killed here in New York by the Communists, but she was about to
close out, and they caught her before she got away, and her own
husband, as. I understand it — I wouldn't swear to it — but her oAvn
husband betrayed her and called her up to meet him.
Senator Ttdixgs. He was a Communist, too; is that right?
Mr. BuDEX'z. Yes. She was in the underground.
Senator Greex. Do you know of any case
Mr. Bxjdexz. That is Julia Stuart Poyntz, P-o-y-n-t-z, an American
school teacher and a very active open Communist leader, out in the
Xow, another thin^ they do : they buy out people to keep them from
testifying. I know tliat Harry C. Wycks, editor of the Daily Worker,
was on the payroll of the Communist Party. This was officially told
to me by Weiner — this is secret — he was on the payroll of the party to
keep them from the Dies committee, at the time he was attacking the
party, he, Harry Wycks. The thing is, the reason I know it, that we
had difficulty with that Chicago Communist paper out there finan-
cially, and I was always urging for more and more money, and Weiner
said, "We have so many calls upon our funds fi-om that so-and-so
Wycks ; I have to give him so much money every month to keep him
from the Dies committee."
606 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator McMahon. Tell me, when you were in these conversations
with the agents, I presume that their inquiry and their main interest
was the way that the party was cooperating in developing the world
Communist line. I suppose that was one of their main
Mr. BuDENZ. That was of interest because they were building up
that case, I believe.
Senator McMahon. Against 11 Communists?
Mr. BuDENz. That started a long time before.
Senator McMahox. I suppose, too, that if they were not they should
have been very interested in who we had in the Government service,
who were off line, and were Communists?
Mr. BuDEXz. Well, I suppose they were, although that question I
didn't discuss the Government people with the FBI, and I left them
to the end.
Senator McMahon. Were they content to do that?
Mr. BuDENz, Well, I don't know whether they were or not.
Senator McMahon. I mean, the loyalty program, you see
Mr. BuDENZ. They asked me about a number of people specifically.
That is to say, I have said that a number of people came to me, and
I think that I have been responsible, insofar as my information is con-
cerned, in having people exempt, more than or as much as I have called
them Communists, because of facts.
Senator McMahon. You have cooperated in the loyalty program
then, since it started in 1947?
Mr. BuDENz. Oh, yes.
Senator McMahon. Right from the start ?
.Mr. BuDENz. Yes.
Senator INIcMahgn. Given the best that you had in you?
Mr. BuDENz. That was spasmodic, of course. There were other
things that came in, these cases came in between.
Senator McMahon. I recognize that, but of course it is all one huge
conspiracy, and these fellows that were contacting you, McCarthy
was one, do you want to give us the other names ?
Mr, BuDENz. Well
Senator MgMahon. Was one Pat Cohen ?
Mr. BuDENZ. Pat Cohen, yes.
Senator McMahon. I have known him for many years.
Mr. BuDENz. There had been also, Guard, but he is only irregularly.
Senator McMahon. Pat has probably been your closest
Mr. BuDENZ. Pat Cohen gave me my initial bath, so to speak.
Senator McMahon. Quite a fellow.
Mr. BuDENZ. Oh, yes; a very fine man. And, McCarthy has been
the man in touch with me most of the time, although from time to
time other agents have accompanied him.
Senator McMahon. I see.
Mr. BuDENZ. Irregular agents.
Senator McMahon. Well now, those 11 that have been convicted,
has that affected things a good deal, do you think?
Mr. BuDENZ. Well, I think it has affected public opinion, Senator.
Senator McMahon. You think it has affected the operations of the
party any — weakened it?
Mr. BuDENz. To a degree. I mean, as yet — if they are convicted
Senator McMahon. You mean if it is upheld ?
Mr. BuDENz. That is right.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 607
We must remember that the Communist counts liis apparatus above
all, and if he can nuiintain an apparatus, he is content; he knows he
is going to be under attack. Now, the thing is that if they are con-
victed, that will certainly be a blow^ to their apparatus.
Senator JNIcMahon. I should think so.
INIr. BuDENZ. No doubt about it.
Senator McJMahon. Tell me, as far as you know, the FBI seems to
be running down all the leads that you gave them, do they not?
Mr. BuDENZ. Oh, yes.
Senator JNIcMahon. Pretty strenuously and vigorously ?
Mr. BuDENZ. That is right. Of course, I will tell you, sometimes
Senator I must confess this : You must not think this is laches, or
anything, but I sometimes conline myself to answering questions.
That is to say
Senator McMahon. It gets pretty tiresome.
Mr. BuDENz, Well, it gets tiresome and it gets well — it isn't only
tiresome, but for instance in the Harry Bridges case, I begged not to
go on the stand. I think you will find that I had the evidence, and
they had all the evidence they needed against him, but I begged not
to, I am not making a plea there
Senator McMahon. That is understandable.
Mr. BuDENz. So that once in a while, I do not. It isn't that I don't
■want to serve the Government, but once in a while I do not give to the
FBI, or take the initiative in any way, and remain sort of passive and
let them ask the questions.
Senator McMahon. I suppose that you must have been able to give
them hundreds of names in this conspiracy and I think it is a wonder-
Mr. BuDENz. Well, I don't know how many hundreds. The fact of
the matter is, I think I have given quite a few, but I was not content
with what I had given them. I felt that I wasn't covering the field well
enough, that is why I began this other list. I think, though, that I have
given them a lot of names.
Senator Mo^Mahon. In this other list, it will include, or will it,
any names that you have heretofore given them?
Mr. BuDENz. Oh, yes; there are duplications in there, but I want
to make a whole complete clean sweep.
Senator McMahon. Do you think that this Institute of Pacific
^Ir. BuDENz. Kelations.
Senator McMahon. The Institute of Pacific Relations was a potent
force in molding opinion?
Mr. BuDENz. I think so, I will tell you why : First of all, it had
this aura of the YMCA back of it. Secondly, it w^as a splendid
agency for joenetrating Washington.
Now, you see I have heard Field's report, which has not been de-
tailed, on Washington activities, that he was active down here. I
know, for several reasons. One time J. Peters came to me, and that
is the name — I don't foolishly call Field a Soviet agent, espionage
agent — J. Peters came to me and asked for a list of names who were
in the Washington cell here, not like Pressman or that crowd, or not
in the Field group, but who were separate and fresh, and he mentioned
Field as operating. I Imow from Field's report, although he was
608 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
very cautious of that, I mean in the Politburo, Field did not get uj,
and make a report on Communist activities.
Senator McMahon. I don't happen to agree with what you said
the other day was the Communist theory that whoever gets China
gets the world. I think that is a mistaken impression.
(Discussion off the record.)
Senator McMahon. But, I could rebut in my own mind
Mr. BuDENZ. I was only reporting.
Senator McMahon. I was just saying, it is not important, but 1
don't think that is right. However, that is neither here nor there.
They believe, the Soviet believes, and hence you, as a good Commu-
nist, believe that whoever won the east won the world ; that is true ?
Mr. BuDENZ. Yes, sir.
Senator McMahon. This Institute of Pacific Relations, in your
opinion, was the spearhead of the Communist propaganda movement
in this country?
Mr. BuDENz. Well, it was going — yes it was, in part, not the whole
thing, but it was a big part.
Senator McMahon. I understand.
Mr, BuDENz. Of course they also relied on Harry Bridges. He was
to penetrate Hawaii.
Senator McMahon. He was an individual.
Mr. BuDENz. He was completely under control.
Senator McMahon, I am talking in terms of a publication, that
was a principal publication — what was it?
Mr. BuDENZ. I called the organization — —
Senator McMahon. The principal organization which had a pub-
Mr. BuDENZ. That is right.
Senator McMahon. Then, in your opinion, that had tremendous
influence in the most vital field of operation, according to the Soviet
Union, and this fellow Lattimore was the editor of that publication
for how many years ?
Mr. BuDENz. I think seven.
Senator McMahon. Seven years?
Mr. BuDENz. Yes, sir.
Senator McMahon. You know, that is why I can't figure out how
you could have spent hundreds of hours with the FBI agents and
never mention his name.
Mr. BuDENZ. Well, the reason is, because that matter of the Insti-
tute of Pacific Relations, while it came up, did not come up in a
very definite or vivid way. We had other things we were busy about,
you must understand.
Senator McMahon. You can see my puzzlement, can you not?
Mr. BuDENZ. I can see your puzzlement; but nevertheless, I can
show you other puzzlements that might also puzzle you if we had
time, other peo]^le that I have not dwelt upon with the FBI.
Senator McMation. I see.
Mr. BuDENz. You see, take for example another thing, Senator:
You understand also, a man who is an ex-Communist, he just simply
also respects a certain amount of power, too. He doesn't rush out and
reveal every one. I had the greatest hesitancy in revealing that list
today, even in executive session, not that I mean to say it will be
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 609
revealed. The point of the matter is that to clash with certain individ-
uals and forces is not desii'able. I don't mean to say j'ou are afraid,
or anything like that, but for you to rush out to do it is not a desirable
thino-. If you are approached and examined and questioned — here is
what happened, the first tliino- was the cases. You see, I have many
other things to do besides this. I teach 14 hours a week.
Senator Green. How often ?
Mr. BuDEXZ. Fourteen hours a week which is considered more than
the ordinary burden: and then, in addition to that, I was confronted
immediately with practical problems, confronted with a number of
deportation cases, many more than I even served in, and in order to
get the cases up, you have to have the greatest care. I felt that Eisler
and Peters were very important. It was my opinion that the strategy
should be first to get those people who were obviously Communist
agents, that is what I thought.
Senator McMahon. Obviously Communist agents?
Mr. BuDENZ. That is right.
Senator McMaiion. And then the ones suspected of being Com-
Mr. BuDENZ. Those whom you could prove were Communist agents,
for this reason — that you had to consult their opinion, and consult
the facts of it during recent years, Senator.
(Discussion off the record.)
Senator ]McMahon. Let me ask you this question : Do you know of
anybody in the State Department now, other than tlie ones whom you
have named, other than the one you have named, Hanson, to be a
member of the Communist Party?
Mr. BuDENZ. Well, Senator, might I ask the privilege of presenting
to this committee such names as I have in the Government, during the
next 2 weeks ?
Senator McMahon. Such names as you have?
Mr. BuDExz. In the Government.
Senator McMahon. People in the Government?
Mr. BuDEXz. Yes, sir, including the State Department.
Senator McMahox. "Well, yes; are there some?
Mr. BuDENZ. I would like to do it carefully. I believe I shall pre-
Senator McMahox^. If they do exist, we certainly want them.
Mr. BuDENz. I would like to do it very carefully, though, and with
an explanation of how I know.
Senator JNIcMahon. Will they be names of people whom you have
given to the FBI ?
Mr. BuDEXz. I think most of them are; yes. I mean, I can't al-
Senator IMcMaiiox'. What is the decision of tlie committee with re-
spect to proceeding?
Senator Greex. I think we can excuse him while we are in execu-
Senator Tydixgs. I think this is more important than answering a
little criticism down on the floor.
Senator McMahox. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
Senator McjSLvhox. Can you give us, for our record, and this may
be a repetition of the questions we asked the other day — when was
610 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Lattimore discussed by you with the FBI? Do you have a record
of the date?
Mr. BuDENZ. I have not.
Senator McMahon. Was it in the past week ?
Mr. BuDENZ. Oh, yes ; it was. I said I thought, Senator — it is ap-
proximately a couple of days after
Senator Tydings. You said 3 or 4 days of the following week, some-
thing of that sort.
Mr. BuDENz. A couple of days after.
Senator Tydings. Yes. But you said distinctly that you had talked
to them about Lattimore — until after we had been down there.
Mr. BuDENz. That is correct.
Senator McMahon. And you gave Lattimore to the FBI, every-
body you knew, of course.
Senator Tydings. We are all being criticized as to what happened
(Discussion off the record.)
Senator McMahon. Tell me, is it a systematic business or in part,
or was it, to start whispering campaigns about people?
Mr. Btjdenz. Well, I don't know.
Senator McMahon. It seems to me I recollect either in some article
that you wrote, or maybe it wasn't your article, but that is
Mr. BuDENz. They start character assassination upon people who
attack them, yes.
Senator McMahon. Frequently they will start a rumor that you
are a Communist?
Mr. BuDENZ. Not to my knowledge.
Senator McMahon. No ? You never knew that to be done ?
Mr. BuDENz. No. That would confuse their own ranks.
Senator jNIcIMahon. I was under the impression, I read somewhere
that one of the favorite techniques was to get somebody and say "Now,
he is attacking us, but really he is one of us."
Mr. BuDENz. I never heard of that.
Senator McMahon. It is not true ?
Mr. BuDENz. It would cause too much confusion in their own ranks.
Senator McMahon. If you haven't heard it, they don't?
Mr. BuDENZ. They attack you on character assassination, they ac-
cuse you of every crime under the sun, sometimes, when your acts
Senator McMahon. Frequently, of course, as you pointed out yes-
terday, any member of this committee might have some public ques-
tion and would coincide for the moment with the views that they have.
Mr. BuDENz. Oh, yes ; that is right.
Senator McMahon. I remember one instance in my public career
when I felt very strongly about something, and was astounded to find
that one of the arguments used against me was that the Daily Worker
was in favor of it. I had evolved that belief before then.
Mr. BuDENz. I think that is not a good argument. That would not
be a good argument in itself.
Senator McMahon. Not a good argument to prove McMahon is a
Communist sympathizer ?
Mr. BuDENz. No, sir; it would not be. I am not discussing you
personally, I mean against anyone.
Senator McMahon. I mean, I was just using that as an example.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 611
Mr. BuDExz. As a matter of fact, the Daily Worker, or — the Com-
Tiniiiists naturally hang together on things in order to penetrate. That
is their means of infiltration.
Senator McMahon. I was thinking, therefore, in the light of that,
and the experience I had myself, that it was likewise very dangerous
to conclude that a fellow was of the party or in the party, if either
line happened to coincide.
Mr. BuDEXz. Well, the only thing is — no, that isn't it.
You don't do it by that. You have to have other evidence, but if
someone keeps coinciding, or it does happen that they don't coincide,
there is a reason for it. Then, of course, you have a different situation.
That is to say, we do know that Communists exist. We do know that
they are concealed •
Senator Mc^SIaiion. Do you think that, or do you think — this is a
question I would like to ask 3^ou : Do you consider, as many people do,
one of the prime tests of a person's adherence, or nonadherence to
the Communist line to be whether or not that person changed over-
night, as the Daily Worker had to on the famous night when Russia
was invaded ?
Mr. BuDEXz. That is, in the case of most people. However, there
are exceptions. You will find in the record of Harry Bridges, that
that is not the case. They had to persuade him by almost strong-arm
methods, I don't mean to say literally, to change; and, there have
been many hesitancies. As a matter of fact, as I mentioned in my
testimony, the Daily Worker lias been compelled to criticize some
of its own members from time to time to bring them into line, but
my answer there is, that is correct.
Senator McMaiion. And you had to do this flip-flop yourself?
]Mr. BuDEX'^z. Any open Communist would have to.
Senator McMatiox. You had to do that flip-flop in June of 1941 ?
Mr. BuDEX'z. Very decidedly; yes.
Senator ^NIcMahox. That must have been a night that will live
in your memory.
Mr. BuDEX^z. I had to do a couple of flip-flops. I had to do one
where we had the Hitler-Stalin pact.
Senator McMahox. And, they reversed on it, and flopped both
Sir. BuDEX^z. That is right. To me, the second was not nearly as
difficult as the first.
Senator McMahox. I was quite impressed by Lattimore's statement,
and I asked him, I Avas the one that asked him, how he acted at the in-
vasion of Russia, and his answer was that he had been on the side
of aiding the Allies, and that, as I recollect his answer — now, I will
have to look it up — and that of course he had no position to change in
June of 1941. That was one of the strong points in his case, to me.
Mr. BuDEX'Z. I would have to examine that. In fact, I do want the
privilege of examining some of those facts and presenting them to the
committee in written form, as I said, for this reason: I believe, al-
though you will find a number of other men who are under Communist
discipline that did the same thing, they had special permission.
Senator McMahox. Special dispensation ?
]Mr. BuDEX'z. That is right.
Senator McMahox. Tell me, you know Lattimore was adviser to
Chiang Kai-shek, did you know that ^
612 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Mr. BuDENZ. Oh, yes ; I knew tliat.
Senator McMahon. During that period when he was adviser to
him, was there ever any indication to you, through reports or any other
way, that he was doubling Chiang ?
Mr. BuDEA^z. Well, I can't remember that distinctly, Senator,
Senator McMahon. You don't remember that?
Mr. BuDENz. Not offliand, now.
Senator McMahon. You know, he testified that he of course ad-
vised Chiang, and supported him to the best of his ability when he was
sent out there as an adviser. That was, of course, after he had been
made editor of Pacific Affairs, of the Institute of Pacific Affairs.
Mr, BuDENZ. Of course there are gaps in some of my information
because I was not present through all the Politburo meetings.
Senator McMahox. You were not present at all of them ?
Mr. BuDENZ. Oh, no. I came up there when I was called up, or
when some circumstances compelled me to go. However, I was there
Senator McMahon. Now, I would like to ask you — and I am about
through, I think you will be glad to know
Mr. BuDENZ. I only hope to get to Fordham tomorrow. That is
the only thing I hope. That is the thing I have to fulfill.
Senator McMahon. As I understand. Senator Tydings read off a
long list of congressional hearings that you have been to, and talked
about this thing, and this is the latest of them, and of course we have
developed in some way your fine relationship with the FBI, and your
effort to cooperate with them.
What other investigators have you talked with — have you talked
with the Department of Commerce at all ?
Mr. BuDENz. No, sir. I talked with the Department of State on
the Marzani case.
Senator McMahon. That was the case tried here, Carl Marzani?
Mr. BuDENz. That is right. He swore falsely. However, I could
not help him on that case. That is the only time, to my recollection,
that the State Department representative ever came to see me physi-
cally, face to face.
Senator McMahon. You remember where that took place ?
Mr. BuDENz. At Fordham.
Senator McMahon. At Fordham?
Mr. BuDENZ. This man, Lennox, he came to Fordham and he may
have seen me once or twice. I think that is the only place he came,
Senator McMahon. He saw you more than once there?
Mr. BuDENZ. That is right. That was the only case that I developed
anything with them and told them I couldn't, after checking it over,
Senator McMahon. Because what you had was hearsay ?
Mr. BuDENZ. I knew him as Wales, and I didn't know him as Mar-
zani, and it was necessary to know him as Marzani too.
Senator McMahon. I know the rest of the members of the commit-
tee will be glad that I have satisfied a good deal of my curiosity, and
will now cease and desist.
Senator Hickenlooper. I have some questions, Mr. Chairman, that
I would like to ask.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY mVESTIGATION 613
1 yliall not insist, one way or another, but I would like to ask about
Do you know of a man, officially — Albert Rliys Williams?
Mr. BuDENZ. I do, I am surprised that you asked me, but I know
Senator Hiokenlooper. Do you know anything about whether he is
a Comnmnist or not?
Mr. BuDENz. Yes, he is a Communist of long standing.
Senator Hickenluopek. Do you know that personally, or by official
Mr. Budexz. I have known him for many years. Of course I have
not seen him recently, but I have known him for years ; even before I
was in the Connnunist Party, I knew he was one.
Senator Hickenlooper. So, you know he is a Communist.
Mr. Budenz. Right.
Senator McMaiion. "Who is that?
Mr. Budenz. Albert Rhys Williams.
Senator McMahon. What does he do ?
Mr. Budenz. I think he was a former minister, or educator for
the — I am not quite sure, something along that line, and then he
became a Soviet propagandist. He has written. He always claimed
to be a liberal and not a Communist, but I know him to be a Commu-
nist. He was a great friend of Robert W. Dunn.
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you know anything about Donald Hiss?
Would you like to comment on that ?
Mr. Budenz. I would not like to comment on that.
Senator Hickenlooper. That means that you would not like to
comment at this time on it.
Mr. Budenz. That is correct.
Senator Hickenlooper. Now, these three names, would you like to
comment on whatever personal knowledge, official knowledge, you
may have on John Davies, of the State Department ?
Mr. Budenz. I know^ nothing about him.
Senator Hickenlooper. I see.
Senator McMahon mentioned three names, three other names. I
mention here Ruby Parsons and John Carter Vincent, who is now
Minister to Switzerland.
Mr. Budenz. I would prefer not to discuss those at the moment,
until I can file the list with the committee. That will permit — I feel
this is quite a responsible obligation — without being more careful in
Senator Hickenlooper. I shall not press
Mr. Budenz. I will say, in reference to Albert Rhys Williams, I
don't know what he is today, whether he is a Communist or not. I
know he was a Communist up to the last minute I heard of him.
Senator Hickenlooper. Are you familiar w-ith Henry Wallace's
book tliat he wrote and published in 1946 about his trip to Siberia,
and up in there ?
Mr. Budenz. I have read his book, but I could not discuss it at
the moment. I would have to read it over.
Senator Hickenlooper. Then, you have no comment at the moment
as to whether the Communists consider that to be a Communist
614 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Mr. BuDENZ. That was what you might call — ^Wallace was just
surrounded by Communist influence there, in the writing of that book,
and also, his policies
Senator Hickenlooper. Are you aware of the fact that Henry
Wallace, in writing that book, gives credit to Owen Lattimore and
to John Rhys Williams as his
Mr. BuDENZ. Albert Rhys Williams.
Senator Hickenlooper. Albert Rhys Williams as his collaborators
in the writing of that book ?