См. предыдущий пост.
http://dyak.livejournal.com/302787.html
STATE DEPARTMENT TEACHER-STUDENT EXCHANGE PROGRAM
[Editor's note.--Naphtali Lewis was a professor of
classical studies at the City University of New York, teaching
also at Columbia, Yale, and Boston universities. He specialized
in deciphering and interpreting the oldest Greek manuscripts,
called papyri, and was president of the International
Association of Papyrologists. In April 1953, Lewis received a
U.S. Educational Exchange Award, or Fulbright scholarship, to
study ancient manuscripts in Florence. He testified in public
session on June 10, and again with his wife, Helen Lewis, on
June 19, 1953.
During their public testimony, Helen Lewis invoked the
Fifth Amendment, after which Senator McCarthy announced: ``Dr.
Lewis, we have just been notified by the State Department that
your job in Italy has been canceled; that you are not being
sent there. I think that is an excellent idea.'' In a written
statement that he filed with the committee, Professor Lewis
asserted: ``Senator McCarthy has not inquired concerning my
qualification as a scholar for a scholarly assignment. He
appears to be interested in my Fulbright award only to the
extent of inquiring into my political opinions and, what is
even more astonishing, into my wife's politics, past as well as
present. This inquisition, if it has its way, establishes a
novel and singularly un-American principle; namely, that before
a man is permitted to pursue a career of research--even in
ancient manuscripts--he must have the stamp of approval of a
congressional subcommittee on himself and his family.'']
----------
WEDNESDAY MAY 20, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953, at 3:00 p.m. in the Office of the
Secretary of the Senate, Senator Henry M. Jackson presiding.
Present: Senator Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan;
Senator Henry M. Jackson, Democrat, Washington.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Ruth Young Watt,
chief clerk; Mason Drury, Senate liaison officer, State
Department.
TESTIMONY OF NAPHTALI LEWIS
Senator Jackson. Will you rise and be sworn, please?
Raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give
shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth
so help you God?
Mr. Lewis. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Would you give us your full name?
Mr. Lewis. My full name is Naphtali Lewis.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell that first name?
Mr. Lewis. N-a-p-h-t-a-l-i.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Lewis, have you ever been a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Well, you are barking up the wrong tree, mister.
The answer is ``no.''
Senator Jackson. Before we proceed any further, you
understand you have a right to counsel if you so desire.
Mr. Lewis. Mr. Cohn explained that to me.
Senator Jackson. I just wanted to make the record clear.
Mr. Lewis. But since no one indicated, in summoning me
here, that I was to be accused of anything, it never occurred
to me.
Senator Jackson. Do you desire to have counsel?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think I need one, no, sir. I have
nothing but simple answers to simple questions, if that is all
that is involved. Now, I am not a lawyer, and if we get into
legalities----
Senator Jackson. You may want to reserve the right?
Mr. Lewis. I hope you will inform me of what my rights are,
and so on.
Senator Jackson. You understand that you have the right to
refuse to answer any question if, in answering that question it
may tend to incriminate you. That means that it may cause you
to be a witness against yourself. Even though that tendency is
slight, you have the right under the Fifth Amendment to refuse
to answer if you conscientiously believe, if you believe in
conscience, that to answer the question would tend to
incriminate you, not in itself incriminate you, but tend to
incriminate you. In that case, you have the right to refuse to
answer.
Mr. Lewis. I understand.
Mr. Cohn. Your testimony is that you have never been a
Communist?
Mr. Lewis. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever attended a Communist meeting?
Mr. Lewis. Certainly not to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Are you at Brooklyn College?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know someone named David McKelvy White?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Alex Novikov?
Mr. Lewis. Now, that is a name that I do know. Alex Novikov
was at Brooklyn College in the biology department. I knew him
slightly, but he has for a long time now not been in New York.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever attended a meeting with him?
Mr. Lewis. A meeting?
Mr. Corn. Yes, any kind of a meeting other than one
connected with your official activities at Brooklyn College.
Mr. Lewis. My best recollection is ``no.'' I mean it would
surprise me if I had. I just don't recall.
Senator Jackson. You do not have any recollection as of
now?
Mr. Lewis. I don't have any recollection of having attended
a meeting.
Senator Jackson. Where he was present?
Mr. Lewis. Where he was present. Well, now, wait a moment.
If you mean where he was present in a large gathering of five
hundred people or so, I can't answer for that.
You mean where he was present to my knowledge?
Senator Jackson. Yes.
Mr. Lewis. Where he was present to my knowledge. Unless it
was some kind of social meeting, the answer is ``no.''
Mr. Cohn. Do you know anyone named Albaum?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, he is a member of the biology department
now.
Mr. Cohn. How well do you know him?
Mr. Lewis. I know him as a colleague.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever attended any meeting with him?
Mr. Lewis. Not that I can recall, no.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not he is a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. No, I would not know.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know of any Communists at Brooklyn
College?
Mr. Lewis. By the way, I could amend my answer on Albaum to
say I have read in the paper about his testimony.
Mr. Cohn. What did you read concerning his testimony?
Mr. Lewis. Well, he testified some months ago that he had
been a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. That was the first you knew of it?
Mr. Lewis. This was all I know about Mr. Albaum's communism
or anybody's. I have no direct knowledge of Communist activity
or membership, since I have not been one myself and have not
associated with such people, to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Irving Goldman?
Mr. Lewis. Who?
Mr. Cohn. Irving Goldman.
Mr. Lewis. I don't know him, though I know who he is.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Charlotte Robinson?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. Her name is now Charlotte Jenkins.
Mr. Cohn. That is right.
Mr. Lewis. She works in the registrar's office.
Mr. Cohn. How well do you know her?
Mr. Lewis. Again, only as a person who works for the
college.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meeting with her?
Mr. Lewis. Well, again, I don't know what you mean by
``meeting.'' If you mean a Communist meeting, the answer is
``no.'' I have never been to a Communist meeting, to my
knowledge.
But if you mean could she have been present at a faculty
meeting where I was, the answer is that she could have been.
Mr. Cohn. As I first told you, we were excluding meetings
held in the course of official business.
Mr. Lewis. Yes. I had forgotten.
Mr. Cohn. So that is out.
Now, outside of that, did you ever attend any meeting with
Charlotte Robinson?
Mr. Lewis. To the best of my recollection, no.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know anyone named Pomerance, P-o-m-e-r-a-
n-c-e?
Mr. Lewis. I know him slightly. He is in the philosophy
department.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meeting with him?
Mr. Lewis. Again, to the best of my recollection, no.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Mrs. Pomerance?
Mr. Lewis. I don't believe so.
Mr. Cohn. You are married, Mr. Lewis?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. And what is your wife's first name?
Mr. Lewis. Helen.
Mr. Cohn. Has she ever been a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Well, again, if you knew my wife, it is really--
My wife is a wife and a mother, and she certainly is no
Communist.
Mr. Cohn. No, my question was: Has she ever been a
Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Has she ever been a Communist? Well, let me give
you a very precise answer. Eleven years ago, when our first
child was born, my wife ceased being a teacher, and since then
she has devoted herself and concentrated on bringing up the
family. She has been, since we have had a family, I would say,
all that any man could want in a devoted wife and a devoted
mother of his children.
Now, before we began our family, my wife was a teacher.
Mr. Cohn. You do have my question in mind?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, I am answering it in the fullest way I
know.
And in those years of her teaching activity, she was very
active in teachers' organizations, teachers committees, and so
on.
Now, at that time, unlike the present, where we are a very
quiet family and have no outside activities, she had many
outside activities in which I did not share. Many times she
would go off to meetings, and I would go to the library to
work.
Now, I am well aware of the fact that in those days, many
teachers' activities were participated in by Communists and
non-Communists alike, but I would want it demonstrated
certainly to me that my wife was engaged in any Communist
activity. Now, naturally, I don't know all of what she was
engaged in those days, and frankly, I much less cared. That is
the best answer I can give you.
Senator Jackson. To your knowledge, is she or has she ever
been a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. To my knowledge, sir, the answer is ``no'' and
the reason I say ``to my knowledge'' is that knowing that she
was associated with all of these teachers outfits, and so on, I
certainly urged her never to join up, and I have no reason to
believe she disregarded my advice.
Mr. Cohn. Your sworn testimony is that to your knowledge
your wife was never a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. I have no reason to believe that she was, yes,
sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether she attended Communist
meetings?
Mr. Lewis. I cannot tell you, because----
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever discussed that with her?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I remember that back in those days when
she was a teacher, she discussed sometimes the meetings she
attended, and I am fully aware of the fact that there must have
been Communists at them.
Senator Jackson. What meeting? Let us pinpoint this a
moment. Let me first of all ask you when you were married. I am
not asking this question to get into your personal affairs.
Mr. Lewis. 1936.
Senator Jackson. Now, the meetings you are talking about
were subsequent to your marriage?
Mr. Lewis. That is right. They would be from about '37 or
'39 to the time when my wife quit all that, when her first
child was born, beginning in '42.
Senator Jackson. Now, between '36 and '42, you say your
wife attended meetings?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. They were teachers union meetings.
Senator Jackson. Was that the Teachers' Union?
Mr. Lewis. That is the Teachers' Union of New York.
Senator Jackson. And did the Communists dominate those
locals, or the local she belonged to?
Mr. Lewis. As you know, that has frequently been charged
and possibly sustained. But in those days, if you recall, there
was a kind of united front, and in those days the Teachers'
Union, that is, in the late thirties, was a very large and
respected organization, to which many of the teachers of New
York City belonged, including for a time myself.
Senator Jackson. Did you attend the meetings with her?
Mr. Lewis. Teachers Union meetings, yes, but not these
committee meetings and all these other things.
Senator Jackson. What do you mean by ``committee
meetings''?
Mr. Lewis. Well, she was on committees of the union. She
was editor of their newspaper for a time, and so on.
Senator Jackson. Those were committee meetings set up by
the union?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Senator Jackson. It did not go beyond that?
Mr. Lewis. Well, not to my knowledge, no; and I say, there
are lots she went to that I never talked with her about.
Senator Jackson. Did she ever talk to you about meetings
being controlled by the commies, or anything like that?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think so. I remember that after a while,
toward the forties, communism began to become an issue.
Senator Jackson. An issue where?
Mr. Lewis. In the Teachers Union. And then, of course as
you undoubtedly know, the Teachers Union split up. It
splintered into pieces. And that is when she dropped out and I
dropped out, and so on.
Senator Jackson. If she were a member of the Communist
party and you were her husband, you certainly should know about
it, should you not?
Mr. Lewis. I certainly should, unless she chose to keep it
secret from me.
Senator Jackson. But she never discussed any membership?
Mr. Lewis. Oh, yes. She discussed it. She discussed it in
the sense that inevitably we had to, when communism became an
issue. And I constantly warned her to keep clear of that.
Senator Jackson. Now, explain that. You said you discussed
the membership. You mean they asked her to join?
Mr. Lewis. I shouldn't be surprised. Not to my
recollection, did I ever ask her that confidence. I don't think
I ever did.
Senator Jackson. Are you sure?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I am just trying to recollect. You know
this is fifteen years ago. That is my best recollection, sir.
Senator Jackson. That they never asked her to join?
Mr. Lewis. No, my best recollection is that we did not
discuss that.
Senator Jackson. You did not discuss that.
Mr. Lewis. That is, in those specific terms. What I tried
to convey before is that when the Teachers Union began to be
attacked because of its Communist membership and alleged
Communist domination, at that point I strongly advised her not
to get involved in any of this.
Senator Jackson. What was your position and the position of
your wife on the Soviet-Nazi Pact in '39?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I really can only speak for my position I
suppose, sir. I certainly regarded that as a disillusionment.
Senator Jackson. At that time?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, and I still do.
Senator Jackson. You opposed it?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I frankly neither opposed nor approved. I
have no real major concern with these things.
Senator Jackson. What was your wife's position on the
subject?
Mr. Lewis. I think it was mostly like mine. But, again, you
see, we have not been a particularly political family, and we
had no really profound or great political discussions. Her
position used to be at any rate, in those days, slightly left
of mine, and perhaps she had fewer reservations.
Mr. Cohn. Where was she teaching then?
Mr. Lewis. She was teaching at Brooklyn College.
Mr. Cohn. What was she teaching?
Mr. Lewis. Psychology.
Mr. Cohn. She was teaching psychology at Brooklyn College.
And you taught philosophy?
Mr. Lewis. No, I taught classical languages.
Senator Jackson. Have you published any books?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, in the last years I have published three
books, twenty articles in learned journals, over thirty book
reviews.
Mr. Cohn. For what have you written book reviews?
Mr. Lewis. The Classical Weekly, Classical Journal,
American Journal of Philology, American Historical Review,
Classical Philology.
Mr. Cohn. Have you had any connection with the exchange
program of the State Department?
Mr. Lewis. If you mean connection with anything in the
State Department, no. But I have applied.
Mr. Cohn. Have you applied?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, I have applied for an exchange fellowship.
Mr. Cohn. Has there been any action on your application?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Was it accepted, or rejected?
Mr. Lewis. It was accepted.
Mr. Cohn. And when was that?
Mr. Lewis. I believe the letter informing me of acceptance
was dated April 30th last.
Mr. Cohn. Just this past April 30th?
Mr. Lewis. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you supposed to go?
Mr. Lewis. Italy.
Mr. Cohn. And when?
Mr. Lewis. The next academic year.
Mr. Cohn. What were you supposed to? Teach over there?
Mr. Lewis. No, I was supposed to do research in the
library.
Mr. Cohn. In what city?
Mr. Lewis. Florence.
Mr. Cohn. On classical subjects?
Mr. Lewis. That is right, and decipherment of the oldest
Greek manuscripts known, which is my specialty.
Mr. Cohn. Was your wife going to accompany you over there?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest this. There are
some other witnesses we want to hear on the subject of Mr.
Lewis, and we were anxious to talk with Mrs. Lewis. I was going
to suggest that we adjourn for the afternoon, and maybe Mr.
Lewis would want to consult counsel. I would feel better about
it if he did. And we would like Mr. and Mrs. Lewis to be down
on Monday afternoon, if that is agreeable, at 2:30.
What room would that be, Ruth?
Mrs. Watt. If the Senate is in session, we could come over
here. But we could get room 101.
Mr. Cohn. Let us make it room 101.
Mr. Lewis. Room 101 where?
Senator Jackson. Senate Office Building.
Mr. Lewis. At 2:30 p.m., next Monday.
Senator Jackson. On Monday the 25th, this coming Monday.
Just one last question. Do you have any recollection of
belonging to any organization cited by the attorney general as
subversive?
Mr. Lewis. No, I don't. As I said, I am not an organization
man, myself.
Senator Jackson. You are not a joiner?
Mr. Lewis. I am not a joiner. I belong to only two or three
professional associations, like the American Philological
Association, Phi Beta Kappa, and the International Association
of Papyrologists, which is my specialty, and I believe that is
all.
Mr. Cohn. What was your wife's maiden name?
Mr. Lewis. Helen Block, B-l-o-c-k.
Mr. Cohn. Was she teaching under her married or maiden
name?
Mr. Lewis. Both, I think. I think after she was married she
used her married name.
Mr. Cohn. Could I get your street address?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. 245 West 101st Street.
Mr. Cohn. And your phone is Academy----
Mr. Lewis. 2-4424.
Senator Jackson. Do you know what organizations your wife
might have belonged to?
Mr. Lewis. I certainly----
Senator Jackson. If you do not know, do not say so.
Mr. Lewis. No, I would have no way of knowing, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Lewis, would you produce that April 30th
letter when you come down on Monday?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. And any other correspondence you had. I assume
you had to make some kind of application.
Mr. Lewis. I can't produce the application, because they
have it.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't retain a copy of it?
Mr. Lewis. No.
Mr. Cohn. I see. We can get that from them. And who did you
give as references on that application?
Mr. Lewis. The dean of Brooklyn College.
Mr. Cohn. What is his name?
Mr. Lewis. His name is William Gaede, G-a-e-d-e, Professor
C. Bradford Welles, W-e-l-l-e-s, of Yale, and Professor James
H. Oliver, of Johns Hopkins.
Mr. Cohn. All right, sir. And anything else, any
correspondence you have had with them of which you have copies,
in other words, your file. That was James C. Oliver?
Mr. Lewis. James H. Oliver.
Mr. Cohn. Johns Hopkins?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. Oh, yes. There were four. And Professor
Meyer Reinhold, M-e-y-e-r of my own department. They asked for
one reference from my own department.
Mr. Cohn. And then your whole file on that. And, as I say,
and as Senator Jackson explained, you have a right to consult
with counsel. He will not be allowed to participate in the
proceedings, but may accompany you, and if at any time you or
your wife desires to confer with him in privacy, you have that
right, and I would suggest that you procure counsel.
Mr. Lewis. All right. You make it sound very serious.
Mr. Cohn. If it weren't serious, we wouldn't trouble you to
come down here.
Mr. Lewis. Well, my record is an open book. There is
nothing in it I am ashamed of or that any American would not be
proud of.
Senator Jackson. Do you have anything you would like to
say? You understand, the question was asked: if you are or ever
have been a member of the Communist party. And you have been
very frank about it. You say you have never belonged.
And obviously, the committee would like to ask the same
question of your wife when she comes.
Mr. Lewis. Naturally.
Mr. Cohn. So you have an idea about what the questions will
be about. I am not saying that it is limited to that, on
Monday, but I am sure you understand that some question has
been raised about whether your wife was a member of the
Communist party or is now.
Mr. Lewis. I gather that, and I think I have answered that
to the best of my ability. I understood also from Mr. Cohn that
there was an accusation made that I was a Communist. I believe
you said that.
Mr. Cohn. No, I didn't say that. But I say you have a right
to assume it is a very serious matter, and if we weren't acting
on the basis of other testimony, we wouldn't trouble you to
come down here.
Mr. Lewis. Didn't you say before that there were witnesses
before me?
Mr. Cohn. Well, I said we were going to talk to other
witnesses, that we had heard witnesses and we would be talking
to some other witnesses. There is no doubt about that.
Mr. Lewis. All right.
In matters of this kind, do you assign or recommend
counsel, or is that something I do on my own?
Senator Jackson. I would suggest, as a lawyer myself, that
I would get competent counsel, to make sure that you are
advised of all your rights. The committee does not recommend
any particular counsel, but I think that from your own
standpoint it is wise to have counsel. The fact that you have
counsel does not create any inference that your case is any
more serious than anybody else's, nor does it create any
inference of guilt of anything. That is your American right,
and the decision as to whether you obtain counsel is entirely
up to you. But I would volunteer the statement that it is
usually a pretty wise thing to do.
Mr. Lewis. Bring counsel with me to the next hearing?
Senator Jackson. Yes. But you understand, the committee is
not requesting you to bring counsel.
Mr. Lewis. I understand. It is a recommendation, shall we
say.
Mr. Cohn. It is just a step for your protection.
Senator Jackson. I am merely trying to be fair to you in
saying that for your own protection it might be a wise thing.
You will be released, then, from the subpoena until Monday.
Mr. Lewis. Well, I haven't received any subpoena.
Mr. Cohn. You were asked to come down. That is the same
thing under the Senate rules.
Mr. Lewis. The girl who phoned me said very specifically I
was not being subpoenaed.
Mr. Cohn. As long as you receive some formal notification,
that is the equivalent of a subpoena.
Senator Jackson. You will be under subpoena until released
by the committee, and the committee will then notify you. This
constitutes a subpoena under the rules.
Mr. Lewis. Well, I am not interested so much in the legal
technicalities. I understand you want me and my wife here on
Monday afternoon.
Mr. Cohn. At 2:30.
Senator Jackson. Monday, the 25th of May.
Mr. Lewis. At the room that I jotted down.
Senator Jackson. Yes.
[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the hearing was recessed until
2:30 p.m., Monday, May 25, 1953.]
STATE DEPARTMENT TEACHER-STUDENT EXCHANGE PROGRAM
[Editor's note.--The actress, director and producer
Margaret Webster (1905-1972) was born in New York City while
her British father, actor Ben Webster was performing on
Broadway (her mother was the actress Dame May Whitty), and as a
result held dual British and American citizenship. Moving back
to New York from London in 1937, Webster was elected to the
board of the Actors' Equity Association in 1941. With Eva Le
Gallienne she founded the American Repertory Theatre in 1945,
and from 1948 to 1951 she directed the Margaret Webster
Shakespeare Company. In 1950, her name appeared in Red
Channels, a private listing of radio, television and stage
actors, writers, announcers and directors alleged to have
belonged to left-wing organizations. She was blacklisted in
radio and television, although she remained active on stage.
In her memoir, Don't Put Your Daughter on the Stage (New
York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1972), Webster described being
subpoenaed to testify before the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations. She felt no need to invoke the Fifth Amendment,
she wrote, since she had ``nothing to tell or refuse to tell.''
But her attorney repeatedly impressed on her the importance of
never saying ``no'' when asked if she had attended a meeting or
subscribed to a cause. She was instructed to answer ``I cannot
remember doing so,'' ``not so far as I can recall,'' and ``to
the best of my recollection, no.'' This, her attorney advised,
was because ``Two witnesses could easily be produced to say
yes, you did or yes, you had and a suit for perjury was in
order.'' Margaret Webster was not called back to a public
hearing.
Helen B. Lewis testified publicly on June 19, and Naphtali
Lewis on June 10 and 19, 1953.]
----------
MONDAY, MAY 25, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953, at 2:30 p.m. in the Office of the
Secretary of the Senate, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin;
Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; Senator
Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan; Senator John L.
McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Senator Henry M. Jackson,
Democrat, Washington; Senator Stuart Symington, Democrat,
Missouri.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Donald A. Surine,
assistant counsel; Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk; Mason Drury,
Senate liaison officer, State Department.
TESTIMONY OF HELEN B. LEWIS (ACCOMPANIED BY HER COUNSEL, MURRAY
WEINSTEIN)
The Chairman. Will you rise and be sworn, please? Raise
your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give
shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
so help you God?
Mrs. Lewis. I do.
The Chairman. Who is your counsel?
Mr. Weinstein. Murray Weinstein, 37 Wall Street, New York
City.
The Chairman. You can confer with your lawyer at any time
you care to at any time during the testimony. Under the rules
of the committee, counsel is not allowed to take a part in the
proceedings except to freely advise his client whenever he
cares to.
Mr. Cohn. Mrs. Lewis, you are the wife of Naphtali Lewis,
is that right?
Mrs. Lewis. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. And Mr. Lewis is a professor at Brooklyn College?
Mrs. Lewis. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. And he has been elected under the State
Department Exchange Program to go abroad?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Are you planning to accompany him?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you been a teacher in the school system at
New York?
Mrs. Lewis. I taught at Brooklyn College.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been a Communist?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question under
the privileges afforded me by the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of the Communist party while
teaching at Brooklyn college?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question under
the privileges afforded me by the Fifth Amendment.
Senator Jackson. Are you now a member of the Communist
party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of the Communist party last
year?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
Mr. Cohn. What date will you assert a privilege under the
Fifth Amendment and what date will you deny membership?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, I must decline to answer that question.
The Chairman. Two years ago were you a member of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. Three years ago were you a member?
Mrs. Lewis. I was not a member of the Communist party two
years ago. Three years ago I was not a member of the Communist
party.
The Chairman. Were you a Communist three years ago?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, Senator, the use of the word Communist is
very loose.
The Chairman. You seem to distinguish between membership
and being a Communist.
Mrs. Lewis. Very frequently the word Communist is used as
quoting anybody you disagree with.
Senator Jackson. Using the definition following Communist
programs and policies, then would you answer the question?
Mrs. Lewis. I am not a member of the Communist party.
Senator Symington. Have you ever been a member of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question.
Senator Jackson. The chairman asked you if you were a
Communist three years ago, and I defined a Communist as
following the program and policies of the Communist party. Were
you following the policies adhering to the party line of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, there might be some things such as
housing or----
The Chairman. May I ask the witness a question? Will you
define what in your mind is Communist?
Mrs. Lewis. In my mind a Communist is an enrolled member of
the Communist party.
Senator Jackson. How about one who follows the program in
every respect but doesn't pay the dues?
Mrs. Lewis. I think when you get into the question of
definition of people's beliefs, opinions and sympathies, you
get into questions which simply cannot be answered.
Senator Jackson. If you walk like a duck, sit like a duck,
quack like a duck, must you not be a duck?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
Senator Symington. Wouldn't it save the committee's time
and save your being in open session by answering the question.
I can see this has distressed you a little bit, but wouldn't it
save the Committee's time and your time to give us the year you
left the Communist party?
Senator Jackson. Let me rephrase the question. Would you
give us a year when you would be willing to say you were not a
member of the Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question. If you
had asked me about a specific year.
Senator Symington. I suggest you ask her as she says, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman. In 1950 were you a member of the Communist
party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. In 1949 were you a member of the Communist
party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1948?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. In 1947?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question.
The Chairman. 1940?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question.
The Chairman. In 1935?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer.
The Chairman. 1930?
Mrs. Lewis. In 1930, sir, I was roughly seventeen years
old.
The Chairman. The Young Communist League?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1931?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer.
The Chairman. You decline to answer on the ground that if
you give a truthful answer, the answer might tend to
incriminate you?
Mrs. Lewis. No, sir. As I understand it no such inference
can be drawn.
The Chairman. Then you are ordered to answer.
Mrs Lewis. I must decline to answer.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer or I shall ask that
you be held in contempt.
Senator McClellan. Maybe we are moving too rapidly. I
suggest that you ask the question again.
The Chairman. The question is: in 1931 were you a member of
the Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1932?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1933?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1934?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, I must decline to answer that question.
The Chairman. Are you declining on the ground that if you
told the truth, gave a truthful answer that answer might tend
to incriminate you?
Mrs. Lewis. I am declining under the protection of the
Fifth Amendment which says that I may not be a witness against
myself.
The Chairman. You are entitled to refuse to answer the
question only if you feel a truthful answer might tend to
incriminate you. I am asking you if that is the reason you
decline to answer the question.
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer your question.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer the question. Just
so you understand, we must determine whether you are entitled
to refuse to answer the question under the Fifth Amendment. You
are only entitled to refuse to answer my question if you feel
an honest answer might tend to incriminate you. If you refuse
to answer that, I am not going to threaten you, but for your
own information, if you do not I will ask the committee to cite
you for contempt. You may consult with counsel?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, then, I will answer your question that if
I answer the question it might tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. And you feel if you gave a truthful answer it
might tend to incriminate?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Today would you say that you feel sympathetic
towards the Communist philosophy?
Mrs. Lewis. Senator, that is a question now that is asking
about my opinions and beliefs, is that right?
The Chairman. I think you understood the question. The
question is: Are you now sympathetic to Communist philosophy?
Mrs. Lewis. There are some things in the Communist
philosophy that I am not particularly sympathetic with.
The Chairman. Can you tell us those things in the Communist
philosophy you are not sympathetic with?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, there have been certain world events
which certainly make it appear as if there is a possibility of
conflict between the United States, for instance, and the
Soviet Union. I am a loyal and patriotic American.
The Chairman. I wonder if you will get back to the
question. What part of the Communist philosophy are you not in
sympathy with. You are entitled to refuse to answer.
Mrs. Lewis. I don't see what particularly--what might be
incriminating in my beliefs.
The Chairman. May I say, just for your information, if you
were really an American citizen, we would not be concerned with
your beliefs. You could believe anything. However, in view of
the fact that there has been testimony concerning you and your
husband before another committee--your husband has been
selected at considerable expense to the taxpayers to a rather
important position. For that reason we are curious to know
whether you are still a believer in communism or not. You are
going on this trip, you see. Otherwise we are not checking
whether you believe in the Communist cause. I ask you again--
what part of the Communist philosophy do you disagree with?
Mrs. Lewis. If I follow your reasoning, it stems from my
husband's selection for the student exchange. I fail to see
where my beliefs are relevant to his selection.
The Chairman. I order you to answer the question unless you
refuse to answer it on the grounds that your answer might tend
to incriminate you. Will you answer that question, Mrs. Lewis?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, as I have already begun to indicate--
although let me say, as I said before, that I think my beliefs
are entirely irrelevant to my husband's selection for the
Student Exchange Program.
The Chairman. Have you gotten a passport yet?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. You haven't gotten your passport yet?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. What part of the Communist philosophy do you
disagree with?
Mrs. Lewis. Let me begin with the beginning of my answer
for the record. I wish the record to indicate that my beliefs--
that questions of my opinions are irrelevant to my husband's
Fulbright scholarship. If you want to know about my opinions
and direct me to answer you as to what part of the Communist--
what was it again?
The Chairman. You said you disagree with some part of the
Communist philosophy.
Mrs. Lewis. I do not believe in philosophy that allows
aggressive action against other states, for instance.
Senator Symington. What was that?
Mrs. Lewis. I do not believe in aggressive action. I
believe that is wrong.
Senator Jackson. You believe aggressive action is wrong?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes.
Senator Jackson. In other words, you believe that
Communists are wrong now in taking aggressive action against
other states. You believe the Communists are wrong in Korea?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, sir. I think it has been demonstrated that
the first moves were made by the North Koreans, and in the
light of that, I am opposed to aggressive action as a solution
to international problems.
Senator Potter. Do you oppose the persecution of the Jewish
people in the Soviet Union?
Mrs. Lewis. I certainly do. I have been against
discrimination all my life.
The Chairman. Would you favor a Communistic form of
government in the United States?
Mrs. Lewis. I am inalterably in favor of our democracy.
The Chairman. I will ask you again. Would you be opposed to
a Communist form of government in the United States?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, I would.
The Chairman. In 1947 were you opposed to a Communist form
of government in the United States?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer your question.
The Chairman. Has your husband ever been a member of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. Now, Senator McCarthy, on advice of counsel, I
am not going to answer any questions about my husband as I
believe such questions would be an invasion of the sanctity and
privacy of our marriage.
Mr. Cohn. Sir, I believe that only includes confidential
communications. In other words, confidential communications to
her which were given in the capacity as his wife. There is no
such thing as an absolute privilege between husband and wife.
It only applies to confidential communications. She cannot
assert a general statement that she is not going to answer any
questions about her husband.
The Chairman. I think you are right, Mr. Cohn----
Senator McClellan. I am inclined to think it would be
rather difficult to separate confidential communications from
others.
Senator Symington. I agree with that.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, suppose they attended meetings.
The Chairman. I think you are strictly right on the rule,
Roy, but I am inclined to agree with Senator McClellan that you
can't tell whether they are confidential communications or not.
Did you attend Communist meetings in 1948?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1947?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer your question.
Senator McClellan. I will ask you if you attended Communist
meetings in 1946 or 1947 with your husband?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that.
The Chairman. On the ground of self-incrimination?
Senator McClellan. I would like to ask a question of the
committee here. I am a little bit lacking in background on this
thing. Has her husband been questioned by this committee or any
other committee?
The Chairman. Yes, he was questioned by Senator Jackson.
Before further questioning he decided he wanted counsel.
Senator Jackson. Mr. Cohn and myself strongly advised him
that he should consult counsel.
Senator McClellan. I feel this way about it. The husband is
available and he is seeking benefit of this government and I
think we should ask him questions directly.
The Chairman. As far as I am concerned, we have finished
with you, Mrs. Lewis. May I say, you are asking for a passport
to go overseas. We have many fine people who have been in the
Communist party who have decided communism was evil and they
have dropped out of that party and are very fond of America
now. If you have been a member of the party and, if you think
that was wrong--if you dropped out of the party and you would
care to tell us about that and tell us why, I assume that is
something that the State Department would be interested in
before granting a passport. I doubt very much that a passport
will be granted to someone, to go overseas and represent us as
your husband will be teaching in the exchange program. I doubt
very much if they will give you a passport unless you come in
and tell us about your activity in the party--if and when and
why you left the party.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, you have asked the
question that I was going to talk about. The chairman has
proved his belief in that position by having an ex-Communist on
the staff of this committee. I am only telling you what is now
a matter of record. It seems if you say you are a good
American, and in effect have admitted you were a member of the
Communist party, it would be far better for you if you said you
had been a member and felt it was wrong based on subsequent
thinking, and inasmuch as you feel you are a good American--
looking at you and listening to you and certainly you are out
of it now--if I had anything to do with giving you a passport,
I would be glad to see you get one. On the other hand, if you
come up here and say that you are a good American and take
refuge through a lot of legal ``claptrap'' behind the Fifth
Amendment, do you think the people of this committee will
approve of your getting a passport to go out of the United
States while you might have reason for not admitting anything
about it. I think you are making a mistake. I think you are
doing yourself an injustice from listening to you.
Mrs. Lewis. I thank you for your interest in my welfare,
but I, myself, do not agree with all the interpretations that
you put on my testimony and my exercise of the Fifth Amendment,
as this is something that I have thought about and do intend to
do.
Senator Symington. One more point. In regard to not
answering questions concerning your husband, you might be
interested to know that in my opinion you have already
testified while I have been here at length against your
husband--if you are interested in his future.
Senator Jackson. I would like to supplement Senator
Symington's statement. The general tenor of the questions will
come up in connection with your passport and would have come
up, and I think that it is a matter that you ought to give
fuller consideration to. Maybe you will want to come back and
discuss it with the committee.
The Chairman. Have you ever engaged in espionage?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. Sabotage?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
Senator Jackson. You don't believe or advocate the
overthrow of this government by force and violence?
Mrs. Lewis. I certainly do not. Never have. I certainly do
not believe in force and violence. I believe in the democratic
solution.
Senator Jackson. Have you ever believed in it--the
utilization of force to change our government here in the
United States?
Mrs. Lewis. I am a peaceful person, sir.
Senator Jackson. Then, if you have never believed in such
force and violence to achieve that end, you can answer the
question. It might be well to keep the record straight,
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer on the grounds of the
Fifth Amendment.
Senator Symington. You realize you will have to take a
position in a public hearing----
Mrs. Lewis. I am going to if I have to.
The Chairman. Mrs. Lewis, you may be excused now. You are
still under subpoena and you will be notified when you are to
appear.
TESTIMONY OF NAPHTALI LEWIS
The Chairman. Professor Lewis, you have previously been
sworn by the acting chairman of the committee, Senator Jackson?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You are reminded that you are still under
oath.
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
The Chairman. You understand that you can freely discuss
any matter with your counsel at any time you care to?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. I understand that the hearing adjourned the
other day so that you could obtain counsel. Mr. Cohn, will you
proceed.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Lewis, you were in here Friday and you have
counsel now.
Mr. Lewis. Wednesday.
Mr. Cohn. You have obtained counsel and had a chance to
confer with counsel, is that right?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. I have never been a member of the Communist
party.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been a Communist? I am not
referring to party membership.
Mr. Lewis. The word Communist is bandied about today so
much----
Senator Jackson. Let's let the witness define it. How would
you define a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Sir, I hardly know how. Perhaps you would be
interested in something that happened in my presence in the
last half year. I was riding on a bus and two men got into an
argument as to whom pushed whom. One party got off the bus and
the parting shot of the other one was--yelled, ``Oh, you
Communist.'' These days the word Communist is used to describe
anybody they disagree with.
The Chairman. We are not interested in the different
definitions of the users--not interested in something you heard
on the bus.
Mr. Lewis. My definition of a Communist is a person who is
a member of the Communist party.
Senator Jackson. How about a person who is not a formal
member but believes in each and every principle of the
Communist party, but does not hold a formal party membership.
Is he a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I don't know if there are such people.
Senator Jackson. I am asking you the question assuming
there are such people.
Mr. Lewis. Is that a hypothetical question?
Senator Jackson. If a person believes in all the principles
of the Communist party that apply to formal membership, is he a
Communist under your definition?
The question I put, Mr. Chairman, assuming that an
individual believes in the principal objectives and aims of the
Communist party but is not a formal member of the party, is he
a Communist under your definition?
Mr. Lewis. Under my definition? You mean of a moment ago?
My definition was a member of the Communist party. You have
given me a hypothetical question. You wish me to respond not in
terms of my definition but as I interpret your question--Well,
I suppose such a person could be called a Communist with a
small ``c.''
The Chairman. Would you answer that question?
Senator Jackson. Have you ever been one who has believed in
accordance with my hypothetical question?
Mr. Lewis. No, I have not.
Senator Jackson. Have you ever attended Communist meetings,
Professor?
Mr. Lewis. Not to my knowledge.
Senator Jackson. Have you ever believed in or espoused the
Communist cause--Communist philosophy?
Mr. Lewis. Well, again perhaps if you specify what you mean
by Communist philosophy.
Senator Jackson. Use your definition?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir, I have not.
Senator Jackson. What is your definition of the Communist
philosophy?
Mr. Lewis. My definition of the Communist philosophy.
Senator, I am no expert on the philosophy of the Communist
party. I suppose----
Senator Jackson. You say you never believed in or espoused
the philosophy of the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. Certainly not. There might have been certain
doctrines held by the Communists that I approve of.
The Chairman. Was your wife a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Lewis. Senator, I am advised by counsel that for
questions to be put to me concerning my wife is an invasion of
the sanctity and privacy of our marriage and I must refuse to
answer questions concerning my wife.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend a Communist party meeting
with your wife?
Mr. Lewis. You have asked a question concerning my wife. I
must refuse on advice of counsel to answer that question.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to answer that question.
You are entitled to refuse to answer any questions concerning
any private communications between yourself and your wife. That
is interpreted very broadly. However, when asked whether or not
you attended a Communist meeting with your wife--that is not a
confidential communication. Have you ever attended Communist
meetings with your wife at which people other than you and your
wife were present?
Mr. Lewis. Well, may I consult with counsel, please?
Senator, I will state here and now, I have never knowingly
attended any Communist party meeting whatever.
Senator Jackson. With or without your wife?
Mr. Lewis. I have not knowingly attended any Communist
party meeting.
Senator Mundt. May I inquire why you inject knowingly?
Mr. Lewis. Had I known it was a meeting of the Communist
party----
Senator Mundt. Have you attended meetings where when you
left the meeting you had knowledge that it was a meeting of the
Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. No. I have not attended a meeting that I knew
was a meeting of the Communist party after I left.
The Chairman. Have you ever attended a meeting which you
subsequently had reason to believe was a meeting of Communist
party members or a meeting for the purpose of recruiting
members of the party?
Mr. Lewis. Not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Then your testimony is at this time that you
are of the opinion that you have never attended a meeting
called by the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
The Chairman. Have you ever been asked to join the
Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. To the best of my recollection, ``no.''
The Chairman. To the best of your recollection ``no.''
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
The Chairman. How long have you been married Mr. Lewis?
Mr. Lewis. Counsel informs me that he thinks the question
is covered by the marital privilege.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to tell when you were
married. It is not a confidential communication.
Senator McClellan. That is a matter of public record.
Mr. Lewis. I was married in 1946.
The Chairman. To your present wife?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
Senator Jackson. And you have been married all that time--
ever since--to her?
Mr. Lewis. That is right.
The Chairman. Roy, have you any further questions?
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Lewis, you deny that you ever believed in
communism for the United States?
Mr. Lewis. Well, of course, you have not defined what you
mean by communism. I have been given a hypothetical question. I
certainly do not hold the view that there is any better form of
government for the United States than the liberal American
democracy.
Mr. Cohn. And you never held an opinion contrary to that?
Have you ever thought communism would be better? Have you ever
advocated communism? Have you ever belonged to the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Lewis. Certainly not.
Senator Jackson. I think I asked you previously at the last
meeting of the committee whether you have ever belonged to any
organization listed by the attorney general to be subversive?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, sir. I believe I told you at that time I
had not. As far as I know, I believe that is a correct answer.
I have not examined the attorney general's list, but the reason
I would think my answer is correct is that I have never
belonged to other than professional organizations.
The Chairman. Do you feel that a person can be a Communist
and at the same time a good American?
Mr. Lewis. There again it depends on what you mean by a
Communist.
The Chairman. A member of the Communist party.
Mr. Lewis. Well, you are way out of my line. I am a
professor of Greek and Latin. I really don't know that I have
any concrete opinion on that.
The Chairman. You don't have any opinion as to whether a
member of the Communist party could also be a good American?
Mr. Lewis. It would seem to me that the American tradition
of liberalism would permit a man to hold opinions ranging from
the extreme right to the extreme left.
Senator Symington. Do you know that the Communist party
advocates the overthrow of the United States by force and
violence.
Mr. Lewis. I don't know it. If it is so dedicated, I would
be, with my entire being, opposed to it.
Senator Symington. Would you like to correct your testimony
then that if it is true that the Communist party is dedicated
to the overthrow of the American system of government by force
and violence you do not think a good American could be a member
of the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. Again, I don't see that the second follows
entirely from the first.
The Chairman. Let me rephrase the question. If you don't
know it, we can inform you that the Communist party is
dedicated to the overthrow by force and violence----
Mr. Lewis. I am certainly opposed to that.
The Chairman. If that is true, any member of that
organization cannot be a good American?
Mr. Lewis. That I don't know.
Senator Symington. If membership in the Communist party
involves being a member of an organization that is dedicated to
the overthrow of the American form of government by force and
violence, can you have membership in the Communist party and be
a good American?
Mr. Lewis. If membership means dedicated to the overthrow
of our government----
Senator Symington. Not dedicated--being a member of the
Communist party which advocates the overthrow of our government
by force and violence.
Mr. Lewis. Well, you see, Senator----
Senator Symington. It is beginning to look as if your
reason for evading the question is that somebody close to you
might be a member of the Communist party. As to whether it is
you or not, I don't know.
Mr. Lewis. I resent the implication.
Senator Symington. Well, I resent your attitude too. I am
getting a little tired of your ducking and dodging. We are
trying to make the questions very straight and simple. The
chairman asked you if you felt a member of the Communist party
could be a loyal American. That is what I remember, and you
felt it was all right for anybody to hold any political views.
After that I asked you if you knew that the Communist party
advocates the overthrow of the American system of government by
force and violence and you get into a lot of languages instead
of saying ``yes'' or ``no.''
Mr. Lewis. I cannot answer that question.
Senator Jackson. Mr. Lewis, you are an intelligent man and
certainly, I assume you read the newspapers even though you are
engaged in teaching classical studies at Brooklyn College.
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Senator Jackson. Aren't you aware of the fact by now that a
person who is a member of the Communist party not only believes
in the advocacy of force and violence to achieve that end in
the United States, but above that owes loyalty to the Soviet
Union?
Mr. Lewis. You asked me if I was aware of it. I am
certainly aware of what has appeared in newspapers and aware
that this is the prevalent view.
Senator Jackson. Now, you are aware of the events that have
taken place since the end of World War II, namely the first
move of the Soviet Union into Greece, threatening violence in
Turkey, and I assume you are also aware of Czechoslovakia and
what happened to Communists in that country. Can there be any
doubt that a member of the Communist party in this country is
in the international conspiracy and is strongly disloyal to
this country?
Mr. Lewis. I am certainly opposed to every one of the acts
of aggression.
Senator Jackson. Just answer the question.
Mr. Lewis. The reason I cannot answer your question--at the
end you seem to me to presuppose that I know what a member of
the Communist party in this country is supposed to do?
Senator Jackson. Aren't you pretty much convinced what they
are supposed to do?
Mr. Lewis. I know nothing of Communist affairs. If you ask
me about events of the day, I will be perfectly willing and
happy to do that, but if you ask me to make a judgment that is
based on knowledge which I do not have, I don't see how I can
do that.
Senator Jackson. Listen, Mr. Lewis, you have been selected
to go abroad and while you are, undoubtedly well-informed in
the classics and very able to teach, responsibility of the
Student Exchange Program entails broad responsibilities of
citizenship above and beyond books.
What about American Communists? Are they loyal?
Mr. Lewis. I don't know. I haven't made a personal
examination of American Communists, so, therefore, I can't say.
Senator Jackson. They may be all right?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think I said that.
Senator Jackson. That is the effect of your testimony.
Isn't that the effect of your testimony? You are saying because
you don't have personal knowledge of the Communist movement in
the United States, you can't answer the question. As an
intelligent citizen you know, or should know, if you don't,
that there is a Communist conspiracy in the world. Three-
fourths of your tax dollar is paying for defense. I don't see
how you can qualify for a scholarship and go overseas to Italy,
as you have been selected to go, without knowing something more
than the classics.
The Chairman. I don't think we should refer to the exchange
program as the Fulbright Scholarship. The people will connect
it with Senator Fulbright. I think we should refer to it
whenever it appears in the record as the Student Exchange
Program.
Senator Mundt. Do you think a man who holds Communist
beliefs is a suitable man to work for the federal government?
Mr. Lewis. Under present conditions of world affairs I
don't think so.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think, Professor, that a man who holds
Communist beliefs is a suitable man to teach on a college or
university faculty publicly supported?
Mr. Lewis. There, sir, you have touched on one of the moot
questions of the day. There is much argument about the
question.
Senator Jackson. You don't mean it is ``moot.''
Mr. Lewis. I don't know that I know what the word means?
Senator Jackson. Legally it means a judicial issue that
doesn't exist--a hypothetical question.
Mr. Lewis. I think the word ``moot'' has a non-legal sense,
which I was applying to it, Senator, that this is an issue
which is very much discussed these days.
The Chairman. Counsel asked you a very simple question. He
asked you whether Communists should be allowed to teach in
colleges.
Mr. Lewis. I have not made up my mind. Senator Taft says
they should, and the Board of American Universities and
Colleges say they should.
The Chairman. The American Association of Universities has
taken the position on one side and the American Association of
University Professors has taken a position on the other side.
Mr. Lewis. I am quoting the American Association of
University Professors.
The Chairman. Do you think a man who holds Communist
beliefs should be granted an American passport to travel
abroad?
Mr. Lewis. What do you mean Communist beliefs?
The Chairman. Communist sympathies?
Mr. Lewis. If his purpose is innocent, a man who is an
American citizen and has broken no laws is entitled to
protection of an American passport----
The Chairman. Your answer to the question would be ``yes.''
Mr. Lewis. Yes, provided conditions are met--he hasn't
broken any laws.
Senator Potter. A man can be a member of the Communist
party and not break any laws at present. He can be an active
member of the Communist party and not break any laws. Is that
your opinion regarding a passport whether he abided by the laws
of our country?
Mr. Lewis. I may be wrong, but my understanding of a
passport is that it provides protection to American citizens
who travel abroad.
The Chairman. Let me ask you two or three questions. If a
person came before a committee and he refused to tell whether
she was a member of the Communist party, whether she had broken
with the party, refused to tell whether she believed in our
form of government or it should be destroyed by force and
violence, on the ground that if she answered the question, such
answer might tend to incriminate her, refused to give names of
fellow members-Let's say that person was the wife of a
professor to go overseas and teach in the Student Exchange
Program, would you say that person should be given a passport
to go overseas and hold that position of a professor
representing the United States.
Mr. Lewis. Senator, if your question refers to my wife in
any respect----
The Chairman. Just answer the question. It you don't
understand I will have it re-read to you.
Mr. Lewis. Is it a hypothetical question or a real
question?
The Chairman. It is exactly as I asked it.
Mr. Lewis. I will ask to consult with counsel.
As I analyze your question, it does not seem to me that you
have given any indication of breaking any of our laws and as
long as people do not break our laws, I do not see why they are
not entitled to an American passport.
The Chairman. In other words, you say a person that refused
to tell whether they were a member of the Communist party,
refused to identify fellow members, refused to tell whether
they advocated the overthrow of the government by force or
violence--you think such a person should be given a passport?
Mr. Lewis. Well, such a person invokes a privilege from
which, as I understand it, no inferences are permissible.
The Chairman. Have you gotten your passport yet?
Mr. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. You are under subpoena and will be told when
to return.
Mr. Lewis, would you turn over the correspondence we asked
you to produce concerning your selection as an exchange
student?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. Will this be returned?
The Chairman. You have handed counsel letter dated April
20, 1953; carbon copy of letter dated April 27, 1953; original
letter dated April 24, 1953; April 22, 1953; another memorandum
dated February 26, 1953; letter dated February 17, 1953; one
dated May 2, 1952; and one dated 28 April 1952. Is it your
testimony that this is the only correspondence you have had
with anyone regarding your selection in this exchange program?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
The Chairman. We have nothing further. We will notify your
counsel when you are to return.
STATE DEPARTMENT TEACHER-STUDENT EXCHANGE PROGRAM
[Editor's note.--Naphtali Lewis was a professor of
classical studies at the City University of New York, teaching
also at Columbia, Yale, and Boston universities. He specialized
in deciphering and interpreting the oldest Greek manuscripts,
called papyri, and was president of the International
Association of Papyrologists. In April 1953, Lewis received a
U.S. Educational Exchange Award, or Fulbright scholarship, to
study ancient manuscripts in Florence. He testified in public
session on June 10, and again with his wife, Helen Lewis, on
June 19, 1953.
During their public testimony, Helen Lewis invoked the
Fifth Amendment, after which Senator McCarthy announced: ``Dr.
Lewis, we have just been notified by the State Department that
your job in Italy has been canceled; that you are not being
sent there. I think that is an excellent idea.'' In a written
statement that he filed with the committee, Professor Lewis
asserted: ``Senator McCarthy has not inquired concerning my
qualification as a scholar for a scholarly assignment. He
appears to be interested in my Fulbright award only to the
extent of inquiring into my political opinions and, what is
even more astonishing, into my wife's politics, past as well as
present. This inquisition, if it has its way, establishes a
novel and singularly un-American principle; namely, that before
a man is permitted to pursue a career of research--even in
ancient manuscripts--he must have the stamp of approval of a
congressional subcommittee on himself and his family.'']
----------
WEDNESDAY MAY 20, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953, at 3:00 p.m. in the Office of the
Secretary of the Senate, Senator Henry M. Jackson presiding.
Present: Senator Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan;
Senator Henry M. Jackson, Democrat, Washington.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Ruth Young Watt,
chief clerk; Mason Drury, Senate liaison officer, State
Department.
TESTIMONY OF NAPHTALI LEWIS
Senator Jackson. Will you rise and be sworn, please?
Raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give
shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth
so help you God?
Mr. Lewis. I do.
Mr. Cohn. Would you give us your full name?
Mr. Lewis. My full name is Naphtali Lewis.
Mr. Cohn. How do you spell that first name?
Mr. Lewis. N-a-p-h-t-a-l-i.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Lewis, have you ever been a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Well, you are barking up the wrong tree, mister.
The answer is ``no.''
Senator Jackson. Before we proceed any further, you
understand you have a right to counsel if you so desire.
Mr. Lewis. Mr. Cohn explained that to me.
Senator Jackson. I just wanted to make the record clear.
Mr. Lewis. But since no one indicated, in summoning me
here, that I was to be accused of anything, it never occurred
to me.
Senator Jackson. Do you desire to have counsel?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think I need one, no, sir. I have
nothing but simple answers to simple questions, if that is all
that is involved. Now, I am not a lawyer, and if we get into
legalities----
Senator Jackson. You may want to reserve the right?
Mr. Lewis. I hope you will inform me of what my rights are,
and so on.
Senator Jackson. You understand that you have the right to
refuse to answer any question if, in answering that question it
may tend to incriminate you. That means that it may cause you
to be a witness against yourself. Even though that tendency is
slight, you have the right under the Fifth Amendment to refuse
to answer if you conscientiously believe, if you believe in
conscience, that to answer the question would tend to
incriminate you, not in itself incriminate you, but tend to
incriminate you. In that case, you have the right to refuse to
answer.
Mr. Lewis. I understand.
Mr. Cohn. Your testimony is that you have never been a
Communist?
Mr. Lewis. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever attended a Communist meeting?
Mr. Lewis. Certainly not to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Are you at Brooklyn College?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know someone named David McKelvy White?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Alex Novikov?
Mr. Lewis. Now, that is a name that I do know. Alex Novikov
was at Brooklyn College in the biology department. I knew him
slightly, but he has for a long time now not been in New York.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever attended a meeting with him?
Mr. Lewis. A meeting?
Mr. Corn. Yes, any kind of a meeting other than one
connected with your official activities at Brooklyn College.
Mr. Lewis. My best recollection is ``no.'' I mean it would
surprise me if I had. I just don't recall.
Senator Jackson. You do not have any recollection as of
now?
Mr. Lewis. I don't have any recollection of having attended
a meeting.
Senator Jackson. Where he was present?
Mr. Lewis. Where he was present. Well, now, wait a moment.
If you mean where he was present in a large gathering of five
hundred people or so, I can't answer for that.
You mean where he was present to my knowledge?
Senator Jackson. Yes.
Mr. Lewis. Where he was present to my knowledge. Unless it
was some kind of social meeting, the answer is ``no.''
Mr. Cohn. Do you know anyone named Albaum?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, he is a member of the biology department
now.
Mr. Cohn. How well do you know him?
Mr. Lewis. I know him as a colleague.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever attended any meeting with him?
Mr. Lewis. Not that I can recall, no.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not he is a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. No, I would not know.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know of any Communists at Brooklyn
College?
Mr. Lewis. By the way, I could amend my answer on Albaum to
say I have read in the paper about his testimony.
Mr. Cohn. What did you read concerning his testimony?
Mr. Lewis. Well, he testified some months ago that he had
been a Communist.
Mr. Cohn. That was the first you knew of it?
Mr. Lewis. This was all I know about Mr. Albaum's communism
or anybody's. I have no direct knowledge of Communist activity
or membership, since I have not been one myself and have not
associated with such people, to my knowledge.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Irving Goldman?
Mr. Lewis. Who?
Mr. Cohn. Irving Goldman.
Mr. Lewis. I don't know him, though I know who he is.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Charlotte Robinson?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. Her name is now Charlotte Jenkins.
Mr. Cohn. That is right.
Mr. Lewis. She works in the registrar's office.
Mr. Cohn. How well do you know her?
Mr. Lewis. Again, only as a person who works for the
college.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meeting with her?
Mr. Lewis. Well, again, I don't know what you mean by
``meeting.'' If you mean a Communist meeting, the answer is
``no.'' I have never been to a Communist meeting, to my
knowledge.
But if you mean could she have been present at a faculty
meeting where I was, the answer is that she could have been.
Mr. Cohn. As I first told you, we were excluding meetings
held in the course of official business.
Mr. Lewis. Yes. I had forgotten.
Mr. Cohn. So that is out.
Now, outside of that, did you ever attend any meeting with
Charlotte Robinson?
Mr. Lewis. To the best of my recollection, no.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know anyone named Pomerance, P-o-m-e-r-a-
n-c-e?
Mr. Lewis. I know him slightly. He is in the philosophy
department.
Mr. Cohn. Did you ever attend any meeting with him?
Mr. Lewis. Again, to the best of my recollection, no.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know Mrs. Pomerance?
Mr. Lewis. I don't believe so.
Mr. Cohn. You are married, Mr. Lewis?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. And what is your wife's first name?
Mr. Lewis. Helen.
Mr. Cohn. Has she ever been a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Well, again, if you knew my wife, it is really--
My wife is a wife and a mother, and she certainly is no
Communist.
Mr. Cohn. No, my question was: Has she ever been a
Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Has she ever been a Communist? Well, let me give
you a very precise answer. Eleven years ago, when our first
child was born, my wife ceased being a teacher, and since then
she has devoted herself and concentrated on bringing up the
family. She has been, since we have had a family, I would say,
all that any man could want in a devoted wife and a devoted
mother of his children.
Now, before we began our family, my wife was a teacher.
Mr. Cohn. You do have my question in mind?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, I am answering it in the fullest way I
know.
And in those years of her teaching activity, she was very
active in teachers' organizations, teachers committees, and so
on.
Now, at that time, unlike the present, where we are a very
quiet family and have no outside activities, she had many
outside activities in which I did not share. Many times she
would go off to meetings, and I would go to the library to
work.
Now, I am well aware of the fact that in those days, many
teachers' activities were participated in by Communists and
non-Communists alike, but I would want it demonstrated
certainly to me that my wife was engaged in any Communist
activity. Now, naturally, I don't know all of what she was
engaged in those days, and frankly, I much less cared. That is
the best answer I can give you.
Senator Jackson. To your knowledge, is she or has she ever
been a member of the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. To my knowledge, sir, the answer is ``no'' and
the reason I say ``to my knowledge'' is that knowing that she
was associated with all of these teachers outfits, and so on, I
certainly urged her never to join up, and I have no reason to
believe she disregarded my advice.
Mr. Cohn. Your sworn testimony is that to your knowledge
your wife was never a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. I have no reason to believe that she was, yes,
sir.
Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether she attended Communist
meetings?
Mr. Lewis. I cannot tell you, because----
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever discussed that with her?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I remember that back in those days when
she was a teacher, she discussed sometimes the meetings she
attended, and I am fully aware of the fact that there must have
been Communists at them.
Senator Jackson. What meeting? Let us pinpoint this a
moment. Let me first of all ask you when you were married. I am
not asking this question to get into your personal affairs.
Mr. Lewis. 1936.
Senator Jackson. Now, the meetings you are talking about
were subsequent to your marriage?
Mr. Lewis. That is right. They would be from about '37 or
'39 to the time when my wife quit all that, when her first
child was born, beginning in '42.
Senator Jackson. Now, between '36 and '42, you say your
wife attended meetings?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. They were teachers union meetings.
Senator Jackson. Was that the Teachers' Union?
Mr. Lewis. That is the Teachers' Union of New York.
Senator Jackson. And did the Communists dominate those
locals, or the local she belonged to?
Mr. Lewis. As you know, that has frequently been charged
and possibly sustained. But in those days, if you recall, there
was a kind of united front, and in those days the Teachers'
Union, that is, in the late thirties, was a very large and
respected organization, to which many of the teachers of New
York City belonged, including for a time myself.
Senator Jackson. Did you attend the meetings with her?
Mr. Lewis. Teachers Union meetings, yes, but not these
committee meetings and all these other things.
Senator Jackson. What do you mean by ``committee
meetings''?
Mr. Lewis. Well, she was on committees of the union. She
was editor of their newspaper for a time, and so on.
Senator Jackson. Those were committee meetings set up by
the union?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Senator Jackson. It did not go beyond that?
Mr. Lewis. Well, not to my knowledge, no; and I say, there
are lots she went to that I never talked with her about.
Senator Jackson. Did she ever talk to you about meetings
being controlled by the commies, or anything like that?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think so. I remember that after a while,
toward the forties, communism began to become an issue.
Senator Jackson. An issue where?
Mr. Lewis. In the Teachers Union. And then, of course as
you undoubtedly know, the Teachers Union split up. It
splintered into pieces. And that is when she dropped out and I
dropped out, and so on.
Senator Jackson. If she were a member of the Communist
party and you were her husband, you certainly should know about
it, should you not?
Mr. Lewis. I certainly should, unless she chose to keep it
secret from me.
Senator Jackson. But she never discussed any membership?
Mr. Lewis. Oh, yes. She discussed it. She discussed it in
the sense that inevitably we had to, when communism became an
issue. And I constantly warned her to keep clear of that.
Senator Jackson. Now, explain that. You said you discussed
the membership. You mean they asked her to join?
Mr. Lewis. I shouldn't be surprised. Not to my
recollection, did I ever ask her that confidence. I don't think
I ever did.
Senator Jackson. Are you sure?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I am just trying to recollect. You know
this is fifteen years ago. That is my best recollection, sir.
Senator Jackson. That they never asked her to join?
Mr. Lewis. No, my best recollection is that we did not
discuss that.
Senator Jackson. You did not discuss that.
Mr. Lewis. That is, in those specific terms. What I tried
to convey before is that when the Teachers Union began to be
attacked because of its Communist membership and alleged
Communist domination, at that point I strongly advised her not
to get involved in any of this.
Senator Jackson. What was your position and the position of
your wife on the Soviet-Nazi Pact in '39?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I really can only speak for my position I
suppose, sir. I certainly regarded that as a disillusionment.
Senator Jackson. At that time?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, and I still do.
Senator Jackson. You opposed it?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I frankly neither opposed nor approved. I
have no real major concern with these things.
Senator Jackson. What was your wife's position on the
subject?
Mr. Lewis. I think it was mostly like mine. But, again, you
see, we have not been a particularly political family, and we
had no really profound or great political discussions. Her
position used to be at any rate, in those days, slightly left
of mine, and perhaps she had fewer reservations.
Mr. Cohn. Where was she teaching then?
Mr. Lewis. She was teaching at Brooklyn College.
Mr. Cohn. What was she teaching?
Mr. Lewis. Psychology.
Mr. Cohn. She was teaching psychology at Brooklyn College.
And you taught philosophy?
Mr. Lewis. No, I taught classical languages.
Senator Jackson. Have you published any books?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, in the last years I have published three
books, twenty articles in learned journals, over thirty book
reviews.
Mr. Cohn. For what have you written book reviews?
Mr. Lewis. The Classical Weekly, Classical Journal,
American Journal of Philology, American Historical Review,
Classical Philology.
Mr. Cohn. Have you had any connection with the exchange
program of the State Department?
Mr. Lewis. If you mean connection with anything in the
State Department, no. But I have applied.
Mr. Cohn. Have you applied?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, I have applied for an exchange fellowship.
Mr. Cohn. Has there been any action on your application?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Was it accepted, or rejected?
Mr. Lewis. It was accepted.
Mr. Cohn. And when was that?
Mr. Lewis. I believe the letter informing me of acceptance
was dated April 30th last.
Mr. Cohn. Just this past April 30th?
Mr. Lewis. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. Where were you supposed to go?
Mr. Lewis. Italy.
Mr. Cohn. And when?
Mr. Lewis. The next academic year.
Mr. Cohn. What were you supposed to? Teach over there?
Mr. Lewis. No, I was supposed to do research in the
library.
Mr. Cohn. In what city?
Mr. Lewis. Florence.
Mr. Cohn. On classical subjects?
Mr. Lewis. That is right, and decipherment of the oldest
Greek manuscripts known, which is my specialty.
Mr. Cohn. Was your wife going to accompany you over there?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest this. There are
some other witnesses we want to hear on the subject of Mr.
Lewis, and we were anxious to talk with Mrs. Lewis. I was going
to suggest that we adjourn for the afternoon, and maybe Mr.
Lewis would want to consult counsel. I would feel better about
it if he did. And we would like Mr. and Mrs. Lewis to be down
on Monday afternoon, if that is agreeable, at 2:30.
What room would that be, Ruth?
Mrs. Watt. If the Senate is in session, we could come over
here. But we could get room 101.
Mr. Cohn. Let us make it room 101.
Mr. Lewis. Room 101 where?
Senator Jackson. Senate Office Building.
Mr. Lewis. At 2:30 p.m., next Monday.
Senator Jackson. On Monday the 25th, this coming Monday.
Just one last question. Do you have any recollection of
belonging to any organization cited by the attorney general as
subversive?
Mr. Lewis. No, I don't. As I said, I am not an organization
man, myself.
Senator Jackson. You are not a joiner?
Mr. Lewis. I am not a joiner. I belong to only two or three
professional associations, like the American Philological
Association, Phi Beta Kappa, and the International Association
of Papyrologists, which is my specialty, and I believe that is
all.
Mr. Cohn. What was your wife's maiden name?
Mr. Lewis. Helen Block, B-l-o-c-k.
Mr. Cohn. Was she teaching under her married or maiden
name?
Mr. Lewis. Both, I think. I think after she was married she
used her married name.
Mr. Cohn. Could I get your street address?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. 245 West 101st Street.
Mr. Cohn. And your phone is Academy----
Mr. Lewis. 2-4424.
Senator Jackson. Do you know what organizations your wife
might have belonged to?
Mr. Lewis. I certainly----
Senator Jackson. If you do not know, do not say so.
Mr. Lewis. No, I would have no way of knowing, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Lewis, would you produce that April 30th
letter when you come down on Monday?
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Mr. Cohn. And any other correspondence you had. I assume
you had to make some kind of application.
Mr. Lewis. I can't produce the application, because they
have it.
Mr. Cohn. You didn't retain a copy of it?
Mr. Lewis. No.
Mr. Cohn. I see. We can get that from them. And who did you
give as references on that application?
Mr. Lewis. The dean of Brooklyn College.
Mr. Cohn. What is his name?
Mr. Lewis. His name is William Gaede, G-a-e-d-e, Professor
C. Bradford Welles, W-e-l-l-e-s, of Yale, and Professor James
H. Oliver, of Johns Hopkins.
Mr. Cohn. All right, sir. And anything else, any
correspondence you have had with them of which you have copies,
in other words, your file. That was James C. Oliver?
Mr. Lewis. James H. Oliver.
Mr. Cohn. Johns Hopkins?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. Oh, yes. There were four. And Professor
Meyer Reinhold, M-e-y-e-r of my own department. They asked for
one reference from my own department.
Mr. Cohn. And then your whole file on that. And, as I say,
and as Senator Jackson explained, you have a right to consult
with counsel. He will not be allowed to participate in the
proceedings, but may accompany you, and if at any time you or
your wife desires to confer with him in privacy, you have that
right, and I would suggest that you procure counsel.
Mr. Lewis. All right. You make it sound very serious.
Mr. Cohn. If it weren't serious, we wouldn't trouble you to
come down here.
Mr. Lewis. Well, my record is an open book. There is
nothing in it I am ashamed of or that any American would not be
proud of.
Senator Jackson. Do you have anything you would like to
say? You understand, the question was asked: if you are or ever
have been a member of the Communist party. And you have been
very frank about it. You say you have never belonged.
And obviously, the committee would like to ask the same
question of your wife when she comes.
Mr. Lewis. Naturally.
Mr. Cohn. So you have an idea about what the questions will
be about. I am not saying that it is limited to that, on
Monday, but I am sure you understand that some question has
been raised about whether your wife was a member of the
Communist party or is now.
Mr. Lewis. I gather that, and I think I have answered that
to the best of my ability. I understood also from Mr. Cohn that
there was an accusation made that I was a Communist. I believe
you said that.
Mr. Cohn. No, I didn't say that. But I say you have a right
to assume it is a very serious matter, and if we weren't acting
on the basis of other testimony, we wouldn't trouble you to
come down here.
Mr. Lewis. Didn't you say before that there were witnesses
before me?
Mr. Cohn. Well, I said we were going to talk to other
witnesses, that we had heard witnesses and we would be talking
to some other witnesses. There is no doubt about that.
Mr. Lewis. All right.
In matters of this kind, do you assign or recommend
counsel, or is that something I do on my own?
Senator Jackson. I would suggest, as a lawyer myself, that
I would get competent counsel, to make sure that you are
advised of all your rights. The committee does not recommend
any particular counsel, but I think that from your own
standpoint it is wise to have counsel. The fact that you have
counsel does not create any inference that your case is any
more serious than anybody else's, nor does it create any
inference of guilt of anything. That is your American right,
and the decision as to whether you obtain counsel is entirely
up to you. But I would volunteer the statement that it is
usually a pretty wise thing to do.
Mr. Lewis. Bring counsel with me to the next hearing?
Senator Jackson. Yes. But you understand, the committee is
not requesting you to bring counsel.
Mr. Lewis. I understand. It is a recommendation, shall we
say.
Mr. Cohn. It is just a step for your protection.
Senator Jackson. I am merely trying to be fair to you in
saying that for your own protection it might be a wise thing.
You will be released, then, from the subpoena until Monday.
Mr. Lewis. Well, I haven't received any subpoena.
Mr. Cohn. You were asked to come down. That is the same
thing under the Senate rules.
Mr. Lewis. The girl who phoned me said very specifically I
was not being subpoenaed.
Mr. Cohn. As long as you receive some formal notification,
that is the equivalent of a subpoena.
Senator Jackson. You will be under subpoena until released
by the committee, and the committee will then notify you. This
constitutes a subpoena under the rules.
Mr. Lewis. Well, I am not interested so much in the legal
technicalities. I understand you want me and my wife here on
Monday afternoon.
Mr. Cohn. At 2:30.
Senator Jackson. Monday, the 25th of May.
Mr. Lewis. At the room that I jotted down.
Senator Jackson. Yes.
[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the hearing was recessed until
2:30 p.m., Monday, May 25, 1953.]
STATE DEPARTMENT TEACHER-STUDENT EXCHANGE PROGRAM
[Editor's note.--The actress, director and producer
Margaret Webster (1905-1972) was born in New York City while
her British father, actor Ben Webster was performing on
Broadway (her mother was the actress Dame May Whitty), and as a
result held dual British and American citizenship. Moving back
to New York from London in 1937, Webster was elected to the
board of the Actors' Equity Association in 1941. With Eva Le
Gallienne she founded the American Repertory Theatre in 1945,
and from 1948 to 1951 she directed the Margaret Webster
Shakespeare Company. In 1950, her name appeared in Red
Channels, a private listing of radio, television and stage
actors, writers, announcers and directors alleged to have
belonged to left-wing organizations. She was blacklisted in
radio and television, although she remained active on stage.
In her memoir, Don't Put Your Daughter on the Stage (New
York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1972), Webster described being
subpoenaed to testify before the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations. She felt no need to invoke the Fifth Amendment,
she wrote, since she had ``nothing to tell or refuse to tell.''
But her attorney repeatedly impressed on her the importance of
never saying ``no'' when asked if she had attended a meeting or
subscribed to a cause. She was instructed to answer ``I cannot
remember doing so,'' ``not so far as I can recall,'' and ``to
the best of my recollection, no.'' This, her attorney advised,
was because ``Two witnesses could easily be produced to say
yes, you did or yes, you had and a suit for perjury was in
order.'' Margaret Webster was not called back to a public
hearing.
Helen B. Lewis testified publicly on June 19, and Naphtali
Lewis on June 10 and 19, 1953.]
----------
MONDAY, MAY 25, 1953
U.S. Senate,
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
of the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to Senate Resolution 40,
agreed to January 30, 1953, at 2:30 p.m. in the Office of the
Secretary of the Senate, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy presiding.
Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin;
Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; Senator
Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan; Senator John L.
McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Senator Henry M. Jackson,
Democrat, Washington; Senator Stuart Symington, Democrat,
Missouri.
Present also: Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel; Donald A. Surine,
assistant counsel; Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk; Mason Drury,
Senate liaison officer, State Department.
TESTIMONY OF HELEN B. LEWIS (ACCOMPANIED BY HER COUNSEL, MURRAY
WEINSTEIN)
The Chairman. Will you rise and be sworn, please? Raise
your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give
shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
so help you God?
Mrs. Lewis. I do.
The Chairman. Who is your counsel?
Mr. Weinstein. Murray Weinstein, 37 Wall Street, New York
City.
The Chairman. You can confer with your lawyer at any time
you care to at any time during the testimony. Under the rules
of the committee, counsel is not allowed to take a part in the
proceedings except to freely advise his client whenever he
cares to.
Mr. Cohn. Mrs. Lewis, you are the wife of Naphtali Lewis,
is that right?
Mrs. Lewis. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. And Mr. Lewis is a professor at Brooklyn College?
Mrs. Lewis. That is right.
Mr. Cohn. And he has been elected under the State
Department Exchange Program to go abroad?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Are you planning to accompany him?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Have you been a teacher in the school system at
New York?
Mrs. Lewis. I taught at Brooklyn College.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been a Communist?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question under
the privileges afforded me by the Fifth Amendment.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of the Communist party while
teaching at Brooklyn college?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question under
the privileges afforded me by the Fifth Amendment.
Senator Jackson. Are you now a member of the Communist
party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of the Communist party last
year?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
Mr. Cohn. What date will you assert a privilege under the
Fifth Amendment and what date will you deny membership?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, I must decline to answer that question.
The Chairman. Two years ago were you a member of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. Three years ago were you a member?
Mrs. Lewis. I was not a member of the Communist party two
years ago. Three years ago I was not a member of the Communist
party.
The Chairman. Were you a Communist three years ago?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, Senator, the use of the word Communist is
very loose.
The Chairman. You seem to distinguish between membership
and being a Communist.
Mrs. Lewis. Very frequently the word Communist is used as
quoting anybody you disagree with.
Senator Jackson. Using the definition following Communist
programs and policies, then would you answer the question?
Mrs. Lewis. I am not a member of the Communist party.
Senator Symington. Have you ever been a member of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question.
Senator Jackson. The chairman asked you if you were a
Communist three years ago, and I defined a Communist as
following the program and policies of the Communist party. Were
you following the policies adhering to the party line of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, there might be some things such as
housing or----
The Chairman. May I ask the witness a question? Will you
define what in your mind is Communist?
Mrs. Lewis. In my mind a Communist is an enrolled member of
the Communist party.
Senator Jackson. How about one who follows the program in
every respect but doesn't pay the dues?
Mrs. Lewis. I think when you get into the question of
definition of people's beliefs, opinions and sympathies, you
get into questions which simply cannot be answered.
Senator Jackson. If you walk like a duck, sit like a duck,
quack like a duck, must you not be a duck?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
Senator Symington. Wouldn't it save the committee's time
and save your being in open session by answering the question.
I can see this has distressed you a little bit, but wouldn't it
save the Committee's time and your time to give us the year you
left the Communist party?
Senator Jackson. Let me rephrase the question. Would you
give us a year when you would be willing to say you were not a
member of the Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question. If you
had asked me about a specific year.
Senator Symington. I suggest you ask her as she says, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman. In 1950 were you a member of the Communist
party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. In 1949 were you a member of the Communist
party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1948?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. In 1947?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question.
The Chairman. 1940?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that question.
The Chairman. In 1935?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer.
The Chairman. 1930?
Mrs. Lewis. In 1930, sir, I was roughly seventeen years
old.
The Chairman. The Young Communist League?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1931?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer.
The Chairman. You decline to answer on the ground that if
you give a truthful answer, the answer might tend to
incriminate you?
Mrs. Lewis. No, sir. As I understand it no such inference
can be drawn.
The Chairman. Then you are ordered to answer.
Mrs Lewis. I must decline to answer.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer or I shall ask that
you be held in contempt.
Senator McClellan. Maybe we are moving too rapidly. I
suggest that you ask the question again.
The Chairman. The question is: in 1931 were you a member of
the Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1932?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1933?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1934?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, I must decline to answer that question.
The Chairman. Are you declining on the ground that if you
told the truth, gave a truthful answer that answer might tend
to incriminate you?
Mrs. Lewis. I am declining under the protection of the
Fifth Amendment which says that I may not be a witness against
myself.
The Chairman. You are entitled to refuse to answer the
question only if you feel a truthful answer might tend to
incriminate you. I am asking you if that is the reason you
decline to answer the question.
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer your question.
The Chairman. You are ordered to answer the question. Just
so you understand, we must determine whether you are entitled
to refuse to answer the question under the Fifth Amendment. You
are only entitled to refuse to answer my question if you feel
an honest answer might tend to incriminate you. If you refuse
to answer that, I am not going to threaten you, but for your
own information, if you do not I will ask the committee to cite
you for contempt. You may consult with counsel?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, then, I will answer your question that if
I answer the question it might tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. And you feel if you gave a truthful answer it
might tend to incriminate?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Today would you say that you feel sympathetic
towards the Communist philosophy?
Mrs. Lewis. Senator, that is a question now that is asking
about my opinions and beliefs, is that right?
The Chairman. I think you understood the question. The
question is: Are you now sympathetic to Communist philosophy?
Mrs. Lewis. There are some things in the Communist
philosophy that I am not particularly sympathetic with.
The Chairman. Can you tell us those things in the Communist
philosophy you are not sympathetic with?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, there have been certain world events
which certainly make it appear as if there is a possibility of
conflict between the United States, for instance, and the
Soviet Union. I am a loyal and patriotic American.
The Chairman. I wonder if you will get back to the
question. What part of the Communist philosophy are you not in
sympathy with. You are entitled to refuse to answer.
Mrs. Lewis. I don't see what particularly--what might be
incriminating in my beliefs.
The Chairman. May I say, just for your information, if you
were really an American citizen, we would not be concerned with
your beliefs. You could believe anything. However, in view of
the fact that there has been testimony concerning you and your
husband before another committee--your husband has been
selected at considerable expense to the taxpayers to a rather
important position. For that reason we are curious to know
whether you are still a believer in communism or not. You are
going on this trip, you see. Otherwise we are not checking
whether you believe in the Communist cause. I ask you again--
what part of the Communist philosophy do you disagree with?
Mrs. Lewis. If I follow your reasoning, it stems from my
husband's selection for the student exchange. I fail to see
where my beliefs are relevant to his selection.
The Chairman. I order you to answer the question unless you
refuse to answer it on the grounds that your answer might tend
to incriminate you. Will you answer that question, Mrs. Lewis?
Mrs. Lewis. Well, as I have already begun to indicate--
although let me say, as I said before, that I think my beliefs
are entirely irrelevant to my husband's selection for the
Student Exchange Program.
The Chairman. Have you gotten a passport yet?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. You haven't gotten your passport yet?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. What part of the Communist philosophy do you
disagree with?
Mrs. Lewis. Let me begin with the beginning of my answer
for the record. I wish the record to indicate that my beliefs--
that questions of my opinions are irrelevant to my husband's
Fulbright scholarship. If you want to know about my opinions
and direct me to answer you as to what part of the Communist--
what was it again?
The Chairman. You said you disagree with some part of the
Communist philosophy.
Mrs. Lewis. I do not believe in philosophy that allows
aggressive action against other states, for instance.
Senator Symington. What was that?
Mrs. Lewis. I do not believe in aggressive action. I
believe that is wrong.
Senator Jackson. You believe aggressive action is wrong?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes.
Senator Jackson. In other words, you believe that
Communists are wrong now in taking aggressive action against
other states. You believe the Communists are wrong in Korea?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, sir. I think it has been demonstrated that
the first moves were made by the North Koreans, and in the
light of that, I am opposed to aggressive action as a solution
to international problems.
Senator Potter. Do you oppose the persecution of the Jewish
people in the Soviet Union?
Mrs. Lewis. I certainly do. I have been against
discrimination all my life.
The Chairman. Would you favor a Communistic form of
government in the United States?
Mrs. Lewis. I am inalterably in favor of our democracy.
The Chairman. I will ask you again. Would you be opposed to
a Communist form of government in the United States?
Mrs. Lewis. Yes, I would.
The Chairman. In 1947 were you opposed to a Communist form
of government in the United States?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer your question.
The Chairman. Has your husband ever been a member of the
Communist party?
Mrs. Lewis. Now, Senator McCarthy, on advice of counsel, I
am not going to answer any questions about my husband as I
believe such questions would be an invasion of the sanctity and
privacy of our marriage.
Mr. Cohn. Sir, I believe that only includes confidential
communications. In other words, confidential communications to
her which were given in the capacity as his wife. There is no
such thing as an absolute privilege between husband and wife.
It only applies to confidential communications. She cannot
assert a general statement that she is not going to answer any
questions about her husband.
The Chairman. I think you are right, Mr. Cohn----
Senator McClellan. I am inclined to think it would be
rather difficult to separate confidential communications from
others.
Senator Symington. I agree with that.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, suppose they attended meetings.
The Chairman. I think you are strictly right on the rule,
Roy, but I am inclined to agree with Senator McClellan that you
can't tell whether they are confidential communications or not.
Did you attend Communist meetings in 1948?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. 1947?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer your question.
Senator McClellan. I will ask you if you attended Communist
meetings in 1946 or 1947 with your husband?
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer that.
The Chairman. On the ground of self-incrimination?
Senator McClellan. I would like to ask a question of the
committee here. I am a little bit lacking in background on this
thing. Has her husband been questioned by this committee or any
other committee?
The Chairman. Yes, he was questioned by Senator Jackson.
Before further questioning he decided he wanted counsel.
Senator Jackson. Mr. Cohn and myself strongly advised him
that he should consult counsel.
Senator McClellan. I feel this way about it. The husband is
available and he is seeking benefit of this government and I
think we should ask him questions directly.
The Chairman. As far as I am concerned, we have finished
with you, Mrs. Lewis. May I say, you are asking for a passport
to go overseas. We have many fine people who have been in the
Communist party who have decided communism was evil and they
have dropped out of that party and are very fond of America
now. If you have been a member of the party and, if you think
that was wrong--if you dropped out of the party and you would
care to tell us about that and tell us why, I assume that is
something that the State Department would be interested in
before granting a passport. I doubt very much that a passport
will be granted to someone, to go overseas and represent us as
your husband will be teaching in the exchange program. I doubt
very much if they will give you a passport unless you come in
and tell us about your activity in the party--if and when and
why you left the party.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, you have asked the
question that I was going to talk about. The chairman has
proved his belief in that position by having an ex-Communist on
the staff of this committee. I am only telling you what is now
a matter of record. It seems if you say you are a good
American, and in effect have admitted you were a member of the
Communist party, it would be far better for you if you said you
had been a member and felt it was wrong based on subsequent
thinking, and inasmuch as you feel you are a good American--
looking at you and listening to you and certainly you are out
of it now--if I had anything to do with giving you a passport,
I would be glad to see you get one. On the other hand, if you
come up here and say that you are a good American and take
refuge through a lot of legal ``claptrap'' behind the Fifth
Amendment, do you think the people of this committee will
approve of your getting a passport to go out of the United
States while you might have reason for not admitting anything
about it. I think you are making a mistake. I think you are
doing yourself an injustice from listening to you.
Mrs. Lewis. I thank you for your interest in my welfare,
but I, myself, do not agree with all the interpretations that
you put on my testimony and my exercise of the Fifth Amendment,
as this is something that I have thought about and do intend to
do.
Senator Symington. One more point. In regard to not
answering questions concerning your husband, you might be
interested to know that in my opinion you have already
testified while I have been here at length against your
husband--if you are interested in his future.
Senator Jackson. I would like to supplement Senator
Symington's statement. The general tenor of the questions will
come up in connection with your passport and would have come
up, and I think that it is a matter that you ought to give
fuller consideration to. Maybe you will want to come back and
discuss it with the committee.
The Chairman. Have you ever engaged in espionage?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. Sabotage?
Mrs. Lewis. No.
Senator Jackson. You don't believe or advocate the
overthrow of this government by force and violence?
Mrs. Lewis. I certainly do not. Never have. I certainly do
not believe in force and violence. I believe in the democratic
solution.
Senator Jackson. Have you ever believed in it--the
utilization of force to change our government here in the
United States?
Mrs. Lewis. I am a peaceful person, sir.
Senator Jackson. Then, if you have never believed in such
force and violence to achieve that end, you can answer the
question. It might be well to keep the record straight,
Mrs. Lewis. I must decline to answer on the grounds of the
Fifth Amendment.
Senator Symington. You realize you will have to take a
position in a public hearing----
Mrs. Lewis. I am going to if I have to.
The Chairman. Mrs. Lewis, you may be excused now. You are
still under subpoena and you will be notified when you are to
appear.
TESTIMONY OF NAPHTALI LEWIS
The Chairman. Professor Lewis, you have previously been
sworn by the acting chairman of the committee, Senator Jackson?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You are reminded that you are still under
oath.
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
The Chairman. You understand that you can freely discuss
any matter with your counsel at any time you care to?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. I understand that the hearing adjourned the
other day so that you could obtain counsel. Mr. Cohn, will you
proceed.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Lewis, you were in here Friday and you have
counsel now.
Mr. Lewis. Wednesday.
Mr. Cohn. You have obtained counsel and had a chance to
confer with counsel, is that right?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. I have never been a member of the Communist
party.
Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been a Communist? I am not
referring to party membership.
Mr. Lewis. The word Communist is bandied about today so
much----
Senator Jackson. Let's let the witness define it. How would
you define a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Sir, I hardly know how. Perhaps you would be
interested in something that happened in my presence in the
last half year. I was riding on a bus and two men got into an
argument as to whom pushed whom. One party got off the bus and
the parting shot of the other one was--yelled, ``Oh, you
Communist.'' These days the word Communist is used to describe
anybody they disagree with.
The Chairman. We are not interested in the different
definitions of the users--not interested in something you heard
on the bus.
Mr. Lewis. My definition of a Communist is a person who is
a member of the Communist party.
Senator Jackson. How about a person who is not a formal
member but believes in each and every principle of the
Communist party, but does not hold a formal party membership.
Is he a Communist?
Mr. Lewis. Well, I don't know if there are such people.
Senator Jackson. I am asking you the question assuming
there are such people.
Mr. Lewis. Is that a hypothetical question?
Senator Jackson. If a person believes in all the principles
of the Communist party that apply to formal membership, is he a
Communist under your definition?
The question I put, Mr. Chairman, assuming that an
individual believes in the principal objectives and aims of the
Communist party but is not a formal member of the party, is he
a Communist under your definition?
Mr. Lewis. Under my definition? You mean of a moment ago?
My definition was a member of the Communist party. You have
given me a hypothetical question. You wish me to respond not in
terms of my definition but as I interpret your question--Well,
I suppose such a person could be called a Communist with a
small ``c.''
The Chairman. Would you answer that question?
Senator Jackson. Have you ever been one who has believed in
accordance with my hypothetical question?
Mr. Lewis. No, I have not.
Senator Jackson. Have you ever attended Communist meetings,
Professor?
Mr. Lewis. Not to my knowledge.
Senator Jackson. Have you ever believed in or espoused the
Communist cause--Communist philosophy?
Mr. Lewis. Well, again perhaps if you specify what you mean
by Communist philosophy.
Senator Jackson. Use your definition?
Mr. Lewis. No, sir, I have not.
Senator Jackson. What is your definition of the Communist
philosophy?
Mr. Lewis. My definition of the Communist philosophy.
Senator, I am no expert on the philosophy of the Communist
party. I suppose----
Senator Jackson. You say you never believed in or espoused
the philosophy of the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. Certainly not. There might have been certain
doctrines held by the Communists that I approve of.
The Chairman. Was your wife a member of the Communist
party?
Mr. Lewis. Senator, I am advised by counsel that for
questions to be put to me concerning my wife is an invasion of
the sanctity and privacy of our marriage and I must refuse to
answer questions concerning my wife.
The Chairman. Did you ever attend a Communist party meeting
with your wife?
Mr. Lewis. You have asked a question concerning my wife. I
must refuse on advice of counsel to answer that question.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to answer that question.
You are entitled to refuse to answer any questions concerning
any private communications between yourself and your wife. That
is interpreted very broadly. However, when asked whether or not
you attended a Communist meeting with your wife--that is not a
confidential communication. Have you ever attended Communist
meetings with your wife at which people other than you and your
wife were present?
Mr. Lewis. Well, may I consult with counsel, please?
Senator, I will state here and now, I have never knowingly
attended any Communist party meeting whatever.
Senator Jackson. With or without your wife?
Mr. Lewis. I have not knowingly attended any Communist
party meeting.
Senator Mundt. May I inquire why you inject knowingly?
Mr. Lewis. Had I known it was a meeting of the Communist
party----
Senator Mundt. Have you attended meetings where when you
left the meeting you had knowledge that it was a meeting of the
Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. No. I have not attended a meeting that I knew
was a meeting of the Communist party after I left.
The Chairman. Have you ever attended a meeting which you
subsequently had reason to believe was a meeting of Communist
party members or a meeting for the purpose of recruiting
members of the party?
Mr. Lewis. Not to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Then your testimony is at this time that you
are of the opinion that you have never attended a meeting
called by the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
The Chairman. Have you ever been asked to join the
Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. To the best of my recollection, ``no.''
The Chairman. To the best of your recollection ``no.''
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
The Chairman. How long have you been married Mr. Lewis?
Mr. Lewis. Counsel informs me that he thinks the question
is covered by the marital privilege.
The Chairman. You will be ordered to tell when you were
married. It is not a confidential communication.
Senator McClellan. That is a matter of public record.
Mr. Lewis. I was married in 1946.
The Chairman. To your present wife?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
Senator Jackson. And you have been married all that time--
ever since--to her?
Mr. Lewis. That is right.
The Chairman. Roy, have you any further questions?
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Lewis, you deny that you ever believed in
communism for the United States?
Mr. Lewis. Well, of course, you have not defined what you
mean by communism. I have been given a hypothetical question. I
certainly do not hold the view that there is any better form of
government for the United States than the liberal American
democracy.
Mr. Cohn. And you never held an opinion contrary to that?
Have you ever thought communism would be better? Have you ever
advocated communism? Have you ever belonged to the Young
Communist League?
Mr. Lewis. Certainly not.
Senator Jackson. I think I asked you previously at the last
meeting of the committee whether you have ever belonged to any
organization listed by the attorney general to be subversive?
Mr. Lewis. Yes, sir. I believe I told you at that time I
had not. As far as I know, I believe that is a correct answer.
I have not examined the attorney general's list, but the reason
I would think my answer is correct is that I have never
belonged to other than professional organizations.
The Chairman. Do you feel that a person can be a Communist
and at the same time a good American?
Mr. Lewis. There again it depends on what you mean by a
Communist.
The Chairman. A member of the Communist party.
Mr. Lewis. Well, you are way out of my line. I am a
professor of Greek and Latin. I really don't know that I have
any concrete opinion on that.
The Chairman. You don't have any opinion as to whether a
member of the Communist party could also be a good American?
Mr. Lewis. It would seem to me that the American tradition
of liberalism would permit a man to hold opinions ranging from
the extreme right to the extreme left.
Senator Symington. Do you know that the Communist party
advocates the overthrow of the United States by force and
violence.
Mr. Lewis. I don't know it. If it is so dedicated, I would
be, with my entire being, opposed to it.
Senator Symington. Would you like to correct your testimony
then that if it is true that the Communist party is dedicated
to the overthrow of the American system of government by force
and violence you do not think a good American could be a member
of the Communist party?
Mr. Lewis. Again, I don't see that the second follows
entirely from the first.
The Chairman. Let me rephrase the question. If you don't
know it, we can inform you that the Communist party is
dedicated to the overthrow by force and violence----
Mr. Lewis. I am certainly opposed to that.
The Chairman. If that is true, any member of that
organization cannot be a good American?
Mr. Lewis. That I don't know.
Senator Symington. If membership in the Communist party
involves being a member of an organization that is dedicated to
the overthrow of the American form of government by force and
violence, can you have membership in the Communist party and be
a good American?
Mr. Lewis. If membership means dedicated to the overthrow
of our government----
Senator Symington. Not dedicated--being a member of the
Communist party which advocates the overthrow of our government
by force and violence.
Mr. Lewis. Well, you see, Senator----
Senator Symington. It is beginning to look as if your
reason for evading the question is that somebody close to you
might be a member of the Communist party. As to whether it is
you or not, I don't know.
Mr. Lewis. I resent the implication.
Senator Symington. Well, I resent your attitude too. I am
getting a little tired of your ducking and dodging. We are
trying to make the questions very straight and simple. The
chairman asked you if you felt a member of the Communist party
could be a loyal American. That is what I remember, and you
felt it was all right for anybody to hold any political views.
After that I asked you if you knew that the Communist party
advocates the overthrow of the American system of government by
force and violence and you get into a lot of languages instead
of saying ``yes'' or ``no.''
Mr. Lewis. I cannot answer that question.
Senator Jackson. Mr. Lewis, you are an intelligent man and
certainly, I assume you read the newspapers even though you are
engaged in teaching classical studies at Brooklyn College.
Mr. Lewis. Yes.
Senator Jackson. Aren't you aware of the fact by now that a
person who is a member of the Communist party not only believes
in the advocacy of force and violence to achieve that end in
the United States, but above that owes loyalty to the Soviet
Union?
Mr. Lewis. You asked me if I was aware of it. I am
certainly aware of what has appeared in newspapers and aware
that this is the prevalent view.
Senator Jackson. Now, you are aware of the events that have
taken place since the end of World War II, namely the first
move of the Soviet Union into Greece, threatening violence in
Turkey, and I assume you are also aware of Czechoslovakia and
what happened to Communists in that country. Can there be any
doubt that a member of the Communist party in this country is
in the international conspiracy and is strongly disloyal to
this country?
Mr. Lewis. I am certainly opposed to every one of the acts
of aggression.
Senator Jackson. Just answer the question.
Mr. Lewis. The reason I cannot answer your question--at the
end you seem to me to presuppose that I know what a member of
the Communist party in this country is supposed to do?
Senator Jackson. Aren't you pretty much convinced what they
are supposed to do?
Mr. Lewis. I know nothing of Communist affairs. If you ask
me about events of the day, I will be perfectly willing and
happy to do that, but if you ask me to make a judgment that is
based on knowledge which I do not have, I don't see how I can
do that.
Senator Jackson. Listen, Mr. Lewis, you have been selected
to go abroad and while you are, undoubtedly well-informed in
the classics and very able to teach, responsibility of the
Student Exchange Program entails broad responsibilities of
citizenship above and beyond books.
What about American Communists? Are they loyal?
Mr. Lewis. I don't know. I haven't made a personal
examination of American Communists, so, therefore, I can't say.
Senator Jackson. They may be all right?
Mr. Lewis. I don't think I said that.
Senator Jackson. That is the effect of your testimony.
Isn't that the effect of your testimony? You are saying because
you don't have personal knowledge of the Communist movement in
the United States, you can't answer the question. As an
intelligent citizen you know, or should know, if you don't,
that there is a Communist conspiracy in the world. Three-
fourths of your tax dollar is paying for defense. I don't see
how you can qualify for a scholarship and go overseas to Italy,
as you have been selected to go, without knowing something more
than the classics.
The Chairman. I don't think we should refer to the exchange
program as the Fulbright Scholarship. The people will connect
it with Senator Fulbright. I think we should refer to it
whenever it appears in the record as the Student Exchange
Program.
Senator Mundt. Do you think a man who holds Communist
beliefs is a suitable man to work for the federal government?
Mr. Lewis. Under present conditions of world affairs I
don't think so.
Mr. Cohn. Do you think, Professor, that a man who holds
Communist beliefs is a suitable man to teach on a college or
university faculty publicly supported?
Mr. Lewis. There, sir, you have touched on one of the moot
questions of the day. There is much argument about the
question.
Senator Jackson. You don't mean it is ``moot.''
Mr. Lewis. I don't know that I know what the word means?
Senator Jackson. Legally it means a judicial issue that
doesn't exist--a hypothetical question.
Mr. Lewis. I think the word ``moot'' has a non-legal sense,
which I was applying to it, Senator, that this is an issue
which is very much discussed these days.
The Chairman. Counsel asked you a very simple question. He
asked you whether Communists should be allowed to teach in
colleges.
Mr. Lewis. I have not made up my mind. Senator Taft says
they should, and the Board of American Universities and
Colleges say they should.
The Chairman. The American Association of Universities has
taken the position on one side and the American Association of
University Professors has taken a position on the other side.
Mr. Lewis. I am quoting the American Association of
University Professors.
The Chairman. Do you think a man who holds Communist
beliefs should be granted an American passport to travel
abroad?
Mr. Lewis. What do you mean Communist beliefs?
The Chairman. Communist sympathies?
Mr. Lewis. If his purpose is innocent, a man who is an
American citizen and has broken no laws is entitled to
protection of an American passport----
The Chairman. Your answer to the question would be ``yes.''
Mr. Lewis. Yes, provided conditions are met--he hasn't
broken any laws.
Senator Potter. A man can be a member of the Communist
party and not break any laws at present. He can be an active
member of the Communist party and not break any laws. Is that
your opinion regarding a passport whether he abided by the laws
of our country?
Mr. Lewis. I may be wrong, but my understanding of a
passport is that it provides protection to American citizens
who travel abroad.
The Chairman. Let me ask you two or three questions. If a
person came before a committee and he refused to tell whether
she was a member of the Communist party, whether she had broken
with the party, refused to tell whether she believed in our
form of government or it should be destroyed by force and
violence, on the ground that if she answered the question, such
answer might tend to incriminate her, refused to give names of
fellow members-Let's say that person was the wife of a
professor to go overseas and teach in the Student Exchange
Program, would you say that person should be given a passport
to go overseas and hold that position of a professor
representing the United States.
Mr. Lewis. Senator, if your question refers to my wife in
any respect----
The Chairman. Just answer the question. It you don't
understand I will have it re-read to you.
Mr. Lewis. Is it a hypothetical question or a real
question?
The Chairman. It is exactly as I asked it.
Mr. Lewis. I will ask to consult with counsel.
As I analyze your question, it does not seem to me that you
have given any indication of breaking any of our laws and as
long as people do not break our laws, I do not see why they are
not entitled to an American passport.
The Chairman. In other words, you say a person that refused
to tell whether they were a member of the Communist party,
refused to identify fellow members, refused to tell whether
they advocated the overthrow of the government by force or
violence--you think such a person should be given a passport?
Mr. Lewis. Well, such a person invokes a privilege from
which, as I understand it, no inferences are permissible.
The Chairman. Have you gotten your passport yet?
Mr. Lewis. No.
The Chairman. You are under subpoena and will be told when
to return.
Mr. Lewis, would you turn over the correspondence we asked
you to produce concerning your selection as an exchange
student?
Mr. Lewis. Yes. Will this be returned?
The Chairman. You have handed counsel letter dated April
20, 1953; carbon copy of letter dated April 27, 1953; original
letter dated April 24, 1953; April 22, 1953; another memorandum
dated February 26, 1953; letter dated February 17, 1953; one
dated May 2, 1952; and one dated 28 April 1952. Is it your
testimony that this is the only correspondence you have had
with anyone regarding your selection in this exchange program?
Mr. Lewis. That is correct.
The Chairman. We have nothing further. We will notify your
counsel when you are to return.