Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

a group holding honorary citizenship, a class of privileged aliens, is too disgusting to merit serious consideration in Congress.

Mr. STEELE. That is all I wish to say.

Mr. RUTHERFORD (presiding). Thank you. Call your next witness, Mr. Lloyd.

Mr. LLOYD. Is General Fries here?

MAJ. GEN. AMOS A. FRIES, OF THE NATIONAL SOJOURNERS General FRIES. My name is Amos A. Fries, major general, United States Army, retired.

Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen, I am here to-day representing especially the National Sojourners, which is an organization of officers, and ex-officers of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Public Health Service and Coast and Geodetic Survey, taking in officers who are Master Masons in good standing and who now hold or have held a commission at any time. Our convention has passed on this question very strongly. We are not only against this bill, but any bill that will create class legislation and give to alien-born citizens, rights which no native-born American citizen has.

We feel that the decision of the Supreme Court in the MacIntosh and Bland cases, was conclusive that such a bill would be unconstitutional, but I shall not go into that, because you have lawyers, and you have the Supreme Court ruling yourselves.

What I want to take up particularly, however, this morning, is to show by records that this whole movement to give to alien slackers rights of citizenship, is tainted with communism. It would have the effect that the communists want of weakening the power of the United States to defend itself in any internal war.

I do not believe that the proponents of this bill, many of them at least, have any idea that under the present decision of the Supreme Court, it would be constitutional, but if this bill were passed, they would at once begin a tremendous propaganda, as they are carrying on now, for the Supreme Court of the United States to change its decision, or for a constitutional amendment, or something else that would make this constitutional, and then you would find propaganda to get every possible organization and others lined up in this, to take an obligation and force it through that they would not defend the United States in any sort, of war. In other words, they would absolutely destroy the power of the United States to protect the nation, and guarantee to every State a republican form of Government, in case civil was was started.

I feel that that idea is back of the whole thing, and that idea is the communistic theory.

William Z. Foster, testifying before the Fish committee, stated that their object is revolution. Roger N. Baldwin testified before the same committee, and stated that the American Civil Liberties Union

Mr. FREE (interposing). Tell who these people are. Who is Baldwin, and what organization is he connected with?

General FRIES. William Z. Foster is the head of Communism in the United States, and openly states such, and that he owes his allegiance

Mr. DIES (interposing). He was a candidate for President.

Mr. JENKINS. And states openly that he prefers the Red flag of Russia to our flag.

Mr. FREE. He ran for President while in jail for violation of the laws of the United States.

General FRIES. Roger N. Baldwin is a director of the American Civil Liberties Union, and is practically executive secretary.

At this time, I also want to introduce the name of Harry F. Ward. Now, Harry F. Ward is the chairman of the national council of the American Čivil Liberties Union. Harry F. Ward, at present, has a sabbatical year's leave to go to the Far East, and is said to be in Russia at the present time. Of that I have no particular evidence. Now, Harry F. Ward was, as late as April 15, 1928, the editor of the Social Service Bulletin of the Methodist Federation for Social Service. That particular issue of the bulletin is signed Methodist Federation for Social Service, by Francis J. McConnell, President; Harry F. Ward, Secretary. Harry F. Ward to-day is chairman, as I said, of the American Civil Liberties Union and at the present time he is on a year's sabbatical leave, and the Reverend John Haynes Holmes, if you please, is the acting chairman of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Now, William Z. Foster was, for 10 years, an active member of the national committee of the American Civil Liberties Union under Harry F. Ward. I have not the evidence here to show that Harry F. Ward was chairman of the American Civil Liberties Union Committee, through all of the 11 years, but I have the evidence that he was the chairman way back in 1920 and 1923, and he is now chairman. He and Bishop McConnell, as shown by Methodist Social Service Bulletin of April 15, 1928, were buddies, one was president of this Methodist social service organization, and the other was executive secretary. They worked hand in glove. William Z. Foster, the communist who stands for the overthrow of our Government by violence, that is by assassination and murder in every hamlet and village, was a member of that committee under Harry F. Ward, and Harry F. Ward was working right alongside, and publishing this bulletin with Bishop Francis J. McConnell, who, a year after this bulletin was published in 1929, became president of the Federal Council of Churches in America.

Now, to show you that they were then working with the American Civil Liberties Union (with William Foster as a member of the national committee as well as other communists) we read at the top of page 2 of that particular bulletin, of "the New Red Hunt." I looked up that New Red Hunt pamphlet. It was interesting. I could not find it in the Congressional Library, but they sent me to the Library of the Labor Department, and I found it, and it is an attack on every patriotic and other organization fighting these un-American organizations that want to bring in aliens and give them rights that no native born citizen has.

In speaking of the New Red Hunt they put in parenthesis this statement "our close cooperation with the American Civil Liberties Union brings much first-hand material in this field, not otherwise easily available to our readers."

On the third page of that pamphlet, they say, in speaking of the work of their own organization, "The secretaries are regular members of the department of social service and research and education of

the Federal Council of Churches, with a voice in those programs; we constantly use the resources of the Council. The office prepared eight articles for a handbook on social service for the research department."

There are other interesting things in this pamphlet, under cooperation they state, "Our own organization has been kept small, not only by necessity, but by choice." In other words, when they want to put over some of the things like this alien bill they found it was much easier handled that way than if they had a large organization. Now, it is very interesting to find that same sort of statement in a Civil Liberties Union letter addressed "To our friends in Washington." This came to me, and I may be included as a friend, I suppose in that way. They were asking for funds to carry on various activities of which the following are some. Requesting money to restrict the powers of the courts to issue labor injunctions, to carry on the campaign against censorship. "The Harlan County affair, the defense of a group of coal miners, carrying up in the California court the refusal of citizenship to an alien socialist," an appeal in western Pennsylvania from sentences of striking coal miners for a fight with company gunmen, in which one striker was killed and twenty wounded; a petition in the appellate court in Maryland for a change of venue for a negro about to be tried in a district where a lynching had taken place, working toward the appeal in Philadelphia of a conviction for sedition, a suit in Glendale, California against the police department for interfering with the meetings of William Busick, a socialist candidate, and other items What I wanted to call particular attention to is their statement, “ we are a small group in the country, but our aggressive tactics and uncompromising principles, give us an influence out of all proportion, to our size."

66

Then add, speaking, to the people who contribute money, "it is only your loyal support by activity and contribution that makes it possible. Those who cannot contribute can at least indicate their special interest in one or another of these activities, and can help with letters and telegrams in campaigns."

In other words, they are a little group misrepresenting a very large group.

You have your Methodist Social Service Bulletin here showing the church crowd to be a small group.

I said these people are working with or at least along the same line as the communists. It is worth going into that subject a little more. Under date of November 27, 1931, 10 days before the first hunger march came to Congress, Roger N. Baldwin wrote this letter to "Our friends in Washington." I seem to get all those friendly letters.

He starts out and says: "As you have doubtless noticed by the newspapers, the communists are arranging a national hunger march." In other words, here is Roger N. Baldwin, "director," under the Reverend Harry F. Ward, "chairman," speaking of this hunger march as communist, and arranged by them. Then, he said, in the second paragraph:

Judging from similar incidents in various States during the yast year, the communists in charge will demand hearings before Congress and at the White House, and they will not accept complacently any obstruction of that program.

They stand upon rights which should be conceded to all, but which both officials and police do not accord freely to communists.

For that reason, we are asking our Washington friends to get in touch with the District authorities at once in order to determine just what plans are being made to handle the demonstration. We see that the Legion and Mathew Woll of the American Federation of Labor are putting pressure on the authorities to break up the demonstration by force. We want to do everything we can to prevent that.

We are therefore asking Mr. Richard W. Hogue of People's Legislative Service, 208 First Street SE., Washington, to get together with a few of our Washington friends who are interested in the issue and go in a group to see superintendent of police to get from him some assurance that the demonstration will be be protected in what are admittedly its rights of petition and of a hearing. Only by such means can disorder be avoided.

Now, bringing these facts down to date, Rev. Worth M. Tippy is a secretary of the Federal council and a member of several committees. He was a member of the committee that recently had a meeting in behalf of Mooney and Billings. I have here a clipping from the Associated Press, which is dated December 26, showing that Mooney is either a communist or else he is working with them. Now this came out in the Star or Post, I do not have that down, but it is A. P. of December 26. I quote:

The International Labor Defense, a communistic organization, announced yesterday that Thomas Mooney has accepted the honorary chairmanship of International Workers Olympiad to be held in Chicago in June of 1932. Mooney's acceptance came in the form of a telegram to the International Labor Defense here from himself in San Quentin.

Now, I have in the publication of the American Civil Liberties Union itself, statements which bear out the statement in there that the International Labor Defense is communistic. They state in a pamphlet called "The Fight for Civil Liberties in 1930-31" that because of difficulties they had gotten into because of the jumping of bail, those men that jumped bail (those communists who jumped bail), and went to Russia, they had to pay some $27,500; that they then refused to work as freely as before with the International Labor Defense. In the case of communists, they make it clear that either the International Labor Defense has to take, up entirely alone cases to defend communists, or they (The A. C. L. U.) will. But they do add this, that after the first trial perhaps, and if it be lost, then the American Civil Liberties Union will take it up no matter which organization conducted the primary trial.

Now, there is another phase showing the interlocking of the Federal Council of Churches with the American Civil Liberties Union, with its communistic taint. Those two organizations are the leaders in fighting for this bill, and they are the leaders in fighting against military training in schools and colleges.

In a letter sent out September 22, 1930, entitled "Dear Friend," asking for aid for this committee on militarism in education, signed by Rev. Harry Emerson Fosdick, Bishop Francis J. McConnell, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, William Allen White, and Rabbi Philippson, there is given the names of the entire national committee. Then here is a letterhead of the American Civil Liberties Union of June 25, 1931. Comparing these two letterheads we find 11 of the national committee, as they call it, on militarism in

education, are 11 of the National Council of the American Civil Liberties Union. Until last fall William Z. Foster was a member of the American Civil Liberties Union committee, along with these 11 who are also on the committee on militarism in education, sponsored by the Federal Council of Churches. Now, I am using the word sponsored" very carefully, because I took up with the executive secretary of the Federal Council of Churches, this question, and asked him certain questions in regard to a pamphlet called "Christ and the Class War," put out by the International Fellowship of Reconciliation, and issued by the American Secretariate, 383 Bible House, Astor Place, New York City. There is an American fellowship of reconciliation of whom Kirby Page, the editor of the World Tomorrow, is an officer. He told me that he was an officer. I think he said the vice president in this American organization. I asked the executive secretary of the Federal Council if he approved of the Christ and Class War pamphlet, and also if the Federal Council approved the report of a meeting of 37 or 38 church and similar organizations out in Evanston, Illinois, in February, 1930, of which meeting this Fellowship of Reconciliation was a member. The Federal Council of Churches was officially represented there, as they state, by one of these organizations, not this one but by another. This Christ and the Class War pamphlet, is as communistic a document as this manifesto of Karl Marx itself, written in 1845 to 1848, and really printed in December of 1847, and put out in 1848.

I will just read you one thing that is in "The Christ and Class War." Under the report under part II starts out by saying, "We recommend fellowship members both as individuals and as groups wherever possible to engage in some social task, and while recognizing the variety of conditions obtaining in different countries, suggest the following lines of practical activity which the present situation seems to call for.

"(3) Joining political movements which aim at the replacement of private capitalism by a system of collective ownership which would not, like capitalism, create class divisions.

That is absolutely communism, and the destruction of private property.

You will find the whole report of that Evanston conference, by the way, in the Congressional Record, I think, of May, 1930.

When I wrote and asked if the Federal Council of Churches approved of the above named two reports, the reply was entirely evasive. The reply was to the effect that the Federal Council of Churches only approves in two ways. Now, they have three great committees, as I understand it, a great convention committee that meets once in four years, another group of one hundred, and then a group (that works more or less continuously, meeting once a month) of about twenty-eight, Rev. Cavert, Executive Secretary stated that unless one of the three Federal Council groups particularly passed on it, it was not a Federal Council approved matter, and that is all he would say. He neither denied that they believed in the reports, un-American and communistic, or that they supported the organization or indeed anything else about them. He simply evaded the question, and a little later, in order to get some more information, I got hold of a book called "Young People's Relationships " the vilest thing I have ever read. Indecent. It says, "Issued under the auspices of the

« ÎnapoiContinuă »