't consider at that time that I was violating security
regulations.
Mr. Cohn. You mean you had a right to see it by asking
somebody working there, and not going through channels?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I am not saying that.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this, Mr. Coleman. Do you know
now that if you did write and ask someone in the Signal Corps
lab to send you confidential or secret material, you would have
been asking them to violate the espionage act? Are you aware of
that now?
Mr. Coleman. No. I am not sure.
The Chairman. In other words, you think that you could do
that, and that would be no violation?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know, Senator. I really don't know.
The Chairman. Well, now, you have been cleared to handle
secret material. You have been working on classified material
until a short time ago. You should know something about the
regulations. Let me ask you this. Do you feel that if someone
in the Signal Corps lab were to send someone outside of the
Signal Corps lab classified material, secret material,
confidential material, that that would be a violation of the
Espionage Act?
Mr. Coleman. Well, if you send the material to someone who
is authorized to receive it, through channels----
The Chairman. I am not speaking about through channels. I
am speaking about private mail. Let us forget about your case.
Let us take a hypothetical case. Let us assume that John Jones,
who was working in the Signal Corps, sends classified material
to Pete Smith, who is working in the marine corps. The request
for it is not made through channels. The request for it is made
by private letter. The material is sent not through channels
but by private letter. Knowing what you do about the rules and
regulations, would you say that that was a violation of the
Espionage Act on the part of the sender of the material?
Mr. Coleman. I know it is in violation of the security
regulations, but I am not sure that it is a violation of the
Espionage Act.
The Chairman. You think it would be a violation of security
regulations?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, I believe it would be a violation of
security regulations on the part of the sender.
The Chairman. And how about the man who received it? Would
you say he was violating any security regulations?
Mr. Coleman. If he had a security clearance and was working
on that same material, the particular material in question, I
don't know what regulation he would be violating. He may have
been violating a security regulation, but I don't know which
one he might be violating.
The Chairman. You never have been aware of the fact that
the army opened your mail and removed classified material that
was being sent you from the Signal Corps lab?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I have never been aware of that fact.
The Chairman. When I say ``the army,'' I should say ``the
military.'' Were you ever told that the military had opened
your mail and had found classified material in the mail
addressed to you?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir. The only information----
The Chairman. I am just asking you the question. The answer
is ``no''? Is the answer ``no''?
Mr. Coleman. With one exception, if you will permit me to
state the exception.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Coleman. The FBI indicated to me that they had a letter
either that I had written to Kitty or that Kitty had written to
me. With that exception, the answer is no.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever ask Kitty to send you a radar manual
that he refused to send?
Mr. Coleman. I don't have any recollection of such a
request.
Mr. Cohn. Now, if you had asked somebody to send you
something, and he had refused to do it, telling you he had
asked you to violate security regulations, you would remember
that, wouldn't you?
Mr. Coleman. I would think I would, yes.
The Chairman. I would think you would, too.
I think we will want him back when we get the material from
the Justice Department.
Mr. Coleman, I do not ordinarily advise a witness when they
have an attorney here, and your attorney can advise you
contrary to that if he cares to, but you are not dealing with a
bunch of school boys here. We have very good reason to call you
back and ask you all of these questions, and I would advise you
for your own protection that you decide to tell us the truth
and give us all of the facts. You are not doing that now. You
see, any man with ordinary common sense knows that if a man who
is dealing with secret and top secret material requests someone
to violate the security rules and regulations and send him
secret material, and he has been getting that through the mail
to the extent that the military starts to check his mail and
knows the material being sent to him and keeps a record of it,
your memory is not so bad that you forget that. It is a pretty
serious matter. We have the direct testimony here that means
that either you are lying or the other witnesses are perjuring
themselves. Your case will be submitted to the Justice
Department with a recommendation that it go to the grand jury,
unless you do what some of the other witnesses have done here.
After first coming in and doing the type of stalling job that
you have done, some of them have changed their minds and given
us all the facts.
If you do that, while I cannot promise you any immunity
from prosecution, we certainly would recommend that anyone who
is helpful in exposing this bad situation be given due
consideration for it.
I just want to tell you, Mister, that you are in a lot of
trouble right now. So you had better go home and think that
over and talk it over with your counsel. And we will tell them
to give you transportation to go home and pick up that list of
material which you were ordered to produce; that and any other
papers bearing upon this material which you removed from the
Signal Corps lab which you have, any notes which you made, any
passes which you have, copies of letters of charges; everything
which you have bearing upon the Signal Corps lab you will be
ordered to produce. It is quarter of one now. How soon could
you get back?
Mr. Coleman. If you give me time for lunch, I suppose we
could be back----
The Chairman. No particular rush. Two o'clock? Two-thirty?
What time?
Mr. Coleman. Two-thirty will be all right.
The Chairman. Two-thirty will be okay.
The lieutenant will furnish you transportation,
Have the record show that counsel has suggested some
questions which I think are proper and which I will now ask the
witness.
Mr. Coleman, it is your testimony that you received no
material of any kind from the Evans Signal Corps lab except
when you were either in the lab or working in the marine corps
on the type of radar equipment about which you were receiving
this information?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. In other words, you only received material
having to do with the work which you were doing in some other
branch of the government or the military?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir. It was associated in one way or
another with my work.
The Chairman. Does that cover it?
Mr. Green. Thank you, Senator. Yes.
[Whereupon, at 12:50 p.m., a recess was taken until 2:30
p.m.]
TESTIMONY OF AARON COLEMAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, RICHARD
F. GREEN) (RESUMED)
The Chairman. Mr. Coleman, you are reminded that you are
still under oath.
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You were asked to give us a description of
the secret documents, the classified documents, found in your
apartment when it was searched by military intelligence. You
now hand me a document marked FMSI 27 September 1946. Do I
understand this is a listing of all the classified material
found in your apartment when it was searched by army
intelligence?
Mr. Coleman. It is a list of all the material, sir,
classified and unclassified.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Coleman, while the senator is looking at
that, there are a couple of background questions we wanted to
clear up. You sent the committee, I believe, something stating
the location and date of your parents' birth; is that correct?
Mr. Coleman. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Your mother's full name is what?
Mr. Coleman. Sarah Bella Pelts, P-e-l-t-s.
Mr. Cohn. And your father's name?
Mr. Coleman. I would like to give you the full story on
that, if I may. When he entered the country, his name was Harry
Coleman, but he told me afterwards that in England his brother
and his name had been Kalmanovitch. K-a-l-m-a-n-o-v-i-t-c-h.
Mr. Cohn. When was this change from Kalmanovitch to Coleman
effective?
Mr. Coleman. He told me his brother had effected it in
England several years before he entered the country, which
would be around 1899 or 1900. And when he found out that his
brother had changed his name, he, too, changed his name to
Coleman. And when he entered the United States, he entered in
1902 as Harry Coleman. This is the story he told me.
Mr. Cohn. I see.
Mr. Coleman. Now, I would like to make some amendments of
my testimony.
The Chairman. Before I start asking any questions on this,
I think you should make your amendments.
Mr. Coleman. The correction I was referring to is that Mr.
Schine asked me a question, ``Do you know Louis Kaplan?'' I
answered ``I do not.'' And I was referring to the Louis Kaplan
who was reported as having been a Communist, and who worked in
one of the agencies here during the war, and who occasionally
has written letters to the editor in the local papers. I
assumed that is the individual to whom he was referring, and I
answered, ``I do not know.'' But I know of another Louis Kaplan
who worked at Evans, until February, anyway, who I met once in
the cafeteria, and he told me he had a great deal of
difficulty, because his name was the same as that of the other
individual.
Mr. Cohn. When did this conversation in the cafeteria
occur?
Mr. Coleman. It occurred at least two years ago, because I
haven't been at Evans for that period of time, sometime two or
three years ago. I hadn't met the individual before. I was
introduced to him at the cafeteria once.
The Chairman. Let me ask you some questions. Will you
describe what this document contains, the one you handed me?
That is entitled ``Fort Monmouth, Statement of Aaron H.
Coleman, Badge 12938, Evans Signal Corps Laboratory, Belmar,
New Jersey,'' and is dated 27 September 1946. Is this your
statement?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And when have you examined this last?
Mr. Coleman. I read it just before I came here.
The Chairman. Were you telling the truth when you gave this
statement?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my knowledge, yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right. Now, you told us several times,
both this morning and over in New York, that every time you got
a classified document from the Signal Corps laboratory, you
signed out for it. You were very positive about that. I asked
you several times, ``Are you sure, Mr. Coleman?'' I suggested
to you that it was contrary to the other evidence, and you
repeatedly said, ``Yes, that is true. I signed for everything I
got from the Signal Corps laboratory.'' Do you want to change
that testimony as of today, or do you want to stick to that?
Mr. Coleman. I would like to elaborate it, if I may. The
testimony is the same. I am not changing my answer as I
understood it from your question, but I would like to tell the
whole story if I may be given the opportunity.
The Chairman. I would like to have you tell the whole
story.
Mr. Coleman. In there, any reference to signing is signing
internally; namely, when a document would come into my
possession internally, it could come into my possession in a
number of different ways. It could come into the section
through mail and would be signed by someone other than myself,
or by a girl, or by me. It could be given to me personally, and
I would sign a receipt for it. And sometimes you didn't sign a
receipt for it, depending on the nature of the material.
For example, it is my understanding that internally,
confidential material didn't need a receipt. So all the
references to those questions are internal signing. But the
answers that I gave to you and I still give are that in
removing them physically from the Evans Signal Laboratory, I
signed out with a whiz pass, in which I lifted the documents
that I was removing from the laboratory.
The Chairman. Let us go over this, then, one by one. Let's
take Radar Bulletin No. 3, ``Radar Operations Manual''
classified confidential. ``I got it while in the service. I
don't remember if it was issued to me.''
You say you signed out for that?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember.
The Chairman. Well, you told me the other day you signed
out for everything.
Mr. Coleman. I said that when I removed material from the
Evans Signal Laboratory, I signed out a whiz pass. In order to
get it outside of the laboratory, I had to have a whiz pass.
And this reference is to signing for it while receiving it in
the service or while at Evans.
The Chairman. In other words, you say your answer would not
apply to this one, because you got this while in the service;
is that right?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I say the answer does not apply to
it, because it is not in connection with removing the document
from the physical environment of Evans Signal Laboratory.
The Chairman. All right. Let's go on to one that does.
Close Cooperation Set No. 00125, entitled ``secret''; let me
stop there and ask you what your understanding of ``secret''
is.
Mr. Coleman. You mean the classification secret?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. It means a document which contains information
that might harm the national security if it were revealed to an
enemy.
The Chairman. Now, you say, ``I don't remember how I got
it. I got it recently. I may have signed for it or received it
from someone in Watson Lab. I do not know how it came in my
possession.''
Now, is it your testimony that this is correct? Or is it
correct as you say now, that you did sign a pass for this
countersigned by someone else in the lab?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember about that document.
The Chairman. You don't remember. The other day you told us
positively. And I said, ``Mr. Coleman, be careful. This is in
direct conflict with other testimony.'' I said, ``Someone is
perjuring himself.'' And you said, ``I signed out for
everything. I signed the pass. The pass was countersigned.'' I
ask you now: Was that testimony true, or not, at that time?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my knowledge, it is true, it is
still true. I mean, I am testifying everything I know.
The Chairman. All right. In 1946, you said, ``I don't know
where I got it.'' Now you say, ``I signed out for it.''
Mr. Coleman. I am trying to differentiate between signing
out for it and signing which involved signing on a whiz pass to
take it out of Evans.
The Chairman. You say, ``I don't remember where I got it.''
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember where I got it internally. I
don't remember how it came into my possession.
The Chairman. You say, ``I may have gotten it from someone
at Watson Lab.''
Mr. Coleman. I may have. I don't remember.
The Chairman. Do you mean you signed out for it in Watson
Lab?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember the circumstances.
The Chairman. The other day you said you signed out for it
at Evans Lab.
Mr. Coleman. Sir, I would like to go over this.
The Chairman. Let me make a suggestion, Mr. Coleman. You
have been giving us evidence that is in direct contradiction to
that of a sizable number of other witnesses. One of the bad
things about not telling the truth--I am not accusing you of
not telling the truth, but it appears that you are not--is that
very few people have a memory good enough to lie.
Mr. Coleman. That is true.
The Chairman. I suggest, if you were not telling the truth
the other day, that you tell us about it.
Mr. Coleman. I would like to tell you the truth, and I am
telling you the truth. There is a large number of documents
involved. If I could remember every one of them, I think you
should doubt my veracity, because I do not have that kind of
memory, and I don't know anyone who does. I am telling the
truth to the best of my knowledge. I can't remember all the
documents. Probably--I don't know--a large number of documents
pass through my hands. I can't remember every one of them.
The Chairman. All right. Let's ask you this. Another one
entitled ``Sitting-In Maintenance,'' marked ``confidential'':
``I got it before I went into the service. I don't remember,
sometime between 1942 and '43. I got it at Belmar. I do not
remember if I signed for it.'' Now, is that true? Do you
remember whether you signed for it?
Mr. Coleman. What the term ``'signed for it'' means is
whether I signed a receipt to someone else inside the
laboratory.
The Chairman. Do you mean that when you told us the other
day you signed for everything, when you told army intelligence
that you don't remember whether you signed, you were using
``signed'' with a different understanding of what ``signed
for'' meant?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir. Would you give me an opportunity to
just explain?
The Chairman. First, will you answer this: Did you get this
at Belmar Lab?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know.
The Chairman. You say here, ``I got it at Belmar.''
Mr. Coleman. Well, if I said it, it must be so. That is the
best of my recollection.
The Chairman. All right. This is a pretty serious matter.
You are accused of espionage. The Justice Department says they
have an espionage case against you, but the statute of
limitations has run out. Your apartment was searched, and these
things were found. You don't forget these things, Mr. Coleman.
You say you got it at Belmar. That is a positive statement. Can
you tell us what you did when you removed it from Belmar, where
it went? Did it go through someone else's hands?
Mr. Coleman. It did not go through someone else's hands.
The Chairman. Where did it go, then?
Mr. Coleman. I can't remember.
The Chairman. Did you bring it into the Signal lab at
Evans?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know. I can't remember.
The Chairman. How could you tell us the other day, then,
that you knew positively? I tried to protect you on that. I
said, ``Mr. Coleman, you didn't sign for all of this at
Evans.'' And you swore you signed for everything out of Evans.
Is it true now that this document you didn't sign out of Evans?
It is a confidential document.
Mr. Coleman. I would like to make one amendment to what I
just said.
The Chairman. You may.
Mr. Coleman. I stated to the best of my recollection that
the documents that came from Evans I signed out with a whiz
pass. Now, there are some documents there that are personal
notes of mine. If it came from Evans--I don't think it did--it
was done at my apartment. For example, there is a document
there stating ``notes taken on ultrahigh frequency case at Red
Bank.'' I didn't take that from Evans. I didn't sign that out,
because it was my own personal property.
One other, please.
The Chairman. Certainly.
Mr. Coleman. There are some manuals shown there, ordnance
manuals, which were unclassified at the time.
The Chairman. I am not talking about unclassified. Let us
stick to the secret and confidential.
Mr. Coleman. The statement I am making is that those
documents from Evans which I removed from Evans in 1946 were
removed with a whiz pass, because the regulations at that time
required the use of a whiz pass. This is to the best of my
memory. I cannot remember all of the documents. I cannot
pinpoint every one and say, ``On January the 23rd at three-
thirty a.m., I took it out.'' I can't remember that.
The Chairman. Let's get back to your testimony of the other
day. At that time you were asked whether you removed classified
material from any lab other than Evans. Do you remember that?
Mr. Coleman. I don't recall.
The Chairman. And you said yes, you kept some from the
marine corps, about ten.
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember the exact testimony, sir.
The Chairman. You may want to examine that testimony.
Mr. Coleman. If you will show it to me.
The Chairman. I want to ask you now: Did you remove secret
material from any lab other than Evans?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember.
The Chairman. You don't remember. All right. Let's refresh
your recollection. ``Technical Report Norge-E-9-1. February 24,
1943, subject: Translation of the Military Requirements of
Range in the Technical Specifications for Radar. Secret.''
Here is your comment: ``It is hard to say where I got it.
Sometime in 1943. Probably before I went in the service, and at
the end of 1943. I don't know if I signed for it.''
Do you want to comment on that?
Mr. Coleman. The only comment I have to make is that of
those documents that I removed from Evans in 1946, I signed out
for them with a whiz pass. About the documents that I got
during the war, I don't know what the procedure was or what
happened in connection with them.
The Chairman. Who gave you the document from Belmar Lab?
You were not working there.
Mr. Coleman. Which one, sir?
The Chairman. Well, did you get any from Belmar Lab?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember. I was working at Belmar Lab
up until the end of 1943 and January 1944.
The Chairman. Did you steal any secrets from Belmar Lab?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Well, now, you say here you did.
Mr. Coleman. I don't believe that says that I stole any
secrets.
The Chairman. Well, you took them. You had no right to
them. Let's not use the word ``steal,'' then. Did you take any
secret documents from Belmar Lab?
Mr. Coleman. I followed whatever the regulations were.
The Chairman. Did you take any documents from Belmar?
Mr. Coleman. I removed documents from Belmar in accordance
with the regulations.
The Chairman. Did you remove secret documents?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember what classification they
were.
The Chairman. Well, in 1946, when you say you removed
secret documents, were you telling the truth?
Mr. Coleman. If at that time--I was telling the truth.
The Chairman. Not ``if.'' You said you read this over?
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
The Chairman. Was this the truth?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Do you know of any regulation which allowed
you to remove secrets from Belmar Lab? Do you know of any
regulation which allowed you to remove secrets from Belmar Lab
without violating the espionage statute?
Mr. Coleman. At what time are you referring to?
The Chairman. At any time. Do you know of any time when the
regulations allowed you, Mr. Coleman, to remove secrets from
Belmar Lab, keep them, never return them? Do you know of any
regulation which allowed you to do that?
Mr. Coleman. I know only of regulations that allowed me to
remove it----
The Chairman. Will you listen to me? Do you know of any
regulation which allowed you to take secret material from
Belmar Lab, take it way, never return it to Belmar Lab? Do you
know of any regulation which allowed you to do that without
violating the Espionage Act?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know of any regulation. But I don't
know whether it involves the Espionage Act or not. I am not a
lawyer, and I can't say. All I agree--I don't know of any
regulation that permits you to remove the documents and keep
them for an extended period of time.
The Chairman. So you know now you were violating the
Espionage Act, don't you?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know that was violating the Espionage
Act. If you tell me it is----
The Chairman. Who in Watson Lab gave you the secret
document? Just so there is no question about the fact that you
stated that someone did, let us let you read this. Can you read
No. 6? ``Close cooperation Set No. 00125. Secret.'' Your
statement: ``I don't remember how I got it. I got it
recently.'' That would be in 1946, would it not? ``I may have
signed for it or received it from someone in Watson Lab. I do
not know how it came in my possession.'' Can you tell us who in
Watson Lab gave it to you?
Mr. Coleman. It could be two or three people.
The Chairman. All right. Who are the two or three people?
Mr. Coleman. There was one man by the name of Cornell.
The Chairman. Cornell. What is his first name?
Mr. Coleman. Les, I think.
The Chairman. Les Cornell. Who are the other two?
Mr. Coleman. It could be Peter Rosmovsky.
The Chairman. Was Peter Rosmovsky a member of the YCL?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know.
The Chairman. Who is the third man?
Mr. Coleman. It could be Albert S. White.
The Chairman. Anybody else?
Mr. Coleman. That is all I can think of right now.
The Chairman. It had to be one of those three people?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know if it had to be. Those are the
people I had contact with at that time and who might know
something about that.
The Chairman. All right. You say, ``I got it recently.''
By, ``recently,'' what would you say you had in mind? The day
of the search was October 1946. By ``recently,'' you must have
meant 1946.
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You got through telling us everything you got
there you must have signed out for. Do you want to correct
that?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember the circumstances of this.
The Chairman. You cannot say you signed out for this?
Mr. Coleman. As I indicated here, I may have signed it or
received it from----
The Chairman. Mr. Coleman, somebody in Watson Lab was
guilty of violating the Espionage Act. You know that. You know
who you got that from. You don't handle secret documents that
easily.
Mr. Coleman. I think it was one of these three people, but
I am not sure. I don't know who it was.
The Chairman. You don't know who gave it to you?
Mr. Coleman. No.
The Chairman. Did you go over there and get it, or did they
mail it to you?
Mr. Cohn. Did all three of those give you material on one
occasion or another?
The Chairman. Do not shake your head. The reporter can not
see you shake your head.
Mr. Coleman. I think they could have. I am not sure whether
they did or did not.
Mr. Cohn. Was this a practice at the lab to walk out with
secret documents so that you could keep them in your home for a
couple of years?
Mr. Coleman. No. I don't think that was a practice. I think
you could go to a laboratory. If you were physically there, you
could sign a receipt for it.
Mr. Cohn. Was Watson Laboratory at that time part of the
Signal Corps, or part of the air force?
Mr. Coleman. It was part of the air force.
Mr. Cohn. You weren't even working for the air force; is
that right?
Mr. Coleman. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. You were working for the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. Right.
Mr. Cohn. Could someone working for the air force at Watson
Lab sign out for documents marked ``secret,'' take them, give
them to someone in the Signal Corps with authority to take them
and keep them in his home? That is something new to me. Maybe
it was a fact.
Mr. Coleman. You could go into Watson Laboratories, and you
could receive a document, sign for it, and then take it and
remove it to your own location at Evans or some other
laboratory.
Mr. Cohn. Could you get documents from Watson Lab yourself,
secret documents?
Mr. Coleman. As I described, you could if you were
physically----
Mr. Cohn. Could you?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You, not working for the air force and not
working in Watson Lab, could go to Watson Lab and get a secret
document and take it home with their permission?
Mr. Coleman. By signing a receipt for it, I would have the
authority to remove it from Watson Lab.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever do that?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember. I may have. I don't remember
exactly the circumstances. I may have, for example, on that
document, but I don't remember.
The Chairman. You named three people who might have given
you secret documents. Do you recall that any of them ever did
give you secret documents?
Mr. Coleman. I don't recall any specific instance. This may
have been a specific instance.
Mr. Cohn. Was the traffic in these secret documents so
heavy that you just don't recall whether people were walking in
and out handing you secret documents which you kept in your
house?
I have looked at this definition of secret here, and it is
pretty imposing, and I assume they didn't go around classifying
this stuff for nothing. It is just inconceivable----
Mr. Coleman. There were probably hundreds of documents of
that classification.
Mr. Cohn. I don't doubt it.
Mr. Coleman. A large number of them. And it is highly
unlikely to remember one particular document.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this. This document entitled
``Close Cooperation''--what was that about?
Mr. Coleman. I think it is about an SCR-584 radio set.
The Chairman. 584. Do you know that the information from
the German technician who left East Germany and went into
Western Germany concerns this particular set?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. You kept this document in your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You were living with a Communist at that
time, were you?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Whom were you living with?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Okun.
The Chairman. Did Ullmann have access to your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, not that I know of.
The Chairman. You were not living with Rosenberg at that
time?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I never lived with Rosenberg.
The Chairman. Did you ever take secret material from Belmar
Lab?
Mr. Coleman. I removed secret material, as I have
previously described.
The Chairman. Did you ever remove secret material from
Belmar Lab?
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
The Chairman. You did. Were you working in Belmar at the
time?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You were working in Belmar. You were, you
say.
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Where is Belmar located?
Mr. Coleman. It is located in New Jersey, in Wall Township.
The Chairman. How far from here?
Mr. Coleman. About ten or fifteen miles.
The Chairman. When did you work in Belmar?
Mr. Coleman. I worked in Belmar from 1942 until '43.
The Chairman. Did you ever work at Watson Lab?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Where is Watson located?
Mr. Coleman. Watson is located at Eatontown, New Jersey.
The Chairman. How far from here is that?
Mr. Coleman. It is a few miles from here.
The Chairman. And did you visit Watson Lab?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How often?
Mr. Coleman. At that time, maybe once a month, maybe twice
a month.
The Chairman. Do you remember ever getting secret material
from Watson Lab?
Mr. Coleman. I believe I may have gotten it. I don't
remember specifically.
The Chairman. The question is: Do you remember going over
and picking up secret material and bringing it back to your
apartment?
Mr. Coleman. I don't specifically remember. I think it is
quite possible that I did so, but I don't specifically
remember. This document, for example, may have fitted that
description.
The Chairman. Who else did you live with in 1946?
Mr. Coleman. Just Mr. Okun.
The Chairman. Who used to visit your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Rosmovsky was one that I remember.
The Chairman. How about Mr. Kitty?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think he visited our apartment in
1946, but I am not absolutely sure.
The Chairman. How about Mr. Sobell?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Sobell never visited our apartment.
The Chairman. Did you ever meet Mr. Sobell?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Sobell was a classmate of mine, and I met
him for the first time after graduation in 1946, at General
Electric Company.
The Chairman. So you met Sobell in '46.
Mr. Coleman. By chance, yes, sir.
The Chairman. How many times in '46?
Mr. Coleman. I think I only met him once in '46, but I am
not sure.
The Chairman. Did you ever visit at his home?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did he ever visit in your home?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Was he ever in your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever give Mr. Sobell any of this
secret material?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you have a typewriter in your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so. Not to the best of my
knowledge.
The Chairman. Did you ever copy any of the classified
documents, secret, confidential, or otherwise?
Mr. Coleman. I may have copied some notes from one or two
documents, but I don't recall whether they were classified or
not.
The Chairman. You had a camera in the apartment?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, not to the best of my knowledge we
didn't.
The Chairman. Did you have a camera?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so.
The Chairman. Well, you know whether you had a camera or
not.
Mr. Coleman. Sir?
The Chairman. You know whether you had a camera or not.
Mr. Coleman. I am not 100 percent sure. I believe I did not
have a camera, but I am not 100 percent sure.
The Chairman. You mean you do not know whether you own a
camera or not?
Mr. Coleman. I know now whether I own a camera.
The Chairman. Do you own a camera now?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. When did you buy it?
Mr. Coleman. I have a Brownie that I think I bought at the
time I was married in '48.
The Chairman. You have two other cameras, have you not?
Mr. Coleman. I was given by my father-in-law, a Mercury
camera.
The Chairman. When did you get that?
Mr. Coleman. I think about the same time.
The Chairman. And the third camera?
Mr. Coleman. And I have an Argus camera that I have had for
some time.
The Chairman. How long?
Mr. Coleman. Oh, for about ten or fifteen years.
The Chairman. So then you had a camera in '46.
Mr. Coleman. No, the reason I said I don't think so--I
think I had it home with my parents. But I am not sure.
The Chairman. What kind of camera was that?
Mr. Coleman. The Argus camera?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. It is a 35-millimeter camera.
The Chairman. Could you have taken pictures of documents
with that camera?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know.
The Chairman. Did you ever try?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever take any pictures of any
documents?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did anyone in your apartment ever take any
pictures of documents?
Mr. Coleman. Not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Did you ever own or have a Minox?
Mr. Coleman. A what?
The Chairman. A Minox.
Mr. Coleman. If you mean a small camera like that, no, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever see one?
Mr. Coleman. I saw one in a movie recently.
The Chairman. Did you ever see one other than in a movie?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did Lesinsky ever visit your apartment in
'46?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know an individual by that name.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss with Okun the search
made of your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, briefly, I think I did, afterwards.
The Chairman. Had he ever seen any of the secret or
confidential material before the search of your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. I don't really know whether he did or did not.
The Chairman. It was right there in plain view? He could
have seen it?
Mr. Coleman. He could have seen it, yes, sir.
The Chairman. You did not hide it?
Mr. Coleman. Well, some of the material I believe was in
closets, but others was on my table.
The Chairman. But who was your landlady?
Mr. Coleman. This was a large apartment house, and it was a
superintendent there, and I don't remember who she was.
Wait a minute. I do. Mrs. Brown, I believe.
The Chairman. Ever rent from Mrs. Fraze?
Mr. Coleman. Fraze? Yes, we did.
The Chairman. F-r-a-z-e?
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
The Chairman. What year was that?
Mr. Coleman. I think it was half of '43 and half of '44.
The Chairman. At that time you were also removing
classified material from the lab and taking it to the
apartment, weren't you?
Mr. Coleman. I was taking it home to work on, yes, sir.
The Chairman. You had it in the apartment, did you?
Mr. Coleman. I don't recall if I had it then.
The Chairman. Mrs. Fraze had access to your apartment,
didn't she?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, she did.
The Chairman. Who were your roommates at that time?
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Okun and Mr. Grossman.
The Chairman. Do you know that Mrs. Fraze actually saw
secret material in your apartment?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I do not.
The Chairman. Would you be surprised to learn that she had?
Mr. Coleman. Would I be surprised to learn that she had?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. Well, not really, because I think she knew we
were doing overtime work, and therefore she knew that we were
working overtime at that time.
The Chairman. In 1946, when you were removing this secret
and confidential material, did you have maid service in the
apartment?
Mr. Coleman. I don't think so, but I am not sure.
The Chairman. Did you clean your own apartment, make the
beds, and that sort of thing?
Mr. Coleman. I think we made the beds.
The Chairman. You had someone to clean up your apartment,
did you not?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember, sir, I don't really remember
whether we did or not.
The Chairman. Did the landlady or landlord have access to
that apartment?
Mr. Coleman. I believe that the landlady did. I am not
sure.
The Chairman. Did it ever occur to you that some landlady
or landlord having access to all of these secret documents
might be a bit dangerous?
Mr. Coleman. Well, I didn't realize at the time the
seriousness of the violation.
The Chairman. Now let me ask you this question. Did it
occur to you ever while you were removing these documents,
leaving them in your apartment lying around, as you said, that
that might be rather dangerous to the security of this nation?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember whether it did or did not.
But I do feel this----
The Chairman. Now, just answer my question. Did it ever
occur to you that that might be dangerous to the security of
this nation? I am not asking whether you realize it now. At
that time did it ever occur to you that leaving those secret
documents concerning the defense of this nation lying around in
the open might be dangerous to the security of this nation?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember. If you will just permit me--
--
The Chairman. That is enough. You can make your speech
after a while.
Mr. Coleman. I don't want to make a speech. Just on this
question. Please? Would you permit me?
The Chairman. Certainly.
Mr. Coleman. I have the definite impression at that time, I
recall, that I considered most of these documents no longer
classified. Although they were marked classified, the war had
ended, and most of these documents were old documents concerned
with radar sets which had been used during the war, not all of
them but most of them. I had the definite impression at that
time that most of them were no longer classified. I don't say
it didn't occur to me. I mean, I am not saying that. Because I
don't remember. But I do feel that I had the definite
impression at that time that most of then were no longer
classified.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this. You were suspended when?
Mr. Coleman. The 28th of September.
The Chairman. Do you think that a man who removes secret
material from the laboratories in which he is working, leaves
that material lying around in his house, freely accessible to
the landlord, the landlady, should be retained in any of the
Monmouth laboratories, or do you think he should be fired
instanter?
Mr. Coleman. I believe that if it occurred today he should
be fired--what was the word you used, sir?
The Chairman. Instanter.
Mr. Coleman. You mean immediately?
The Chairman. Fired immediately.
Mr. Coleman. If it occurred today, I would say yes, sir.
The Chairman. But you say in 1946 the situation was
different?
Mr. Coleman. It was a common practice to do that.
The Chairman. Who else did it? If it was a common practice
who else did it?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know of any specific----
The Chairman. If you say it is common practice, you must
know someone else who did it.
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I don't know of----
The Chairman. Do you know of one single other individual
who kept secret material lying around his apartment the way you
did?
Do you know of one?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I do not know, except, as I read in
the newspapers, that my supervisor, apparently, Mr. Yamins, did
do that. I don't know it from his own lips. He never told me
that.
The Chairman. You said it was a common practice?
Mr. Coleman. It was.
The Chairman. If it was, you must be able to tell me of one
person who did it.
Mr. Coleman. I cannot think of anybody. I can not say
specifically that anyone did it.
The Chairman. Do you know of anyone else who did it? Do you
know of anyone else? If it is a common practice, Mister, to
steal secrets and leave them in your apartment, and you
testified to that under oath, you must be able to give us the
name of one person who did the same as you did.
Mr. Coleman. I think I can give you a reason why I thought
so. You were permitted to remove the documents with a whiz
pass, and you were permitted to state on the whiz pass you were
taking it to your home. And I knew that that was generally done
by many people, that whiz passes were issued. Therefore, I
gathered the impression that it was a common practice. Today I
am sure that is not permitted. Nor do I think it was permitted
even after my violation.
The Chairman. Let me ask you another question. Referring to
``Research Laboratory Special Report No. 1-301-F, register
number 2427, subject of report: Radar Scanning System, WR 1596,
British Secret, United States Secret, obtained from someone
within the past six months,'' do you know whether you signed
out for that or not?
Mr. Coleman. In the sense of removing it from the
laboratories?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. Or in the sense of----
The Chairman. You know what signing out for it means, do
you not?
Mr. Coleman. Well, there are two----
The Chairman. What is your definition of signing out for
it?
Mr. Coleman. In the sense it is used in there?
The Chairman. No, not in the sense it is used here. When
you say ``sign out,'' what do you mean?
Mr. Coleman. In signing out, in order to remove it from the
laboratories, I used the term ``whiz pass'' associated with
that.
The Chairman. In other words, when you refer to signing
out, you mean signing out when you got it from the laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. When removed from the laboratory, yes, sir.
The Chairman. When you say, ``signing out'' you refer to
signing it out of the laboratory into your possession; is that
correct?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right. Did you sign out for this one?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my recollection, yes, sir. I
cannot remember the specific document.
The Chairman. The other day you said you had signed out for
all of them.
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my recollection.
The Chairman. All right. Now let me read this to you. You
say, ``I do not think I signed out for it.'' Now, what is
correct?
Mr. Coleman. By that I meant at that time--my terminology
at that time meant signing a receipt, internally.
The Chairman. Signing out for it?
Mr. Coleman. Internally.
The Chairman. Mister, you are in more trouble right along.
Mr. Coleman. I am telling the truth, Senator.
The Chairman. It is about time for you to start.
Mr. Coleman. Believe me, I am telling the truth. I have
nothing to hide.
The Chairman. You say that in 1946, by signing out, you
meant signing in, really. Now by ``signing out,'' you mean
signing out. Is that correct? You just got through telling me
that by signing out you mean signing it out of the laboratory.
Is it correct that in 1946, when you said, ``signing out,'' you
meant signing it into the laboratory? Is that correct?
Mr. Coleman. I am not sure what you are driving at right
now. I am not sure I understand the question.
The Chairman. It is a very simple question. You say, ``I do
not think I signed out for it.'' Did you mean actually that you
did not think you signed in for it? What did you mean then?
Mr. Coleman. I think I meant that I did not sign a receipt
for it internally. But I did not remember any specific----
The Chairman. What did you mean by ``sign out'' in 1946?
Mr. Coleman. I believe I meant signing a receipt for it.
The Chairman. When you received it into the laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. Inside the laboratory.
The Chairman. In other words, when you received it.
Mr. Coleman. For the first time, yes, sir.
The Chairman. When you received it into the laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Was it your function to sign receipts for the
material which officially came into the lab?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. That was not your function, was it?
Mr. Coleman. When an individual----
The Chairman. Just a minute.
Mr. Coleman. No, not in the sense that it came in through
the mail.
The Chairman. Now let us get this straight. When secret
material came into the lab, who checked it in and signed in for
it?
Mr. Coleman. Do you mean came into the lab by messenger, or
by mail?
The Chairman. In any fashion. If it is handled differently
by messenger, tell us.
Mr. Coleman. If it came into the lab and was addressed to
the director, it would be handled by Mail and Records Section.
The Chairman. All right. Was there ever any occasion when
you had the task of checking in the secret material?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. You did not?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. So that you never checked in the secret
material.
Mr. Coleman. In the sense that----
The Chairman. In any sense?
Mr. Coleman. A person could, if he had a number of copies
of documents that he received, distribute them to others. When
he did that, the other people had to sign for it with an
internal receipt. This is what I am referring to.
Mr. Cohn. I think you told us this morning you worked on
SCR 527 and SCR 627. Is that correct?
Mr. Coleman. I believe I stated that it was one of the sets
assigned to my section at the time I entered the Marine Corps.
The Chairman. Well, now, did you ever see anything about
that over in Evans before you went with the Marine Corps?
Mr. Coleman. Oh, yes, sir. Before I went with the Marine
Corps, yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you have access to classified material
concerning SCR-527 and SCR-627?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How about SCR-537?
Mr. Coleman. 537?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember that set particularly, by
that name, anyway.
The Chairman. How about PPN 10?
Mr. Coleman. PPN 10?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember that name particularly.
The Chairman. All right. APG 30.
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I don't remember that name.
The Chairman. UPH 3. It looks like U 6-3 and 4.
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember those names.
The Chairman. APS 10?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. APN 57?
Mr. Coleman. APN 57?
The Chairman. Yes, sir. That was an air force set,
obviously.
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember those.
The Chairman. DPW 1?
Mr. Coleman. DPW 1, I recall. I think I mentioned before it
probably was handled by Navigation and Maintenance Section. I
am not sure of the title number.
The Chairman. Did you have anything to do with it?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever see any papers connected with
it?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know. I don't think so, but I am not
absolutely sure. Ordinarily I would not see papers connected
with it.
The Chairman. Now, did any of these documents on this list
have anything to do with SCR 527 and 627?
Mr. Coleman. Sir, I can think of possibilities. I can't
tell from the title.
The Chairman. Will you indicate those?
Mr. Coleman. How shall I indicate?
The Chairman. Just read off the number on that sheet and
the description.
Mr. Coleman. I can think of No. 9. It could have something
to do with it. I don't know. It says ``Summary of Military
Characteristics for Equipment as Used in the Army Air Force.''
The Chairman. What is the classification?
Mr. Coleman. This one was at that time marked secret.
The Chairman. I see. And that might have had a relation to
what? 527? Or 627?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know if it actually does, but it
might. It says, ``Sitting'' here. It is actually ``Siting.''
``Siting of 1 p.m. mobile equipment, confidential.'' That might
have had something to do with it.
The Chairman. Do you think it did?
Mr. Coleman. I don't know. I believe the equipment you are
talking about might come under this general title, but whether
this specifically refers to those sets, I don't know.
The Chairman. How about the No. 9? Does that come generally
under that title?
Mr. Coleman. Well, as you see, No. 9 is a summary of
military characteristics for equipment. I assume from the title
that there are a large number of equipments, and perhaps 527
and 627 are listed in there.
The Chairman. Give me that again, will you? Now let me ask
you this one question again and get this record absolutely
straight. You say on September 27, 1946, when you used the term
``signing out,'' you meant just what? Go over that again, will
you? What did you mean?
Mr. Coleman. I believe that I meant----
The Chairman. Do you know what you meant?
Mr. Coleman. No, I am not absolutely sure.
The Chairman. You do not know what you meant?
Mr. Coleman. I believe, to the best of my recollection,
signing in the sense that it is used there is signing a receipt
internally for the document.
The Chairman. Well, now, you say the occasion of that would
be if there were several documents, several copies, and they
were distributed to different personnel who needed them, then
you would give a receipt for it. That is what you refer to as
signing, signing out?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You call that signing out. Is that what you
meant in 1946?
Mr. Coleman. I believe I did, yes, sir; as far as I can
recall.
The Chairman. Do you know what you meant in '46?
Mr. Coleman. I am not absolutely sure.
The Chairman. You do not know what you meant in '46.
Mr. Coleman. I am not absolutely sure. I think that is what
I meant.
The Chairman. You think that is what you meant.
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. But now when you refer to signing out, what
do you mean? When I asked you today, ``What did you mean by
`signing out' for something,'' and when I asked you last week,
what did you mean? When you were before me in New York, and I
said, ``Did you sign out for these things?''--what did you
understand by that?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember that as a specific question
without some qualification, such as ``from Evans Signal
Laboratory.'' If you would phrase it that way, then I believe I
could answer it completely.
The Chairman. Well, would it have a different meaning if it
were from Belmar or some place else? When you signed out for a
secret document, did signing out mean something different in
Belmar than it did at Evans?
Mr. Coleman. Well, Belmar and Evans are the same thing.
The Chairman. What do you mean today when you say you did
or did not sign out for it? What do you mean? I don't care
whether it is Evans or Belmar or Watson.
Mr. Coleman. I think by itself it could be either of the
two.
The Chairman. What do you think I meant when I asked you if
you signed out for what was found in your home?
Mr. Coleman. Oh, when you are referring to a document that
was found in my home, I assume that you mean signing it out
from Evans, and in that connection I believe, and I stated,
that I got that with a whiz pass.
The Chairman. When you told me you signed out for all these
documents, you meant signing them out of the laboratory when
you took them away; is that correct?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And if you did not sign out for them, you
realize you are committing perjury? Do you understand that when
you say you signed out for all of them, if that were not true
you were committing perjury?
Mr. Coleman. Sir, but I didn't say I signed out for all of
them, because I didn't take all of them from Evans. Some were
my personal property. Some I got in the marine corps. But those
I took from Evans----
The Chairman. Do you say now you only signed out for those
you took from Evans?
Mr. Coleman. Those I took from Evans I removed with a whiz
pass, which I signed, to the best of my knowledge.
The Chairman. In other words, you signed out for them. You
took them out, and you signed something?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. On all occasions, when you took them?
Mr. Coleman. To the best of my memory.
The Chairman. Now, did you sign out for anything you got
from Belmar? In other words, did you sign a receipt when you
took it away from the laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. Well, Evans and Belmar are the same thing. I
don't understand your question, sir.
The Chairman. Belmar is the same as Evans? That is my
mistake. I thought they were two separate laboratories. Then
when you say you got something from Belmar, you really mean you
got it from Evans. Is that correct?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Then when you say, ``I don't know whether I
signed for it or not, you mean you do not have any recollection
of signing for it at all? Is that correct?
Mr. Coleman. Internally, yes, sir.
The Chairman. But you say you did sign for it when it was
taken out?
Mr. Coleman. Well, sir, I would like to just state it that
in 1946 the practice was to sign out with a whiz pass. Any
documents I took out in 1946 I signed out for with a whiz pass.
I was following the regulations as I understood it then.
The Chairman. How about the stuff you got from Watson?
Mr. Coleman. I believe I signed a receipt for it when I got
it, I am not sure.
The Chairman. You are not sure. Has something happened
between 1946 and this date to convince you that you signed for
it? What has happened since to make you think you signed for
it? At that time you said you had not signed for it.
Mr. Coleman. I haven't changed. I don't remember. I don't
know.
The Chairman. You just got through telling me you thought
you signed for it.
Mr. Coleman. I am not sure.
The Chairman. Well, do you think you signed for it?
Mr. Coleman. I am not sure. I don't remember.
The Chairman. I see. You don't know, in other words. Do you
want to correct the statement you just made that you thought
you had signed for it?
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
The Chairman. Looking over this document you gave me, which
is a list of all the secret and confidential material you have,
would you say that that would give any enemy agent almost a
perfect picture of our radar equipment at that time? In other
words, it runs almost the entire gamut, does it not?
Mr. Coleman. Nothing that he didn't already know, because
most of it was unclassified already. This covered equipment
that was in use in World War II, and the war was over. And as I
understand it, quite a bit of this equipment was given to
various allied nations.
The Chairman. I have asked you a very simple question. In
1946, when you removed those secret documents concerning radar,
the documents listed on that document, if an enemy agent had
all the documents which you had in your apartment, would that
have given him a rather complete picture of our development of
the radar as of that time? I am not asking you whether he knew
it anyway or not. I am asking you whether or not those
documents would not have given him a rather complete picture.
Mr. Coleman. Would you mind if I check it, just give it
another glance through?
The Chairman. It is a rather important question. You will
have to check it, if you have forgotten what you took.
Mr. Coleman. I think it would give him a complete picture
as of probably around 1944 or '45. I would say enough of a
picture so that he could construct a complete picture. But I
don't think as of '46. I think it is mostly wartime equipment.
The Chairman. You think?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir, I think; to the best of my
knowledge, as far as I can tell.
The Chairman. You say that you never turned any classified
material over to anyone who is not working for the Signal
Corps?
Mr. Coleman. Not working for the Signal Corps?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Coleman. If I turned any material over, I never turned
it over to anyone who did not have the authority or the
clearance to obtain it.
The Chairman. Did you leave any material in a place where
it would be available to anyone who did not have authority to
obtain it? Any classified material from the Signal Corps?
Mr. Coleman. The material which was in my apartment--
someone who was determined to get it could have gotten into the
apartment.
The Chairman. In other words, you left secret material,
material classified as secret and confidential, over a long
period of time in places where it would have been available to
individuals not authorized to obtain that material? Is that
correct?
Mr. Coleman. If they broke into the apartment, yes, sir.
The Chairman. Well, how about the landlord who had the key
to the apartment, or the landlady, and their friends? There is
no question that you left the material available to
unauthorized personnel, secret and confidential material. You
know that, do you not?
Mr. Coleman. Well, as I said before, I had the general
impression.
The Chairman. I do not care what your impression is. Is it
correct that you left secret material where it would be
available to unauthorized persons?
Mr. Coleman. It is correct in the sense that we have been
talking about it all along.
The Chairman. So that if there is testimony that enemy
agents had access to your apartment, you realize then that you
are guilty of espionage, guilty of violating a section of the
Espionage Act, on which there is no statute of limitations? You
realize that, do you not?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir, I really don't know. I am not a
lawyer, and I can't say.
The Chairman. Then I will tell you. And this is the last
comment I have, and you can leave. This is for your own
protection.
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. We have the testimony before this committee
that the secret material, which you unlawfully took from the
laboratory, left lying around your apartment, was available to
enemy agents. I just want you to know that as of today, from
all the study which my staff has made, you are guilty of
violating the Espionage Act, and not the section which is
tolled by the statute--you are guilty of violating that also--
but a section of the statute which is not tolled by any statute
of limitations. I am telling you that for your protection. We
intend to submit this to the Justice Department. I may say that
I think you have given this committee about the same type of
cooperation which Rosenberg gave the court in New York. I think
you are evasive, lying, and doing everything you can to cover
up a deliberate case on your part. You may leave. I assume this
is your only copy, and you want that back.
Mr. Coleman. No, sir. You may have that.
Mr. Green. Senator, that has no direct relation to the
matters on which you have been examining the witness.
The Chairman. I understand that.
We asked him to bring along anything he had, any documents
which had any relationship to his work in the Signal Corps lab.
Mr. Green. I didn't so understand the question. I thought
it was with respect to the particular transaction.
The Chairman. No, it was with respect to his handling of
any classified material.
Mr. Cohn. On that other document, is that the only copy you
have? I wonder if we could photostat it and return the
original?
Mr. Green. I would like very much to have it back promptly,
however, because we will need it.
Gen. Lawton. I can do it right here on the post.
Mr. Cohn. That will be fine, General. We will appreciate it
a lot.
[The subcommittee then heard testimony from Barry S.
Bernstein, which it subsequently published.]
[Whereupon, at 4 p.m., a recess was taken to reconvene at 8
p.m., in room 29, Federal Building, New York, N.Y.]
ARMY SIGNAL CORPS--SUBVERSION AND ESPIONAGE
[Editor's note.--After returning to New York City from Fort
Monmouth, Senator McCarthy held an evening session of the
subcommittee. He told reporters that he had questioned a
witness who had refused to answer when asked if he was a paid
Soviet spy, and noted that the witness had access to secret
files while compiling a classified pamphlet for the navy on gun
direction by radar.
Harvey Sachs did not testify publicly. Leonard E. Mins
(1900-1988) and Sylvia Berke (1920-1977) testified publicly on
December 14, and Benjamin Wolman on December 15, 1953.]
----------
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
New York, NY.
The subcommittee met at 8:00 p.m., pursuant to recess, in
room 29, Federal Building, New York, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
(chairman) presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Francis Carr,
staff director; Daniel G. Buckley, assistant counsel; Harold
Rainville, administrative assistant to Senator Dirksen; and
Robert Jones, research assistant to Senator Potter.
Present also: John Adams, counselor to the secretary of the
Department of the Army; and Maj. Gen. Kirke B. Lawton.
The Chairman. Mr. Wolman, will you raise your right hand
and be sworn? In this matter now in hearing before the
committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Wolman. I do, sir.
Mr. Cohn. May we have your full name, please?
TESTIMONY OF BENJAMIN WOLMAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
VICTOR ABRAMOWITZ)
Mr. Wolman. Benjamin Wolman, W-o-l-m-a-n.
Mr. Cohn. And your address?
Mr. Wolman. 505 Alabama Avenue.
Mr. Cohn. Will you note counsel is Victor Abramowitz?
Now, Mr. Wolman, what is your occupation at the present
time?
Mr. Wolman. I am in the public school system.
Mr. Cohn. What school do you teach in?
Mr. Wolman. Public School 3.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that? In Brooklyn?
Mr. Wolman. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. What do you teach there?
Mr. Wolman. I am assistant principal.
Mr. Cohn. And for how long a period of time have you been
assistant principal of that school?
Mr. Wolman. Just under a year.
Mr. Cohn. Sir, I can't hear.
Mr. Wolman. Just under a year.
Mr. Cohn. And what were you before that?
Mr. Wolman. A teacher.
Mr. Cohn. What did you teach?
Mr. Wolman. Social studies and economics.
Mr. Cohn. Social studies and economics?
Mr. Wolman. And also, when I had a different kind of
program, the elementary school might have math.
Mr. Cohn. For how long a period of time were you teaching
at that school?
Mr. Wolman. That was in the high school, for about three
years, before that in the elementary school for three years.
Mr. Cohn. Was there ever a time when you were with the
Signal Corps at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Wolman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. When were you with the Signal Corps at Fort
Monmouth?
Mr. Wolman. I can give you the exact date, if I may.
Mr. Cohn. Would you do that, sir?
Mr. Wolman. Let me tell you what it was. I was an officer
candidate. I was in officer candidate school from some time
toward the end of December 1942 for the period of the three
months that the school ran. And I got my commission in March,
March the 22nd or 23rd, 1943. I was there longer than that. I
got a leave of absence after that, and then was sent to a
course called ``Fundamentals of Electricity.'' My recollection
is that it was not at Fort Monmouth, but at Asbury Park, but it
was part of the same general command. That is, I resided at
Asbury Park and went to school there.
After that, I was sent to another school of the Signal
Corps. ``Long Lines Inside'' was the name of the course. And
that was also Asbury Park, under the jurisdiction, though, of
the headquarters of the Signal Corps, Fort Monmouth. After that
I was transferred out of the Monmouth command to Camp Crowder.
Mr. Cohn. Now, Mr. Wolman, we have it that you are now the
assistant principal of Public School No. 3 in Brooklyn. Before
that you taught social studies.
Mr. Wolman. Not there.
Mr. Cohn. You taught at other schools?
Mr. Wolman. At a high school, and three years prior to that
at an elementary school.
Mr. Cohn. And you were at the Signal Corps down at Monmouth
in 1943 and 1944?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir, I didn't say '44.
Mr. Cohn. 1943?
Mr. Wolman. '43. I can give you the exact date of transfer.
Mr. Cohn. I think the record indicates that.
The Chairman. Were you not inducted into the Signal Corps
in May '42?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. May '43?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir. As an officer, in March '43. Let me
explain. When I entered the army, I went through basic training
and then was shipped out to Texas. Now, May 1942 was my date of
induction into the army.
Mr. Cohn. That is all right. You were at Monmouth in '43?
Mr. Wolman. From December '42 to, let us say, July or so of
'43.
Mr. Cohn. At that time, when you were at Fort Monmouth,
were you a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever attended a Communist party meeting?
Mr. Wolman. I don't think so, certainly none that I knew
was a Communist party meeting.
Mr. Cohn. Was there any doubt about it in your mind?
Mr. Wolman. No, I could say I have never attended.
Mr. Cohn. Are you sure you have never attended a Communist
party meeting?
The Chairman. Did I understand the witness to say that he
had never attended any Communist party meetings?
[Mr. Wolman confers with Mr. Abramowitz.]
Mr. Cohn. You can consult with counsel any time you wish,
Mr. Wolman.
Mr. Wolman. I did. I explained to him that barring a
situation where I was unfamiliar with the surroundings--but I
can't even think of that kind of situation.
Mr. Cohn. Now, was Mrs. Wolman a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Wolman. I have been informed that I have a privilege to
protect questions of conversation or discussion between husband
and wife. I would like to stand on that.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any Communist meetings
with your wife? First let me ask you: Is your wife's first name
Diana?
Mr. Wolman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any Communist party
meetings with your wife?
Mr. Wolman. No.
The Chairman. You did not. Did your wife ever ask you to
attend Communist party meetings with her?
[Mr. Wolman confers with Mr. Abramowitz.]
Mr. Wolman. I claim my privilege on that.
The Chairman. You mean the husband and wife privilege?
Mr. Wolman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Did your wife ever discuss with you her
membership in the Communist party in the presence of anyone
other than the two of you? In other words, when a third person
was present?
Mr. Wolman. No.
The Chairman. Your answer is ``no''?
Mr. Wolman. ``No.''
The Chairman. Was your wife a Communist prior to your
marriage with her?
Mr. Wolman. I wouldn't know that, sir.
The Chairman. You do not know whether she was or not. Did
she ever mention to you that she was a Communist before you
married her?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you have any reason to believe she was a
Communist before you married her?
Mr. Wolman. None that I know of. I don't think the question
arose.
The Chairman. Not whether the question arose. Did you have
any reason to believe your wife was a Communist, before you
married her, from her conversations with you or otherwise?
There is no privilege between girlfriend and boyfriend.
Mr. Wolman. Yes, I realize the distinction made with the
marriage. I would say: no.
The Chairman. You would say ``no''?
Mr. Wolman. ``No.'' Will you phrase the question again, so
that I know what I am answering, please?
The Chairman. Did you, prior to your marriage to your wife,
have any reason to suspect that she might be a Communist?
Mr. Wolman. No.
[Mr. Wolman confers with Mr. Abramowitz.]
Mr. Wolman. The question I have just raised here was on a
question of knowledge or something that I heard or knew as a
fact. Outside the area of marriage privilege, I could answer
whether I did or did not know. But you asked me whether I had
any reason for suspecting it. I think that comes into a sort of
conjecture.
The Chairman. Let us hear your conjecture. You are here
before this committee to give us any information you have. We
are asking you for it.
Mr. Abramowitz. May I suggest, sir----
The Chairman. No, you may not suggest, Counsel. You can
suggest to your client.
[Mr. Abramowitz confers with Mr. Wolman.]
Mr. Wolman. Well, it is more or less as I presented it. It
is a question of conjecture, and I don't see how I can, in
fairness to the committee or to myself, attempt to give
anything like the kind of an answer one can give on facts.
The Chairman. What is your answer?
Mr. Wolman. To the question on conjecture? I mean, you are
asking me really to make a----
The Chairman. I asked you a simple question.
Mr. Wolman. You asked me to make a guess.
The Chairman. You are an assistant principal of a school.
You should have enough intelligence to understand the question.
If you have not, we will ask it again.
Mr. Wolman. No, I understand the question.
The Chairman. Then answer.
Mr. Wolman. ``No.''
The Chairman. The answer is ``no''?
Mr. Wolman. No. No grounds for making--insufficient grounds
for making that kind of guess.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any suspicion before you
were married----
Mr. Wolman. That is what I mean.
The Chairman. Let me finish the question.
Mr. Wolman. I am sorry.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any suspicion before you
were married that your wife was a Communist?
Mr. Wolman. As I say, you are still asking me to guess, and
I would have to say ``no,'' then.
The Chairman. Is the answer ``no''?
Mr. Wolman. ``No.''
The Chairman. Did you have any suspicion or any thought
that she might be a Communist sympathizer?
[Mr. Wolman confers with Mr. Abramowitz.]
The Chairman. Mister, we know something about you, or you
would not be here.
Mr. Wolman. Well, I assume there must be some grounds for
being called here.
The Chairman. I just want to tell you something for your
own protection. We know something about you or you would not be
here.
Mr. Wolman. I say I assumed that.
The Chairman. You can go ahead and commit perjury if you
care to. I do not care. You will not be the first witness in
this hearing who has done it. But do not think you can play
with this committee. I would suggest to you that you either
tell the truth or refuse to answer.
Mr. Wolman. Well, I am trying to tell the truth as well as
I can. You asked me a question, however, that is a guess.
The Chairman. I would suggest that you better try a little
harder.
Mr. Wolman. But you are asking me to guess.
Mr. Cohn. You do not have to do any guessing, Mr. Wolman.
When were you married?
Mr. Wolman. In 1946.
Mr. Cohn. In November?
Mr. Wolman. In November 1946.
The Chairman. Did you have any reason to believe that your
wife was a Communist sympathizer before you married her?
Mr. Wolman. On the same basis as I answered before, I don't
think so.
The Chairman. ``Yes'' or ``no''?
Mr. Wolman. Well, no.
The Chairman. In other words, nothing came to your
attention which would give you any reason to suspect that your
wife might be either a Communist or a Communist sympathizer? Is
that correct?
Mr. Wolman. You are assuming, of course----
The Chairman. I am not assuming anything. I am asking you a
question.
Mr. Wolman. May I finish, please?
The Chairman. No, I am asking you a question. I will ask it
again. Did anything ever come to your attention prior to your
marriage which might give you any reason to suspect or think
that your wife might be a Communist or a Communist sympathizer?
Mr. Abramowitz. Mr. Senator, may I have a few moments to
consult in private with the witness?
The Chairman. Surely. You can take him into the back of the
room if you want to.
Mr. Sachs, will you raise your right hand?
In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Sachs. I do.
Senator, can I ask something first, please? My employer
happens to be with me here tonight, and I would like to ask you
if you would grant him the privilege of hearing my testimony.
Mr. Cohn. If you want him in, we will have him in.
Mr. Sachs. His name is Mr. Boylen, and he is out here.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Sachs, where are you employed?
TESTIMONY OF HARVEY SACHS (ACCOMPANIED BY IRVING BOYLEN)
Mr. Sachs. I am employed at the Shore Television Company in
Brooklyn, New York.
Mr. Cohn. And for how long a period of time have you been
there?
Mr. Sachs. I have been there for a little over four years
now.
Mr. Cohn. What kind of work do you do there?
Mr. Sachs. I happen to be an electrical engineer, and my
capacity happens to be that of plant manager.
Mr. Cohn. Do they have any government contracts there?
Mr. Sachs. Yes, they have two at the present time, one from
the Signal Corps and one from the air force.
Mr. Cohn. Is there any classified work?
Mr. Sachs. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. They are unclassified projects?
Mr. Sachs. They are.
Mr. Cohn. What do they concern?
Mr. Sachs. One happens to be for a dummy load test set, and
the other happens to be for a relay test set.
Mr. Cohn. There is a Signal Corps one from Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Sachs. Well, it is not directly from Fort Monmouth,
although the engineering samples were submitted there.
Mr. Cohn. Were you ever connected with the Army Signal
Corps?
Mr. Sachs. I certainly was.
Mr. Cohn. When?
Mr. Sachs. I worked for them from July of 1941 until April
of 1944, at which time I went into the navy, was drafted into
the navy.
Mr. Cohn. When you were with the Army Signal Corps, where
were you stationed?
Mr. Sachs. I started by working at Fort Hancock, which was
a part of the Fort Monmouth Signal Laboratory, and then I was
assigned to field work in Baltimore, Maryland, and at Sunbury,
Pennsylvania, and at the time I returned to the laboratory for
assignment to work there they had moved that section to Evans
Signal Laboratory in Belmar.
Mr. Cohn. Did you then work at Evans?
Mr. Sachs. I worked at Evans for some period of time, and
then I spent two and a half months in Toronto at the plant of
Research Enterprises, Limited, and then again I returned to
Belmar to work.
Mr. Cohn. Did you have a clearance to work on classified
material?
Mr. Sachs. At that time? Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And did you work on classified material?
Mr. Sachs. I worked on confidential material primarily,
yes.
Mr. Cohn. You did work on classified material?
Mr. Sachs. Yes, I did.
Mr. Cohn. Now, were you ever a member of the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Sachs. No, sir, I was not.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meetings of the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Sachs. Not to my knowledge. I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man by the name of Fred Kitty?
Mr. Sachs. Yes, I am acquainted with him.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meetings of the Young
Communist League with Fred Kitty?
Mr. Sachs. No, sir, I did not.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any meetings with Fred
Kitty?
Mr. Sachs. No, not to my recollection.
Mr. Cohn. Did you go to Cooper Union?
Mr. Sachs. I certainly did.
Mr. Cohn. During what years?
Mr. Sachs. I went to Cooper Union from 1937 until 1941,
from September of '37 until May of 1941.
Mr. Cohn. Do you deny, under oath, that you were a member
of the Young Communist League at Cooper Union?
Mr. Sachs. I certainly do. I deny that.
Mr. Cohn. Do you deny under oath that you attended any
meetings of the Young Communist League while at Cooper Union?
Mr. Sachs. I would like to point out that I did attend at
that time, to my recollection, some meetings of groups that I
feel, in looking back, were probably sympathetic to the
Communist cause at that time, but if you were to ask me whether
or not it was the Young Communist League, I couldn't honestly
tell you it was so.
Mr. Cohn. You just said a few moments ago you didn't.
Mr. Sachs. In my recollection.
The Chairman. For your protection, and in view of the fact
that you do not have counsel here, I want to inform you that
the committee has testimony from a number of witnesses that you
attended meetings of the Young Communist League and were a
member of the Young Communist League. I tell you this so that
you will be fully informed of that, so that if there is any
subsequent legal proceeding you cannot claim you were entrapped
or anything of the kind.
Let me say I know nothing about whether you are telling the
truth or whether they are telling the truth. We have witnesses
who have sworn that you were a member of the Young Communist
League and that you attended meetings. I would suggest to you,
if I may give you some advice, as a lawyer myself, that you
realized when we called you here that we called you for a
purpose. We did not reach into a grab bag and pull out your
name. We knew something about you, or you would not be called
here. Do not assume you are dealing with a bunch of school boys
when you are dealing with this staff. They have been
investigating for a long time. They know all the rules of
evidence. They know all the criminal laws involving people who
come in and perjure themselves. So I would suggest to you that
you either tell the truth to Mr. Cohn in answer to his
questions or that you refuse to answer. Otherwise, you will
find yourself in an awful lot of trouble.
Mr. Sachs. Well, Senator, can I make a statement concerning
my position before I am asked any more questions?
The Chairman. You certainly may. I may say if you want an
adjournment to get a lawyer, you may have an adjournment.
Mr. Sachs. In all truthfulness, Senator, I don't think it
is necessary, because I am going to tell you in my own terms
what is, I think, the truth. I realize this is a very serious
matter, and I am not going to say whether I am doing something
foolish. Maybe I am.
Perhaps I should seek a lawyer's advice, and my employer
would probably be the best one to tell me that. But I will tell
you what my position is.
At the time I went to Cooper Union, '37 to '41, twelve or
thirteen years ago, I was with a group of individuals who were
probably, some of them, Communistically inclined. And I can
tell you that I attended meetings of what was probably--what
the heck did they call it--some student group. I forget the
name at the moment. Can anybody suggest it?
Mr. Cohn. The American Student Union?
Mr. Sachs. Was that the one?
Mr. Cohn. I don't know what you have in mind.
Mr. Sachs. I think it was the American Student Union, or
whatever it was. I attended meetings of that. And as far as I
know, those were the only meetings that I attended. If somebody
called it a YCL meeting, as you put it, I am sorry to say that
I honestly do not recollect that I attended a YCL meeting. If
somebody called it that or said they saw me at one, that is
their testimony.
Mr. Cohn. Were these meetings obviously under Communist
domination? I mean, do not fence now. Just be completely
candid.
Mr. Sachs. You mean looking back? At this time looking
back?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Sachs. Yes, I would say so.
Mr. Cohn. Who were the people who attended these meetings
with you?
Mr. Sachs. Well----
Mr. Cohn. We have you. How about Fred Kitty?
Mr. Sachs. No, not that I recollect. Because I didn't know
him at that time.
Mr. Cohn. Who do you recollect?
Mr. Sachs. Well, there were fellows that went to school
with me at that time that were in my class.
Mr. Cohn. Give us some names.
Mr. Sachs. There are only two fellows that I can think of,
because they were in my particular class, and I knew them.
The Chairman. Before you name them, I assume if you follow
the usual pattern you will give us the names of a couple of
well-known Communists. Now you can go ahead and name them.
Mr. Sachs. No, I can only name fellows who were in my
class. One was Alfred Sarant, and the other's name was Ralph
Cricker.
Mr. Cohn. When did you first meet Alfred Sarant?
Mr. Sachs. At school, in Cooper Union.
Mr. Cohn. In what year?
Mr. Sachs. Well, in my freshman year, I don't believe I
knew him very well. As a matter of fact, I don't believe I knew
him at all until 1940.
Mr. Cohn. Try and keep your answers a little shorter. Do
your thinking, and give us the conclusion, just so that you can
save time. About what year do you think you met Mr. Sarant?
Mr. Sachs. I would say in 1940 I really got to know him,
because we were in the same class together.
Mr. Cohn. Was he present at some of these meetings you have
described?
Mr. Sachs. Yes, I would say he was.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Sarant was a Communist?
Mr. Sachs. Did I know what?
Mr. Cohn. Did you know Mr. Sarant was a Communist, one of
these people you described as Communistically inclined.
Mr. Sachs. I would say he was.
Mr. Cohn. Did you see Mr. Sarant down at the Signal Corps?
Mr. Sachs. Yes, I did.
Mr. Cohn. What was Mr. Sarant doing there?
Mr. Sachs. He was an engineer.
Mr. Cohn. Did you report him to the authorities, by the
way?
Mr. Sachs. Did I report him to the authorities?
Mr. Cohn. Yes. Here is a man you knew was a Communist, or,
to take your words, Communistically inclined, and you see him
working down in the Signal Corps on classified material. I
wonder what steps you, not being a Communist, took to bring the
matter to the attention of the authorities down there?
Mr. Sachs. First of all I don't know whether he was working
on classified work or not.
Mr. Cohn. Where was he working in the Signal Corps?
Mr. Sachs. He was working in another section. I am sorry to
say I don't recall which.
The Chairman. Counsel asked you if you ever reported him to
anyone.
Mr. Sachs. No, sir.
The Chairman. Here is a Communist you knew was working in
the Signal Corps.
Mr. Sachs. I didn't know he was a Communist.
The Chairman. Did you not think he was a Communist?
Mr. Sachs. I will put it this way. I believe that he was
communistically inclined.
The Chairman. But you decided not to report him to anyone?
Mr. Sachs. I don't think I made a decision one way or
another.
The Chairman. Aside from these two well-known and well-
identified Communists--you know they are publicly known. It is
so easy to say ``I know Earl Browder.'' He is well known--would
you like to search your names as to other individuals?
Mr. Sachs. The reason I recollect those two people----
The Chairman. I am not asking you about that. I am asking
you if you can tell us any other names.
Mr. Sachs. Offhand, no.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this. Did you, in the year
1940, pay money to the Young Communist League?
Mr. Sachs. I don't recollect. I mean, I don't know what it
could be. It is very hard for me to recollect something like
that.
The Chairman. Do you think that would be such a casual
thing, joining the Young Communist League, that you would not
remember paying money to them?
Mr. Sachs. I didn't belong to the Young Communist League.
The Chairman. Did you not pay membership dues? Let me tell
you, Mister, our FBI is not too dumb. Sometimes they have
people collecting those dues, in case you do not know it.
Now, if you want to tell us, all right. In 1940, did you
not pay membership dues to the Young Communist League?
Mr. Sachs. I simply do not recollect anything like that.
The Chairman. Well, do you want to tell us positively you
did not?
Mr. Sachs. I can't positively say I did not.
The Chairman. You cannot positively say?
[Mr. Sachs confers with Mr. Boylen.]
Mr. Sachs. These are legal points. I am trying to answer as
best I can.
The Chairman. You have a right to have a lawyer, and I may
say to you that you should have a lawyer. You see, we know that
joining the Communist party is important enough in any man's
life that he remembers it. When you come here and say, ``I do
not remember whether I joined or not. I do not remember whether
I gave them membership dues''--there is no jury in the land
that would believe you were honest.
Now, you are entitled to have counsel. If I were in your
place, I would go and get myself a lawyer. I would suggest also
that you not get a Communist lawyer. We have seen men come in
here with Communist lawyers often. I want to suggest this to
you, that they owe a higher duty to the Communist party than
they owe to you. So if you have a Communist lawyer, he is going
to take instructions from the party. I would suggest to you not
to get one.
Mr. Sachs. I will hire----
The Chairman. Let me say this, for the benefit of your
counsel. We have what we consider very definite proof from a
man who has no reason to lie about you that you belonged to the
Young Communist League, that you attended meetings, that you
did this often enough that there could be no conceivable doubt
in your mind about it, that you were associated with the
Communists over there. That is not necessarily a crime. If you
come in here and lie about it, it is a crime. I don't know
whether you have kept up your membership or not, frankly. I
perhaps should not tell you that, but I will. I do not know
what you have done in '47, '48, '49, and '50.
So I would say to you: Either tell us the truth now, or, if
you are afraid it might incriminate you, go out and get
yourself a lawyer and come back. We will give you time to get a
lawyer and time to lay the whole course before us.
Mr. Sachs. Well, Senator, you see, I could tell you what
the truth is to my best knowledge, because I know that is what
you are trying to get at.
Mr. Boylen. Senator, may I ask a question? I have spoken
with Mr. Sachs. He is my employee; in fact, my right-hand man
in my business. I have the utmost faith in him personally. I
tell you this, to state my own position. I feel this, that what
Mr. Sachs will tell you tonight, with or without the advice of
counsel--and I only advise counsel because the line seems to
indicate there might be some perjury here even though it is
involuntary. I don't know where the law puts the point. In
other words, where do you draw the line, whether the perjury is
voluntary or involuntary?
Mr. Cohn. There is no such thing as involuntary perjury.
Perjury must be willful.
Mr. Boylen. I know one thing, and I am trying to recollect
back ten or eleven years----
The Chairman. We have a rule that counsel cannot take part,
so we cannot let you. If you want to advise your employee to
get counsel, you can do it. I do not want to hear argument on
it.
The question is: Do you want an adjournment to get counsel,
or do you want to proceed?
[Mr. Sachs confers with Mr. Boylen.]
Mr. Sachs. The point is if I tell them something and I do
not honestly recollect the circumstances, then I am considered
to perjure myself.
The Chairman. Mr. Sachs, unless you have an unusual mind,
you know whether you paid the Young Communists money.
Mr. Sachs. Senator, I can honestly say----
The Chairman. The question is: Do you want to proceed now
with your testimony, or do you want an adjournment to get
counsel? That is all I want to ask you. And we can proceed with
the questioning.
Mr. Sachs. I think I had better adjourn to get counsel.
Because I may be doing something which unknowingly will harm
me.
The Chairman. You want to get counsel? You may have the
adjournment.
Mr. Sachs. Can I ask something else?
The Chairman. Certainly.
Mr. Sachs. It just so happens I am in the middle of moving
into a home, and I don't know if it is possible or not, but I
would like sufficient time to just move, if I can.
The Chairman. I think that is a reasonable request.
Mr. Sachs. I don't know how long the hearings are going on.
The Chairman. How long will it take you to move?
Mr. Sachs. I am moving on Monday.
The Chairman. How many days will it take you?
Mr. Sachs. By the time I am settled, until Tuesday or
Wednesday.
The Chairman. We will give you at least a week, then. We
will not call you back until some time late next week or early
the following week. That will give you sufficient time, will it
not, to see your counsel?
Mr. Sachs. I think so. That is very fair of you.
The Chairman. We will call you back.
Mr. Cohn. You mentioned the name of Alfred Sarant, and then
you mentioned an additional name. What was that?
Mr. Sachs. Ralph Cricker.
Mr. Cohn. Where is Mr. Cricker today?
Mr. Sachs. I don't know.
Mr. Cohn. When is the last you heard of him?
Mr. Sachs. The last I heard of him was when, shortly after
we left school, he got a job working for some motor company up
in Connecticut somewhere, and I have not seen him or heard of
him since.
Mr. Cohn. When did you first hear of Alfred Sarant?
Mr. Sachs. You mean actually hear of him in terms of where
he was?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Sachs. Well, the last I saw of him was in 1946. The
last I heard of him was one year ago.
Mr. Cohn. What were the circumstances of your seeing him in
'46?
Mr. Sachs. An FBI agent visited me.
[Mr. Boylen confers with Mr. Sachs.]
Mr. Sachs. Oh, when did I hear of him in '46?
Mr. Cohn. You said you last saw him in '46.
Mr. Sachs. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Where was that?
Mr. Sachs. In New York City.
Mr. Cohn. In whose company was he?
Mr. Sachs. Alone.
Mr. Cohn. Did you just run into him?
Mr. Sachs. No. I had just gotten married after I got out of
the service, and I happened to be staying with my mother-in-law
in New York.
Mr. Cohn. What did he do? Call up?
Mr. Sachs. He happened to call that weekend, and I happened
to be with my wife.
Mr. Cohn. Whom did he call?
Mr. Sachs. He called my wife to find out, I think, if she
knew anything about me. Because at that time he didn't know I
was married. I don't know. It is hard to recollect.
Mr. Cohn. Did you know he was a Communist espionage agent?
Mr. Sachs. No, I did not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know now that he has escaped to the Soviet
Union?
Mr. Sachs. I was told this one year ago by an agent of the
FBI.
The Chairman. I missed part of your answer. Was he a friend
of your wife's?
Mr. Sachs. No; just through him knowing me.
The Chairman. I see. He called her because he knew you?
Mr. Sachs. Yes.
The Chairman. I do not think we should ask you any more
questions if you want to get counsel. May I say to you, Mr.
Sachs, for your information that I have no way of knowing
whether the other witnesses are telling the truth or whether
you are. All I know is that with your testimony here that you
did not join the YCL and did not pay it any money someone has
perjured himself before the committee.
So I would suggest, number one, that you get a lawyer who
is not a Communist, a good, honest, lawyer; number two, that
you tell him everything.
Mr. Sachs. I will tell him everything.
The Chairman. You see, your lawyer cannot tell us what you
told him. There is a privilege between lawyer and client. So
you can tell him anything. Tell him about any Communist
activities of yours, everything. Then you follow his advice.
And counsel will tell you when to come back.
You will consider yourself under subpoena in the meantime.
Mr. Sachs. And, Senator, what does that mean? That what I
told you tonight is off the record, or stricken from the
record?
The Chairman. Everything is on the record. I may say this.
We have had a number of witnesses before us who did not tell us
the truth, who lied, who perjured themselves. They, after
thinking it over, decided to come clean, and we agreed to
strike all the previous record for them so that they would not
be subject to perjury charges. If you decided after thinking
this over, that you were not telling us the truth, and if you
come in and tell us you want to change your story, while I am
not making you any previous promises, we will definitely let
you know then whether we will strike out the previous
testimony.
Mr. Sachs. Well, Senator, I will just really have to think
about it, but I can only say just in parting that, to the best
of my recollection, I told you the truth.
The Chairman. Well, think it over and talk to your lawyer.
Will you?
Mr. Sachs. I certainly will.
TESTIMONY OF BENJAMIN WOLMAN (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
VICTOR ABRAMOWITZ) (RESUMED)
The Chairman. Rather than have the reporter try to find the
last question asked, let me re-ask the question: Prior to your
marriage, did anything occur that gave you any reason to
suspect that your wife was either a Communist or a Communist
sympathizer?
Mr. Wolman. I still feel Mr. Senator, that you are asking
me something that it is almost impossible to put a finger on,
the question of sympathizing----
The Chairman. Just answer. I do not want any speech from
you.
Mr. Wolman. If you insist on an answer, I will say ``no.''
But I think it is unfair to ask me to answer on a question as
intangible as that.
The Chairman. Well, at this time, then, you cannot
recollect anything that occurred prior to your marriage which
would give you any reason to suspect or think that your wife
might be a Communist or a Communist sympathizer? Your answer is
``no''?
Mr. Wolman. Yes.
The Chairman. Is the answer ``no''?
Mr. Wolman. Yes, sir, I think it is unfair to expect me
to----
The Chairman. Oh, I know it is awfully unfair to ask you
whether your wife was a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. You were married November 3, 1946?
Mr. Wolman. I am not sure of the date, but it was 1946.
Mr. Cohn. About that time, specifically in 1943 and 1944,
was your wife in charge of the Export Department of the Four
Continent Book Corporation?
[Mr. Abramowitz confers with Mr. Wolman.]
Mr. Wolman. I do not know the date.
Mr. Cohn. Was she ever connected with the Four Continent
Book Corporation?
Mr. Wolman. I am trying to remember whether such a
statement was ever made by her to me.
[Mr. Abramowitz confers with Mr. Wolman.]
Mr. Wolman. I plead the privilege of married couples.
The Chairman. You are not entitled to that privilege. This
goes to a period before the marriage.
Mr. Abramowitz. The question did not go to that, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, I submit this is not a confidential
communication anyway.
The Chairman. This would not be a confidential
communication with your wife. You have no marriage privilege
there.
Mr. Cohn. I ask a directed answer.
Mr. Wolman. I might point out I never knew my wife in '43
and '44.
Mr. Cohn. Now, look. Would you please answer the question,
Mr. Wolman? I would like to get some truthful answers.
Mr. Wolman. I have been giving you truthful answers.
Mr. Cohn. She was your wife, and I assume you know
something about what she did just prior to your marriage.
Mr. Wolman. This was not just prior to the marriage.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know she was connected with the Four
Continent Book Corporation?
The Chairman. At any time?
Mr. Wolman. At any time, leaving out those dates--because
that I do not know--I believe she was.
The Chairman. Let me ask you something. Why do you stall
about that? Why do you try to avoid it? We are going to stay
here and get the truth from you.
Mr. Wolman. What is that?
The Chairman. You might as well make up your mind. Why are
you afraid to tell counsel.
Mr. Wolman. This gentleman asked me specific dates. I don't
know those dates. That I affirm to you.
Mr. Cohn. You know, don't you, that the Four Continent Book
Corporation was one of the best known subsidiaries of the
Communist party?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You taught social studies, did you not?
Mr. Wolman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You never heard of the Four Continent Book
Corporation in connection with the Communist party?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. This is the first you have heard of it?
Mr. Wolman. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. You never heard that before from anybody.
Mr. Wolman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Or your wife?
Mr. Wolman. That is privileged, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Now when I ask you if you have heard it from your
wife, you say it is privileged.
Mr. Wolman. I stand on the privilege.
The Chairman. Let me ask you. Did you ever hear from anyone
that this organization was a Communist-controlled outfit?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. From anyone including your wife?
Mr. Wolman. You differentiated there. I said I stand on the
privilege with regard to my wife.
The Chairman. Anyone on earth, anyone, and I include every
person you know; did you hear from anyone that it is a
Communist controlled outfit? Do you stand on the privilege
there?
Mr. Wolman. Sir? With regard to my wife, yes. With regard
to the others, I have answered truthfully, sir. With regard to
anyone else, the answer is: no.
The Chairman. While I am asking you a question, you will be
quiet.
The question is: Did you ever hear from anyone that this
was a Communist-controlled organization? What is your answer?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Does that include your wife? Or are you
excepting her from the answer?
Mr. Wolman. Well, I wanted to except her from the answer,
only in order to keep this privilege of a married couple.
Mr. Cohn. There is no general privilege.
Mr. Abramowitz. Will the senator----
The Chairman. No.
Mr. Abramowitz. I just wanted to suggest that the witness
answer the question. I am sorry. I won't interrupt again.
Mr. Cohn. As your counsel will advise you, as I hope he
will advise you, because it is the law, there is no general
privilege. You can only assert it as to a specific question if
a confidential communication between you and your wife is
involved. There is no such thing as preserving a privilege as
to anything. It can only be claimed with respect to a specific
question on a specific point, if you have reference to a
confidential communication made in the course of the marital
relationship by your wife to you.
Mr. Wolman. With that understanding, I tried to answer it
for my wife. When the question was made to include everyone
else, the answer was ``no,'' and thought I stated that flatly.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member----
Mr. Wolman. May I make the point? I don't know whether
anyone even mentioned the place to me, but I did know the name.
But you raise another question: Did I know whether Four
Continent was part of something else? And to that I told you
``no.''
Mr. Cohn. Were you, in 1947, a member of the Brownsville
Section of the Communist party?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did you attend meetings of the Brownsville
Section of the Communist party in 1947?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. And if witnesses come in here and say you did,
and they attended them with you, they are lying; is that your
testimony?
Mr. Wolman. Well, I don't know what witnesses you have that
could swear to that or could state that.
Mr. Cohn. I say if any witnesses have sworn to that, they
are not telling the truth; is that right?
Mr. Wolman. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. You never attended?
Mr. Wolman. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any Communist party meeting
with your wife?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You never attended any Communist party meeting at
all?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Did anyone ever ask you to go to a Communist
party meeting?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did your wife ever attend any Communist party
meetings?
Mr. Wolman. Husband and wife privilege, sir.
The Chairman. That will not be privileged. There is nothing
privileged about her attending a meeting. If she attended a
meeting, she could not be alone. You are ordered to answer.
Mr. Wolman. I have to retain that privilege, sir.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer. Do you still
refuse?
Mr. Wolman. I don't refuse. I stand on the privilege, which
you yourself indicated to me or this man indicated to me I had.
The Chairman. Have the record show that the witness has
been ordered to tell whether his wife attended Communist
meetings. Let the chair have the record show that the chair has
instructed him that there is nothing confidential about her
attending a meeting attended by other Communists. He does not
have the privilege. And he still refused to answer.
Mr. Cohn. Was a Communist party meeting ever held in the
home of yourself and your wife?
Would you read the question to him, please?
Mr. Wolman. I got the gist of it. Not to my knowledge, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Not to your knowledge. Would there be any doubt
about it in your mind?
Mr. Wolman. Let's say at any time when I was in the house
on present.
Mr. Cohn. Was any held in your home when you were not
present?
Mr. Wolman. That would be difficult for me to answer. How
could I answer that? You meant to my knowledge, was any held
while I was not in the house?
Mr. Cohn. Yes.
Mr. Wolman. I don't know.
The Chairman. Did anyone ever tell you one was held in your
house while you were not present?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever have any reason to believe there
were Communist meetings held at your home?
Mr. Wolman. Do I have any reason for believing that?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Wolman. I don't think so.
Mr. Cohn. You are an assistant principal of a school. How
many students are there in the school?
Mr. Wolman. Well, in my particular building about six
hundred.
Mr. Cohn. About six hundred students, and you are the
assistant principal. You have taught social studies and
everything else. And it is a matter of conjecture, it is a
difficult question, when I ask you if you didn't have
reasonable grounds to believe there were Communist meetings
held at your home.
Mr. Wolman. You asked me if I had any reason for believing
one was held, and I said ``no.''
Mr. Cohn. Is the answer ``no,'' you don't think so? Is
there any doubt about it in your mind?
Mr. Wolman. To the best of my knowledge, no.
Mr. Cohn. Is there any doubt about it in your mind? That is
a pretty important point.
Mr. Wolman. I don't think there is any doubt about it, if I
said ``no,'' I don't have any reason for believing there was
such a meeting.
Mr. Cohn. You are saying to us categorically there is no
reason whatsoever, including what your wife told you, that led
you to believe a Communist meeting had been held in your home?
Mr. Wolman. I have no----
[Mr. Abramowitz confers with Mr. Wolman.]
Mr. Wolman. Except for the husband and wife privilege, my
answer is as before, no.
The Chairman. You have waived the privilege, Mister, when
you said that nothing ever came to your attention to indicate
there was a Communist meeting in your home that would include
your wife, so you have waived the privilege. You cannot assert
that privilege anymore.
Mr. Wolman. I don't understand.
The Chairman. I just got through telling you that when you
were asked the question whether or not anything ever occurred
or any information ever came to your attention that Communist
party meetings were ever held in your home, when you answered
that without excepting your wife, you have waived any
privilege.
Mr. Wolman. I have attempted at every point to indicate
that there is a relationship between myself and my wife. I
stand on the privilege.
The Chairman. You will answer counsel's question. You will
be ordered to answer, because you have waived the privilege.
Mr. Wolman. I still stand on that privilege.
Mr. Cohn. Did you attend Communist party meetings in 1945
with a woman named Diana Muldover, whom you later married?
Mr. Wolman. I stated before: I never attended a Communist
party meeting.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, I don't want to ask this witness
any more questions. He is committing perjury right and left,
and I think we ought to prove it.
The Chairman. He is in contempt of the committee and has
committed perjury. I think this is a waste of time, except,
Roy, I think we should have the record very clear.
The last question was: Did you ever attend any Communist
party meetings with Diana Muldover?
Mr. Wolman. In 1945? I said ``no.''
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any Communist party
meetings----
Mr. Wolman. I said ``no'' earlier.
The Chairman. Let me finish the question now.
Mr. Wolman. I didn't mean to interrupt. I thought that was
the question you were asking.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any Communist party
meetings with Diana Muldover at any time?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any meetings of the Young
Communist League with Diana Muldover?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. What was you wife's name prior to marriage?
Mr. Wolman. Muldover.
The Chairman. How do you spell it?
Mr. Wolman. M-u-l-d-o-v-e-r.
The Chairman. Did anyone invite you and Diana Muldover to
attend Communist party meetings or meetings of the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Wolman. No. You said invite us, and I said ``no.''
The Chairman. Did anyone invite you?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. And Diana Muldover never indicated to you
that she was a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Cohn. Did Diana Muldover ever indicate to you that she
was a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did she ever indicate to you that she was
engaged in any Communist activities?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
The Chairman. I think the record is clear enough. You may
step down. You will consider yourself under subpoena.
Who is the principal of your high school?
Mr. Wolman. It is not high school; an elementary school.
Mr. Janoson.
The Chairman. What is his first name?
Mr. Wolman. Harry.
The Chairman. Did any of your students ever attend any
meetings in your home, or were they ever present in your home?
Mr. Wolman. I don't know of a single instance where any
student of mine--let me think back.
No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Is your wife a teacher today?
Mr. Wolman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. What school?
Mr. Wolman. Thomas Jefferson.
Mr. Cohn. Is she a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Wolman. Privilege, sir.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend any meetings with any of
your students?
Mr. Wolman. Well, I was once in charge of the Arista
Society. It is an honor society in school. Is that what you
mean, in connection with a school club or school organization,
specifically school?
The Chairman. How do you spell that word?
Mr. Wolman. A-r-i-s-t-a. It is an honor society.
The Chairman. Did you have meetings of this honor society
outside of the school?
Mr. Wolman. No. I might point out I was in charge only for
a period of less than a year.
The Chairman. The answer is ``yes,'' or ``no.''
Mr. Wolman. Well, I said ``no.'' And then I wanted to point
out----
The Chairman. I don't want your speech. I just asked you a
question.
Mr. Wolman. I am not making a speech, sir. I have neither
the ability nor the inclination. No meeting was held outside of
the high school.
The Chairman. Did you attend any meetings with any of your
students outside of the school, meetings of any kind? The
answer is ``yes,'' or ``no.''
Mr. Wolman. No, sir, I know of no such meeting.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man named Dave Flax?
Mr. Wolman. I know a man of that name. He must be a
teacher.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend a Communist meeting with him?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. You were never in the same section of the
Communist party with him?
Mr. Wolman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. That is your sworn testimony?
Mr. Wolman. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Abramowitz, we would like to ask to have that
doctor's certificate in the morning at 10:30, if we may.
Did your wife teach today?
Mr. Wolman. No, sir.
Mr. Cohn. She was home sick?
Mr. Wolman. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Was she out at all during the day?
Mr. Wolman. She was out in the morning. We had been served
last night. As a matter of fact, I was the one to receive the
service.
Mr. Abramowitz. I will be here myself tomorrow morning at
10:30. Whether I can get the certificate physically by that
time----
The Chairman. What is the name of the doctor?
Mr. Wolman. I called Dr. Eisenstein.
The Chairman. What is his address?
Mr. Wolman. His office address is 179 Herch Street in
Brooklyn, H-e-r-c-h.
The Chairman. And what is his first name?
Mr. Wolman. Henry.
Mr. Cohn. E-i-s-e-n-s-t-e-i-n?
Mr. Wolman. E-i-s-e-n-s-t-e-i-n.
The Chairman. Is it your testimony that you called the
doctor to attend your wife? Come over and sit down. It is your
testimony that you called----
Mr. Wolman. Dr. Eisenstein. This afternoon.
The Chairman. This afternoon. To attend your wife?
Mr. Wolman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And he told her she could not testify
tonight?
Mr. Wolman. He didn't come at that time. I left before he
came. I called up to find out how she was, and what I got was
on the phone, that he had been over there and told her to
remain in bed.
The Chairman. He told you he had been over there?
Mr. Wolman. Not he. My wife told me, sir.
The Chairman. Your wife told me?
Mr. Wolman. My wife. It was in a phone conversation.
The Chairman. Did your wife tell you that the doctor told
her she could not testify tonight?
Mr. Wolman. I don't know that she asked that question, sir.
All I asked was: how was she? She was in bed at the time I left
the house, as a matter of fact, at about 6:30 or thereabouts.
The Chairman. Was she all right last night when you were
served with the subpoena?
Mr. Wolman. I imagine reasonably well. There was no reason
for suspecting that she was ill yesterday. I mean, I didn't see
her ill last night.
The Chairman. Why could not she testify tonight? What is
wrong with her?
Mr. Wolman. She told me on the phone that the doctor had
said, a virus.
The Chairman. A virus infection?
Mr. Wolman. I assume that is what was meant. I didn't ask
her.
The Chairman. Was she out this morning?
Mr. Wolman. Well, frankly, I didn't know whether she was
ill----
The Chairman. Was she out of the house this morning?
Mr. Wolman. Yes, she was.
The Chairman. Where did she go this morning?
Mr. Wolman. Well, I was going to contact----
Mr. Abramowitz. Where did she go this morning? That is what
the question was.
The Chairman. Where did she go this morning?
Mr. Wolman. She went with me downtown into New York.
The Chairman. She was perfectly all right then, was she
not?
Mr. Wolman. You said ``perfectly.'' I don't know whether
she was or not. She was probably upset anyway, as far as that
is concerned. But as far as illness in terms of the usual
symptoms of virus or cold, I didn't see any.
The Chairman. When did she first complain that she was
sick?
Mr. Wolman. I would say when we got home it must have been
about 2:30.
Mr. Jones. She was running a high fever tonight?
Mr. Wolman. When I was there, yes, sir. As I say, I left
before the doctor came.
The Chairman. Step down. You will wait out in the anteroom
until we contact the doctor.
Will you raise your right hand?
In this matter now in hearing before this committee, do you
solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Mins. I do.
Mr. Cohn. May we have your full name, please?
TESTIMONY OF LEONARD E. MINS (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
VICTOR ABRAMOWITZ)
Mr. Cohn. And, Mr. Mins, did you ever have anything to do
with the writing of a radar manual or a manual connected in any
way with radar?
Mr. Mins. I never wrote a radar manual.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever have anything to do with the
preparation of it?
Mr. Mins. I never had anything to do with the preparation
of a radar manual.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever have anything to do with a radar
manual in any form, shape, or manner?
Mr. Mins. No. Did I have anything to do with it? What do
you mean by that?
Mr. Cohn. Pardon me?
Mr. Mins. Did I ever see one? Well, during work in the war
I saw things of that sort, marked restricted, of course.
Mr. Cohn. I see. Did you ever have anything to do with
things of that sort?
Mr. Mins. I wrote a pamphlet, an ordnance pamphlet during
the war.
Mr. Cohn. What was the pamphlet you wrote?
Mr. Mins. 1060.
Mr. Cohn. What did it concern?
Mr. Mins. Gun directing.
Mr. Cohn. Did that involve radar materials at all?
Mr. Mins. I didn't handle the radar part of it.
Mr. Cohn. Was there a radar part in it?
Mr. Mins. Radar is mentioned in that manual only to the
extent that it was possible for restricted information to be
published there. Anything beyond the restricted classification,
confidential, secret, top secret, was out.
Mr. Cohn. Radar was mentioned in connection with this
pamphlet?
Mr. Mins. Was mentioned, yes.
Mr. Cohn. For whose use was this pamphlet written?
Mr. Mins. BuOrd, Bureau of Ordnance.
Mr. Cohn. Of the United States Army?
Mr. Mins. Navy.
Mr. Cohn. Was this used by the army at all?
Mr. Mins. I have no idea.
Mr. Cohn. This was written specifically for the navy?
Mr. Mins. It was a navy contract.
Mr. Cohn. When you participated in the writing of this
contract, were you a member of the Communist party? \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Leonard Mins wrote for the New Masses in the 1930s. Among his
other publications was an ``authorized translation of the Manifesto of
the Communist Party by Karl Marx and Frederick Engles (Moscow-
Leningrad: Society of Foreign Workers in the U.S.S.R., 1935).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Mins. I want to read you something, sir.
Mr. Cohn. No, don't read me anything. Answer my question.
Mr. Mins. I am answering your question.
The Chairman. You will answer that question.
Mr. Mins. I will answer that question.
The Chairman. You will answer it ``yes,'' or ``no.''
Mr. Mins. I will answer it by saying that no person shall
be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. You are refusing to answer on the ground that
no one need be a witness against himself?
Mr. Mins. I am refusing to answer it on the grounds cited
in the Constitution verbatim. I don't construe the
Constitution. I merely cite it.
The Chairman. Do you feel that if you were to tell us the
truth----
Mr. Mins. I feel nothing, sir. I feel nothing, and I don't
believe you have the right to draw any inferences from what I
say.
The Chairman. Do you feel if you were to tell us the truth
as to whether you were a member of the Communist party at the
time you wrote this pamphlet, that truthful answer might tend
to incriminate you?
Mr. Mins. I repeat: No person shall be compelled to be a
witness against himself.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to answer, unless you
tell me you feel that a truthful answer would tend to
incriminate you.
Mr. Mins. I don't believe the courts require that that
inference be drawn. I am citing the Fifth Amendment to you,
Senator, and I think that suffices. You draw the inferences. I
cite the amendment.
The Chairman. Do you refuse to answer on the ground that a
truthful answer might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Mins. I repeat: No person shall be compelled to be a
witness against himself.
The Chairman. That is all right. We can stay here, Mister.
Do you feel that a truthful answer to the question of whether
or not you were a Communist at the time you wrote this pamphlet
would tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Mins. Do you consider this a conflict of wills? I can
repeat that as long as you ask the question. No person shall be
compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. I will cite you for contempt finally on this.
Mr. Mins. I repeat: No person shall be compelled to be a
witness against himself.
The Chairman. Are you refusing to answer the question?
Mr. Mins. I am refusing to answer the question on the
ground of the protection afforded by the Fifth Amendment, that
no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. Will you have the record show that the
witness first was asked whether he was a member of the
Communist party at the time he wrote this pamphlet for the
Bureau of Ordnance. He refused to answer. Have the record show
the chairman then asked him whether or not he felt that a
truthful answer would tend to incriminate him. He has refused
to answer that. Therefore the chair feels that he is not
entitled to the privilege in so far as the first question is
concerned. He has been ordered to answer that question. He is
now ordered to answer the question of whether or not he was a
member of the Communist party at the time he wrote this
pamphlet.
Will you have the record show that the witness sits mute
and refuses to answer.
Mr. Mins. The witness does not sit mute. The record does
not show anything of the sort, Senator. The record shows that
the witness refuses to answer that question on the grounds of
the protection afforded him by the Fifth Amendment, period.
The Chairman. Are you a member of the Communist party as of
today?
Mr. Mins. I cite the privilege of the Fifth Amendment, that
no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. Do you feel that if you were to tell the
truth as to whether you were a Communist today, that truthful
answer might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Mins. I give you the same answer that I gave you to the
series of questions, or the repeated question you gave me just
a few minutes ago.
The Chairman. Mister, you put yourself in contempt as often
as you like. We will give you full opportunity. Have the record
show that the witness was asked whether or not he was a
Communist as of today. He has refused to answer. The chair has
asked him whether or not he feels that a truthful answer might
tend to incriminate him. Have the record further show that the
chair now instructs the witness that he is entitled to the
privilege of the Fifth Amendment only if he feels the truth
might tend to incriminate him. He has no protection in case he
intends to perjure himself. For that reason I must ask him
whether or not he feels that a truthful answer might tend to
incriminate him. He refused to tell me whether or not he feels
a truthful answer would tend to incriminate him. Therefore, he
is ordered to answer the original question of whether or not he
is a member of the Communist party as of today.
Mr. Mins. May I ask you a question, Senator?
The Chairman. No, you may not.
Mr. Mins. I may not. I will tell you something, instead of
answering it. I am not a lawyer, sir, but my understanding is
that a witness invoking the Fifth Amendment----
[The chairman pounds with the gavel.]
Mr. Mins [continuing]. Does not have to construe the Fifth
Amendment. It is as simple as all that.
The Chairman. Are you refusing to answer that question?
Mr. Mins. I refuse to answer on the grounds of the
protection afforded me by the Fifth Amendment, that no person
shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. Have you engaged in espionage?
Mr. Mins. I answer in the same fashion. No person shall be
compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. Do you feel if you were to tell me the truth
as to whether you engaged in espionage, a truthful answer might
tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Mins. I repeat the answer that I have given you to that
question before.
The Chairman. Then you are ordered to answer the question
whether or not you engaged in espionage.
Mr. Mins. I cite my answer that no person shall be
compelled by you or anyone else to be a witness against
himself. That is a constitutional protection, Senator.
The Chairman. Have you engaged in sabotage?
Mr. Mins. I cite you the same answer. The Fifth Amendment
specifies that no person shall be compelled to be a witness
against himself. I invoke that privilege.
The Chairman. Do you feel that if you were to tell me the
truth as to whether or not you were engaged in sabotage, that
truthful answer might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Mins. We have gone over this before, have we not,
Senator? Are you building up a case? I cite you the same
answer.
The Chairman. You are then ordered to answer whether or not
you ever engaged in sabotage.
Mr. Mins. My answer to that question is, I refuse to answer
under the protection afforded me by the Fifth Amendment, that
no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. That is four, is it not?
Mr. Mins. Are you counting, Senator? You can get plenty
more, I assure you. My patience and my endurance are just as
long as yours. I understand you are a man of great endurance.
So am I. I once worked eighty hours on end, Senator.
Mr. Cohn. For whom were you working eighty hours on end?
Mr. Mins. A firm in Law Street that translated a hundred
thousand word deposition.
The Chairman. Were you part of an espionage ring between
1945 and 1953?
Mr. Mins. I didn't hear the beginning of that, Senator.
The Chairman. Strike that.
Have you ever engaged in any illegal activity in connection
with membership in the Communist party, or in connection with
Communist party activities?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment, that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. Where did the radar information used in this
pamphlet come from?
Mr. Mins. I don't know. It was brought to the office of the
firm I worked for.
The Chairman. What was the name of it?
Mr. Mins. Walter Dorwin, D-o-r-w-i-n, Teague, T-e-a-g-u-e.
Mr. Cohn. That is the firm that had the contract from the
Bureau of Ordnance?
Mr. Mins. No, it isn't. That is a firm that had a
subcontract from General Electric.
Mr. Cohn. General Electric had the contract from the Bureau
of Ordnance, and they had the subcontract?
Mr. Mins. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. And the radar material was supplied to your firm?
You don't know who supplied it?
Mr. Mins. I don't know who supplied it.
Mr. Cohn. Was that supplied from the Signal Corps?
Mr. Mins. As far as I know, it was not.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you think it came from?
Mr. Mins. I am sorry.
Mr. Cohn. Where do you think it came from?
Mr. Mins. It all had navy stamps on it. They were navy
publications.
Mr. Cohn. Was this classified?
Mr. Mins. I believe at that time it was classified
restricted.
Mr. Cohn. At that time it was classified restricted. Is
that right?
Mr. Mins. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Radar was involved in this question of gun
direction; is that right?
Mr. Mins. Yes, the pictures showed a radar antenna on top
of the director, but the operation of the radar and everything
else was left out.
Mr. Cohn. Did that involve Radar Project No. 270?
Mr. Mins. Never heard of it.
The Chairman. May I interrupt? Did this involve gun
direction by radar?
Mr. Mins. It involved gun direction by radar and by optical
telescopes, both in parallel.
The Chairman. One other question. I am not sure if you
understood counsel. He asked you whether or not the material
that came to you, from which you got your information for the
writing of this manual, was classified.
Mr. Mins. Oh, yes, much of it was classified, although none
of it was classified higher than confidential.
The Chairman. In other words, confidential or restricted?
Mr. Mins. Confidential or restricted.
The Chairman. And about how many confidential or restricted
pamphlets did you have in connection with your writing of this
pamphlet?
Mr. Mins. Oh, good Lord. That is a hard question to answer.
I worked on that for--let me see--the better part of two and a
half years. And they varied. Some stuff would be brought in,
gotten rid of, brought in, returned to General Electric or to
BuOrd. I don't know. Twenty, thirty. I can't give you a figure.
It could be twenty, ten, thirty, forty.
The Chairman. Did you ever discuss any of this classified
material with any member of the Communist party?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment, that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. Did you ever turn any of this classified
material over to an espionage agent?
Mr. Mins. I invoke the privilege of the Fifth Amendment,
that no person shall be compelled to be a witness against
himself.
The Chairman. I wish you were over in Russia before a
Russian tribunal and invoked the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Mins. I don't know that they have a Fifth Amendment
there, Senator.
The Chairman. You would not last very long, Mister.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Mins, where were you physically located at
the time you wrote this pamphlet?
Mr. Mins. That is a strange thing. Where did I live, or----
Mr. Cohn. Did you write this at your office?
Mr. Mins. I worked for Walter Dorwin Teague.
Mr. Cohn. Where is that office?
Mr. Mins. 444 Madison Avenue. If you asked me the questions
directly, I would tell you.
Mr. Cohn. We have information here to the effect that at
the time you prepared this pamphlet you were in the service of
Soviet military intelligence. Is that true?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment, that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. Are you in the service of Soviet military
intelligence----
Mr. Mins. I cite the----
Mr. Cohn. Do you want to hear my question?
Mr. Mins. I heard it. Am I in the service of Soviet
military intelligence?
Mr. Cohn. At this time.
Mr. Mins. I am sorry. I cite the text of the Fifth
Amendment. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against
himself.
Mr. Cohn. Were you employed by the Office of Strategic
Services, by OSS?
Mr. Mins. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. While you were employed by the OSS, were you a
member of the Communist party?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment, that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. When you were employed by OSS, were you also on
the payroll of Soviet Military Intelligence?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment, that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. In addition to this one pamphlet, 1060, did you
prepare any other material for the armed forces of the United
States?
Mr. Mins. No.
The Chairman. When you were preparing this pamphlet and
handling this classified material over that two and a half year
period of time, were you on the payroll of Soviet Military
Intelligence?
Mr. Mins. I think I answered that. I will answer it again.
I cite the privilege of the Fifth Amendment, that no person
shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. Do you feel that a truthful answer to that
might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. Mins. I feel nothing, Senator. I cite merely the
privilege that I have constitutionally, of not being compelled
to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Do you feel that a truthful answer might tend
to incriminate you?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. Then you are ordered to answer the question
of whether or not you were on the payroll of Soviet Military
Intelligence at the time you were preparing this pamphlet.
Mr. Mins. You order me to answer. My answer is that the
privilege of the Fifth Amendment specifies that no person shall
be compelled to be a witness against himself. I invoke that
constitutional privilege.
Mr. Cohn. Now, while you were preparing this pamphlet for
the navy, were you a teacher at the Workers School?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment, that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. Have you worked for the International Union of
Revolutionary Writers?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment, that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. Have you been engaged in espionage with a man
named Nicholas Dozenberg, D-o-z-e-n-b-e-r-g?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment, that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, I feel that this witness is not
cooperative.
Mr. Mins. Understatement, isn't it, Mr. Cohn? I don't think
the committee was very cooperative in serving me at twelve-
thirty this afternoon.
Mr. Cohn. What is your occupation now?
Mr. Mins. Translator.
Mr. Cohn. For whom?
Mr. Mins. For myself.
The Chairman. You have got your own business, you mean?
Mr. Mins. Yes.
The Chairman. What is the address of it?
Mr. Mins. Same address I live at.
The Chairman. What is that address?
Mr. Mins. 130 West 57th Street.
The Chairman. What language do you translate?
Mr. Mins. The languages that I know, French, German, and
Russian.
The Chairman. Ever lived in Russia?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The Chairman. Ever attend the Lenin School of sabotage and
espionage?
Mr. Mins. I don't know what school it is, but I cite the
text of the Fifth Amendment, that no person shall be compelled
to be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. Do you believe in the overthrow of the government
of the United States and its Constitution by force and
violence?
Mr. Mins. I cite the text of the Fifth Amendment, that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. I
also cite the text of the First Amendment in that connection,
that my beliefs are not the subject for anybody's inquiry.
The Chairman. Where were you born?
Mr. Mins. You will be very much surprised, Senator, but I
was born in Yonkers, New York. You asked for it. I suppose you
wanted me to say ``Odessa,'' didn't you?
The Chairman. No, we have a lot of Commies born in this
country.
You will consider yourself under subpoena. Your counsel
will be notified when you are wanted.
Mr. Mins. I hope with a little more time.
The Chairman. You are instructed to keep in touch with him
each day so he will know where you are, so that we will not
have to look for you to serve you.
Mr. Mins. You didn't today. You can find me at 130 West
57th all the time.
The Chairman. It is rather difficult at this time to tell
you when you will be called. It will perhaps be, I would say,
roughly, two weeks. And, Mr. Counsel, we will contact you and
not contact the witness.
You may step down.
Mr. Cohn. Did we get the year of the preparation this
pamphlet from you?
The Chairman. What years did you work on that?
Mr. Mins. I think from the fall of '43 to--wait a second. I
have to add something to what I said before.
From the fall of '43 to, I believe, the winter of '45-'46.
And after that I started work on a gun director for a three-
inch gun. I don't remember what number. I never finished it.
Mr. Cohn. Did that involve radar?
Mr. Mins. No.
The Chairman. What kind of a gun director?
Mr. Mins. Three inch.
The Chairman. Was it a visual direction?
Mr. Mins. Optical.
The Chairman. Had nothing to do with radar?
Mr. Mins. No, no radar.
The Chairman. Who paid you for the first pamphlet?
Mr. Mins. I was on salary for Walter Dorwin Treague. If you
don't know his name, he will be very much insulted. He is a
great designer. They contacted General Electric.
The Chairman. Do you know who they had a contract with?
Mr. Mins. I was told with BuOrd.
Mr. Cohn. Who did you work with in the Bureau of Ordnance
in connection with this?
Mr. Mins. I saw a captain. I once saw the rear admiral
himself. And I saw a man whose name I don't remember. The Fire
Control Section.
The Chairman. You do not remember the names of any people
you saw down there?
Mr. Mins. Good Lord.
The Chairman. Just any one of them?
Mr. Mins. A captain somebody or other, a captain in charge
of fire control.
The Chairman. You do not know what his name was?
Mr. Mins. I don't remember. There was a southerner who was
a civilian assistant. I don't remember his name.
The Chairman. Do you know whether you got security
clearance before you received this classified material?
Mr. Mins. I haven't any knowledge at all. You fill out a
questionnaire, and you go to work.
Mr. Cohn. You were permitted to handle this classified
material?
Mr. Mins. I was permitted to handle it.
Mr. Cohn. At the time you were permitted to handle it, were
you on the payroll of Soviet military intelligence?
Mr. Mins. I cite the privilege of the Fifth Amendment on
that, sir.
The Chairman. You said you filled out a questionnaire. Were
you asked whether you were a Communist in that questionnaire?
Mr. Mins. I cite the privilege of the Fifth Amendment in
that connection, that no person shall be compelled to be a
witness against himself.
Well, if you want more of me, sir, will you permit me to
sit down?
The Chairman. You may sit down.
Mr. Mins. So that I need not proceed in a peripatetic
fashion.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to answer that. The
question is: In the questionnaire, were you asked whether you
were a Communist?
Mr. Mins. Would you repeat that question to me?
[Question read by reporter.]
Mr. Mins. I answered that, I believe, to the effect that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself, by
the text of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
The Chairman. I did not ask you what your answer was. I did
not ask you whether you were a Communist. I merely asked
whether in the questionnaire there was a question as to any
Communist activities or affiliations on your part. The form of
the questionnaire could not incriminate you.
Mr. Mins. Whether the questionnaire had that question?
The Chairman. Was there such a question?
Mr. Mins. I think I have answered that adequately, sir,
that no person shall be compelled to be a witness against
himself.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer the question.
Mr. Mins. I repeat that the Fifth Amendment's protection is
that no person shall be compelled to be a witness against
himself.
Mr. Cohn. I just wanted to ask you one or two questions
here. When you filed your application, was one of your
references Commissioner Leland Olds of the Federal Power
Commission?
Mr. Mins. Since we are discussing this, let me get my copy
out, too, while we are at it. My answer to that is that no
person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. Was another one of your references Quincy Howe of
the Columbia Broadcasting Corporation?
Mr. Mins. My answer is that no person shall be compelled to
be a witness against himself.
Mr. Cohn. I have no further questions.
The Chairman. I think we are all through with you for
tonight.
Mr. Mins. Unless you have an afterthought. I will walk
slowly to the door, Senator.
Mr. Cohn. Are you represented by counsel?
Mrs. Berke. No, I am not.
The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand and be sworn?
Will you stand up, please? In this matter now in hearing before
the committee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mrs. Berke. I do. But I would like to say something. May I?
Mr. Cohn. Could we get your name for the record, first,
please.
TESTIMONY OF SYLVIA BERKE
Mrs. Berke. Yes. Sylvia Berke.
Mr. Cohn. How is that spelled?
Mrs. Berke. B-e-r-k-e.
Mr. Cohn. And where do you reside?
Mrs. Berke. 1545 Leland Avenue, Bronx 60 New York.
Mr. Cohn. And what is your occupation?
The Chairman. I think she wants to make a statement.
Mr. Cohn. I wanted to get the background information.
The Chairman. You may make any statement you care to.
Mrs. Berke. I was subpoenaed at six o'clock this evening to
come down here. When the gentleman subpoenaed me, I told him I
could not come, that I had a baby and could not get out. He
gave me a phone number to call, and told me to take it up. I
called between 6:30 and 7:00 three times. There was no one here
who could give me any information. I got a phone call saying I
had to come down or I would be cited for contempt. I have no
counsel. I don't think I should be requested--I am not familiar
with this.
Mr. Cohn. They were unable to serve the subpoena earlier. I
think the witness is entitled to some time.
The Chairman. Yes, you are entitled to whatever time within
reason you want, to get counsel.
May I say the subpoena was prepared some time ago and was
not served. Whether that is the fault of my staff or not, I
don't know, but in any event, you are entitled to have time to
procure counsel.
Mrs. Berke. I would like to request time until at least the
middle of next week.
The Chairman. You may have the time. I will not be sitting
next week, so we will give you more time than that. I will be
sitting tomorrow. I gather you will want more time than
tomorrow.
Mrs. Berke. Yes.
The Chairman. I will be back here in about ten days, more
or less, so you will consider yourself under subpoena, and some
member of the staff will call you, or if you will get counsel
and have counsel contact the staff, we will contact your
counsel and tell him when you are supposed to be present.
Mrs. Berke. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. If you would like to know the general nature
of the inquiry----
Mrs. Berke. Yes.
The Chairman. I think we can do that.
Mr. Cohn. Yes. The general nature of the inquiry will cover
whether or not you were employed by the Signal Corps, and
Communist activities on your part.
The Chairman. In other words, that will be the principal
subject. We may get into possible Communist connections. We do
not know what testimony may be brought in here in regard to
your activities at the Signal Corps, but essentially it will
involve Communist activities.
Mrs. Berke. My employment at Fort Monmouth?
Mr. Cohn. Your employment at Fort Monmouth.
The Chairman. I may say I am sorry we got you away from
home without a babysitter.
Mrs. Berke. I was pretty angry. I will tell you that. It
caused a great deal of inconvenience.
The Chairman. I may say we are at great inconvenience
sometimes sitting here, too.
Mrs. Berke. I don't doubt it.
[Whereupon, at 10:00 p.m., a recess was taken until 10:30
a.m., Friday, October 23, 1953.]
