Mr. SOURWINE. Are you a graduate of Harvard University Law School?

Mr. DAVIS. I did.

Senator KEATING. Are you a member of the bar now?

Mr. DAVIS. What?

Senator KEATING. Are you a member of the bar of the State of New York?

Mr. DAVIS. NO; I am a member of the bar of the State of Georgia. Senator KEATING. Have you ever been admitted to the bar of the State of New York?

Mr. DAVIS. I have not.

Senator KEATING. Have you applied for admission?

Mr. DAVIS. No.

Mr. SOURWINE. Mr. Davis, do you know Gus Hall, the gentleman seated second from the right from you?

Mr. DAVIS. I wish to say why I am not going to answer that question.

I consider answering questions before this committee as meaning no good to the Constitution or to the American people. And this committee is acting as a judge and jury and seeks to convict people without proceedings. I wish to protest the fact that I am being called before a committee headed by Senator Eastland, of Mississippi, who has got no right in Congress, who is one of the worst Negro haters, and of the Jewish people as well, and of minority groups, and who is defying the Constitution of the United States and the U.S. Supreme Court, and ought to be thrown out of Congress. And I consider also that this committee has no authority or power to ask questions of me concerning my political views or anything of the sort. And it will get no cooperation from me whatsoever. And therefore I refuse to answer that question on the grounds of the first and fifth amendments. Senator KEATING. You decline to answer on the ground that the answer might tend to incriminate you?

Mr. DAVIS. The first and fifth amendments.

Mr. SOURWINE. Do we understand, Mr. Davis, that you will refuse to answer any and all questions that are asked of you?

Mr. DAVIS. That is according to what questions are asked.

Mr. SOURWINE. So that in spite of your contempt for the committee and its purposes, there are some questions that we might ask that you will answer; is that correct?

Mr. DAVIS. Conceivably.

Mr. SOURWINE. While you were at Harvard Law School, were you a contemporary there of Alger Hiss?

Mr. DAVIS. I refuse to answer that question, the first and fifth.

Mr. SOURWINE. Did you know Harry Dexter White while he was a professor?

Mr. DAVIS. I refuse to answer that question.

Mr. SOURWINE. Did you know Lauchlin Currie?

Mr. DAVIS. Who?

Mr. SOURWINE. Lauchlin Currie.

Mr. DAVIS. No; I did not.

Mr. SOURWINE. Did you know Henry Collins, a graduate student? Mr. DAVIS. What?

Mr. SOURWINE. I am asking you if, while you were at Harvard, you knew Henry Collins, a graduate student there.

Mr. DAVIS. I don't recall knowing any such person.

Mr. SOURWINE. Will you tell us what position you hold in the Communist Party, U.S.A.?

Mr. DAVIS. I refuse to answer that question.

Mr. SOURWINE. Isn't it true that you are the national secretary of the party?

Mr. DAVIS. I refuse to answer that question, first and fifth.

Mr. SOURWINE. Isn't it true also that you and Gus Hall have joined forces for the purpose of procuring the replacement of Mr. Eugene Dennis and being certain that he does not return to power in the party?

Mr. DAVIS. That is an impertinent question, and I refuse to answer it on the first and fifth.

Senator KEATING. Mr. Davis, you are now excused to enable you to appear at the other hearing to which you have been subpenaed.

Mr. DAVIS. I would like to protest the fact that this committee has done nothing to investigate the lynchers of Mack Parker and the anti-Semitic outrages in the country. And I consider that a proper field, and it stands exposed as long as it refuses to do anything about such things.

Senator KEATING. Proceed, counsel.

TESTIMONY OF GUS HALL-Resumed

Mr. SOURWINE. Mr. Hall, as a Communist leader trained in Moscow, have you been active in promoting the Communist Party line within the trade unions and among the trade unions of this country?

Mr. HALL. I claim privilege under the fifth amendment.

Mr. SOURWINE. You have written on this subject in Political Affairs, the Guide and Theoretical Organ of the Communist Party, U.S.A., have you not?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. Are you not the author of the article "30 Years of Struggle for a Steel Workers Union and a Working Class Ideology" which appears in Political Affairs for September 1949 at pages 54-70? Mr. HALL. I claim privilege.

Mr. SOURWINE. Are you not the author of the article "Coal Miners Lead the Way" which appeared in Political Affairs for March 1950 at pages 18 to 31?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. Mr. Hall, did you make the summary speech to the 15th National Convention of the Communist Party, U.S.A., held in New York City December 20 and 21, 1950?

Mr. HALL. I claim privilege.

Mr. SOURWINE. Did you not also make the main report to that convention as indicated in Political Affairs of February 1951?

Mr. HALL. I claim privilege.

Mr. SOURWINE. I quote you from page 12 of Political Affairs of February 1951, your summary speech in which you said:

We take particular pride in the greetings from the great Bolshevik Party, the party of Lenin and Stalin, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

Why did you take particular pride in greetings from the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Mr. Hall?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. You are, are you not, the Gus Hall who wrote a eulogy of "William Z. Foster, Leader in the Struggle for Peace," which appeared under that title in Political Affairs for March 1951, pages 13 to 21?

Mr. HALL. I claim privilege.

Mr. SOURWINE. You there referred to him at page 13 as "The foremost Marxist leader and theoretician of our party." Do you still consider Mr. Foster as an outstanding Communist theoretician? Mr. HALL. I claim privilege.

Mr. SOURWINE. Mr. Hall, one of the basic declarations of Communist Party theory made by William Z. Foster was this, made in 1928:

The Red army is not an enemy army, but the army of the international proletariat. In the event of war against the Soviet Union the workers in capitalist countries must not allow themselves to be scared from supporting the Red army and from expressing their support by fighting against their own bourgeois by the charges of treason that the bourgeois may hurl against them. Is that good Communist doctrine today?

Mr. HALL. These hearings are sounding like the old McCarthy hearings every minute, and I claim privilege to answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. I didn't hear you.

Mr. HALL. I said, "These hearings are sounding like the old McCarthy hearings every minute, and I claim privilege to answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. Here is another piece of doctrine from Mr. Foster. This is from his testimony before the [Hamilton] Fish committee:

The workers of this country and the workers of every country have only one flag, and that is the Red flag. That is the flag of the proletarian revolution. All capitalists' flags are flags of the capitalist class, and we owe no allegiance to any of them.

Has the Communist Party, U.S.A., ever repudiated that doctrine? Mr. HALL. You should direct the question to Mr. Foster, not me. I claim my privilege.

Mr. SOURWINE. Why should the committee direct the question to Mr. Foster and not you?

Mr. HALL. I claim my privilege.

Mr. SOURWINE. No; this is your statement; you said the committee should direct that question to Mr. Foster and not you.

Mr. HALL. Because you are quoting Mr. Foster, that is why. Mr. SOURWINE. We are quoting Mr. Foster?

Mr. HALL. You say you are, anyway.

Mr. SOURWINE. What is the question which you say we should direct to Mr. Foster and not you?

Mr. HALL. You are not quoting me.

Mr. SOURWINE. You recall the question which you said we should direct to Mr. Foster and not you.

Mr. HALL. When you say you are quoting Mr. Foster, ask him, and not me.

Mr. SOURWINE. I read you a statement and asked you if the Communist Party U.S.A. had ever repudiated that doctrine.

Mr. HALL. And I claim my privilege on it.

Mr. SOURWINE. But you said that we should ask that question of Mr. Foster and not you. You are the top official of the Communist Party U.S.A., today. We are asking you if the Communist Party has ever repudiated that doctrine.

Mr. HALL. And I claim my privilege.

Mr. SOURWINE. Do you repudiate that doctrine today?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. In 1940 the 11th National Convention of the Communist Party, U.S.A., adopted this resolution:

We are proud to bear the high title of a member of the Communist Party of the United States of America. Let us raise high the banner of proletarian internationalism. We are proud to be associated with the Communist International. We are proud to be associated with the greatest thinkers and heroes of all history and of all lands, with Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin. We are proud to be associated with Dimitroff, Thaelmann, Thorez, Gallacher, Diaz, and La Pasionaria, and with the militant leaders of the rising young Latin American working class and Communist workers, Blas Roca, Encina, Labarca, Prestes, with the great Philippine leader Evangelista, with Tim Buck of Canada, and many others. We are proud to be associated in the ranks of proletarian internationalism with the greatest thinker and leader and builder of our time, who carried the work of Marx, Engels, and Lenin to new heights, from the establishment of socialism to the period of transition to communism, to the safeguarding of the Communist advantage against the furious dying struggles of a capitalist world, the great Communist Stalin.

Did the Communist Party, U.S.A., do anything to repudiate that resolution?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. In 1957, which you may remember as the year of the rape of Hungary, Mr. Hall, William Z. Foster wrote in Political Affairs:

To mention only one more of the many Leninist policies that have contributed to the relative success of the Communist Party has been its militant policy of internationalism, particularly its active support of the development of the Soviet Union, and in later years of People's China and the European people's democracies.

Is it still the position of the Communist Party, U.S.A., to maintain a militant policy of internationalism supporting the Soviet Union, the Red Chinese, and the satellite so-called people's democracies of Europe?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. Mr. Hall, in William Z. Foster's book "Toward Soviet America" there are several statements which go to the question of the policy of the Communist Party, U.S.A. I will read those statements, identifying the page and the book from which each is

taken.

If I read to you a statement by Foster which you consider false or mistaken or misleading, please interrupt me to challenge it or correct it or amend it.

At pages 271 and 272, Mr. Foster wrote:

The American soviet government will be organized along the broad lines of the Russian Soviets.

At page 272 he wrote:

The American soviet government will join with the other soviet governments in a world soviet union.

At page 273 he wrote:

The American soviet government will be the dictatorship of the proletariat. At page 275 he wrote:

The leader of the revolution in all its stages is the Communist Party. Further on this same page he wrote:

Under the dictatorship, all the capitalist parties-Republican, Democratic, Progressive, Socialist, etc.-will be liquidated, the Communist Party functioning alone as the party of the toiling masses. Likewise will be dissolved all other organizations that are political props of the bourgeois rule, including chambers of commerce, employers' associations, Rotary Clubs, American Legion, YMCA, and such fraternal orders as the Masons, Odd Fellows, Elks, Knights of Columbus, etc.

Is that good Communist doctrine today, Mr. Hall?
Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. In Political Affairs of April 1951 appeared an article under your byline entitled "The Stalin Interview-A Blow at the Warmongers." In that article you refer to the Soviet Union as the "leader of the world camp of peace." That statement appears on page 15 of the April 1951 issue. Do you today regard the Soviet Union as the leader of the world camp of peace?

Mr. HALL. The same answer. Mr. SOURWINE. In that article in Political Affairs in April 1951 you included the United States as a part of the "imperialist camp,' perialist camp" being your words, and you urged that—

" "im

A mass movement of protest against the sabotage of peaceful negotiation can result in unmasking the war aims of the imperialist camp, in narrowing down the area of demagogic maneuvering by the warmakers.

Do you regard the United States as part of the imperialist camp today, Mr. Hall?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. When in 1951 you urged "a mass movement of protest" in the passage I have just read, were you urging a protest against the policies of the United States of America?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. Did you, in that article, urge the American people to "compel the Truman administration to accept the Chinese proposals for a peaceful settlement of the war in Korea"?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. The fact is that you did write this and it also appears on page 15 in this article; isn't that true?

Mr. HALL. Same answer.

Mr. SOURWINE. Mr. Chairman, may I ask that the particular passage to which I refer, this item in Political Affairs, be photographically reproduced and printed in the record at this point?

Senator JOHNSTON (now presiding). I think that would be the best evidence, and for that reason it will be done.