Witness

by Whittaker Chambers

  “Gen. Muir Fairchild of the Air Corps, a member of the Dumbarton Oaks delegation.

  “Henry Fletcher, former Assistant Secretary of State, and member of the Dumbarton Oaks delegation.

  “Green Hackworth, former legal adviser of the Department of State and a member of the Dumbarton Oaks delegation, now a judge of the International Court of Justice at The Hague.

  “Admiral Arthur Hepburn, member of the United States delegation at Dumbarton Oaks.

  “Stanley Hornbeck, a member of the Dumbarton Oaks delegation, later our Ambassador to The Hague, and earlier, as chief far-eastern expert of the Department of State, my immediate superior from the fall of 1939 until the early winter of 1944.

  “Breckenridge Long, former Assistant Secretary of State, and a member of the Dumbarton Oaks delegation.

  “Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, a member of the San Francisco delegation and also of each United States Delegation to the meetings of the General Assembly.”

  I am not sure that my memory is correct as to Mrs. Roosevelt’s participation in San Francisco.

  The Chairman: I should imagine so.

  Mr. Hiss (continuing):

  “Harold Stassen, a member of the United States delegation to the San Francisco Conference.

  “Rear Adm. Harold Train, member of the Dumbarton Oaks delegation.

  “Frank Walker, former Postmaster General and member of the delegation to the London meeting of the General Assembly.

  “Edwin Wilson, my predecessor as director of the office for United Nations Affairs and my last immediate superior in the Department of State who was also a member of the Dumbarton Oaks delegation, now our Ambassador at Ankara.

  “Other superiors to whom I reported:

  “Chester Davis, Administrator of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration when I was there, and now president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

  “Francis Sayre, my first direct supervisor in the Department of State, former Assistant Secretary of State and United States High Commissioner to the Philippines, now United States representative to the Trusteeship Council of the United Nations and member of the United States delegation to the General Assembly.

  “These are the men whom I was honored to help in carrying out the finest and deepest American traditions. That is my record. I, too, have had a not insignificant role in that magnificent achievement of our Nation in recent times.

  “These men I have listed are the men with whom and under whom I worked intimately during my fifteen years in Government service—the men best able to testify concerning the loyalty with which I performed the duties assigned me. All are persons of unimpeachable character, in a position to know my work from day to day and hour to hour through many years. Ask them if they ever found in me anything except the highest adherence to duty and honor.

  “Then the committee can judge, and the public can judge, whether to believe a self-discredited accuser whose names and aliases are as numerous and as casual as his accusations.

  “The other side of this question is the reliability of the allegations before this committee, the undocumented statements of the man who how calls himself Whittaker Chambers.

  “Is he a man of consistent reliability, truthfulness, and honor? Clearly not. He admits it, and the committee knows it. Indeed, is he a man of sanity?

  “Getting the facts about Whittaker Chambers, if that is his name, will not be easy. My own counsel have made inquiries in the past few days and have learned that his career is not, like those of normal men, an open book. His operations have been furtive and concealed. Why? What does he have to hide?

  “I am glad to help get the facts.

  “At this point I should like to repeat suggestions made by me at preceding hearings with respect to the most effective method of getting facts so far as I can supply them. The suggestions I made, beginning with the very first time I appeared before your committee, were not then accepted, and the result has only been confusion and delay. Let me illustrate by recalling to your minds what I said when you asked me to identify the accuser, not by producing him under your subpoena power but by producing only a newspaper photograph taken many years after the time when, by his own statements, I had last seen him. I said to you on the occasion of my first appearance:

  “‘I would much rather see the individual—I would not want to take oath that I have never seen that man. I would like to see him; and I would be better able to tell whether I had ever seen him. Is he here today—I hoped he would be.’

  “Let me add one further example of how the procedures followed have caused confusion and delay. In your secret sessions you asked me housekeeping and minor details of years ago that few if any busy men would possibly retain in their memories with accuracy. I told you, and one of your own members acknowledged, that you or I should consult the records. I warned you that I had not checked them and that I doubted if I could be helpful under those circumstances.

  “I am having a check made of the records, and will furnish the results to you.

  “One personal word. My action in being kind to Crosley years ago was one of humaneness, with results which surely some members of the committee have experienced. You do a favor for a man, he comes for another, he gets a third favor from you. When you finally realize he is an inveterate repeater, you get rid of him. If your loss is only a loss of time and money, you are lucky. You may find yourself calumniated in a degree depending on whether the man is unbalanced or worse.”

  Now, I would like this committee to ask these questions on my behalf of the man who calls himself Whittaker Chambers, and I would like these to be part of the statement which the committee has authorized me to make.

  MR. STRIPLING: Just a moment.

  MR. HISS: Where does he reside now?

  THE CHAIRMAN: Just a minute.

  MR. STRIPLING: I noticed that counsel is passing out these questions to the press.

  MR. DAVIS: I will let you have these.

  MR. HISS: “Where do you reside?” I would like that question asked of Whittaker Chambers.

  THE CHAIRMAN: All right, proceed. The meeting will come to order. Everyone will please take his seat.

  MR. HISS: Before reading these questions, I would also like to repeat in public what I said on the occasion of the executive session in New York, where I—

  THE CHAIRMAN: Just a minute. Will you please take your seats?

  MR. HISS: I would like to repeat in public, and in public session, what I said in New York at the executive session, where Chambers was present, and I said it in his presence. I challenge him to make the statements about me with respect to communism in public that he has made under privilege to this committee. The questions that I would like this committee on my behalf to ask him—many questions have been asked of me, and I do not know what questions have been asked of him—I would like you to ask him where he now resides and I would like to know the answer. I have not been able to find out even where he lives at the present time. Shall I go on with the questions?

  MR. MUNDT: Oh, yes; go ahead.

  THE CHAIRMAN: Proceed.

  MR. HISS: I would ask that you ask him to list the various places where he has lived since 1930, indicating the length of time he has lived at each place, and the name he has used at each place. As far as I am concerned, that is all a matter of the record of the committee as to where I have lived, and the name I have used.

  Next, what name was he given when he was born? What names has he used at any time since his birth for any purpose?

  Ask him to give his complete employment record during his membership in the Communist Party, since his resignation from the Communist Party, stating the name of each employer, stating his occupation, and his compensation, also the name by which he was employed in each instance.

  I would like him to give a complete bibliography of all his writings. He says that he was a writer. Give the writings under any and every name he has used.

  I would like him to be asked whether he has ever been charged
or convicted of any crime.

  I would like him to give the full particulars, if so, as to where, when, and for what.

  I would like him to be asked whether he has ever been treated for a mental illness.

  MR. HÉBERT: Mr. Chairman, may I interrupt there to tell Mr. Hiss that at least one question has been asked Mr. Chambers, No.7. I asked him in New York whether he had ever been treated for any mental illness, whether he was ever in a mental institution or not, and he replied in the negative, and added also he was not an alcoholic. So, you can strike that. That was asked already.

  MR. HISS: Was that the extent of the committee’s inquiry into that subject?

  MR. HÉBERT: The committee’s inquiry into that was because a typical Communist smear is: When a man gets up to testify, and particularly a former Communist, is to say he is insane or an alcoholic or something else is wrong with him.

  Immediately after Mr. Chambers testified before this committee, the committee heard reverberations already of the fact that he was a mental case; in fact, it said it came from Time magazine by his own associates, so I have always believed the only way to find out anything to start off with is to ask the individual involved, and I asked Mr. Chambers a direct question. “Mr. Chambers, were you ever in a mental institution or treated for any mental disease?” I wanted to know, and I wanted to ask him, and then check back from there.

  THE CHAIRMAN: I might say—

  MR. HÉBERT: I asked him, and he denied it, and said, “No,” and also added to that that he was not an alcoholic, which was another charge that was made against him.

  I may say to you now, Mr. Hiss, that I do not accept Mr. Chambers’ word on his own statement. I intend to check that, too.

  MR. HISS: So do I.

  THE CHAIRMAN: I might say, Mr. Hiss, and also to the members of the committee, that Mr. Chambers will take the stand directly after you finish on the stand today.

  MR. NIXON: Mr. Hiss, excuse me, do you have any evidence that you would like to present at this time that Mr. Chambers has been in a mental institution? You made the charge that he has been.

  MR. HISS: I have made no such charge.

  MR. NIXON: The charge has appeared in the newspapers.

  MR. HISS: Not from me. I have made no such charge.

  MR. NIXON : Then, you do not mean that by your statement?

  MR. HISS: I mean that I am making no charges. I am seeking information.

  MR. NIXON: The charge appeared yesterday from your letter, as you recall—the suggestion of Mr. Chambers being a mental case. Now, do you have any evidence to present to the committee that he is?

  MR. HISS: I have made no such charge. I just read the record here—the letter into the record. I asked the question, “Is he a man of sanity?”

  MR. NIXON : Will you answer the question as to whether you have any evidence of his having been in a mental institution? MR. HISS: I have had various reports made to me to the effect that he has been.

  MR. NIXON: What reports have you had?

  MR. HISS: I have had reports made by individuals.

  MR. NIXON: What individuals?

  MR. HISS: They are so far only hearsay. The reports that came to me were from individuals, individual members of the press, so far, that they had heard rumors to that effect.

  MR. NIXON: What members of the press?

  MR. DAVIS: Mr. Mundt, can he finish his statement? I understood we were not to be interrupted. Let them take notes and then ask the questions after he finishes.

  THE CHAIRMAN: All right, go ahead and finish the questions.

  MR. HISS: I would like the committee to ask him if he has ever been treated for mental illness, where, and when, and by whom. I would like him to be asked where, when, and to whom he has been married. How many children he has; where does his wife now reside.

  I would like him to be asked to describe the circumstances under which he came in contact with this committee and to make public all written memoranda which he may have handed to any representative of the committee.

  I would like to know whether he is willing, as I said at the outset of these questions, to make before this committee, in a manner free from the protections of this committee, the statements so that I may test his veracity in a suit for slander or libel.

  THE CHAIRMAN: Now, does any member of the committee have any questions to ask Mr. Hiss over the statement he made or in relation to these questions he wants the committee to ask?

  MR. HÉBERT: I would like to, Mr. Chairman.

  THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hébert.

  MR. HÉBERT: Now, the question has been asked: “Do you recall certain individuals with whom you were friendly?” I will recall them from memory and ask you each question. Do you recall Henry Collins well?

  MR. HISS: I have answered that I have known Henry Collins since we were boys together at a boys’ camp in Maine.

  MR. HÉBERT: Do you know that Henry Collins is a Communist?

  MR. HISS: I do not know that Henry Collins is a Communist. I do not know that he is not a Communist.

  MR. HÉBERT: You do not know whether he is or is not a Communist?

  MR. HISS: No; that is not the kind of thing I would know.

  MR. HÉBERT: Do you know John Abt?

  MR. HISS: I do know John Abt, and I have testified as to the circumstances under which I know and have known John Abt.

  MR. HÉBERT: Do you know John Abt as a Communist or not as a Communist?

  MR. HISS: I have never known John Abt as a Communist. I do not know whether he is or not.

  MR. HÉBERT: Do you know Lee Pressman?

  MR. HISS: I know Lee Pressman, and I have testified as to how and when I knew Lee Pressman.

  MR. HÉBERT: Do you know whether or not he is a Communist?

  MR. HISS: I do not know whether or not Lee Pressman is a Communist.

  MR. HÉBERT: Did you know Harold Ware?

  MR. HISS: I knew Harold Ware only to the extent that I have testified to in my public testimony.

  MR. HÉBERT: Well, I will say this, that it is an established fact that Harold Ware was a Communist when he was living.

  MR. HISS: I knew Harold Ware to the extent I testified to in 1933 or 1945. It was not my practice then to ask people whom I met casually whether they were Communists.

  MR. HÉBERT: But you do not know whether any of these people were Communists or not.

  MR. HISS: I do not.

  MR. HÉBERT: And particular reference with regard to Henry Collins, who refused to testify here that it might incriminate himself.

  MR. HISS: I have no reason for knowing what counsel advised Mr. Collins to do with respect to his rights.

  MR. HÉBERT: Now, the reason I ask those questions, Mr. Hiss, is to bring you up to date on your letter which you just read and recited a long list of persons who would know you and know what you were about, and know who you are and what you are.

  MR. HISS: That is right.

  MR. HÉBERT: And it was an imposing array of fine American people. How would they know whether you are a Communist or not, when you don’t know about intimate people that you know, whether they are communists or not?

  MR. HISS: Mr. Hébert, I did not cite their names on that issue. I cited their names on my record, because I think my record is relevant to this inquiry.

  MR. HÉBERT: You cited that list of names to leave the impression that these people could testify that you are not a Communist?

  MR. HISS: I said, and I say now, that those people can testify as to whether they noticed in my demeanor over sometimes prolonged periods any indication of any departure from the highest rectitude.

  MR. HÉBERT: Well, none of these people could testify as to whether or not you are a Communist, could they?

  MR. HISS: Have any of them testified?

  MR. HÉBERT: I did not ask that.

  MR. HISS: Whether I departed from rectitude, in their opin-. ion?

  MR. HÉBERT: I asked you a question: Can any of them testify whether or not you are or are not a Communist?r />
  MR. HISS: That is for them to say.

  MR. HÉBERT: Can they testify? You have injected their names in the hearing. I did not.

  MR. HISS: I did not cite them for that purpose, to you, Mr. Hébert. If you wish to ask them that question, that is your privilege. If you do not wish to ask them, I shall attempt to obtain affidavits from them for the committee’s information.

  MR. HÉBERT: Well, their testimony would not be worth any more than your testimony will be against Ware, Collins, Abt, Pressman.

  MR. NIXON: Now, what is the implication that is left from the testimony that because of that $150 loan, which Crosley owed you, that he has willfully circulated this charge that you are a Communist?

  MR. HISS: I did not testify to your committee that I had any understanding of the motive which could have led him to make such a serious charge. I am not prepared to say that I understand or have any inkling as to what could have led him to make such a charge, Mr. Nixon. I would not want to say that the words we had over these relatively minor financial transactions could possibly motivate any normal person to make such a charge.

  MR. NIXON: Well, now, of course, as you have indicated, the charge that you or anybody else is a Communist now is a serious charge. Also the inference which, of course, the statements regarding which you made before the committee, and your answers to questions which you have given to the committee that somebody has been treated for a mental illness today is also a serious charge. I would appreciate, in helping the committee, to find out what the motive could have been, to find out whether possibly there is a mental condition here, if you would tell the committee now what your sources are that you have for believing that Mr. Crosley has been treated for a mental illness.

  MR. HISS: Mr. Nixon, the first reference to that which came to my attention was on the afternoon of the morning which occurred after I first testified before the committee. One of two friends, who came to the hearing with me, a lawyer who was at law school with me, and who came with me to the hearings, simply as a friend, was told by a representative of the press that there had been reports being received by the press ever since Chambers had testified that he had spent a considerable part of the last 4 or 5 years in mental institutions. That seemed to me to be a significant assertion, and I have attempted to run it down. I have not found any evidence as yet. I shall continue to search for evidence.