personally couldn’t procure the grant. The grant was voted by at least
a majority of the trustees for the Pacific Northwest Labor School.
Mr. TAVENNER. Was the grant actually made through your efforts?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I advocated that the grant be made, yes.
Mr. TAVENNER. And Daschbach interviewed you with regard to it
before you presented it?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes, that is correct.
Mr. TAVENNER. Was any part of that grant or any other grant
used for the benefit of the Northwest edition of the Daily People’s
World?
Mr. O’CONNELL. As far as I know, certainly not. I mean the
grants were made to the organization and certainly no part of that
grant as far as I would know, what actually Daschbach may have done
with it later I wouldn’t be able to specifically say.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did you learn anything about it, even from a
second-hand source?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No; I never learned, never had any information
that it was used for any other purpose.
Mr. TAVENNER. Do you know whether any part of the $4,000 grant
or any other grant from the foundation was used for the benefit of the
Civil Rights Congress in the State of Washington?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I don’t know whether it was, that grant or any
other grant. I know there was some argument and some consultation with
me by Mr. Daschbach about it and I was very specific--I think that was
before the grant was made--and I was very specific with him that no
part of the grant would be used for any other purpose than that for
which it was made. That was the Pacific Northwest Labor School.
Mr. TAVENNER. Was John Daschbach an official of the Civil
Rights Congress in Seattle?
Mr. O’CONNELL. If I remember correctly, I left Seattle, I
don’t remember when the Civil Rights Congress was organized in Seattle,
but as I remember when I left Seattle Daschbach was then functioning as
head or director of the Washington Civil Rights Congress.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did he hold that position at the time he spoke
to you about the use of proceeds of the grant for the Civil Rights
Congress?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I don’t think I would be able to say whether he
was actually in the position at that time. I can’t recall. I remember
at the time that he asked me about the grant they were closing out,
they were terminating this Seattle Labor School and they had borrowed
money from particularly various labor union members about the town. I
remember I think it was either Frank or Fred Carlson to whom they owed
money and other people, I can’t remember precisely who they were now,
but anyway the representations made to me in connection with the grant
were they were trying to close out the labor school and pay off their
debts and pay I think back salaries that were owed to Mr. Daschbach and
to some others there, I don’t know who.
Mr. TAVENNER. Was John Daschbach known to you to be a member
of the Communist Party?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I never knew John Daschbach was a member of the
Communist Party.
Mr. TAVENNER. Had you heard that he was a member of the
Communist Party?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I had never heard that he was a member of the
Communist Party. I actually, my first, I think the first time I met
Mr. Daschbach was in Spokane and I think he was attending Gonzaga
University, a Jesuit university in Spokane, and as far as I knew
personally, I didn’t know he was a Communist, didn’t know whether he
was or was not.
Mr. TAVENNER. You are aware now, are you not, that he has been
identified by a number of witnesses as a member of the Communist Party?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I couldn’t say that I know that precisely; but
I do know he was indicted as a Smith Act defendant in Seattle.
Mr. TAVENNER. And convicted.
Mr. O’CONNELL. And convicted. I don’t know whether he is in
prison now.
Mr. TAVENNER. Do you recall what individual it was in the
National Lawyers Guild who solicited an award from the trustees?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Well, my best recollection as far as that would
be concerned is that it was Mr. Martin Popper, who was an attorney in
New York.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did the executive secretary of the National
Lawyers Guild take any part in representations or solicitations
regarding the grant?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I think Mr. Silberstein (Robert J.
Silberstein), I wouldn’t remember correctly. It is hard for me to
remember. I would say Mr. Silberstein actually probably prepared the
actual application that was made to the foundation for a grant.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did he confer with you about the matter?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I can never even remember Bob Silberstein
talking to me about a grant for the Lawyers Guild. As I remember the
particular grant, it was made in connection with labor work that the
guild was doing, and Mr. Martin Popper, as I remember it, was the one
who actually made the presentation, at least I know he talked to me and
I think to some of the other trustees.
Mr. TAVENNER. The New World issue of March 25, 1948, reflects
that Jerry O’Connell launched a series of three special forum programs
at the Pacific Northwest Labor School to discuss our foreign policy and
our fight for peace. Do you recall that?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No; I don’t recall that. I know I never made
any speeches at Seattle Labor School.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did you have any connection with the
presentation of a special forum program at the Seattle Labor School?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I certainly cannot recall any. I don’t remember
ever speaking at the Seattle Labor School or being involved in any
forum. Was that a forum I was supposed to conduct?
Mr. TAVENNER. The article says you launched a series of three
forum programs.
Mr. O’CONNELL. It says it is on foreign policy?
Mr. TAVENNER. That the subject was Our Foreign Policy and Our
Fight for Peace.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I certainly don’t remember any such thing.
Practically all the time I was in the State of Washington I was engaged
either as executive secretary of the Democratic Party or was executive
secretary of the Progressive Party and my particular work was in
political organization and political work and I don’t want to say I did
or didn’t but I certainly now don’t recall any such series of lectures.
Mr. TAVENNER. Mr. O’Connell, you have advised us that you
became chairman of the National Committee To Defeat the Mundt Bill
during the year 1948.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes; that is correct.
Mr. TAVENNER. Were you aware of a special fund drive conducted
by the Communist Party in 1947 for the purpose of fighting anticipated
congressional action relating to the Communist Party?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I had no knowledge of any such--what was it a
fund?
Mr. TAVENNER. Mrs. Blauvelt testified before the Committee on
Un-American Activities within the past 3 weeks on that subject. She was
a police detective for the city of New York and was a member of the
Communist Party and served the New York City Police Department as an
underground agent for a period of more than 8 years before her identity
was discovered. Mrs. Blauvelt testified for nearly a week.
In the course of this testimony she stated that upon the agitation
for a bill relating to communism in the House of Representatives the
Communist Party hurriedly made a fund drive and that they sought to
raise a total of $225,000 for the purpose of fighting the opposition to
communism. Within 25 days the Communist Party raised $250,000.
During the period that you were chairman of this committee to defeat
the Mundt bill--that was over the period from 1948 until some time in
1950 or 1951----
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes; but it ought to be explained that in 1948
the only functioning of the committee was from a period I would say
probably in June of 1948 until the adjournment of Congress, which was
in that year I think, because of the party conventions, the national
conventions, was adjourned quite early.
I know there was probably, I was here probably a month or a little over
a month in that connection, and then I did not--all during 1949 there
was no functioning of the committee whatsoever, as I remember it, and I
think the first time I came down in 1950 was, I would say, about March
of 1950 and I was here until about maybe the early part of June, when I
returned to Montana to take the bar exams I have already talked about.
Mr. TAVENNER. As you stated, you came back here in July and
were here for a period of time?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I think the latter part of July or first part
of August and I was here until the Congress adjourned sine die about
the middle of September.
Mr. TAVENNER. That is correct.
To complete my question: Did the Communist Party give your committee
any financial assistance at any time during the period from 1948 to
1950 while you were chairman of the National Committee To Defeat the
Mundt Bill?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Of my knowledge, I don’t know of any assistance
that the Communist Party gave to the National Committee To Defeat the
Mundt Bill. I, of course received, all I received, I think I received
$125 a week salary, if I remember correctly. I had no charge of funds
or the expenditure of funds.
Mr. TAVENNER. Was that salary of $125 a week paid by the
Progressive Party?
Mr. O’CONNELL. In 1948 I think the salary was paid by the
Progressive Party, but I am not too sure.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did you not so certify on the reports made to
the Clerk of the House of Representatives?
Mr. O’CONNELL. If I did, that was so.
Mr. WILLIS. For the record, Mr. Tavenner, state the substance
of the Mundt bill.
Mr. TAVENNER. The Mundt bill is that section of the Internal
Security Act of 1950 which requires the registration of the Communist
Party and registration of Communist fronts. There is also written into
that bill the substance of what was known as the Wood bill, which dealt
with persons employed in defense contracts. The remaining part of the
bill related to immigration and naturalization matters and is known as
a different section of the bill.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Then I think there was the detention camp
features added in the Senate.
Mr. TAVENNER. There are no detention camp features to the bill.
Mr. O’CONNELL. In the bill that was finally passed in the
Senate I think Senator Kilgore and some of the other Democratic
Senators offered an amendment to the bill or a provision that provided
for----
Mr. TAVENNER. In conference between the Representatives of the
Senate and the House, it was agreed to accept the House bill exactly as
prepared and submitted by this committee, which was done.
How were you employed at the time you first became chairman of this
committee?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I was the executive secretary of the
Progressive Party in the State of Washington.
Mr. TAVENNER. I believe you have told us that Mr. Robert J.
Silberstein, executive secretary of the National Lawyers Guild, was one
of the official family of the National Committee To Defeat the Mundt
Bill.
Mr. O’CONNELL. My recollection is he was secretary. I don’t
want to be held to it but I am pretty sure he was the secretary of the
committee.
Mr. TAVENNER. Was he a person known to you to be a member of
the Communist Party?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No; I never knew Bob Silberstein to be a member
of the Communist Party.
Mr. SCHERER. I didn’t get the last answer.
Mr. O’CONNELL. No; I never knew or did not know that Bob
Silberstein was a member of the Communist Party and I don’t know it now.
Mr. TAVENNER. Had you heard he was a member of the Communist
Party?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I had not heard that he was.
Mr. TAVENNER. Up until this present time you have not heard?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I have not heard that Bob Silberstein is a
member of the Communist Party.
Mr. TAVENNER. Mr. Chairman, this committee heard 2 witnesses
from California in 1952, both of them attorneys at law, one of them a
professor at a law university, who testified to the effect that Mr.
Silberstein was a member of the Communist Party.
Mr. Silberstein was subpenaed before this committee and confronted with
the testimony of those two lawyers and he refused to testify on the
subject, claiming that to do so might tend to incriminate him.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Just for the record, Mr. Tavenner, I, of
course, haven’t read all the proceedings of this committee; I have
not had available to me the transcript of the hearings of the
committee, what some lawyers in California may have testified about Bob
Silberstein in 1952, I don’t know anything about.
Mr. TAVENNER. Are you aware of the fact that the National
Lawyers Guild has been cited by this committee as a Communist-front
organization?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes; I am.
Mr. TAVENNER. Were you a member of the National Lawyers Guild?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I am a member, have been and am now a member of
the National Lawyers Guild.
Mr. SCHERER. When did you last have any connection with Robert
J. Silberstein?
Mr. O’CONNELL. In 1950, sir. In 1950 we had occasional
meetings in connection with the Mundt bill at that time and Mr.
Silberstein attended those meetings and I am pretty sure he was the
secretary of the organization.
Mr. SCHERER. Was that the last time you saw him?
Mr. O’CONNELL. That is the last time I have seen Bob
Silberstein.
Mr. SCHERER. Have you had any communication with him since?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I of course receive a membership card in the
National Lawyers Guild and I think it is signed by Bob Silberstein as
executive secretary, or executive secretary of the National Lawyers
Guild.
Mr. SCHERER. Is that his position today?
Mr. O’CONNELL. My understanding is he has resigned, at the
last convention of the National Lawyers Guild, that he resigned and was
replaced by somebody else.
Mr. SCHERER. Do you know what he is doing today?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No; I don’t have any idea.
Mr. SCHERER. Do you know where he lives?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Well, the last I knew he was living in New
York. He actually, I think, comes from New Jersey and I think he is
married to a banker’s daughter who comes from wealthy family, if I
remember correctly, in New Jersey.
Mr. TAVENNER. Will you tell the committee the circumstances
under which the Progressive Party contributed your services to the
National Committee To Defeat the Mundt Bill?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Well, in connection with the--there were
hearings being held in the Senate, as I stated yesterday, by a
subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1948. I think those
hearings were being presided over by former Senator Ferguson and
Senator Langer of North Dakota was a member of the committee.
If I remember correctly, we received a communication from the national
office of the Progressive Party, I think particularly from Mr. C. B.
Baldwin, who was then executive vice chairman, if I remember rightly,
asking us to send, the Progressive Party of the State of Washington,
to send somebody to Washington to testify at this hearing before the
Senate Judiciary subcommittee, and I was delegated by the Progressive
Party in the State of Washington to come to testify at that hearing.
I also think Mr. Russell Fluent, who was chairman of the Progressive
Party at that time--he was also incumbent Democratic State treasurer of
the State of Washington, was also a delegate, and I think the two of us
came down here to testify and I said yesterday while we were waiting to
testify the hearings had been going on several days, Senator Ferguson
adjourned the hearings and Senator Langer--a considerable number of the
people there were upset because they had waited around to be heard and
there was considerable protestation, as I remember, about the hearings
being adjourned and so Senator Langer asked the people who had not
testified to come to his office or, rather, his committee room.
As I remember then he was chairman of the Committee on Post Offices and
Post Roads of the Senate, and we adjourned to that particular committee
room and had a meeting there. I can’t remember now the precise details
of the situation, whether it was Senator Langer or somebody in the
group or who it was who suggested a committee ought to be formed to
defeat the bill. I know Senator Langer suggested I become chairman of
the committee. He had known me as a member of Congress and I have known
him for a long time. North Dakota and Montana are very close together
and our political situations are quite similar and so on.
So it was at that meeting it was decided I should become chairman, that
I should stay to see what could be done to lobby and so forth, to see
what could be done to defeat the legislation. I think arrangements were
then made with the Progressive Party in the State of Washington for me
to stay down here during the month or so that was necessary and to have
my salary advanced by the Progressive Party.
Mr. TAVENNER. What was the occasion for your return to
Washington in March of 1950?
Mr. O’CONNELL. As I remember, the legislation had again been
reintroduced. It had not cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee in
1948 by the time of congressional adjournment, then, but I think the
legislation was reintroduced in the next session of Congress and if I
remember correctly it passed, it had already passed the House and it
was pending in the Senate, and hearings were being held and were to be
held in the Senate in March of 1950.
I came on down. I don’t remember whether, I can’t remember whether it
was Mr. Silberstein or Mr. Waybur (Bruce Waybur), who contacted me and
it was anticipated at the time I would have to spend about a month down
there lobbying.
Mr. TAVENNER. I hand you a copy of a telegram which the
committee procured under subpena duces tecum from the Western Union,
dated July 18, 1950, addressed to you, which reads as follows:
Greetings. Essential you take first plane or train here.
It shows it was charged to the National Lawyers Guild and signed
“Silberstein.” The telegram was charged to the National Lawyers Guild.
Will you examine it, please.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes, sir. I think that is the----
Mr. TAVENNER. I desire to offer the telegram in evidence and
ask that it be marked “O’Connell Exhibit No. 2” for identification
purposes only and to be made a part of the committee files.
Mr. WILLIS. It is so ordered.
Mr. O’CONNELL. What is the date?
Mr. TAVENNER. July 18, 1950.
Did you then advise Mr. Silberstein that you would require advancement
of funds for the purpose of making the trip?
Mr. O’CONNELL. As I remember, I had been down here, as I
said earlier, from March until I returned to Montana to take the bar
examinations, and then I was out there in the State of Montana getting
ready to establish my law practice and I got this wire from Mr.
Silberstein to come back, or to come on down. Now what arrangements
were made to send me funds, I don’t know whether Mr. Silberstein----
Mr. TAVENNER. I hand you a second telegram addressed to you
under date of July 26, 1950, signed “Silberstein,” and charged to the
account of the National Lawyers Guild, and obtained by this committee
in the same manner as the former telegram, reading as follows:
Sorry funds not available here. Proceed other plans.
Does that refresh your recollection?
Mr. O’CONNELL. What this would mean, as far as I can recollect
now, was that of course I informed him I had no funds to come down
here, to fly or whatever it was, and that unless I had them I would not
be able to come and would stay out in the State of Montana.
Mr. TAVENNER. What was meant by that part of the telegram
which suggested that you “proceed other plans?”
Mr. O’CONNELL. The thing, I am sure I can’t remember now but I
am sure I told Mr. Silberstein that I had no funds of my own to advance
to come down to Washington and do any kind of work down here, and that
unless I got funds I would not be able to come.
Mr. TAVENNER. That explanation would not be responsive to the
language of the telegram. The telegram says “proceed other plans.”
Mr. O’CONNELL. It says, “Proceed other plans.”
Mr. TAVENNER. “Proceed other plans.”
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes.
Mr. TAVENNER. What other plans?
Mr. O’CONNELL. As far as I was concerned, I am sure I had
notified them unless there were funds sent to me I could not come down
here at all.
Mr. TAVENNER. Would it be logical that Mr. Silberstein would
tell you to proceed by other plans, when to adopt your construction it
would mean that that just meant for you to remain where you were?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Well, actually, I imagine if I had all of the
correspondence or wires here I could probably give you the full and
complete story. That is way back, almost 5 years ago. It is hard for me
to recall but I am pretty sure that what I told him if I didn’t have
the funds, whatever work I would have to do on the bill it would have
to be done from the State of Montana.
Mr. TAVENNER. I desire to offer the document in evidence,
and asked that it be marked “O’Connell Exhibit 3,” for identification
purposes only, and be made a part of the committee files.
Mr. WILLIS. It is so ordered.
Mr. TAVENNER. On July 28, 1950, 2 days later, there was
another telegram signed “Silberstein” directed to you and charged to
the National Lawyers Guild, which reads as follows:
Means now available for travel. Telephone me collect.
Will you examine that telegram, please, sir?
Mr. O’CONNELL. What is the date on the second one?
Mr. TAVENNER. 26th.
Mr. O’CONNELL. I think this would be in line with what I had
said. I told him there was no way I could possibly come without funds.
Mr. TAVENNER. I desire to offer the document in evidence and
ask that it be marked “O’Connell Exhibit No. 4” for identification
purposes only, and to be made a part of the committee files.
Mr. WILLIS. It is so ordered.
Mr. TAVENNER. How were the funds referred to in Silberstein’s
telegram made available to you?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I just don’t remember, but I am pretty sure
that Mr. Silberstein sent me the funds.
Mr. TAVENNER. Were those funds, funds of the National Lawyers
Guild?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I really couldn’t say whether they were the
funds of the National Lawyers Guild or not. As I remember, there
was some confusion between the guild and Mr. Waybur of the national
committee about the funds. I think Silberstein sent these wires out
of the National Lawyers Guild office and then, if I remember, later
collected from the national committee for them, the National Committee
to Defeat the Mundt Bill.
But as I remember, my best recollection is I got the funds from Mr.
Silberstein. I have a recollection, they could have been Lawyers Guild
funds or could have been Mr. Silberstein’s personal check, I am not
sure.
Mr. TAVENNER. When you returned to Washington did you
establish a headquarters for the National Committee to Defeat the Mundt
Bill?
Mr. O’CONNELL. If I remember correctly, Mr. Silberstein was
taking his vacation at that time. I think a month or 6 weeks’ vacation.
He turned over to us the use of the field offices here in Washington.
Mr. TAVENNER. The National Lawyers Guild offices in Washington?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes.
Mr. TAVENNER. What address was that? Do you recall?
Mr. O’CONNELL. The thing that comes to my mind was 918 or 920
K Street.
Mr. TAVENNER. Wasn’t it 902 20th Street NW.?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes; I think that is right.
Mr. TAVENNER. As a matter of fact, hadn’t that been the
headquarters since 1948 of the National Committee to Defeat the Mundt
Bill?
Mr. O’CONNELL. No. Originally we set up offices in a building
downtown on--what is the main street? Is it E Street, where the
theaters are all located?
Mr. TAVENNER. Could that be F Street?
Mr. O’CONNELL. F Street. I guess it is. If I remember
correctly, the building is the Atlantic Building or some such name, and
we had offices there during 1948, and early--I know offices before I
returned to Montana were also in the same building in 1950.
Mr. TAVENNER. When did you first occupy the offices of the
National Lawyers Guild as the headquarters of the National Committee To
Defeat the Mundt Bill?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I am sure when I came back after July 28, I
probably got there--I can’t remember--either the very last part of July
or the early part of August.
Mr. TAVENNER. Now, prior to 1950 had you registered as a
lobbyist for the National Committee To Defeat the Mundt Bill with the
Clerk of the House of Representatives?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes.
Mr. TAVENNER. Did anyone else register with you for the same
purpose?
Mr. O’CONNELL. I couldn’t say for sure, but I think Mr. Waybur
did. I don’t know.
Mr. TAVENNER. Let me refresh your recollection. Our
investigation shows Mr. John B. Stone registered with you on the same
day.
Mr. O’CONNELL. Yes; I remember he was doing press work, press
relations for the committee.
Mr. TAVENNER. Who selected Mr. Stone to register?
Mr. O’CONNELL. Who selected him to register?
Mr. TAVENNER. Yes.