and I think any realistic party or person would recognize that that is not a weakness in any party.

MIKE WALLACE. You don't really believe that the CP is a real factor in the life of America today, do you?

GUS HALL. Well, I don't want to overestimate its influence, I do, however, think that we are a bigger factor in American life than most people want to recognize or even fully appreciate.

MIKE WALLACE. Well, even in your keynote speech to the 17th national convention of the party, which has just finished, you said this, "The central question before this convention is, how can the party move out into the broad stream of the people's movement, how can it break the bonds of its isolation and become more and more effectively a factor in the life of our Nation?" So, you confess that certainly over the past few years you have not been a factor but you would like wistfully to make yourself a factor in our lives.

GUS HALL. No, I think what it says is that we want to become more of a factor.

MIKE WALLACE. Yes.

GUS HALL. Now you see, Mike, you have to really know our party, you see, we are possibly the only organization that takes a completely self-critical attitude towards our work. We honestly value its weaknesses publicly, we never hide our weaknesses and this is an attempt again publicly to evaluate a weakness; that while we have an influence, we don't want to exaggerate that influence and we think that we should be a bigger factor and a bigger force in the political life of our Nation.

MIKE WALLACE. A Communist has the freedom in CP meetings then, you are saying, the freedom to evaluate weaknesses, wrongs and so forth.

GUS HALL. Yes, not only have that right but we encourage that.

MIKE WALLACE. Well, under those circumstances, I'd like you to reconcile that statement with this by John Gates, who was the editor of the Daily Worker and a leader in the American CP for 27 years. When he left the party about a year or so ago, I interviewed him and he gave me this reason for getting out. He said, "I resigned from the party because it no longer believes in the freedom it professes to have as its goal. It does not have democracy and so it is dying from self-destruction." And, now with the party at its lowest membership in history, it would appear that John Gates was right.

GUS HALL. Well, I would say that John Gates was looking for justification to leave the party, and I'm sure that even Gates knows better; that that does not reflect the realities of life in our party. I don't think-I don't think there is a more democratic party in existence in America than our party.

MIKE WALLACE. By your own admission, the party was at its lowest ebb last year. Now, why?

GUS HALL. Well, I think that reflects a number of factors. I think it reflects the conditions of the past period; it reflects the attack that our party has been under from the McCarthy hysterics, as well as reflected a certain internal struggle that took place that we call factionalism, which Gates was a part. Therefore, about a year ago we hit bottom, and since then, however, we have been growing. We have renewed our internal life, and I think very fast we are again becoming an important factor in the political life of our country.

MIKE WALLACE. Fast or rather Gates was part of the factionalism that you talk about?

GUS HALL. Yes.

MIKE WALLACE. He had to leave the party because evidently he couldn't make his voice heard in the party any more. You are the national leader of the party. Listen to what another disillusioned Communist, one of your most prized intellectuals for many years, who left the party, has to say about the life of a Communist Party leader, and you are the top man. This is by Howard Fast-he says: "The Communist Party leader is the final judge, he is the final appeal; he can make absolute decisions and he can command servile obedience. He can gage his ego, given all this." Fast goes on: "He must also be driven by a lust for power, for there are few other rewards for a party leader. The pay is poor, the privilege is petty, the dangers great, the struggle long; but the reward of power is sufficient and enormous."

GUS HALL. Well, I-it doesn't describe in any way my powers as the general secretary, and I must say again that here again it is an attempt by people who don't want to possibly admit cowardice, or they can't take the fact that they're not in the limelight. I must say that the people you are quoting now were pos

sibly the noisiest people in our party, made more speeches, and wrote more articles than possibly anybody, and I don't think that they can complain about they didn't have a voice in our party.

MIKE WALLACE. They were exercising the privileges of which you are so

very

GUS HALL. Well, they were not kicked out. They left on their own. MIKE WALLACE. Well, yes; Fast said that his disillusionment was triggered by the Khrushchev speech, the so-called secret speech to the 20th Party Congress which confessed Joseph Stalin's barbarism. With regard to you, how did you

react to that speech?

GUS HALL. Well, my reaction, of course, I think, was much more levelheaded. That is that is, I don't condone in any way or justify the actions of Stalin in his later years; however, I temper that with the understanding of the historical setting that brought about these conditions; that is, that here was a new nation, with a new economic system, surrounded by antagonistic forces, and not only threatened, but a number of times invaded, and in an atmosphere like that it is understandable why some excesses took place, while it is not justifiable.

MIKE WALLACE. Again we can come to talk about freedom and freedom within the CP, Gus. In your keynote speech the other day, this is what you said— you said: "Our party entered this convention to cure us from the elements of liquidationism and revisionism, having in the main eradicated their twin evils, left sectarianism and dogmatism." Now, after you wander through all those isms and try to figure out what it is that you say, it seems to me that what you've said is that you've gotten rid of all opposing views.

GUS HALL. Well, see now, these are ideological currents.

MIKE WALLACE. Well, what is the difference between a view and an ideological current?

GUS HALL. Well, I mean in the sense that we don't stamp out a view but an ideological direction, we will resist and fight against it. In this sense, the party becomes unified and has one general policy, one general direction in which there can be many variations and debates, and there are, and decisions. But in a sense, that the party does move in one direction. Whereas, we don't have the situation like the Democratic and Republican Parties. Where, you have the Dixiecrats on one hand, then you have a more progressive wing and the same with the Republican Party. We have a party that has one general program, one general direction of things, and within that there are differences and discussions and debates.

MIKE WALLACE. Gus, let's take a look at America today. We've never been more prosperous. Gross national income is at a record high. We have problems and challenges admittedly but these are being dealt with by our two parties. Why do we need the Communists? What can you do that's better?

GUS HALL. Well, first, I can not go along with the idea that the problems that America faces are being dealt with by the two parties. I think generally we face a number of very serious questions in our country and there are new answers needed to many new problems. Amongst them, for instance, the question of automation and the results of automation. Here we are in this boom period as you very correctly stated, but during this very boom period we have, according to the Government figures, a little more than 4 million unemployed and again, according to the statistics of the Government, large areas of desolation like in West Virginia and Kentucky, and I would say further that there are even graver basic problems. You take an average individual, it's true that he has an automobile, and it's true that he'll buy a refrigerator and all the equipment; but this is all on time payments. And if you take the question of insecurity, here we have one recession after another, and after you are out of work only for a few weeks, you're back in payment and you lose your car. And in a sense there is a prosperity, but there is a lack of security in America and this is a growing thing not a diminishing thing. So there were many basic questions where new thoughts are needed and generally this has been the role of our party throughout history, that we have pioneered in a number of fields including fields like social security, unemployment insurance, equal rights for the 18 million Negroes in America and other minority groups. In a sense, we are an advance detachment of society and project advanced ideas and only years later they are accepted more or less by other sections of the population. MIKE WALLACE. All right.

GUS HALL. I think this is a very important role for us.

MIKE WALLACE. I've listened to your catalog and I think there are some inaccuracies or what I believe inaccuracies in certain things that you have said, but I won't argue with you. But, it seems to me that both the Republicans and the Democrats and even Norman Thomas Socialists have been doing very well in trying to solve these problems and look to the future to solve these problems but within the framework of basic freedoms under which this country was constituted and which you people, which the Communists, would deprive us of. GUS HALL. I would say the framework of the existing system of capitalism, of domination by big business and monopoly interests, in other words, and they are trying to solve a lot of these questions within that framework while we say that some of these problems we will have to find a solution temporarily under this framework but in a basic sense the solution will be found only under socialism.

MIKE WALLACE. Well, I asked former party leader John Gates, the fellow who left the party, about that. He said, I asked him, I said, "If you and the rest of you had had your way when you were in the party, would not the United States be a dictatorship or satellite country? Wouldn't we all be living here in fear and without freedom?" and he replied, "Yes, if we had had our way that would have been the case." You claim that you're on the side, you're in the forefront of the fight for the labor movement but labor, too, is one of your most bitter antagonists. Mr. Khrushchev found that out when he met labor leaders during his recent visit. He and Walter Reuther-and certainly George Meany is not done fighting and yet you say that your members, that you're in the forefront of the fight for labor. How? When?

GUS HALL. Well, I would say that our basic influence has not yet met the leadership of the labor movement but the major influence of the party is with the rank and file, and workers in the shops and factories in life, that is the root of our influence in the labor movement.

MIKE WALLACE. How many members are there in the CP, U.S.A., right now? GUS HALL. Well, the convention report stated that it is in the vicinity of 10,000.

MIKE WALLACE. But you, your hunch is that it may be, that it was much less. GUS HALL. No, my hunch was actually that it was more.

MIKE WALLACE. Well. The other day you told my reporter this, Gus, you said this, "Dwight Eisenhower is a man of courage and farsightedness." Now, I'd like to know how you mean that? What makes you say that about our President? And, we'll get Gus Hall's answer in just 1 minute.

Now back to our story with Gus Hall, the new national head of the Communist Party, U.S.A. Gus, to repeat, the other day you said this "Eisenhower is a man of courage and farsightedness," what did you mean?

GUS HALL. Well, I meant that in a little more narrow sense. In a sense that insofar as the President has taken the initiative in the direction of thawing out the cold war, in the direction of peaceful coexistence, in the direction of putting an end to the atomic bomb tests and so on. In this sense, I meant that I think Eisenhower shows courage and farsightedness in taking this initiative.

MIKE WALLACE. Tell me this, he recently completed an 11 nation tour, was met everywhere by tremendous ovations. How do you interpret that?

GUS HALL. Well, the way I interpret that is that Eisenhower is now receiving the benefits of the image of being one of the two men that stands for peace, and was an image that grew out of the Khrushchev visit, and the initiative, the Camp David meeting. I think that what the millions of people of Asia and Africa are showing is the support for this type of an outlook in settling world affairs.

MIKE WALLACE. When you say that one of the two men who stands for peace, Khrushchev and Eisenhower?

GUS HALL. That is right.

MIKE WALLACE. What about Mao Tse-tung? He's a Communist.

GUS HALL. Well, Mao Tse-tung is a Communist and stands for peace but he didn't take part in these negotiations.

MIKE WALLACE. He stands for peace?

GUS HALL. Oh yes, I think so.

MIKE WALLACE. Well, how come when you said that one of the two men in the world that stands for peace why didn't you say one of the three men that stands for peace?

GUS HALL. Well, I meant symbolically, that in the sense the two men were the men who met at Camp David and I think that the world has come to accept

them because there are other men who are for peace besides Eisenhower and Khrushchev but symbolically they have taken that posture on the world scale. MIKE WALLACE. Mao Tse-tung in Tibet and Mao Tse-tung in the Indian border, he still stands for

GUS HALL. Oh, I think so. I think these are local problems that should be settled and I'm sure they will but in an overall sense China and Mao Tse-tung are peace forces of the world.

MIKE WALLACE. Fidel Castro, what do you think of him?

GUS HALL. Well, I think Castro is a force, a patriot of Cuba, and is now taking Cuba on the road of independence and freedom and independence especially from the big business interests of the United States. And I'm all for independence and freedom for any nation.

MIKE WALLACE. Allen Dulles, who is the Director of our Central Intelligence Agency, made this statement the other day. He said, "Russia has now passed out a mandate to the Communist Parties of the world that they should espouse the cause of nationalism in the new and emerging states." We see that today in the Caribbean.

GUS HALL. Well, I would say that nobody has to pass out a mandate like that to the Communists in the Communist Party because we have, our program as always called for independence and freedom for these countries and colonial liberation. That has been a part of our program from the inception of the Communist Party for 40 years.

MIKE WALLACE. To your knowledge is Castro a Communist?

GUS HALL. To my knowledge he is not.

MIKE WALLACE. You mean you don't know?

GUS HALL. Well actually, I think I would know if he was and he is not.
MIKE WALLACE. You are for peaceful coexistence?

GUS HALL. Yes.

MIKE WALLACE. In April of this year FBI Chief J. Edgar Hoover talked about the new Communist Party line, and he said in part this, he said the American Communist leaders joined by duped or unthinking sympathizers, loudly singing falsetto choruses of "let's be friendly tunes." The danger of the national security, he went on, should assuredly be evident in the feverish activities and the spirited optimism of the Communist Party, U.S.A., whose foremost targets in the new offensive are labor groups. It is an all-out effort to degrade the American economic systems. Now, in a sense isn't this more or less the line that we have been hearing from you for the past half hour? GUS HALL. Well, except that it's distorted in Hoover's statement. It is true that we are active, and we are active for peace, we are active against the atomic tests. We are for coexistence, but very frankly we are convinced that there is absolutely no other road for civilization.

MIKE WALLACE. Final question. You told my reporter the other day that you expect that you will see a Communist President, or not that you will see, but there will be, let us say, in our children's lifetime or maybe our grandchildren's, to go along with Mr. Khrushchev, a Communist President of the United States.

GUS HALL. Well, I don't as a rule make predictions of that type because really it is a hazardous game to do, but I will say without setting a date that, yes, someday we will have a Communist President.

MIKE WALLACE. Gus Hall, thank you very much for coming and spending this half hour and telling us a little bit about your point of view and that of the Communist Party, U.S.A.

GUS HALL. It has been my pleasure.

MIKE WALLACE. I'll be back with a footnote in a moment to this interview with Gus Hall.

MIKE WALLACE. J. Edgar Hoover warns that the objective of the American Communist Party is still the overthrow of our free government. For this reason there are individuals who undoubtedly will question our purpose in giving Communist Gus Hall a microphone. But, if Gus Hall and his opinions are like that deceptive one-tenth of an iceberg that shows above the surface, then we have at least marked him on the map as an aid to political navigation. We thank Gus Hall for adding his portrait to our gallery; one of the people other people are interested in. Mike Wallace. That's it for now.

Senator KEATING. May I intervene, Mr. Chairman, before I have to go to the floor.

I would like to make an appeal to Mr. Rein.

You are a member of the bar of the District of Columbia?

Mr. REIN. Yes.

Senator KEATING. And of the New York bar also?

Mr. REIN. Yes, sir.

Senator KEATING. You reside in the District also?
Mr. REIN. Yes.

Senator KEATING. You have appeared here as counsel for a great many members of the Communist Party, and many of the leaders of the Communist Party, both now and in the past. This committee is engaged in an effort to determine whether there has been any change in the policies of the party since Mr. Hall became the head of it and took over from Mr. Dennis, what their future course is, and so forth. Now, as a loyal American citizen, can't you assist this committee in referring us to witnesses who can give us information on that subject?

Mr. REIN. I assure you, I cannot.

Senator KEATING. I know of several, but how many party members have you represented before this committee?

Mr. REIN. I don't know, Senator Keating.

Senator JOHNSTON. Would you look it up on your books and later tell us?

Mr. REIN. I think you would have a record of that which would be much more adequate than mine.

Senator KEATING. We can't ask you to do anything which would interfere with your professional relationship with your own clients.

Mr. REIN. It seems to me that that is what you are running into. Mr. HALL. Is there an inference here that it is a crime to represent people in a committee like this, or is this an attempt to create an atmosphere

Senator KEATING. No question is being addressed to you, Mr. Hall. Mr. Rein knows that this committee recognizes the right of any witness who appears here to be accompanied by counsel, and counsel is not required in any way to divulge, of course, any confidential communications with his client.

Mr. REIN. I can see no other purpose in your question, Senator. Senator KEATING. I am appealing to you as a loyal American citizen to try and assist this committee in its efforts to determine what changes, if any, have taken place in the course of the Communist Party since the new regime took over.

Mr. REIN. I have no information on that.

Senator KEATING. You have represented more than any other lawyer that I am familiar with. There is no way to force you, I recognize that, but I am appealing to you to try to assist this committee, if there are those who are prepared to tell us about what changes, if any, have taken place in the party since the new regime took over.

Mr. REIN. I have no information that I could give to the committee on the subject.

Mr. SOURWINE. Mr. Hall, during your television appearance on the Mike Wallace program you stated that the rank-and-file shopworker is the root of the Communist Party influence in the labor movement. How many American Communists are members of labor unions? Mr. HALL. I claim my privilege.