Chapter I: Part 1

INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN THE
SEATTLE, WASH., AREA--Part 2

HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
EIGHTY-FOURTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION

MARCH 18 AND 19, 1955

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

(Index in part 3 of these hearings)

UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON: 1955

COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FRANCIS E. WALTER, Pennsylvania, _Chairman_
MORGAN M. MOULDER, Missouri HAROLD H. VELDE, Illinois
CLYDE DOYLE, California BERNARD W. KEARNEY, New York
JAMES B. FRAZIER, JR., Tennessee DONALD L. JACKSON, California
EDWIN E. WILLIS, Louisiana GORDON H. SCHERER, Ohio
THOMAS W. BEALE, Sr., _Chief Clerk_

CONTENTS

March 18, 1955: Testimony of-- Page
Robert B. Krahl 379
Robert Miller 382
Eugene Victor Dennett (resumed) 391
Lawrence Earl George 414
Harriett Pierce 416

March 19, 1955: Testimony of--
Eugene Victor Dennett (resumed) 419
Paul William Delaney 438
Jacob Bitterman 441
John Stenhouse 443

Afternoon session:
John Stenhouse (resumed) 450
Eugene Victor Dennett (resumed) 466
Abraham Arthur Cohen 490
Eugene Victor Dennett (resumed) 492
Bernard Freyd 493
Hans Lenus Adolph Westman 495

(Testimony of Eugene V. Dennett, Harold Johnston, Edwin A. Carlson, and Margaret Elizabeth Gustafson, also heard on March 18, 1955, is printed in pt. 1 of this series.)

PUBLIC LAW 601, 79TH CONGRESS

The legislation under which the House Committee on Un-American Activities operates is Public Law 601, 79th Congress [1946], chapter 753, 2d session, which provides:

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

PART 2--RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

RULE X

SEC. 121. STANDING COMMITTEES

* * * * *

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

RULE XI

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES

* * * * *

(q) (1) Committee on Un-American Activities.

(A) Un-American activities.

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

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

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

RULES ADOPTED BY THE 84TH CONGRESS

House Resolution 5, January 5, 1955

* * * * *

RULE X

STANDING COMMITTEES

1. There shall be elected by the House, at the commencement of each
Congress, the following standing committees:

* * * * *

(q) Committee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine members.

RULE XI

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES

* * * * *

17. Committee on Un-American Activities.

(a) Un-American Activities.

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

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

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

INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN THE SEATTLE, WASH., AREA--Part 2

FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 1955

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES,
_Seattle, Wash._

PUBLIC HEARING

A subcommittee of the Committee on Un-American Activities met, pursuant to recess, at 1:30 p. m., in Room 402, County-City Building, Seattle, Wash., Hon. Morgan M. Moulder (chairman) presiding.

Committee members present: Representatives Morgan M. Moulder (chairman) and Harold H. Velde.

Mr. MOULDER. The committee will be in order.

Are you ready to proceed, Mr. Wheeler?

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. Robert Krahl.

Mr. MOULDER. Will you hold up your right hand and be sworn?

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

Mr. KRAHL. I do.

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT B. KRAHL, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, JAY G. SYKES

Mr. WHEELER. Would you state your full name?

Mr. KRAHL. My name is Robert B. Krahl.

Mr. WHEELER. Will you spell the last name?

Mr. KRAHL. K-r-a-h-l.

Mr. WHEELER. I see you are represented by counsel.

Will counsel identify himself for the record?

Mr. SYKES. Jay G. Sykes.

Mr. WHEELER. When were you born, Mr. Krahl?

Mr. KRAHL. To the best of my knowledge, I was born on February 6, 1925.

Mr. WHEELER. Where do you presently reside?

Mr. KRAHL. I live in Seattle.

Mr. WHEELER. What is your present occupation?

Mr. KRAHL. I am unemployed.

Mr. WHEELER. What was your occupation before becoming unemployed?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. With the chairman’s permission, I would like to make a very, very short statement, less than a hundred words.

Mr. MOULDER. What was the question, Mr. Wheeler?

(The pending question was read by the reporter.)

Mr. MOULDER. That question calls for an answer, not a statement. And you can reply or give the answer, and then make any explanation you wish if it is relevant to the question and your answer.

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. Well, I have been employed with odd jobs the past 9 months; haven’t really been employed. I just worked a few days here and there.

Mr. WHEELER. Would you relate to the committee your occupational background for the past 5 years?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. To the best of my knowledge--let’s see; 5 years would be around 1950. I think I have worked as a waiter, I have worked as a draftsman, I have done a little extra work as a casual laborer, worked a little time in a sawmill--I think that about covers it.

Mr. WHEELER. What is your educational background?

Mr. KRAHL. I graduated from high school. I have got a couple of years of college. I haven’t graduated from college.

Mr. WHEELER. What college did you attend?

Mr. KRAHL. The University of Arizona.

Mr. WHEELER. When did you cease your studies there?

Mr. KRAHL. I think it was around the end of 1947.

Mr. WHEELER. How were you employed from 1947 to 1950?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. From 1947 until 1950 I worked as a seaman part of that time; I think most of that time.

Mr. WHEELER. Have you served in the Armed Forces?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. Yes; I have.

Mr. WHEELER. In what branch of the service did you serve?

Mr. KRAHL. In the United States Army.

Mr. WHEELER. What were your dates of service?

Mr. KRAHL. I am not sure, but I think it was around the beginning of 1951 until about the end of it, probably 2 weeks after the first of the year, until a week prior to Christmas 1951, I am pretty sure.

Mr. WHEELER. What type of discharge did you receive?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. I received a general discharge under honorable conditions.

Mr. WHEELER. Are you familiar with the committee called the Youth Committee that is within the circles of the Communist Party in King County?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to invoke the fifth amendment on the ground that I think that this may lead into questions which could force me to testify against myself.

Mr. WHEELER. Are you acquainted with Mrs. Barbara Hartle?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. I give the same answer, for the reasons previously stated.

Mr. MOULDER. You decline to answer for the same reason?

Mr. KRAHL. I decline to answer for the reasons previously stated.

Mr. WHEELER. I would like to refer to part 2 of a document entitled “Investigation of Communist Activities in the Pacific Northwest Area.” It is a copy of the transcript of hearings held here last June. Mrs. Hartle is testifying:

About 1949 and 1950, the last year that I was in Seattle--a youth
committee was set up which I worked with, controlled, and guided
all of its activities and tried to train the youth along Communist
Party lines; and on that youth committee I remember a young man
named Al Cumming, Robert Krahl, Calvin Harris.

Are you acquainted with Mr. Al Cumming?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. I invoke the fifth amendment for the reasons previously stated. I believe that is the way to work it.

Mr. WHEELER. What were the functions of the youth committee of the Communist Party?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. I again invoke the fifth amendment on the grounds previously stated, and refuse to answer.

Mr. WHEELER. Was Mrs. Hartle correct when she identified you as a member of the Communist Party, a member of the youth committee?

Mr. KRAHL. I give the same answer, for the same reasons.

Mr. WHEELER. Are you a member of the Communist Party today?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. I give the same answer, for the same reasons.

Mr. WHEELER. No further questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. MOULDER. Do you decline to answer as to whether or not you are a member of the Communist Party today, and, as the reason for your refusal, do you invoke the fifth amendment?

Mr. KRAHL. That is correct; yes.

Mr. MOULDER. Mr. Velde, any questions?

Mr. VELDE. Were you a member of the Communist Party during the time you were in the Army?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. For the reasons previously stated, I must invoke the fifth amendment and refuse to answer.

Mr. VELDE. I take it that you will refuse to give this committee the benefit of your knowledge concerning the Communist Party activities, and rely on the fifth amendment whenever you are questioned about anything touching on communism. Is that correct?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. I refuse to answer that question for the same reasons and the reasons I have previously stated.

Mr. VELDE. That is all.

Mr. MOULDER. How long were you in the service? I forgot the period of time. That is, in the armed services of the United States.

Mr. KRAHL. About a year. Just under a year.

Mr. MOULDER. Was that the full period of your enlistment, the time you served, or were you discharged prior to the termination of your period of enlistment?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. Well, I was drafted. I didn’t enlist.

Mr. MOULDER. Why were you discharged?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. I decline to answer, reluctantly, because I am a little--I don’t really understand where this question of waiver comes in. So I decline to answer that question on the grounds of the fifth amendment, and for the reasons that I have previously stated.

Mr. MOULDER. Where were you stationed while in the service?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. Well, I was stationed for a while at Fort Ord. I think it was a few days. And then I served the rest of my time at Camp Roberts.

Mr. MOULDER. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party? I believe the question was asked in another form.

Mr. KRAHL. Mr. Chairman, I decline to answer that question on the grounds of the fifth amendment, and for the reasons I have previously stated.

Mr. VELDE. Did I understand you to say that you were given a general discharge under honorable conditions from the Army?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. That is what I said; that is correct.

Mr. VELDE. That is not as high class a discharge as an honorable discharge; is it?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. Well, I really don’t know. I don’t know the answer to that.

Mr. VELDE. Don’t you have any idea why you weren’t given an honorable discharge instead of a general discharge?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. At this point I invoke the fifth amendment and decline to answer that question on the grounds that I have previously stated.

Mr. VELDE. That is all.

Mr. MOULDER. Do you know whether or not you were discharged for security reasons?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly invoke the fifth amendment again, and for the same reasons, the reasons that I have previously stated.

Mr. MOULDER. While you were serving in the armed services were you at any time engaged in any un-American or subversive activities?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. KRAHL. Mr. Chairman, I decline to answer that question on the grounds of the fifth amendment and for the reasons previously stated.

Mr. MOULDER. The witness is excused.

Call your next witness.

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. Robert Miller.

Mr. MOULDER. Put up your right hand and be sworn.

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

Mr. MILLER. I do, sir.

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT MILLER, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, SOLIE M. RINGOLD

Mr. WHEELER. State your name, please.

Mr. MILLER. My name is Robert Miller.

Mr. WHEELER. When were you born, Mr. Miller?

Mr. MILLER. To the best of my knowledge, November 22, 1922.

Mr. WHEELER. Where do you presently reside?

Mr. MILLER. Seattle, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. What has been your educational background?

Mr. MILLER. General, normal grammar school. I don’t know whether you call it junior or senior. And up to the third year of high school.

Mr. WHEELER. Are you currently employed?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. How are you employed?

Mr. MILLER. I am an appliance, radio and television repair man, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Is that here in Seattle?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. And what has your employment background been, say since 1940?

Mr. MILLER. Since 1940, part of the time in the shipyards, part of the time in Boeing Airplane Co. Part of the time also was spent in the Armed Forces during the period which you mentioned.

Mr. WHEELER. What is your military service record?

Mr. MILLER. I was inducted into the Navy, and, the best I can recall, the dates are from June of 1945 until March of 1946.

Mr. WHEELER. What type of discharge did you receive?

Mr. MILLER. It is difficult for me to answer that. I believe it was an honorable discharge. There is some question now that you bring it up, as to whether it was what the Navy refers to as a battleship discharge, which I think they reserve to only those who have served overseas. There are no peculiarities in regard to my discharge, if that is the intent of the question.

Mr. WHEELER. When were you employed at Boeing Aircraft?

Mr. MILLER. To the best of my knowledge, with interruptions, of course, it was in 1943. I do not know now when I was last employed by Boeing Aircraft except to place it in relation to an event which would be several months prior to the strike which has been mentioned, of course, in the proceedings. I could not recall even the month or the year involved.

Mr. WHEELER. How were your services terminated at Boeing?

Mr. MILLER. My services were terminated for lack of attendance there.

Mr. WHEELER. Lack of attendance at work?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. While at Boeing were you a member of any union?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. What union was it?

Mr. MILLER. The Aeronautical Mechanics Union,[1] sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Are you still a member?

Mr. MILLER. No, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Why are you no longer a member of the union?

Mr. MILLER. Because when I was terminated from Boeing Aircraft I saw no reasons for further continuing membership, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. I see you are represented by counsel.

Will you identify yourself, please?

Mr. RINGOLD. My name is Solie, S-o-l-i-e, M. Ringold, R-i-n-g-o-l-d. I am an attorney practicing law in the city of Seattle.

Mr. WHEELER. Do you know a person by the name of Barbara Hartle?

Mr. MILLER. I have known her in the past, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Under what circumstances have you known her?

Mr. MILLER. I recall one. I have eaten dinner with her at my father-in-law’s establishment.

Mr. WHEELER. Did you ever see her on any other occasion?

Mr. MILLER. I have seen her on television, perhaps on the street, and I may have other than that.

Mr. WHEELER. Do you recall ever meeting her in connection with Communist Party activities?

Mr. MILLER. It is difficult to say as to what were the connections. I would say that perhaps it was in relation to the Communist Party, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Have you been a member of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. When did you first become a member of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. To the best of my knowledge, in 1943, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. What were the circumstances under which you joined the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. It is difficult to reach back that far for me and determine just what motivated my becoming a member. The only thing that I can recall is I attended several open Communist Party meetings during that period of time and I saw nothing at variance with what I believed to be for the common good of the people of the country. I thereupon became active, and I could not even recall the initial period of action, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Who contacted you to get you in the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. That I could not recall at this time, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. After you joined the Communist Party were you assigned to any particular group or unit?

Mr. MILLER. Not at any time that I recall, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Not at all?

Mr. MILLER. Not that I can recall, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. How long were you a member of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. There were perhaps interruptions while I was in the service; I believe there were. To the best of my knowledge. I was probably a member of the Communist Party from 1943 until 1948, the best I can recall. I believe there was a period of time there that I was not a member, and it is hard for me to distinguish between what is actual membership and carrying of a card, if there is such a thing, or payment of dues, and whether I just worked with them. It is difficult to reach that far back in my mind, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. During this 1943-48 period I believe you stated you were in the United States Navy. Is that correct?

Mr. MILLER. For a portion of that--from 1945 until 1946. Approximately 9 months, to the best of my knowledge.

Mr. WHEELER. When did you say your employment terminated at Boeing Aircraft?

Mr. MILLER. I cannot name a date. I can only relate it to some several months prior to the major strike which they had. I could not name the date.

Mr. WHEELER. Was that in 1943 or 1944?

Mr. MILLER. No. Could someone refresh me as to when the strike occurred at Boeing Aircraft Co.?

It was 1946 or 1947; I believe in there, at the time which I was terminated.

Mr. WHEELER. Were you a member of the Communist Party while employed at Boeing?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Were you employed at Boeing when you became a member of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. I do not recall. I think I was perhaps a member prior to going to Boeing Aircraft Co. I do not recall, however.

Mr. WHEELER. Mrs. Hartle, in previous testimony before the committee, went into quite a bit of detail on the efforts of the Communist Party to infiltrate Boeing Aircraft. Do you have any knowledge along those lines?

Mr. MILLER. The answer that you want from me is whether there was any direction as far as I was concerned, as to where to get employment. Is that, as I understand, the intent of the question?

Mr. WHEELER. Yes.

Mr. MILLER. At no time, to the best of my recollection, was I directed to go anywhere to work or to do any specific thing, as I can recall it now.

Mr. VELDE. Do you have knowledge of any attempt by the Communist Party to infiltrate the Boeing plant?

Mr. MILLER. I have no specific knowledge which I can testify as to facts, sir. I assume that is what you want, only things I know to be fact.

Mr. VELDE. Yes.

Mr. WHEELER. Did you ever hold an office in the Aero Mechanics Union?

Mr. MILLER. Yes. I was at one time a shop steward, at one time a shop committeeman, and, if memory serves me right, I was president of one of the locals during the war. I am not too clear on whether that was president or vice president, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. To your knowledge, were there any other members of the Communist Party in the Aero Mechanics Union?

Mr. MILLER. I do not know with any degree of certainty anyone at Boeing while I was there who might have been members of the Communist Party. There was certainly speculation or perhaps reason to assume they were. However, I would like to confine my testimony to facts, and I do not know any to be a fact.

Mr. WHEELER. We desire to be confined to facts. Are you testifying that you knew no one at Boeing Aircraft Co., to be a member of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. To the best of my recollection at this time, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. You knew no one in the Aero Machinists Union to be a member of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. In the Aero Mechanics Union?

Mr. WHEELER. Aero Mechanics; I am sorry.

Mr. MILLER. I relate the two together, in that I believe the Aero Mechanics were only involved with employees of Boeing.

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. WHEELER. You have also stated, I believe, that you were not assigned to any group or unit of the Communist Party.

Mr. MILLER. To the best of my recollection, that was my testimony, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. You don’t recall who recruited you into the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. I do not, sir. In fact, I might explain it this way: I am not even sure whether it was any specific individual or whether, during the course of an open meeting, it fell upon me, a desire to become a member. It is difficult for a man to reach that far back in years and testify with any certainty, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. You were very vague in your testimony as to how you became a member of the Communist Party.

Mr. MILLER. Sir, is it unreasonable to be vague on something that occurred nigh onto 12 years ago when I was between the age of 20 and 21, sir? Is that difficult to understand, that a man might honestly be vague?

Mr. WHEELER. How many meetings of the Communist Party did you attend from 1943 until the time you went in the Armed Forces in 1945?

Mr. MILLER. I would be unable to give you any number with any degree of accuracy. It would be pure speculation and only an estimate. If you want an estimate, I could give it if the committee so desires.

Mr. WHEELER. I think you can speculate on this part of your testimony.

Mr. MILLER. As I get the question, you are asking me how many do I think might have gone to. If I am recalling something I would have an actual number and would not have to estimate. I am not able to recall any number of meetings at which I attended. There was perhaps 30, 40 meetings, I do not know, over this period of time. It is purely a speculative answer, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. But you may have attended that many?

Mr. MILLER. That is right. And that may be at variance 50 percent one way or the other.

Mr. WHEELER. We are not binding you on this.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Where were these meetings held that you attended?

Mr. MILLER. I cannot recall specifically where any meetings might have been held. In fact, most of my activity while at Boeing’s was in legitimate, recognized trade-union work within the framework of the contract with Boeing Aircraft Co. Most, or if any, activity with other members, who I perhaps suspected to be Communists, or persons of my particular persuasion, was not in the form of a meeting, but perhaps I would meet one while at work, or I might meet one at the cafeteria, or several of us might meet together in the cafeteria and just discuss general problems.

Mr. WHEELER. Did you receive any direction from the Communist Party to conceal your membership because of your employment at Boeing’s?

Mr. MILLER. I do not believe it was at anyone’s direction. Thinking back--and I can only assign, a reason now going backward--I perhaps knew of my own intelligence not to do so. I would perhaps be expelled from the Aero Mechanics Union, which, of course, would mean loss of employment at Boeing’s. I do not recall any specific direction.

Mr. WHEELER. But you have testified that you may have attended approximately 40 meetings during the period from 1943 to 1945, a period of, say, 18 months or 20 months.

Mr. MILLER. I had thought I was testifying during the whole period at which I was in the party.

Mr. WHEELER. No, it is confined to the period from the time you joined the Communist Party to when you entered the United States Navy.

Mr. MILLER. Well then, of course, it makes more obvious that the answer was purely speculative and could well have been largely in error. I thought I was answering or speculating in regard to my whole membership in the Communist Party.

Mr. WHEELER. Would you like to estimate again that period of time?

Mr. MILLER. Well, I have got to go backward here. Which period of time are you referring to?

Mr. WHEELER. From the time you joined the Communist Party until you entered the United States Navy.

Mr. MILLER. That would be from 1943 up until 1945. Right? Two years?

Mr. WHEELER. That is right.

Mr. MILLER. Again a purely speculative answer: perhaps 20 meetings, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Now you attended approximately 20 meetings from 1943 to 1945. And from 1946 to 1948 you attended approximately 20 more. And you don’t recall the place where any of these meetings were held?

Mr. MILLER. I have testified where I recalled that I thought we had conducted some. I cannot recall any specific place. One or two might have occurred at a rooming house where I stayed. I do not recall, sir.

Mr. MOULDER. Where were they usually held? Was there a regular meeting place?

Mr. MILLER. To the best of my knowledge; no, sir.

Mr. MOULDER. Who called the meetings? That is, how did you get a notice there was going to be a meeting held somewhere? How did you know where to go?

Mr. MILLER. About the only way that I can think of it backward now, and I am not at all sure, is I would probably see or meet someone else on the job or in the cafeteria, and they might mention that we were going to get together and discuss the general problems.

Mr. MOULDER. On the average, how many people would ordinarily attend those meetings?

Mr. MILLER. As I recall it, it was a very, very few. I could not say. Probably under 10, looking way, way back. But it is difficult to say.

Mr. MOULDER. Were they composed of people that you knew at the same place of employment?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. MOULDER. All of them?

Mr. MILLER. To the best of my knowledge now; yes, sir.

Mr. MOULDER. Proceed, Mr. Wheeler.

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman, might I make one brief point in regard to this time? It might be better understood.

The question probably arises as to how I am so vague on meetings and meeting places. It might be better understood if we take into account that, as best I can recall, this occurred during the time when the Communist Party was then the Communist Political Association. I believe that they held open meetings. I do not recall too much secrecy involved in it. And for that reason secrecy did not perhaps impress itself on my mind. And to recall in one period of time where a change takes place and into another, it changes things, looking backward and forward.

Mr. MOULDER. Yes; I can appreciate what you are saying.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you.

Mr. MOULDER. At those meetings would there be a record kept of the meeting; minutes of any sort?

Mr. MILLER. Not to my knowledge, sir.

Mr. MOULDER. Would there be an officer or a person presiding at the meeting? Someone who would act as a chairman or some official?

Mr. MILLER. Whether it would be a person who acted as a chairman or whom the rest might just look to on the basis that--from the manner in which they spoke, they appeared to----

Mr. MOULDER. Were dues paid at those meetings?

Mr. MILLER. I cannot recall anything specific. However, I would imagine that there were, sir.

Mr. MOULDER. I wish to compliment you for coming forward here as a witness admitting that you were a member of the Communist Party, which is far better and a better reflection upon you as an individual and as an American citizen than to hide behind the fifth amendment. But surely while you were a member you recall having paid membership dues.

Mr. MILLER. Sir, I would have to answer it in this way, that undoubtedly I did. However, to recall a specific instance--I could not.

Mr. MOULDER. Do you recall the name of any one person who attended those meetings at any time? I mean during that long period of time, with the frequent meetings you have admitted that you attended, and the close contact that you had with the individuals, where you say you not only attended meetings, but frequently had lunch or ate meals together or visited with one another and discussed the meetings, surely you could remember the name of at least one person or more that you know, of your own personal knowledge, who associated with you at the same time in that respect.

Mr. MILLER. Perhaps I am confused. Perhaps that is the difficulty I have in answering. I was under the impression that the only names which you wished from me, to give out here publicly, would be persons whom I was certain or knew to be Communists.

Mr. MOULDER. Right.

Mr. MILLER. And it is only for that reason that I do not mention names. It is probable that I could prod my memory into remembering persons whom I met with or worked with while at Boeing’s in the trade unions. But to identify them here gives the impression that I am identifying them as Communists, which I do not know to be a certainty.

Mr. MOULDER. Do you recall the names of any persons who attended any of those meetings that you have referred to as Communist Party meetings or as Communist Political Association committee meetings, who were not members of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. Sir, I could not be certain of where they were. I mean either way. If I was certain of those who were not members, that, by process of elimination, would make me certain of those who were. And I am not certain either way, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. Mrs. Hartle testified that you were a member of the Holly Park Branch of the Communist Party. Does that refresh your memory to any degree?

Mr. MILLER. In relation to what question, sir?

Mr. WHEELER. Do you recall being a member of that unit or cell of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. I do not recall any activity in the branch that is mentioned. It is possible that in their records or in their determination that they maybe have regarded me as a member of that branch and that I did reside there.

Mr. WHEELER. You testified that during the period of time of your membership, the Communist Party was dissolved and the Communist Political Association formed. However, when you returned back from the Army in 1946 the Communist Political Association had been disbanded and the Communist Party reformed. A reorganization had taken place and the party had tightened up considerably after the Duclos letter, if you are familiar with that.

But did you notice, upon your return from the Armed Forces, any difference in the structure of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. I don’t know that I paid any particular attention, sir. I don’t recall any great activity in the Communist Party after I returned from the service.

Mr. WHEELER. You have also testified that you left the Communist Party in 1948. For what reasons did you leave the party?

Mr. MILLER. As to the best of my knowledge, sir, I was dropped from the Communist Party for inactivity.

Mr. WHEELER. Have you attended any other Communist Party-type meetings like the Socialist Workers Party since you left the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. To be specific, as far as the Socialist Workers Party, I never have. And, to the best of my knowledge, I have attended no meetings of that type, sir.

Mr. WHEELER. And at this time you cannot recall one individual who was a member of the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. Well, I could put it this way: I could recall knowing Barbara Hartle. The only way I could say that she was is that she has publicly testified that she was.

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions at this time. However, I would like to recommend that the witness’ subpena be continued.

Mr. MOULDER. All right.

Do you have a question, Mr. Velde?

Mr. VELDE. Yes.

I believe you said you got out of the Army in 1948. Is that correct?

Mr. MILLER. To the best of my knowledge, sir.

Mr. VELDE. What prompted you to get out of the Communist Party when you did?

Mr. MILLER. To the best of my knowledge, the party dropped me for inactivity, sir.

Mr. VELDE. You never wrote a letter disavowing membership in the Communist Party then?

Mr. MILLER. No, sir, I never did.

Mr. VELDE. Or any other formal withdrawal from the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. Not to my knowledge, sir.

Mr. VELDE. Are you a Communist Party member today?

Mr. MILLER. No, sir, I am not. And again I have to testify to the best of my knowledge. I hope and trust that no one has me on the rolls unbeknownst to me. To my knowledge, I am not a member, no, sir.

Mr. VELDE. I certainly do appreciate your coming forward. It is rather refreshing.

It appears to me that with a little searching of your memory you might be able to recall some of the incidents more clearly than you have. I am sorry to say you are vague in your testimony about activities of the Communist Party in this area. So I will be in favor of the recommendation of Mr. Wheeler that you be retained under subpena so that you might check. If you want any assistance from our files, I am sure Mr. Wheeler will be able to give that to you. Next time you testify you may testify a little more definitely.

Mr. MOULDER. For your own benefit and for your own interest, I will ask you this question:

You say, as far as you know, you are no longer a member of the Communist Party.

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. MOULDER. That is with the fear that some organization or someone might still be carrying your name on the rolls.

Mr. MILLER. It is a possibility.

Mr. MOULDER. Do you publicly, and here and now before this committee, disavow any belief in the Communist Party and refute all of the principles and policies for which it stands? Do you now take that stand, and do you now so testify?

(The witness confers with his counsel.)

Mr. MILLER. The question, as I understand it, is--I mean the question of my avowal of a belief.

I hope I am allowed a little bit of latitude in answering this.

I state I am not a member of the Communist Party today due to any action on my part. I further state that I disavow anything which is contrary to the best interests of our country and of our people. As to pinning it down to the Communist Party, I have to frankly concede that I am not at all sure where the Communist Party is. I mean if the things that are ascribed to them are true, certainly I disavow them. I say that I have no association with them. It is only that I hesitate to disavow anything that I am not sure of.

I am sure of the one thing, that I am opposed to anything that is against the best interests of the people of our country.

Actually, since I was dropped in 1948 I have been inactive in all political activities to the point where I am not even registered to vote, I don’t believe, since 1948. I am confused on where most everybody stands, and I have not enough facts to draw a conclusion on it.

Mr. MOULDER. The reason I ask you that question is because there is considerable evidence before this committee and other investigative Government agencies that many Communist Party members ceased to be active as party members but have gone underground and still continue in their same belief, the same philosophy, and with, of course, the same objectives. I believe your answer is clear to this point: you attended all of those Communist Party meetings; I believe you said a hundred, and it would vary one way or another, 50 percent either way.

Mr. VELDE. Approximately 40, wasn’t it?

Mr. MILLER. That is it.

Mr. MOULDER. But during that period of time you certainly must have been well versed and qualified to know the purposes and the policies of the Communist Party as such, because at those meetings didn’t you study the Communist Party literature and study the purposes for which it was organized?

Mr. MILLER. Is that the question?

Mr. MOULDER. Yes.

Mr. MILLER. Yes, I did.

Mr. MOULDER. Has your opinion now changed with respect to the Communist Party from what it was when you were attending the Communist Party meetings? Or is it the same as it was then?

Mr. MILLER. I see what you are driving at, and it is hard for me to get my understanding across.

Mr. MOULDER. You say you have severed your association with the party, and I want to know if it is just a technical disassociation or is it a clean break from the Communist Party?

Mr. MILLER. No; it is not a technical disassociation. If I might have a moment, I would like to go on a little further.

First, the reference is to having attended, say, up to 40 meetings, one way or the other, and being aware of the goal of the Communist Party. I would have to say this in all honesty: During the time I was a member of the Communist Party I at no time was aware of their desire to do anything which was contrary to the best interests of the people. Now it could conceivably be that I was not aware, perhaps naive.

All of my activity--and, in fact, that is what prompted me not to take the fifth amendment. At no time in my life have I knowingly done anything contrary to the best interests of the people of this country. And certainly were I to be aware of that in an association and continue activity I would be guilty of doing something against the best interests of the people.

Mr. MOULDER. The subpena that has been served upon you will be in full force and effect. You will be subject to recall upon due notice.

Mr. MILLER. Should I leave for the day?

Mr. MOULDER. Yes.

The subpena will remain in full force and effect, and you will be subject to recall upon due notice at any time in the future. That does not mean, of course, that you have to attend any of the hearings here today or tomorrow.

Mr. TAVENNER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call Mr. Eugene V. Dennett at this time.

TESTIMONY OF EUGENE VICTOR DENNETT, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, KENNETH A. MacDONALD--Resumed

Mr. TAVENNER. Mr. Dennett, at the time we suspended your testimony you had completed your narrative with regard to your experience in the CCC camp, and told us that immediately thereafter you had been shanghaied into working shipping.

(At this point Representative Morgan M. Moulder left the hearing room.)

Mr. DENNETT. A little freight boat here in Puget Sound.

Mr. TAVENNER. I am sure that would be a very interesting story, but it is not a matter we are investigating in our work here.

After you had that experience how long was it before you returned to the work of the Communist Party?

Mr. DENNETT. It was within a very few months because I didn’t know at the time I started to work in the freight-boat industry in Puget Sound that there was an organizing drive of a union to organize the employees and that they had reached the point before I came along where they had entered into an arbitration. And they were awaiting the decision of this arbitrator. Finally the decision came down, I think about 3 or 4 months after I entered the industry, and the decision was so adverse that the men stopped work as soon as the boats got into port.

Mr. TAVENNER. What do you mean by saying that a decision came down?

Mr. DENNETT. The arbitrator handed down his decision. He was a very long time making his decision. When it finally came down it was very disagreeable to all the employees. In fact, they rejected it; they refused to accept it and called a strike.

When they called that strike they were confronted with a problem of electing delegates to attend a meeting of the union to determine what course of action to pursue.

I was elected a delegate from the crew that I was working with.

When we arrived at this meeting--I believe the meeting was held in the labor temple--we discussed the award, and the union leaders at that time were very frankly disappointed in the results of it.

The sum total of it was that it led to a strike, and the members seemed to like the way I presented their case during the course of the arguments, getting ready for the strike. And when the strike occurred I was elected chairman of the strike committee and chairman of the negotiating committee.

So we were again brought into public attention, and the Communist Party looked me up very quickly to find out what was going on and to try to advise me how to conduct myself in the course of that strike. They really knew very little about it. They learned a great deal from me because I was working with the men. And their advice was I must immediately fight the leadership of the union.

I made a few feeble efforts in that direction and found that I didn’t have any good reason for fighting that leadership because they were carrying out the program which I had advocated in the original strike meeting to satisfy the needs of the members.

Mr. TAVENNER. Apparently, the Communist Party was more interested in promoting its own objectives than it was the objectives of the union which was on strike.

Mr. DENNETT. They were anxious that someone from the Communist Party gain control in that organization.

Mr. TAVENNER. What was the name of the organization?

Mr. DENNETT. At that time it was called the Ferry Boatmen’s Union of the Pacific. It later has changed its name, and, in making use of that name, I certainly want it to be clearly understood that using that name in nowise should be construed as meaning that it was any Communist organization because it was not.

Mr. TAVENNER. It rather demonstrated just the contrary.

Mr. DENNETT. And its leaders were not.

But the leaders of that organization were making as sincere an effort as they knew how to represent the wishes and needs of the membership.

While there were some tactical differences between myself and them on various occasions, we did adopt a program wherein we agreed with each other that none of us would attempt to do anything or to speak in behalf of the organization without conferring with the other. In other words, we made a mutual agreement among ourselves as officials of the strike committee which required the exchange of mutual confidence. And, to the best of my ability, I carried that out, and I think, in all fairness, it should be said that, to the best of their ability, they carried their part out. I think the value of that is demonstrated by the fact that in the final settlement of that strike we succeeded in raising the wages of the freight-boat employees from $49 per month, without any regulation of hours, to a wage of about $150 per month with a regulation of hours and provision for overtime.

Mr. VELDE (presiding).

I am not quite clear about this ferry boatmen’s union. Was it a local union not affiliated with any other?

Mr. DENNETT. It was a part of an American Federation affiliate. At that time it was the Ferry Boatmen’s Union of the Pacific, affiliated with the International Seamen’s Union of America, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor.

Mr. VELDE. In what year?

Mr. DENNETT. That was in 1936.

Mr. VELDE. How large was the local? How many members?

Mr. DENNETT. I think there were in the neighborhood of 300 or 400 members in Puget Sound at that time. But that, of course, controlled all the tug boats and all the barges, all the towing, all the servicing, on the waterside of the smaller vessels.

I think that that completes the statement of what was in progress at the time of the question.

Mr. TAVENNER. After this experience on the waterfront what was your next contact with the Communist Party?

Mr. DENNETT. The next occurred in the district council of the Maritime Federation of the Pacific. That was Northwest District Council No. 1 which was in Seattle. This was the council to which delegates were sent from all the maritime unions.

(At this point Representative Morgan M. Moulder returned to the hearing room.)

Mr. DENNETT. And some of the shoreside unions, which worked in the shipyards.

These unions were brought together in the 1934 strike, which was before my time. And I would be presuming on you to try to give any testimony about the exact way in which it was formed except to say that, consistent with the Communist Party policy, it was our objective, from the days of the old Marine Workers Industrial Union, which was one of the affiliates of the Red International of Labor Unions, to organize all the maritime workers into one organization.

However, it was the desire of the workers in the industry to choose their membership in the duly constituted, chartered organizations of craft unions which were already in the field, such as the Sailors’ Union of the Pacific, the Marine Firemen, Oilers, Water Tenders and Wipers Association, the Marine Cooks and Stewards of the Pacific.[2] And later on I believe the radio operators, the masters, mates, and pilots,[3] and the marine engineers.[4] Then, of course, the shoreside organizations of longshoremen, machinists and shipwrights, joiners, boilermakers. There were many organizations that were involved in any kind of waterborne traffic.

Through the Maritime Federation of the Pacific all of these were brought together, and, for a brief period of time at least, cooperated quite successfully.

However, by 1935 one organization began to object to the Communist Party influence in the federation. That was the sailors’ union under Harry Lundeberg. However, in that dispute it wasn’t clear to the average person who was in the industry just what the nature of the dispute was, and most people felt that the dispute was a personal dispute between the leaders of the sailors and the leaders of the longshoremen. My own knowledge of the situation, of a later date, would lead me to believe that that is not an adequate explanation of what the dispute was all about.

The dispute ran much deeper than personality clashes. The dispute was a fundamental policy question dispute, and that dispute centered around whether or not the organization would move closer and closer to the Red International of Labor Unions through this new form or whether it would permit itself to separate into the respective component parts and each function separately and independently without that international Red affiliation.

Mr. TAVENNER. What was the outcome of that dispute?

Mr. DENNETT. The outcome was that the split spread. First one organization and then another began to have misgivings as to the consequences of being full partners in the Maritime Federation of the Pacific.

The first one to show the disaffection were the sailors. Subsequently the marine firemen showed disaffection. Then the master mates and pilots showed disaffection. And the marine engineers showed disaffection. The radio operators began to show some disaffection. Some of the longshoremen showed disaffection.

So the result was that by the time 1937 or 1938 rolled around the Maritime Federation was becoming sort of a bare skeleton which existed with a powerful name but did not have the moral backing and support of the members of the organizations that were affiliated to it.

Mr. TAVENNER. Was the organization Communist-dominated?

Mr. DENNETT. The Maritime Federation of the Pacific top leadership had at all times some prominent Communist leaders, some persons who were Communists.

Mr. TAVENNER. Can you at this time give us the names of those who occupied an official position in that organization who were known to you to be members of the Communist Party?

Mr. DENNETT. One of the first ones that I knew was a man by the name of Walter Stack.

Mr. TAVENNER. Did Walter Stack become very prominent in the Communist Party?

Mr. DENNETT. Walter Stack was in the marine firemen’s union and exercised a great deal of influence in that organization here.

Another was Ernest Fox. Ernest Fox was a patrolman in the Sailors Union of the Pacific, and he exercised a great deal of influence in the sailors union. He was one of the original ones. When Mr. Lundeberg was the first president of the organization Mr. Fox was his right hand bower who did most of the leg work for Mr. Lundeberg at that time. Lundeberg was the first president of the Maritime Federation of the Pacific.

Mr. TAVENNER. At that time was he anti-Communist?