there, I was, and of course I was all for any organization that was
fighting for constitutional liberties and still am, any organization
that fights for them.
Mr. TAVENNER. How long did you remain associated with the
National Federation for Constitutional Liberties?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Associated with them?
Mr. TAVENNER. Yes.
Mr. O’CONNELL. In what capacity?
Mr. TAVENNER. In any capacity. You were a sponsor of the call
for the constitutional liberties conference which gave birth to the
National Federation for Constitutional Liberties.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I imagine I was a sponsor as long as it took
to sponsor the call. I don’t know how long that might be. But I had no
office in the National Federation.
Mr. TAVENNER. How was your assistance as a sponsor in this
movement obtained?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Have you got a list of the officers of the
federation?
Mr. TAVENNER. No; I do not.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I would presume--if you had a list of the
officers--I presume I was contacted through the officers.
Mr. TAVENNER. Are you aware that this organization merged with
the International Labor Defense, another arm or branch of the Communist
Party, to form the Civil Rights Congress?
Mr. O’CONNELL. My information is that the Civil Rights
Congress was formed from a merger of these two organizations. That is
as I understand it.
Mr. TAVENNER. Our information is that the Civil Rights
Congress was given grants totaling $63,500. Are you familiar with those
grants?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I am sure the Civil Rights Congress was given
grants. Whether or not that total figure is correct or not I couldn’t
say.
Mr. TAVENNER. Civil Rights Congress was cited as subversive
and Communist by Attorney General Tom Clark in 1947 and in 1948.
Mr. O’CONNELL. As I understand, they now are going through
proceedings before the Board to determine whether or not they are?
Mr. TAVENNER. Yes, whether or not they will be required to
register. That is the provision of law.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I mean the determination of whether or not they
register is whether or not they are a Communist-front organization.
Mr. TAVENNER. They are probably making the defense that they
are not required to.
Did you also make grants totaling $10,125 to the National Negro
Congress which subsequently was increased to $54,530?
Mr. O’CONNELL. That sounds--I am sure grants were made to the
National Negro Congress for the employment of a labor secretary to work
particularly on the organizing of both working and unemployed Negroes
in the Southern States. I am sure that was done.
Mr. TAVENNER. Were you aware that that organization was cited
as subversive and Communist by the Attorney General Tom Clark, on
December 4, 1947, and again on September 21, 1948?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Do you know when our grants were made to the
National Negro Congress?
Mr. TAVENNER. Yes, from 1942 until March 1951.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Well, then, I am sure that, I feel sure we knew
it had been cited. As I said before, of course mere citations by the
Attorney General is not sufficient----
Mr. TAVENNER. It wasn’t sufficient to put you on inquiry?
Mr. O’CONNELL. It wasn’t sufficient at least in my mind to
proscribe that organization, and I think history and subsequent events
have proved that it is necessary to go a little further than just to
have the Attorney General put organizations on a list.
Mr. TAVENNER. You say a little further? You didn’t go any
further, did you?
Mr. O’CONNELL. As far as we were concerned, as I told you
when an organization came to us they came to us with the specific
application for funds for a specific purpose and we never--as a matter
of fact, we never permitted the organization to appear before the
foundation or any representative of the organization. We went into the
matter ourselves. We conducted no investigations to determine what
their political beliefs might be or anything like that.
Mr. TAVENNER. You made the awards regardless of the purpose
behind the formation of the organization; is that what it comes down to?
Mr. O’CONNELL. For instance, we never went, we never sent out
a group of investigators, never had the funds, as a matter of fact, to
do that to find out.
Mr. TAVENNER. If you had read the citation of Attorney General
Francis Biddle, for instance, which was made on September 24, 1942, you
would have learned as follows:
A. Philip Randolph, president of the congress since its inception
in 1936, refused to run again in April 1940 on the ground that it
was deliberately packed with Communists and Congress of Industrial
Organization members who were either Communists or sympathizers
with Communists.
Commencing with its formation in 1936, Communist Party
functionaries and fellow travelers have figured prominently in the
leadership and affairs of the congress. According to A. Phillip
Randolph, John P. Davis, secretary of the congress, has admitted
that the Communist Party contributed $100 a month to its support.
From the record of its activities and the composition of its
governing bodies there can be little doubt that it has served as
what James W. Ford, Communist Vice Presidential candidate elected
to the executive committee in 1937 predicted: an important sector
of the Democratic front sponsored and supported by the Communist
Party.
Those are the words of Francis Biddle, Attorney General of the
United States, in 1942. Do you say that statement was not worthy of
consideration?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I, of course, didn’t have that statement in
front of me.
Mr. TAVENNER. It would have been in front of you if you had
inquired about it. It was in the Congressional Record.
Mr. O’CONNELL. We didn’t take the Congressional Record. There
are many things in the Congressional Record, as you well know, that you
just don’t take as it’s the Bible.
Mr. TAVENNER. Actually you were not interested to see whether
or not the money which you were paying out was for the promotion of
Communist Party projects?
Mr. O’CONNELL. That didn’t enter into our consideration, the
fact that an organization came to us with a specific application for a
specific purpose to do a certain job, and if we thought it ought to be
done and thought it was in the provisions of the will we granted it. We
didn’t think it was incumbent upon the trustees to make any kind of an
investigation into these organizations as far as the political opinions
and beliefs of their leaders or their members, whatever they might be.
We just didn’t do it. It just wasn’t particularly being done by private
individuals or private trusts.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did your foundation make grants totaling $1,500
to the Southern Conference for Human Welfare?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes, sir.
Mr. TAVENNER. That is, through 1942 and subsequently increased
to a grand total of $14,000.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I am sure, I don’t know whether that total is
correct, but I am sure we made grants to the Southern Conference for
Human Welfare.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did you look into that organization or the
formation of that organization?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No. From my own information they were doing an
excellent job in the field of promoting Negro rights, in the field of
organizing of labor unions, and so on in the South, and particularly
asked for the grant, if I remember correctly, to employ a labor
secretary to develop that particular part of the conference or group.
Mr. TAVENNER. This organization was cited as Communist-front
which received money from the Robert Marshall Foundation, one of the
principal sources of funds by which many Communist-fronts operate,
Special Committee on Un-American Activities reported March 29, 1944.
Did you make total grants of $30,750 to the Southern Negro Youth
Congress?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I am sure we made grants to the Southern Negro
Youth Congress. Whether that total is correct, I can’t say.
Mr. TAVENNER. This organization was cited on December 4, 1947,
by Attorney General Tom Clark as subversive and among the affiliates
and committees of the Communist Party, U. S. A., which seeks to alter
the form of the Government of the United States by unconstitutional
means.
You thought that was not worth looking into?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I knew nothing about that. I certainly knew
that that was--Who said that? I don’t know who said it now.
Mr. TAVENNER. Attorney General Tom Clark.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Do you think yourself that--well, that Tom
Clark’s mere proscription of this organization is sufficient?
Mr. TAVENNER. Certainly this should have been a warning to you
to make some inquiry and investigation unless your view and purpose was
to help the Communist Party by promoting its interests through large
awards.
Mr. O’CONNELL. That might be your conclusion but there were
certainly no awards or grants made to these organizations from the
point of view of being beneficial in any respect to the Communist Party.
Mr. TAVENNER. Do you recall grants having been made of $6,000
to U. S. Week?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes; I think I can recall that. Wasn’t that
young Bill Dodd (William E. Dodd, Jr.), son of the former Ambassador to
Germany?
Mr. TAVENNER. Young Bill Dodd was the son of the former United
States Ambassador to Germany, but I don’t know who applied to you.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I think that was the magazine he was interested
in, if I remember.
Mr. TAVENNER. It was cited on March 29, 1949, by this
committee as a Communist front which received funds from your Robert
Marshall Foundation.
Mr. O’CONNELL. When was the grant made to U. S. Week?
Mr. TAVENNER. 1941. Were grants made to American Youth for
Democracy in the amount of $5,000?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Was it grants or grant?
Mr. TAVENNER. I am not sure whether that is the total grant or
whether that is one grant.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I am not, either. I recollect a considerable
amount of discussion about that grant when it came up.
Mr. TAVENNER. What was the nature of the discussion?
Mr. O’CONNELL. There was some discussion about what kind of
a job they were doing and what organization it was, and so on. I am
pretty sure the grant was not continued.
Mr. TAVENNER. It was cited as subversive and Communist by
Attorney General Tom Clark on December 4, 1947, and the citation by
the Special Committee on Un-American Activities report March 29, 1944,
reads as follows:
Cited as the new name under which the Young Communist League
operates and which also largely absorbed the American Youth
Congress.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Do you know when the grant was made?
Mr. TAVENNER. No; I do not. It would be between 1942 and 1951,
but I don’t know the specific date.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I can remember a discussion about the grant,
and I think you will find--I could be wrong, but I think there was only
one grant made, and it was discontinued.
Mr. TAVENNER. Were grants totaling $6,500 made to the
California Labor School?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes; I don’t know whether that total amount is
correct, but I know a grant was made to the California Labor School.
Mr. TAVENNER. This organization was cited by Attorney General
Tom Clark on June 1, 1948, as a subversive and Communist organization.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Do you know when the grant was made?
Mr. TAVENNER. No, sir. Grants totaling $8,000 were made to the
Council for Pan-American Democracy. Do you recall those grants?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I can remember that a grant was made, or
grants, to that organization, but I can’t remember who the people were
that were involved.
Mr. TAVENNER. The organization was cited by Attorney General
Tom Clark on June 1, 1948, as subversive and Communist and by the
Special Committee on Un-American Activities report on March 29, 1944,
and again on June 25, 1942.
$21,000 was granted to Farm Research, according to our information. Do
you recall that?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Well, I don’t recall it, but I presume your
information is correct.
Mr. TAVENNER. Farm Research was cited by the Special Committee
on Un-American Activities on March 29, 1944, as a Communist-front
organization, receiving finances from the Robert Marshall Foundation.
Did the foundation make grants to the National Lawyers Guild in the
amount of $15,250?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I am sure it did, although I don’t know whether
the amount is correct?
Mr. TAVENNER. What was the purpose of those grants?
Mr. O’CONNELL. The purpose of those grants was to assist
the Lawyers Guild in getting out certain legal material as far as
particular labor cases before the NLRB and the courts were concerned.
Mr. TAVENNER. Was it furnished to assist the guild in getting
out any other work besides that?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No. They came in with a specific application to
do this particular kind of job or work that had to be done, and where
they were working particularly in representation of labor, in the labor
field.
Mr. TAVENNER. Total of $25,000 was granted, according to our
information, to the New World?
Mr. O’CONNELL. $25,000?
Mr. TAVENNER. Yes, sir.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I know grants were made, I think that paper
was originally called the Washington New Dealer. Isn’t that right?
And grants were made to it while it was the Washington New Dealer. It
was changed to the New World and grants were made both to it as the
Washington New Dealer and the New World.
But the minute it became a part of the People’s World which became a
Northwest edition of the People’s World, there were no further grants
made.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did you procure from the Robert Marshall
Foundation a grant to be used by any progressive causes in the
Northwest in May 1949?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes; I think a grant for the Seattle Labor
School.
Mr. TAVENNER. Was the amount of that $4,000?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes.
Mr. TAVENNER. You left Seattle in May 1949 to attend your
meeting in New York City of your trustees?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes. I don’t know whether it was May of 1949,
but some time----
Mr. TAVENNER. And returned with $4,000 for the Seattle Labor
School.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes; that is right.
Mr. TAVENNER. The Seattle Labor School, according to the
testimony of Barbara Hartle, is the same as the Pacific Northwest Labor
School. It was first known by the name of Seattle Labor School and then
later became known as the Pacific Northwest Labor School.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Wasn’t it the other way around?
Mr. TAVENNER. I may have it backward. You probably would know.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I don’t remember which was which, but I think
it was the other way around. But I can remember that grant; yes.
Mr. TAVENNER. Who was instrumental in soliciting the funds for
that labor school?
Mr. O’CONNELL. John Daschbach.
Mr. TAVENNER. The same person who used your name on the
catalogue of the school as an instructor of course 112?
Mr. O’CONNELL. That is right.
Mr. TAVENNER. You knew it was a Communist Party school at that
time, didn’t you?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No; I did not.
Mr. TAVENNER. It was cited by the Attorney General Tom Clark,
as early as December 4, 1947.
You again state you just didn’t pay any attention to that citation by
an Attorney General?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I don’t recall that it was cited. I don’t
remember, but as I said, a citation by the Attorney General or placing
it on a list would not be determinative for me as to whether or not it
ought to get a grant.
Mr. TAVENNER. We have demonstrated in the testimony to you
here today that nearly every teacher on the staff was a member of the
Communist Party, according to testimony before this committee. We have
shown you now the citation of the Attorney General of that school, and
we find now that you procured this grant of $4,000.
Did you procure any other money for this school besides this grant of
$4,000?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No; I can’t----
Mr. TAVENNER. Our information is that the total amount
advanced to the Pacific Northwest Labor School was $11,500.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I thought you meant money outside of the
Marshall Foundation.
Mr. TAVENNER. No.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I am pretty sure grants were made to the
Seattle Labor School for 2 or 3 years, I don’t remember which.
Mr. TAVENNER. In fact, it would have closed its doors but for
the financial assistance given it through you?
Mr. O’CONNELL. As a matter of fact, when the last grant was
made it had closed its doors and the grant was made to pay up debts and
salaries and things of that kind that were--incurred loans.
Mr. TAVENNER. Salaries to Communist Party teachers?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I don’t know. Daschbach’s salary for one.
Mr. TAVENNER. He has been identified by a number of witnesses
as an active member of the Communist Party.
Mr. O’CONNELL. As far as I was concerned, I didn’t know he was
a member of the Communist Party and many of these people I don’t even
know that you read today as teachers at that school, I don’t even know.
I do know Gundlach, who was a professor at the University of
Washington. Whether he is a Communist or not, I don’t know, but----
Mr. TAVENNER. You are not willing to accept the testimony of a
Communist Party functionary, the No. 2 person in the Communist Party in
the State of Washington, for that?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Well, of course, I haven’t had an opportunity
to read her testimony. Did she say Gundlach was a Communist? The reason
I feel so sure Gundlach isn’t a Communist is when the State un-American
activities committee was conducting its investigations out there----
Mr. TAVENNER. I read to you this morning and read into the
record the identification of Gundlach as a member of the Communist
Party, according to the testimony given this committee and my
recollection is that it was Barbara Hartle.
At any rate, didn’t you know that and weren’t you aware of the fact
that he was ousted from the university as a professor because of his
Communist Party membership?
Mr. O’CONNELL. If I remember correctly, and it is a long time
ago, Gundlach was actually ousted, if I remember correctly, because
President Allen, who was at the university at the time, didn’t think he
was a Communist but thought that his conduct in connection with the
investigation that was carried on by the State un-American activities
committee, was such that he didn’t think he was a fit and proper person
to be a teacher at the university. That is my recollection of it.
The reason I wonder about Gundlach is that he took an entirely
different course, as I remember, before the State un-American
activities committee out there than certain others who were there
later, but if Barbara Hartle says he is and says he was, she may be
right. I don’t know. All I am doing is conjecturing on the basis of----
Mr. TAVENNER. As a matter of fact, Mr. O’Connell, from your
vast experience and your intelligence, didn’t you form the opinion
that the Pacific Northwest Labor School was a training school for the
Communist Party?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No; I particularly didn’t get that idea because
I know some excellent people who were connected with the school. One is
Frank Carlson, who was in the streetcarmen’s union out there who was an
outstanding labor leader who certainly wasn’t a Communist.
I. E. Sandvigen of the machinists union was not a Communist, I am
sure. Many others identified with the school particularly in the labor
movement that promoted the school and I think what may have happened
to it as it went along, I don’t know, but the idea of the school was a
good one and I think they were trying to do a good job.
Daschbach became director of the school somewhat later in its history,
as I remember it.
Mr. TAVENNER. Let me read into the record at this point, Mr.
Chairman, the testimony of Barbara Hartle regarding the labor school.
She was asked the question as to what connection there was between the
school and the Communist Party. That is between the Pacific Northwest
Labor School and the Communist Party. Her answer was as follows:
The Pacific Northwest Labor School was a Communist front project
in the field of education and its basic purpose was to spread
Marxist-Leninist education, but to do it in such a way as to
attract non-Communists in addition to its use for being a school
for Communist Party members.
It had a double purpose, to educate the party membership and to
draw as many non-Communists into classes as possible at the same
time. It was not considered a party leadership training school,
it was more for the membership. And in order to attract a broader
segment of persons into the school a number of courses were
included that were not in Marxism-Leninism, but they were included
in order to appeal to people from labor unions, professional
fields, and others.
For example, parliamentary law would be a subject intended for the
purpose of drawing people into the school and drawing them closer
to it with no idea on their part that they were getting into a
Communist school. An air of respectability was also created in this
way so that people would feel if they enrolled in this school they
had a perfect right to do so and there was nothing wrong with being
in it.
The hope, of course, was that if non-Communists enrolled this way,
after a while they would learn more about it and would become
convinced to enroll in courses on Marxist-Leninism. The objective
of the school was to gain Communist influence over non-Communists,
recruit as many people as possible out of this school into the
Communist Party, and special attention was paid to members of
organized labor through this school.
Mr. DOYLE. The committee will stand in recess until 9:30
tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon, at 4:20 p. m. the committee was recessed, to reconvene at
9:30 a. m., Thursday, June 2, 1955.)
INVESTIGATION OF COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES IN THE SEATTLE, WASH., AREA
THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 1955
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES,
_Washington, D. C._
PUBLIC HEARING
A subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 9:45 a. m. in the Caucus
Room, Old House Office Building, Hon. Edwin E. Willis, presiding.
Committee members present: Representatives Edwin E. Willis and Gordon
H. Scherer.
Staff members present: Frank S. Tavenner, counsel.
Mr. WILLIS. The subcommittee will come to order.
Let the record show there are present today Mr. Scherer, of Ohio, and
myself, Edwin E. Willis, of Louisiana.
Inasmuch as the subcommittee is reconstituted, that is, members are
here today who were not present yesterday, it might be well to reswear
the witness.
Let the record show also that the chairman of the committee appointed
a new subcommittee to continue these hearings, namely, Mr. Doyle, Mr.
Scherer, and myself as chairman.
Will you stand and be sworn? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony
you are about to give before this subcommittee will be the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I do.
Mr. WILLIS. Proceed, Mr. Tavenner.
TESTIMONY OF JEREMIAH JOSEPH O’CONNELL--Resumed
Mr. TAVENNER. Mr. O’Connell, continuing with the matter of
grants by the Robert Marshall Foundation, of which you were one of the
trustees, it is noted that grants totaling $30,366.85 were made to you.
Can you explain that?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes. Those would be in my opinion the total
amount that I received for traveling expenses, for meetings of the
foundation.
Mr. TAVENNER. Do you mean, then, no specific grant was
actually made to you?
Mr. O’CONNELL. There was no actual specific grant made to
me. The provisions of the will, as I remember them, provided that the
trustees are to receive no compensation except their traveling expenses
to and from meetings of the trustees of the foundation.
Mr. TAVENNER. I note that there was introduced into the record
during the Canwell hearings, check No. 94 bearing date of October 2,
1942, drawn on the funds of the Robert Marshall Foundation in the
amount of $150 made payable to you.
Have you any explanation to make of that item?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I am sure that, if I knew the meeting date of
the foundation at that time, we also had a practice when a meeting of
the foundation was called by the trustees, if the financial situation
of the trustee involved was such that he needed an advance for expenses
to come to the meeting, an advance was made in the amount of probably
$150 or so, but it was always expended for either transportation or
meals and hotel and so on, while in attendance at the meetings of the
foundation.
Mr. TAVENNER. You testified yesterday that in May of 1949 you
procured a grant of $4,000 for the use of the Northwest Pacific Labor
School.