you ever heard of Owen Lattimore.
Mr. BiDEXz. It is the first time I heard of him in an official capacity,
yes, sir. 1 have heard him mentioned by individuals, but never in an
Mr. MoKOAx. At this meeting to which vou refer, in 1937, will vou
tell us when the meeting was held'^
Mr. BuDEXz. You mean the month?
Mr. Morgan'. As nearly as you can.
Mr. BroEXZ. Well, 1 cannot recall the month. It seems to me to be
in October, but that may be wrong. The reason I recall that time was â€”
Browder discussed with me, just before the meeting, my going to Chi-
cago, and I went there in November; but it could have been, since
that discussion existed over a number of months, it could have been
earlier. I will just have to speak of a period. I can't remember
dates that well.
Mr. Morgan. In your testimony, you characterized, and correct me
if I am wrong, this meeting as "a conspiracy designed to efl'ect this
new line," is that correct (
Mr. BuDEXz. Yes, sir. The Communist Party is purely and ex-
clusively a conspiracy, not a political party in any sense of the word.
Its only reason for existence is to engao;e in recruiting people for espi-
onage work, and for what they call diversive activities, namely, in-
fluencing Government, public opinion agencies, and the like. That
is all the Communist Party is designed for ; and, it is organized on that
You have, first of all
Mr. MoRGAX. I understand that, Mr. Budenz. What I mean in that
comiection is this; as I remeniber your testimony, and I do want to
be corrected if I am wrong, this meeting in 1937 I believe you char-
acterized as a conspiracy designed to influence policy relative to China.
Is that correct?
Mr. BiDEXz. That is correct, and we had specific instructions wdiich,
by the way, are much broader than I have indicated, that the assign-
ment to the American Communist Party was to see that America
acquiesced in a Red China and a Red Poland. I can bring to the
connnittee evidence of this.
As a matter of fact. Earl Browder dissolved the Connnunist Party
and formed the Communist Political Association in May 1944, and
in doing so explained to the National Committee that he did so under
instructions in order to make America believe that communism was
ceasing to be a factor in the scene and that thereby they could obtain
acquiescence by America in a Red China and a Red Poland.
502 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION'
Those were the two chief assignments given the American Com-
mun St Party. We were told, and by the way the Commnnist docii-
Zs said tli for many years China is a key, not -^^y^^^^lX^ct
cf the Pacific, I am not making a literal quote, Senatois, but i can
show documents to that effect-not only the key to the conq-
Pacific, but largely a key to the conquest of the world, with its millions
of people who can be pressed into armed service
Mr. Morgan. Back to our original chain of thought the Â« M
Budenz â€¢ Conceding, for the purposes of our discussion here that that
was th; conspiracy: as you s^ggk-is the J-^ToH of yom^ tes^rmony
that Mr. Lattimore was in this conspiracy that was set up m lJ6i, at
^^"MirBuDfiz. Yes, sir. Mr. Lattimore can be placed in that con-
^^Mr?'^IoRGAN. Was Mr. Lattimore present at that meeting?
Mr. Budenz. No, sir; he was not present. ,,:^,-â€žpp
Mr. Morgan. And, upon what information, or i^on what eMdeiice,
do you base the conclusion that you have made, that , Mr. Lattimore
despite the fact that he was not there, was a part of this conspiracy?
Mi Budenz. Upon the official reports of Frederick Janderbilt
Field whom I know, by official documents, to be associated with Mi.
Lattimore n a verv close caoacity, Mr. Field being secretary of he
imeTk' n bmnch of the Institute of Pacific Kelations, and Mr. Latti-
more beino- editor of its publication ; and by the fact that this was part
of a series^'of instructions and directions given me, as time went on, m
regard to Mr. Lattimore. â€¢ ^ . .-u- -la^r
Mr. Morgan. Now, limiting ourselves at this point to this 19o
meetincr, your feeling that Mr. Lattimore was a part^of this so-called
cinspkacy was based on what Frederick Vanclerbilt Field told you, is
i^Ir Budenz. His report, not to me, but to a group called together
bv Earl Browder in which Earl Browder agreed, likewise, m his ]udg-
nient and he, Browder, was head of that conspiracy at that time-
that is to say, as a Communistâ€” they referred to Lattimore.
Mr Morgan. Mr. Budenz, I would like to call your attention, it i
niav at this point, to an article which you wrote, I believe, and which
appears in the March 19, 1949, edition of Collier's magazine. Do you
recall the article ?
Mr. Budenz. Yes, sir. . .
Mr Morgan. I believe this same meeting is the one to which you
refer on page 48 of that article, and if I may, I would like to read
here one paragraph, and ask your observation concerning it, referring
to this meeting. You say :
We are agreed that the change could not be effected immediately, since our
recent emphasis had been on the "revolutionary aspect of the Chinese Soviet.
Then Field outlined an alternative, we could work through legitimate Far East
organizations and writers that were recognized as oriental authorities, lieid
einphasized the use of the Institute of Pacific Relations. This is not a Com-
munist organization, but Field later succeeded in becoming Secretary of it^s
American Council. Also chosen were the American League Against War and
Fascism and Friends of the Chinese People, the latter a Rod-front organization.
Their publications Fight and China Today were to be used in the design.
Now, as I read that statement here, and if I am wrong please correct
me, it appears that you were outlining a program to be consummated
in the future, is that correct?
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INA'ESTIGATION 503
Mr. BuDENZ. Not necessarily in the future ; to be begun, but to be
used as soon as events took place.
Now. I could consult the Daily Worker, I could give you the various
changes in the line, I mean, it will take time â€” that is why I want to
present these documents to you â€” it will take tiuie to show you how
this gradually was elt'ected. That is to say, you have to gather men
together: you have to perfect an organization; you have to deluge
America, as was the fact, with the information.
Mr. Morgan. What I am referring to
Mr. BuDENZ. Am I oif the subject? I thought I was answering
Mr. Morgan. I want you to have every opportunity to explain your
answer, but what I liave in mind here is, as I understand the facts â€”
at this meeting in 1937, there was a projected plan of action, is that
Mr. BuDEXz. That is correct ; yes, sir.
Mr. ^loRGAx. A conspiracy designed to accomplish a certain ob-
jective with respect to China, is that correct?
Mr. BuDEXz. That is correct ; yes, sir.
Mr. ]\IoRGAx. How was Mr. Lattimore properly in the conspiracy,
at that point, if he was not ])resent at this meeting, and the plan and
project was to be in the future ? That is my question.
^Ir. BiDEXz. A^"ell. lie is in the cons])iracy because right along, he
is officially referred to as being a member of the conspiracy, and he
was associated in an intimate caj^acity with the man making the re-
port. I think that we shall find that they called each other by their
fiist names, and other things of that character.
Mr. MoRciAX. Did Mr. Field tell you that Mr. Lattimore, at this
j)oint. would be used in the future? Just what did he tell you, Mr.
Budenz. at this meeting?
Mr. BrnEXz. It was agreed that Mr. Lattimore. because of his
position, which had to be very safely safeguarded, by the way, would
be enabled to influence writers and others on this question; and, it
was a long-time program, which I outlined as indicated, to some
degi'ee. in that article. Of course that is a magazine article, and
every woi'd is not chosen carefully, but every word is indicated there.
As a matter of fact, it was carried forward, and revived from time
to time, and came into full bloom about 1948 or 1944, as I recall.
But. there was this campaign, and it followed from this meeting
because Ave had other reports on this, reports on this to which I did
not refer because of the fact that I cannot always locate them in
the same way that I can this meeting, by time and by place.
Mr. M(tR(;.\x. Now, in order to get this picture, and I think it is
very significant for our purposes â€” at this 1937 meeting, which ap-
parentty is the springboard for this entire situation, I would like for
you to again indicate to us, as specifically as you can, whether any-
one t(jld you at that time that Mr. Lattimore was a member of
the Conununist Party, or whether you were told that Mr. Lattimore
would be used, by Mr. Field, in order to accomplish their objective.
Can you help us on that? I think there is some confusion on that
Mr. BuDENz. Yes, sir ; I can.
68970 â€” 50â€” pt. 1 .33
504 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Mr Lattimore was referred, of course yon understand the Com-
munists do not go around telling each other, "This man is a member
of the Communist Party." Mr. Lattimore was referred to as a
Communist by Mr. BroWder and by Mr. Field, m regard to the
work that he had done in placing Communist writers, and that is a
matter of public record, in the various organs of the Institute ot
Pacific Relations; but specifically, Pacific Affairs, of which he was
editor, and they had noted that he had done good work m that re-
spect especially recently, and he was referred to by Mr. Browder,
General Secretary of the Communist Party, as a Communist.
Now in this respect, there are Communist Party members, those
who are smaller people, and out-and-out Communists under dis-
^^ The% Communists under discipline, since 1969 or 1940, since the
Hitler-Stalin Pact, are ordered not to have any vestige of member-
ship about them, except in exceptional instances where the Politburo
decides otherwise, and therefore the expression "as a Communist
or "under Communist discipline" means m fact the same as being a
Communist Party member. . .i . t r i ,
Mr Morgan. Yon just made a statement, not that I did not grasp
it but about which I would like for you to comment on further. You
saV there is documentary evidence of Mr. Lattimore's placing of Com-
nnmists in key positions in certain publications ; is that correct ?
Mr BuDENZ. Not the act, itself; I saidâ€” documentary evidence m
the form of names of these Communists in considerable numbers, m
the articles in the Pacific Affairs, and I will mention one more,
althou'di I don't know whether he wrote just prior to 1937, but at the
time Mr. Lattimore was there, and that is James S. Allen, former
Communist International representative to the Philippines, and later
on, foreign editor of the Daily Worker.
I mentioned him specifically because his name comes immediately
to mind. There were many others.
Mr. Morgan. For our benefit, and for our record, let us see it we
can get a little better impression of this 1937 meeting. This was a
meeting at which these leaders in the Communist movement in this
country gathered together for the purpose of outlining a plan to influ-
ence policy with respect to Asia. Now, at that meeting, will you give
us some idea of how that was carried on ? Would each member sug-
gest ideas as to how he expected to accomplish that objective, and then
Mr. BuDENZ. No, sir; that isn't the way Communist meetings are
Mr. Morgan. Give us an idea.
Mr. BuDENZ. Communist meeting decisions are largely to find out
how you stand on a proposition, see if you are going to carry it out
fully. The report is already prepared in advance, just like the Com-
munist trials are prepared in advance. That is to say, Earl Browder
opened the meetingâ€” of course, I can't give you all the details, this is
quite a while ago
Mr. ]\Iorgan. Thirteen years ago.
Mr. Budenz. Yes, sir. It made an impression upon me, however,
because it Avas when he got the message that the Chinese Reds, who
we always had pictured as our ideal revolutionists, were nothing but
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IN^'ESTIGATTON 505
North Dakota Nonpartisan Leaguers, our agrarian reformers, as Mr.
Now, in this meeting Mr. Browder opened up, as he would when he
was the Jeacler of the organization, by reporting that this was now
iiecessary. Mi-, lirowder was generally a very abrupt man in his
instructions of that character. He had called together not the official
i^oiitburo, that doesn't make any difference in the Communist Party,
he had called together these people whom I remember iust now, J
Peters and Fenicci Marini, or Fred Brownâ€” these were the secret
leaders for the Communist International, and the late Harry Cannes,
^''^^!^/y'^^, an authority on China, a very extensive authority on China
and Larl Bristol, myself, and some others.
At any rate Mr. Browder opened up by asserting that this was now
tlie policy, and that we would have to develop
Mr. Morgan. May I interrupt ?
K.^^v/'^^''!' /""T ^^'^\}^''- F^^^^^' ^^^^o had already talked to Mr.
iii o^^ der, went further. The mam meaning of our meeting there was
to participate m the discussion so each could receive instruSions from
Mr. Browder and ]\ir. Field.
Mr. Morgan That, I understand, Mr. Budenz. I understand that
he me was set, and was merely accepted by this meeting, consistent
^\ itli party discipline.
fiJ^'"'^ f i''l? "' '"'i''"^ ^^l'''"^' ^^^^ ^h^^= that these party leaders, did
the^ or did they not at that meeting plan the means by which thev
inmiilr'''''^ Â°''^ predetermined policy? That is what I have
\f ^ nn?'^^''^- ^^ "^"l they never -o into details. I mean to say, that
It lb not a Communist practice. They merely assign the undertaking
to some individual, some Communist responsible is assigned to that
KvMk FieM Â«"^^-^^^^ this work to Mr. Lattimore, to be contacted
. Now, the thing is that that is a common Communist practice. This
IS not novel. The Communists do not outline all of the steps to be
taken. They leave those steps to the initiative, to the men who ai-
assigned; and, m addition, they leave it to the executive instructions
and contacts )vliich are established later with the Politburo members
bec-aiise except m imusual circumstances, it would take too much time,'
and that is not the Communist way of proceedino-
Mr. Morgan. I notice, Mr. Budenz, that in "this article in which
''Th^Afp.*'Â«l 7p' Tn^^' ^^'f ''^''^) ^^'' '"'^ticle is entitled, incidentally,
pjp f \' f f/-^""^ ^^'"'^' ^'^^ ^'""''^ "^^^^^ "Â« reference there what-
e^ er to 31r. Lattimore.
Is there any explanation for that ?
Mr. Budenz. There is certainly an explanation, and that is. that
I AAas not permitted to make the reference. That is, I doirt meai-
there was a censorship, don't misunderstand me. I mean to say tint
a great numl^r of names, including Mr. Lattimore's,Ure ?n mv
or.-gmal rough draft. As a matter of fact, Mr. Lattimore is direct v
so far as I could, referred to there, bv mentioning all thrcLmnun "st
writers ^vho wrote for tlie Pacific Atl'airs. Â«^oimnunist
vJ'ih'/-''^Y'^ Kearney recognized Mr. Lattimore immediately. He
put that in his general resume of Mr. Lattimore's career in The Co
n.mb.a. In other words, in my original article, I mean the rouoh
506 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
cli-ift which I conferred with the Collier's editorial board on, and by
the way I had to confer a lon^r time on that ai-ticle for weeks-
Mr. Simore's name was included, among others, but ColUei;^^ chd no
wish to do it I agreed with that, for a snnple reason : Betoie i lett
the plrty^Senatorrthe Communist Party-and this is something ha
evervonJ should know-aoreed that after that period of 1945 that
'Ttlf ?he cold war beginning, all concealed Communists should sue
Lyone who accused them of being Communists, sue t-J. Â±- jbeh
is Alexander Trachtenberg, who made ^h^ i.^P^^' J.f^^^\-^ ^f^^l^^
not necessarily for the purpose of winning the libel suit, it is to bleecl
whie anyone who dares ti accuse anyone of being a Communist so
tii^^^^^^^^^^^ be shut up." And, as a matter of fact, that became the
^'""you must understand that before that, the exact opposite was the
policv you were forbidden to sue for libel on the ground of being a
F^. mmiiist because it was considered that the case would cast a
de'rada on i"e Communist Party. With the cold war on they
loTew the Communist Party was going to be degraded anyway, m the
bbc mind, so it was agreed to shut up, and this plan was verj
successf I those who mig^it speak in organs, or in the press or over
t le n dio of concealed Communists- that the concealed Communists^
as a mat er of dutv, were to sue them for libel, and we Inive a veiy
^tr k ng c^^^^^^^ Mrs. McCullough, the.wife of t^- fcUtor of Time inaga-
zine, who, even if she wins the case, is going to lose $55,000 iiom the
^^t:! lhat^:S considered by nie when the Colliers f^^^^^
the representative of it, dealt with me, and deleted not only Mi. Latti-
more's name, but a number of others from this article.
Mr FORTAS. Mr. Chairman, may I interrupt tor a moment
There came into my possession this morning, some documents deal-
in - wtrtrssubWt I hastily wrote out some questions relating to
l^fsrd<^^u lent ,ind I now hand them in and ask that they be asked
of this witness, in accordance with the committee's previously an-
"'s^lrSiNGS. Would you like for Mr. Morgan to ask them?
Mr. FoRTAs. If you please, sir.
Senator Tydings. At this point .â€¢ , ;4^ \u-
Mr. FoRTAS. At this point, I think these are pertinent, if Mi.
Morgan will ask. , at -n.,^i^,w i Avmilrl
Mr. Morgan. Before asking these questions Mr ^/^^^"f;. A ^^^
like to ask you what you said in that article about Mr Lattimoie.
M Bude'^z. The only thing I said there was the -Terence which
is in there, to the infiltration of the-so f ar as I ^'^.^^.^^^j^-^^^^^''^"
Eed writei's into the organs of t^^ I^l^t^t^l^^^^P^^^'J^^^f.l^^^^^^^ ,
Mr. Morgan. Did you refer, m this article, to Mr. Lattimoie as a
Communist, or someone carrying out this program ? .
Mr. BuDENz. Oh, no, no, no ^ ^
Mr Morgan. What did you say about him m the article
Mr BuDENZ. I iust referred to him as the editor during that period
This walT the first rough draft of the article which we discussed
'tr'M^.'5S.^-t to the request of the Chairman, I show you
this document, Mr. Budenz
Mr. Budenz. Yes.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 507
Mr. Morgan. A dociiment consistiiior of .22 paj>:es-
Seiiator IIickknloopkr. !Mr. Cliaiiniaii, in keeping with the past
custom in this hearinir. where questions or documents or even exhibits
'nave been ofiered for, or are being ]>ut into the record, I think the
committee members are entitled to see what these questions are, in
1 do not liave any objection to any questions that I know of, but we
liave followed that custom, and I see no reason for not following it
Senator Ty'dings. As I understand it, the exhibit is not being put in
the record at this point, it is simply being tendered to the witness for
tlie purposes of identification. Later on, if it is offered for the record,
I think the committee might want to see it before it is made a part
of the record.
However, in this proceeding, there is a rather wide latitude of
opinon, and all sorts of latitude with the normal rules of evidence,
and the chairman does not want to take an arbitrary position, either
on one side or the other
I\fr. FoRTAS. Mr. Chairman, will you indulge me?
In all fairness, I should say that these documents came to me in
the mail this morning, but did not come from Collier's magazine. I
think I owe it to the magazine to state that.
Senator Ttdings. We will give Mr. Budenz time to look over the
document, and identify it before the questioning proceeds. That is
the point of tendering it to him.
Mr. BuDExz. This is not, as a matter of fact, first of all. Senator,
this is not the original outline to which I referred, or discussed with
Collier's, but nevertheless this refreshes my memory. That is to say,
this does say:
Two men of fllstiiiction wiio have seen eye to eye with Mr. Field for a long
time in regard to China, and who have enjoyed close personal relations with
him are Owen Lattimore, anthor of Solution in Asia, and .Joseph Barnes, former
foreign editor of tlie New York Herald Tribune and now editor of the leftist
New Y'ork Star. As a Communist, I have read the names of Messrs. Lattimore
and Barnes frequently referred to in reports by Mr. Field, and also in the most
complimentary manner. They have been devoted adherents of the "Poor Chinese
agrarian reformer" theory.
Senator Tydings. Mr. Budenz, I don't want to stop you from testi-
fying, but I understand the document was submitted to you first for
the pur])oses of identification, and we are getting it into the record
without the committee seeing it, which Senator Hickenlooper does not
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, I raise the question about
this document, I am only asking
Senator Ty'dings. I don't know how to iiile. You say that has
been the ride. You want to see it. I am trying to meet your point
of view. It is difficult for me to tell what you want us to do.
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, I said a moment ago that
it had been a custom in these hearings that documents and questions,
es])ecially if there have been a series of questions submitted, be given
to the committee members for their examination.
I see no reason to vary that rule at this moment
Senator Tydings. That is exactly what I am trying to do. Mr.
Budenz is not to read it into the record before the committee has
seen it, in accordance with the recjuest that you just made.
508 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATIOX
Mr. Morgan. May I clear this up. First for identification, that is,
of a document presented to us by counsel for ^Ir. Lattimore. Mr.
Budenz, I show you a document consisting of 22 pages and ask you
whether this is n'ot your original draft of the Collier's article which
appeared in the March 19, 1949, issue of that magazine.
Mr. Budenz. It is the original draft, but there was a rough draft
before, which I took personallv and discussedâ€” there have been, as a
matter of fact, about 6 or 10\-evisions of that article. There were
Mr. Morgan. Will you turn to pages 13 and 14, and read into the
record the two paragi'aphs which mention Mr. Lattimore, and are
marked with black pencil.
jNIr. Budenz. Thirteen and fourteen?
Senator Tydings. Just a minute. Before you do that, I would like
to ask any member of the committee, before it is read into the record,
if he would like to see the document so that we will have a uniform
Senator Hickenlooper. Yes: I would like very much to see the
document, and also state, in keeping with past objections that have
been raised here by some of the members, that if part of that document
goes in, the whole document goes in.
Senator Tydings. The whole will be put in, if a part is read; but
I understand, for the purposes of this interrogation, while it will
all be offered, there are certain parts that will be used for interroga-
tion. , 1 â€¢ Q
Would you like to look over my -shoulder, while I am reading this Â«
(There was a conference off the record.)
Senator Tydings. Without objection, the whole article will be put
in the record, and counsel will continue with his interrogation.
(The document above referred to was thereupon marked ''Exhibit
77'' and will be found in the files of the committee. )
]Mr. Morgan. Let the article be identified for the record, please.
Senator Tydings. It has been requested that tlie article be identi-
iied, marked as the proper exhibit number, and the date of it will be
given and any other characteristics. Please identify it so that we can
all follow the interrogation. . . ^r ^r
Will you do that, Mr. Budenz; or will you do it, Mr. Morgan, m
your own way ? â– , , . r- j
' Mr. Morgan. I think Mr. Budenz might read the items referred
to on pages 13 and 14.
Mr. Budenz. There is no date of identification.
Senator Tydings. Wliatisthat?
Mr. Budenz. There is no date.
Senator Tydings. What was it written for?
Mr. Budenz. This was written as one of several original drafts tor
Senator Tydings. And when was it offered ?
Mr. Budenz. As a matter of fact, I want to say on this. Senator,
that this was first a rough outline or draft which I went down and