Mr. MOULDER. Did he have anything to do with your promotion to that
position?
Mr. STENHOUSE. I am sure he did.
Mr. MOULDER. Do you remember the names of the persons who were employed
under your immediate supervision?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, there was one fellow just prior to my promotion.
(Name deleted.)
Mr. MOULDER. I am not suggesting any of those persons be named in the
record; I am testing your memory as to why you remember some people
with whom you were associated and why you cannot remember the names of
some other people with whom you were closely associated.
Mr. STENHOUSE. I can remember the names of many of the people in my
division because we have exchanged Christmas cards since then, and I
have seen some of them since then.
Mr. MOULDER. In line with Mr. Velde’s questioning regarding the first
Communist Party meeting to which you referred, how did you go? By car,
by bus, or by train? Was it just as you say, a short distance? How did
you get there?
Mr. STENHOUSE. No, I didn’t say it was a short distance. I said it was
in Virginia.
Mr. MOULDER. That is not far from the District of Columbia.
Mr. STENHOUSE. We lived in Maryland.
Mr. MOULDER. How did you travel to the place of the meeting?
Mr. STENHOUSE. I suppose it was by bus because we didn’t have a car in
those days.
Mr. MOULDER. You went by bus over there?
Mr. STENHOUSE. I say bus. I mean public transportation.
Mr. VELDE. Mr. Chairman, I think we ought to make it clear we have
no intention of having the public press or anyone else feel that
any of the persons you mention who were associated with you in your
professional work at that time are connected in any way with the
Communist Party or any of its functions. We have hitherto tried to make
that perfectly clear. The mere fact that you mention a name of one of
your associates should lead no one to believe that he is in any way
connected with it or has been connected with the Communist Party or
Communist Party activities.
Mr. MOULDER. Did other employees in your section attend any of the
meetings to which you have referred?
Mr. STENHOUSE. No.
Mr. MOULDER. In line with Congressman Velde’s suggestion the names
mentioned by you in that connection will be stricken from the record.
Mr. STENHOUSE. I want to make one clarification.
In regard to this matter of references, I don’t want it on the record
that I didn’t give any references. If they were required I suppose I
gave them. But don’t remember now who I gave.
(The witness confers with his counsel.)
Another point, Mr. Chairman, in regard to this matter of remembering
the names of the people who were at these discussion groups, there were
not more than 3 or 4 meetings as far as I remember. There were very few
in number.
Mr. MOULDER. How many meetings did you attend while you were in
Washington?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Three or four; at the most, five; I can’t remember
exactly. They are very limited. I am trying to live back in those days
and pinpoint when it could have been and where they could have been.
And I can identify in a vague way three locations.
Mr. MOULDER. Were you issued a Communist Party membership card at any
time while you were in Washington, D. C.?
Mr. STENHOUSE. I don’t think so.
Mr. MOULDER. But you still refer to them as Communist Party meetings?
Mr. STENHOUSE. That is what I understood them to be. I am sure in my
own mind now that I was just on the fringes of this thing, that----
Mr. MOULDER. Proceed, Mr. Tavenner.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did you not describe the meetings in Washington as being
the same type of meetings you attended in Los Angeles?
Mr. STENHOUSE. I said they were similar.
Mr. MOULDER. Doesn’t that mean the same type?
What difference was there between the meetings you attended in
Washington and those you attended in Los Angeles?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, I suppose one difference would be that in
Washington, D. C., to the best of my knowledge, all the people present
were members of the union.
Mr. MOULDER. Were they also all employees in the Department of Commerce?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Right.
Mr. MOULDER. Were any of them employees in your immediate section?
Mr. STENHOUSE. No.
Mr. MOULDER. The China Section of the Department of Commerce?
Mr. STENHOUSE. No.
Mr. MOULDER. Do you, of your own personal knowledge, know whether any
of the persons attending those meetings were members of the Communist
Party?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, they were at the meetings.
Mr. MOULDER. Yes; but that isn’t my point. They were at the meetings,
but do you know of your own personal knowledge whether or not they were
Communist Party members?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Why I don’t know how you identify that exactly. I don’t
recall seeing anybody’s card. Again, there was some sort of dues
payment.
Mr. MOULDER. Do you recall hearing any one of them say that they were
members of the Communist Party?
Mr. STENHOUSE. I can’t remember now whether they did or not. I
was there and I thought I was some sort of a member, and I just
assumed--Maybe I shouldn’t assume it. But I just assumed they were.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did you pay dues in this organization or in this group?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, again, it was somewhat the same arrangement as
before. There were books to be bought and some sort of dues arrangement.
Mr. TAVENNER. To whom did you pay the dues?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, I don’t remember who the individual was. The money
was just--somebody said “Well, here are the books.” And the money was
put on the table.
Mr. TAVENNER. How long did you remain a member of that group or attend
meetings of that group?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, that is the question that you asked before, and,
as I told you, I find it very difficult to pinpoint the time. I think
I can limit it to somewhere near the end of 1945 because of the fact
that I didn’t get there until June and I had the operation, and then my
family came out, and we were preoccupied with getting into a house and
things of that sort. And I think it was--I was out of it by the early
part of 1947.
Mr. TAVENNER. So that you continued until the early part of 1947?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, I say it was somewhere in that area. And I can’t
remember.
Mr. TAVENNER. Will you tell the committee, please, the circumstances
under which you stopped attending these meetings?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, the Communist publications that we were studying
seemed to be overready to excuse the Soviet Union and criticize our
country, and this didn’t jibe with the ideas that I had had about the
situation during the war. And I just stopped going and nobody ever
tried to get me back in or approached me in any way.
Mr. TAVENNER. You have said that you cannot recall the names of any of
these people or give any more descriptive information than you have
because of the lapse of time, and the fact that you are separated now
by long distance from the place you were then.
Did anything occur in 1946 or 1947 which would have served to refresh
your recollection as to who these individuals were?
Something that would have called this matter very definitely to your
attention and would have impressed itself on your memory. Do you recall
anything of an unusual character having occurred?
Mr. STENHOUSE. I suppose you are referring to the fact that I was
investigated or questioned by the FBI.
Mr. TAVENNER. That is right.
Mr. STENHOUSE. It may have recalled their names to me then, but it
doesn’t now.
Mr. VELDE. Did you give any names to the FBI when you were questioned?
Mr. STENHOUSE. No; I didn’t.
Mr. VELDE. You said it may have recalled some of the names to you at
that time but it doesn’t now. If at that time it recalled the names of
people with whom you had associated, why didn’t you give them to the
FBI?
Mr. STENHOUSE. I declined to state whether or not I had been a member
of the Communist Party in Los Angeles.
Mr. VELDE. Do you mean you declined to state to the FBI whether or not
you had been a member of the Communist Party in Los Angeles?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Yes. And, as far as I remember, he told me I didn’t have
to state. I can’t be sure of that, but that is my recollection.
Mr. VELDE. Of course, you don’t have to tell the FBI anything. But I am
just wondering what was in your mind at that time--the reason why you
did not give the FBI that information.
Mr. STENHOUSE. The reason was that I had, to the best of my knowledge
and conscience, done nothing hostile to the United States. In fact, I
thought that I had been a very loyal and active citizen in promoting
the war effort.
Mr. TAVENNER. When did your employment terminate with the Department of
Commerce?
Mr. STENHOUSE. I got my termination notice in October, and it was
effective in November of 1947.
Mr. TAVENNER. What was the reason for termination of your services?
Mr. STENHOUSE. It stated that I was being relieved due to a reduction
in force.
Mr. TAVENNER. I believe you stated then your next employment was with
the United Nations. Is that correct?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Yes, sir.
Mr. TAVENNER. Will you tell the committee, please, how you obtained
your employment with the United Nations?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, I was trying many avenues to get employment.
Mr. TAVENNER. I am referring only to your employment with the United
Nations.
Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, there may have been a number of channels through
which I got it, but I think that it may have been through the Institute
of Pacific Relations.
Mr. TAVENNER. Why did you appeal to the Institute of Pacific Relations?
Mr. STENHOUSE. Because I had been a subscriber to the Institute of
Pacific Relations, and I knew of the Institute as one interested in
far-eastern affairs. And that, amongst several dozens of business firms
and organizations, seemed to be a likely place to find an occupation in
the area where I wanted to be.
Mr. TAVENNER. Before going to the Institute of Pacific Relations, did
you have in mind that you desired to secure a position with the United
Nations?