The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10: 30 a. m., in the caucus room, Old House Office Building, Hon. J. Parnell Thomas (chairman),presiding.
Committee members present: Representatives J. Parnen Thomas,Karl E. Mundt, ,John McDowell, Richard M. Nixon, Richard B. Vail,and F. Edward Hebert.
Staff members present: Robert E. Stripling, chief investigator; Louis J. Russell, William A. Wheeler, Donald T. Appen, investigators;Benjamin Mandel, director of research; and A. S. Poore, editor, for the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. The meeting will come to order.
Take your seats, please, those who have seats.
The record win show that those present are Mr. Mundt, Mr. McDowell, Mr. Nixon, Mr. Vail, Mr. Hebert, and Mr. Thomas.
A quorum of the fun committee is present.
The Chair would like to make this short statement. On August 3 the committee received testimony from Whittaker Chambers regarding the operation within the Government of the Communist apparatus during the period 1934 to 1937. According to the testimony of Mr. Chambers, Mr. Alger Hiss was a member of this group, which had as its purpose Communist infiltration of the American Government, with espionage as one of its eventual objectives.

On August 5 the committee heard in open session Mr. Alger Hiss at his own request, who categorically denied the testimony and stated that he had never known an individual by the name of Whittaker Chambers and could not identify him as a person he had ever known by photographs which were shown him.

The committee in an effort to determine the facts promptly sent a subcommittee to New York and again called Whittaker Chambers, took his testimony in executive session in the Federal Building in New York City on August 7. Mr. Chambers was questioned at length regarding his associations with Mr. Hiss. He gave the committee such detailed information concerning his associations with Mr. Hiss and his family during the period in question that the committee came to the conclusion that it was impossible for the two persons not to have been closely associated.

Following this session, part of the staff of the committee was then detailed to corroborate, if possible, the testimony of Whittaker Chambers, which had been taken in New York City. As a result of this investigation, on August 16 the committee again brought before it Mr. Alger Hiss, who was questioned in executive session in Washington concerning the detailed testimony that Mr. Chambers had given in New York in executive session. During the course of this testi-
mony Mr. Hiss again failed to identify Whittaker Chambers from the photographs which .were shown to him. However, he did advise the committee that he had searched his mind and that he did recall an individual by the name of George Crosley, whom he had known during the period in question. He expressed some doubt, however, that this was the person known as Whittaker Chambers.

The following day, August 17, the committee brought about a confrontation at an executive session of the committee at the Commodore Hotel, New York City, between Alger Hiss and .Whittaker Chambers, at which time Mr. Hiss made the positive identification of Whittaker Chambers as an individual that he knew as George Crosley.

While the testimony of Whittaker Chambers is not directly involved in the two espionage rings which the committee has been investigating -namely, the Silvermaster and Perlo groups, as disclosed by ElIzabeth T. Bentley-nevertheless, because of the direct conflict in the testimony of Mr. Hiss and Mr. Chambers, the committee has continued its investigations and has subpenaed both of these witnesses to appear here in public session this morning in an effort to determine the true facts. As a result of this hearing, certainly one of these witnesses will be tried for perjury. The Congress and the American people are entitled to the truth on this important matter. These hearings will be fair
and impartial.

I should, therefore, like to caution the people present today that they are guests of the committee. We are glad to have as many representatives of the American public as is possible to crowd in this room today. I shall ask, therefore, that you conduct yourselves in an orderly manner and to refrain from any demonstration whatsoever, including applause.
I should like to say to the news reels and photographers that they are likewise welcome here, but they must not in any way interfere with the orderly procedure of the committee.
With this understanding, we shall proceed to call the first witness.
Mr. Stripling, the first witness.

Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Alger Hiss.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hiss, raise your right hand, please.
Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. HISS. I do.
The CHAIRMAN. Sit down.

TESTIMONY OF ALGER HISS, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, JOHN F. DAVIS

Mr. STRIPLING. Are you accompanied by counsel?
Mr. HISS. I am, Mr. Stripling. 
Mr. STRIPLING. Will you have your counsel identify himself?
Mr. DAVIS. My name is John F. Davis. I am a partner in the firm of Hilmer & Davis, with offices at 1700 I Street NW., Washington, D. C.
Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Hiss, you are here this morning in response to a subpena which was served upon you on August 17 at the Commodore Hotel in New York City; is that correct?
Mr. HISS. Mr. Stripling, as I told the subcommittee on that day, there was no need to serve a subpena on me. A subpena was handed to me. I had already told the committee I would be very glad to be here on August 25.
Mr. STRIPLING. You are here also in response to the subpena, however?
Mr. HISS. I received the subpena; yes, Mr. Stripling.
Mr. STRIPLING. You are here in response to it; is that correct?
Mr. HISS. To the extent that my coming here quite voluntarily after having received the subpena is in response to it; I would accept that statement.
Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chairman, I would like to read a brief statement at this time.
Public Law 601 of the Seventy-ninth Congress, second session:
House Resolution 5 of the Eightieth Congress provides the authority for the Committee on Un-American Activities, United States House of Representatives.
Public Law 601 states:
The Committee on Un-American Activities as a whole or by subcommittee is authorized to make from time to time investigations of (i) the extent, character, and objects of un-American propaganda activities in the United States, (ii) the diffusion within the United States of subversive and un-American propaganda that is instigated from foreign countries or of a domestic origin and attacks the principle or the form of government as guaranteed by our Constitution, and (iii) all other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress in any necessary remedial legislation.
     Pursuant to this mandate the committee has been conducting an investigation in the past several months into alleged Communist infiltration by Communist agents in the Federal Government and the operation within the Government of certain persons who were collecting information to be turned over to a foreign government. The hearing this morning is for the purpose of pursuing this investigation. Among the witnesses who have been subpenaed to appear this morning are Mr. Alger Hiss and Mr. Whittaker Chambers.
     All questions propounded to Mr. Hiss and Mr. Chambers or the other witnesses will be pertinent to the inquiry, and they shall be required to answer them.
    Mr. HISS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to address a question to the chairman if I might.
    The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hiss.
    Mr. HISS. May I be permitted to make an opening statement?
    The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hiss, is that opening statement the same as the letter you sent to me?
    Mr. HISS. I would like to read that letter into the record so that it is actually a part of the record in these proceedings.
     The CHAIRMAN. Is it the same as the letter?
     Mr. HISS. In part it is, but I have a few additional comments I would like to make in addition to reading--
     The CHAIRMAN. We have already read the letter in the newspapers.
     Mr. HISS. But it is not a part of the record of this proceeding, Mr. Chairman.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chairman.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. May I suggest that we proceed with the questions and at the conclusion of the questions and answers the committee take
     Mr. Hiss' statement under advisement as to whether he should read it.
     The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Chairman, do I understand your ruling that I may not read the letter into the record?
     The CHAIRMAN. Not necessarily. You may not read the letter right at this point. Later on we will take under consideration whether or not the letter will be read.
     Mr. HISS. May I, Mr. Chairman, make the other part of the statement I desire to make at the outset of the meeting?
     The CHAIRMAN. Not at this point. Go ahead, Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Hiss, would you kindly stand up, please?
     Mr. Chambers, will you stand up?
     Mr. Hiss, have you ever seen this individual [Mr. Stripling points to Mr. Chambers.]
     The CHAIRMAN. Would you repeat the question, please?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Have you ever seen this individual who is standing?
     Mr. HISS. I have.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Do you know him?
     Mr. HISS. I identify him, Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. As who?
     Mr. HISS. As George Crosley.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When did you know him as George Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. According to my best recollection-and I would like to repeat what I have said to the committee before, that I have not had the opportunity to consult records of the time-I first knew him sometime in the winter of 1934 or 1935.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When did you last see Mr. Crosley, as you have identified him ?
     Mr. HISS. Prefacing my answer with the same remarks I have just made, I would think sometime in 1935.
     Mr. STRIPLING. In 1935 was the last time you saw him?
     Mr. HISS. According to my best recollection, not having checked the records.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Would you remain standing a moment, Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. Chairman, would you swear in Mr. Chambers?
     The CHAIRMAN. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I do.

TESTIMONY OF WHITTAKER CHAMBERS

     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chamber, do you know the individual who is now standing at the witness stand?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I do.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Who is he?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Mr. Alger Hiss.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When did you first meet Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think about 1934.
     Mr. STRIPLING. 1934?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. 1934.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When did you last see :Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. About 1938.
     Mr. STRIPLING. About 1938. Have a seat, Mr. Chambers. Sit     down, Mr. Hiss.
     Mr. Hiss, when you appeared before the committee on August 3, I think it was--

TESTIMONY OF ALGER HISS--Resumed

     Mr. HISS. I appeared on August 5, I think.
     Mr. STRIPLING. August 5-I am sorry-you were shown pictures of Mr. Whittaker Chambers.
     Mr. HISS. I was shown a photograph.
     Mr. STRIPLING. At that time you could not identify this individual from that photograph.
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When you appeared before the committee in executive session in Washington on August 16, you were again shown a picture of Mr. Whittaker Chambers.
     Mr. HISS. I think I was shown two pictures that day, according to my recollection.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You also failed at that time to identify Mr. Chambers as Mr. Crosley.
     Mr. HISS. I said that the pictures were definitely of a face that was not unfamiliar to me. There was a certain familiarity about it.
    Incidentally, Mr. Stripling is referring to certain testimony of mine taken in executive session, Mr. Chairman. I wonder if there is any reason why all of the testimony thus far taken in this case should not be made public. A good deal of it has reached the press by one means or another. There is a considerable amount of distortion and misunderstanding.
    I have no reason to want any of that testimony-mine or Mr. Chambers', which I have never seen-to remain secret. It seems to me the public and the press would like to have full access to all of the testimony that has been taken to this date.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that the committee make all of the testimony public as or this moment.
     Mr. HISS. I think that would be a very good idea.
     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that yesterday, in your absence, the members of the committee who were here decided that today we would make all the testimony available provided it was agreeable to the other members of the committee.
     Mr. HISS. I am very gratified.
     The CHAIRMAN. All right. Without objection, it will all be made public as of this moment.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Hiss, .would you relate to the committee the circumstances under which you first met the person you have identified that you knew as George Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Stripling, I have already in an effort to be helpful to the committee when I came to the executive session on the 16th willingly in response to a request from the chairman given the best recollection that I have.
     As I said then, I have no opportunity to consult records. The connection between Crosley and Chambers did not enter my mind until Monday morning, the 16th, while I was on the way by train to the afternoon session. According to my best recollection, without checking the records-and I do think it would be more helpful if the committee would go by records; I would like to know what the records say; some of the records I find are not available to me; I believe they are in the custody of the committee. I have attempted through counsel in the last few days to have access to the records.
     Mr. STRIPLING. .Just a moment, Mr. Hiss. What records have you attempted to obtain which were in the custody of the committee?
     Mr. HISS. I have attempted to obtain records of leases of premises where I was resident during the period in question. I have attempted to get the records with respect to the Ford automobile that I owned. I am informed that the records with respect to the latter in particular are not in their normal, official location but are in the custody of the committee.
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is absolutely untrue. The committee has issued no subpenas upon any realty company nor has it obtained any leases.
    It has subpenaed a photostatic copy of a document from the Department of Motor Vehicles or the District or Columbia. However, the original document is still in the files.
     Mr. HISS. I am told, Mr. Stripling, that the original document is no longer in the files. I tried to have my counsel have access to it.
     Mr. STRIPLING. .When did you try to secure that document?
     Mr. HISS. I will have to rely on counsel to say just when they tried.
     The CHAIRMAN. It would be interesting to the committee to know from counsel when you tried to get this document.
     Mr. DAVIS. A representative of mine tried to get this document yesterday afternoon, I am informed by the representative. I did not myself go to the Motor Vehicle Bureau. He was told that it was photostated at some time prior to yesterday but the document itself
had been taken from its normal place yesterday.
     Mr. MUNDT. Who was that representative and who told him it was taken from the place and who took it from the place? Let's get down to specific facts. If you were not told yourself, who was your representative?
     Mr. DAVIS. I am sorry-I am not trying to be evasive-I do not know who the person was that went. I can ascertain who went to the Bureau to find out. I do not know.
     Mr. MUNDT. You do not know who it was who told you that?
     Mr. DAVIS. I do not know and I do not know that it was stated that the committee had taken the original. All I know is he was told the original had been removed from its normal place.
     Mr. MUNDT. But you don't know who told you that or who told the other man that. That is very vague from the standpoint of our committee, you understand.
     Mr. DAVIS. I understand it is very vague. I do not know who it was. I can ascertain who it was during a recess.
     Mr. MUNDT. Was he a member of your firm?
     Mr. DAVIS. He was not a member of my firm.
     Mr. NIXON. How did you find it out, then?
     Mr. DAVIS. I was informed.
     Mr. NIXON. By whom?
     Mr. DAVIS. I was informed of this--
     Mr. STRIPLING. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that counsel be sworn if he is going to testify. Perhaps it would be better if you were sworn.
     The CHAIRMAN. Stand and raise your right hand.
     Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
     Mr. DAVIS. I do.
     The CHAIRMAN. Sit down.
     Mr. NIXON. It would be helpful to the committee if counsel would tell us how he received the information that these records were missing from their normal place. Who told him?
      Mr. DAVIS. I would be very glad to.
     Mr. NIXON. Yes.
     Mr. DAVIS. I was told. as I recollect, by Mr. Fontaine Bradley, who is an attorney in Washington, and whom I had asked while I was in New York to make certain inquiries in Washington in respect to these matters.
     Mr. MUNDT. Would you please identify the firm of which Mr. Fontaine Bradley is a member?
     Mr. DAVIS. I believe that Mr. Bradley is a member of the Covington firm.
     Mr. NIXON. When did he tell you this?
     Mr. DAVIS. He told me this fast evening when I saw him when I finally got to Washington.
     Mr. NIXON. Then you know this is the man who told you that, don't you? You said "to the best of my recollection." I mean, if he told you last evening, you certainly know if it was he or somebody else, don't you ?
     Mr. DAVIS. I believe it was he.
     Mr. NIXON. You believe. Did you have a conversation with him, Mr. Davis?
     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Chairman.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Mundt.
     Mr. MUNDT. I would just like to register a protest at this continuous evasion on the part of these witnesses. I am getting tired of flying half-way across the country to get evasive answers. If the gentleman doesn't know who told him, let him say, "I don't know." If he knows, let him say "I do know." Let's not say "I believe" or "I think."
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Nixon, you have the questioning, so you may proceed with the questioning.
     Mr. NIXON. I want counsel to take plenty of time to answer the question. I think the question is quite simple.
    Last evening somebody told him about these records. Now certainly you can remember who told you last night, Counsel.
     Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Nixon, there were three people present at this time.
     There was Mr. Bradley, there was a partner of Mr. Bradley, and there was Mr. Hiss and myself, four persons present, as I remember, at the time of this conversation.
     Mr. NIXON. I see.
     Mr. DAVIS. I think it was Mr. Fontaine Bradley who gave me this information.
     Mr. NIXON. Who else could it have been?
     Mr. DAVIS. It is possible it was his partner who was there who gave me the information, but I do not believe that was so.
     Mr. NIXON. Then it definitely was Mr. Bradley or his partner who gave you the information?
     Mr. DAVIS. That is to the best of my recollection, and I shouldn't forget what happened last night.
     Mr. NIXON. Certainly. This conversation you had wasn't a telephone conversation?
     Mr. DAVIS. It was a person-to-person conversation.
     Mr. NIXON. Just what did he tell you?
     Mr. DAVIS. He told me, as I have just stated, that inquiries--and my memory is not certain whether he said the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, or what the bureau is, the official bureau where you go with respect to getting the certificates of title--inquiry had been made, I think not by him, but by some agent that he sent, to see if we could examine that certificate, and that he ascertained that the certificate itself had been photostated by the committee, I believe, at some prior time, but that the certificate itself had been removed from its customary place and was not available for inspection by our agent at the time we were there.
     Mr. NIXON. Thank you very much, Counsel.
     The CHAIRMAN. Does anyone else want to ask counsel any questions before Mr. Stripling proceeds with the witness?
     Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Hiss, will you continue to give the committee the circumstances under which you met the person you have identified as George Crosley.
     Mr. HISS. According to my best recollection, a man representing himself to me as George Crosley came into my office in the Senate Office Building while I was acting as chief counsel to the Senate Committee Investigating the Munitions Industry. He represented himself as a free-lance writer for magazines. He represented himself as preparing a series of articles about the munitions investigation.
     As did many other members of the press, research people, and similar people, he had a perfect right to come to my office either directly or by reference from the central office. Very many members of the press and others interested did come to see me about the cases of which I was in charge.
     It was one of my duties to give the press such helpful information about the record, such guidance, one might say. as to the significance of what the committee had been developing. That is my best recollection of how I first met George Crosley.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Counsel, may I interpose a question here on a matter which Mr. Hiss has previously covered?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, I understood you to say that you felt that the records of the leases should be checked before you could testify actually as to date; is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. I was asked, Mr. Nixon, on the 16th and, I think on the 17th-the record will show--
     (At this point an unknown person confers with Mr. Davis.)
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Counsel, will you please identify the man who came up?
     Mr. DAVIS. The man who came up is Mr. Harold Rosenwald.
     Mr. MUNDT. A little further identification, please. Is he counsel?
     Mr. DAVIS. He is a practicing lawyer in New York City.
     Mr. MUNDT. His address and the name of his firm?
    Mr. ROSENWALD. 55 Liberty Street, New York City. The firm is Oseas, Pepper & Segal, O-s-e-a-s-, Pepper & Segal. I am employed by them.
     (At this point there was a further consultation between Mr. Rosenwald and Mr. Davis.)
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Chairman, since the committee seems to be very much interested in counsel for giving me any kind of assistance, may I just state that not being a man of considerable means, I have been much gratified by the volunteer assistance of friends, many of whom not unnaturally are lawyers.
     Mr. Rosenwald, who has just been identified, is a graduate of the same law school that I am. I knew him also in practice in Boston, and have kept in touch with him since.
     He has been voluntarily assisting me in attempting to get records and similar materials.
Mr. Davis, who is with me today, is also a personal friend of some standing, some long standing. I have had some difficulty with respect to continuity of counsel.
     The first adviser I had, Mr. Willam Marbury, an old friend in Baltimore, who accompanied me to the other hearing on August 5, was sent within the week or within 10 days to London by the Government on important business.
     I have been doing the best I could to get such assistance of a voluntary nature as I possibly could. I think it may be appropriate to put that in, since the committee seems to be very much interested in who are helping.
     Various others have volunteered their assistance.
     The CHAIRMAN. I will say this for the committee. We are very much interested in hearing what you have to say.
     Mr. Nixon, did you have a question?
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss was interrupted when he was answering.
     Mr. HISS. Will you repeat your question? I am sorry.
     Mr. NIXON. I understood you to say that you thought the committee should check the leases and also I thought I understood you to say that you had not yet checked the leases yourself. I wanted to be sure I heard you correctly.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I have not checked the leases myself. I thought I had the leases in my papers in New York.
     Mr. NIXON. You so testified.
     Mr. HISS. I said on the 16th I thought they were there. I have now looked in my apartment in New York, and I must have got rid of the leases when I moved from the house into an apartment which meant a certain contraction of possessions. I did get rid of a good many old papers at that time, and apparently the leases were among them.
    So it has meant going back, first, remembering the real-estate agents I dealt with, and, second, going back to the real-estate agents to find out from them what the actual terms and dates of the leases were.
    I was asked on the 16th and on the 17th a good many questions by members of the committee and I think by Mr. Stripling as to where I lived at various times. I was not even able to recall the street correctly. To the best of my recollection, I testified that I lived on Twenty-ninth Street. I have now ascertained that it was Twenty-eighth Street.
My reference to the leases was that I could not after all these years be expected to remember with accuracy and to be really helpful to the committee in its presumed search for truth and the complete truth unless I did have the opportunity to consult records.
     But I also told the committee that I was not in any sense going to be evasive. I hope the acting chairman's reference to evasiveness was not in any remote sense an implied reference to me.
     I went forward, Mr. Nixon, and said, testifying simply on recollection of rather trivial housekeeping details of 14 years ago, I would tell you the best I could recall, and so I did.
     Mr. NIXON. Then, the point is that you have not checked the leases as of this morning?
     Mr. HISS. I still have not been able to get hold of all the leases. Some of the leases have been consulted, there have been some telephone conversations with the real-estate people. I have asked counsel to prepare as rapidly as possible a collection of all the available record evidence--photostats, originals, or copies--of all the record evidence on these matters, which it is apparent the committee considers of importance.
    That has not been completed yet.
     Mr. NIXON. That is all.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Hiss, do you have the lease between you and Mr.. Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. I have never testified that there was any lease between me and Mr. Crosley. I said that it was an oral arrangement; a sublease orally arranged.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, you gave the committee the circumstances under which you met Mr. Crosley. Could you give us the date, the approximate date?
     Mr. HISS. Again, my best recollection would be--and this is a reconstructed memory trying to recall when I did various things with the Nye committee. I have not even been able to get the list of all the staff of the Nye committee, for example.
     I would think it must have been either in the late winter of 1934 or the early winter of 1935.
     Mr. STRIPLING. At this point, I would like to read from your testimony which you gave on August 16.

     Mr. HISS. The name of the man I brought in--and he may have no relation to this whole nightmare--is a man named George Crosley. I met him when I was working for the Nye committee. He was a writer. He hoped to sell articles to magazines about the munitions industry. I saw him, as I saw in my office over in the Senate Office Building, dozens of representatives of the press, students, people writing books, research people. It was our job to give them appropriate information out of the record, show what had been put in the record. This fellow was writing a series of articles, according to my best recollection, freelancing, which he hoped to sell to one of the magazines. He was pretty obviously not successful in financial terms, but as far as I know was not actually hard up.
     Mr. STRIPLING. What color was his hair?
     Mr. HISS. Rather blondish; blonder than any of us here.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Was he married?
     Mr. HISS. Yes, sir.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Any children?
     Mr. HISS. One little baby, as I remember it, and the way I know that was the subleasing point. After we had taken the house on P Street and had the apartment on our hands, be one day in the course of casual conversation said he was going to specialize all summer in getting his articles done here in Washington, did not know what he was going to do, and was thinking of bringing his family. I said, "You can have my apartment. It is not terribly cool but it is up in the air and near the Wardman Park." He said he had a wife and little baby. The apartment was not very expensive and I think I let him have it at exact cost. My recollection is that he spent several nights in my house because his furniture van was delayed. We left several pieces of furniture behind. The P Street house belonged to a naval officer overseas and was partly furnished, so we did not need all our furniture, particularly during the summer months, and my recollection is that definitely, as one does with a tenant trying to make him agreeable and comfortable, we left several pieces of furniture behind until the fall. His van was delayed, was not going to bring all the furniture because he was going to be there just during the summer, and we put them up two or three nights in a row, his wife and little baby.
      Mr. NIXON. His wife and he and little baby did spend several nights in the house with you?
      Mr. HISS. This man Crosley; yes.

     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, is that as you recall it, Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. HISS. That was the best recollection I had on the day I testified and that is why I so testified.
    I have since learned that my lease on the house began earlier than I thought and my lease on the apartment terminated somewhat earlier than I thought. The overlap which I remembered, and which was the main thing in my memory, was, according to the best records I have so far been able to check, accurate.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When did you first move into the P Street house?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Stripling, I really think the best way for this committee to get full facts is to go to records, if possible. I have said that several times in these hearings.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Witness.
     Mr. HISS. I have not been able yet to get--and I will furnish it to the committee as soon as I get it--the actual records of when I took the lease on the P Street house and when I moved into the P Street house.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hiss, we appreciate your suggestions as to how to conduct these hearings, but if you do not mind, and if the committee does not mind, we have certain questions we would like to proceed with.
     Mr. HISS. Certainly.
     The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead, Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chairman, at this point I would like to read into the record a letter from Sandoz, Inc., real estate and insurance, dated August 20, 1948, from Teresa B. Mileham, who signed herself as a bookkeeper, addressed to Robert E. Stripling, Chief Investigator:

    My DEAR MR. STRIPLING: This is to certify that our records show that we rented 2905 P Street NW., to Priscilla Hiss for 1 year from May 1, 1935, to June 15, 1936, at a monthly rental of $105.
    Very truly yours.

    Does that refresh your recollection on that at all, Mr. Hiss?
    Mr. HISS. Mr. Stripling, I would have thought in view of information I have received as to the date during which my tenancy of the apartment on Twenty-eighth Street lasted, that I must have moved into the P Street house a little earlier than the date just read, which I understood to be May 1.
    (Mr. Stripling hands letter to Mr. Hiss.)
    Mr. HISS (continuing). And again I would like to check all possible records to see whether I moved in before the date of the lease, according to their records, which is sometimes the custom, to be given a month or so in addition to your regular lease, earlier or later, at the beginning preceding the lease or after its termination; so that again I can't testify with any exactness without an opportunity to refresh my recollection by trying to refer to various records which are not easy to get hold of after all this lapse of time.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now I believe you testified earlier, Mr. Hiss, that you sublet your apartment on Twenty-eighth Street-that was apartment 42, at 2831 Twenty-eighth NW.,-to George Crosley. Is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. I did so testify and I did so sublet.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When did you sublet this apartment to George Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. My recollection had been that it was at the beginning of the summer. whether it was a little earlier or a little later than that I couldn't be sure-and again I would want to have access to all the records possible in order to be as accurate as possible.
    The CHAIRMAN. What year?
     Mr. HISS. What year did what happen?
     The CHAIRMAN. The summer of what year?
     Mr. STRIPLING. That you sublet the apartment.
     Mr. HISS. The summer of 1935.
     Mr. STRIPLING. What was the agreement regarding this apartment between you and Mr. Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. According to my best recollection, the agreement was that of a simple informal sublease at the cost to me, the privilege of his occupying the premises as long as I had disposition of them, and it has been my recollection from Monday, the 16th of this month, on that I did have the disposition of that apartment or could assure the disposition of that apartment over a period of several months after I moved into 2905 P Street.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Do you recall just when your lease for the apartment expired?
     Mr. HISS. No; I do not.
     Mr. STRIPLING. How long did Mr. Crosley remain in the apartment?
     Before you answer that, I believe you testified on August 16 on page 52, you were asked by Mr. Nixon:

     Can you state again just when he first rented the apartment?

     referring to Mr. Crosley. You say:

     I think it was about June of 1935.

     Do you recall whether or not it was June?

    Mr. HISS. My best recollection at the time I testified was it was about June. Whether it was a little earlier or a little later after 14 years or so I am afraid I just am not able to recall.
    Mr. STRIPLING. Do you recall how long he remained at the apartment?
    Mr. HISS. I have no idea. My recollection is that he was entitled, as far as I was concerned, to remain for several months and that I was in a position to assure him that he could remain for several months. Whether he did or not would be no concern of mine.
     Mr. STRIPLING. At this point, then, Mr. Chairman, I should like to read into the record a letter from Randall H. Hagner & Co., real estate, 1321 Connecticut Avenue, Washington, D. C. The letter is addressed to Robert E. Stripling, chief investigator of the Committee on Un-American Activities, and signed by Mary Petherbridge. The letter reads:

    DEAR MR. STRIPLING: Our records show that Alger Hiss made application to us through the manager, Mrs. W. M. Jeffers, on May 29, 1934, for apartment 42, 2831 Twenty-eighth Street NW. His tenancy began on July 1, 1934, for 1 year. We assume from the application that a lease was made. However, our old leases have been destroyed. Mr. Hiss vacated on June 28, 1935. His previous address given at that time was 3411 0 Street NW. The number of occupants was listed as two adults and one child. This apartment was vacant for the month of July.
On August 1, 1935, it was rented to W. E. Isemann.
    Very truly yours.

    Mr. HISS. May I say it is apparent that the committee has been better staffed with people to inquire into records than I have been. May I also say with reference to my earlier statement about the assistance of friends, that I did not mean to exclude any friends who have been helpful by not mentioning their names.
    It might be appropriate to mention that Mr. Bradley, whose name has come into the testimony, is also a personal friend of some standing.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, Mr. Hiss, when you moved to the P Street house, did you take your furniture with you?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Stripling, I have been and will continue to do the best I can to remember these housekeeping details. I have talked to my wife on the telephone and asked her to remember as best she can.
    My best recollection is that I did not take all of the furniture that was in the Twenty-eighth Street apartment when I first moved into the P Street house; that I left some of it behind for Mr. Crosley's use.
    As I testified, it is my recollection that the house at 2905 P Street was furnished or partly furnished, and that we did not actually need all of our own furniture in order to furnish that house.
     Mr. STRIPLING. So you sublet the apartment to Mr. Crosley; is that correct ?
    Mr. HISS. Under the circumstances I have stated, according to my best recollection, the answer is "Yes."
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, you stated that Mr. Crosley and his wife and baby stayed several days in your house on P Street prior to moving into the apartment. Is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. That again is to the best of my recollection, Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. And the reason they stayed with you is because they were waiting for a moving van to come down?
     Mr. HISS. So I recall, Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, I will read your testimony which you gave on August 16, beginning on page 53.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Stripling, before you go into that may I clear up the matter about the lease?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. I think that from the testimony Mr. Hiss has given and from the documents Mr. Stripling has presented that it is very clear as to what these terminal dates for this lease were.
    As I understand it, Mr. Hiss' lease on the house he moved to on P Street started on May 1; is that correct?
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss has suggested he might have moved into that house before, that as a courtesy he might have received a month or so free rent before he moved into the house, but the lease as far as the records show--he first had his rental contract on his new house on May 1.
    You have also indicated that the apartment which he sublet to Mr. Crosley was rerented to a new tenant, not Mr. Crosley, commencing August 1. Is that correct?
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, when did Mr. Hiss' lease on the apartment run out? Have you put that matter into the record yet?
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is in the record. It expired on the 28th of June.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss' lease on the apartment expired on the 28th of June?
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is right.
     Mr. NIXON. In other words, the amount of time for which his sublease could have run would be approximately from May 1 to June 28.
     That was the period at which Mr. Hiss had the disposal of the apartment and in which he could have been in the new house. Is that correct?
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is what it appears from the records.
     Mr. HISS. Is that a question to me or to Mr. Stripling?
     Mr. NIXON. I am making the statement. If you have objection to the statement, you are perfectly welcome to make it.
     Mr. HISS. The only thing I would like to say, Mr. Nixon, first, in general there seems to me to be relatively little disagreement as between the testimony of Mr. Chambers as he now calls himself and me with respect to the period and the circumstances of our acquaintance.
    As I said in the letter which I sent to the chairman, the chairman said he read my letter of yesterday in the newspapers. That was certainly not necessary. The letter was delivered to the chairman's office, a signed letter by me.
     The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would like to say that the chairman was not in the office when your letter arrived; but he did have an opportunity to read the letter in this morning's New York Herald Tribune.
     Mr. HISS. It was delivered to your office yesterday afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
     The important issues, the important charges are not questions of leases, but questions of whether I was a Communist, and it was to try to get the issues raised that are the real issues--it seems to be topsy-turvy to be talking only about leases, Mr. Nixon; in such a
serious charge as this it seems to me we should be getting after the question of my record and what did people who worked closely and intimately with me think of me.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hiss, I would like to say again that the committee appreciates your suggestions as to how to conduct these hearings, but we do have certain questions to ask and, if you don't mind, Mr. Nixon will continue questioning if he has any more questions.
     Mr. NIXON. Yes; I have. I would like to comment upon Mr. Hiss' statement that the only issue in this hearing today is whether or not Mr. Hiss was a Communist.
    The issue in this hearing today is whether or not Mr. Hiss or Mr. Chambers has committed perjury before this committee, as well as whether Mr. Hiss is a Communist.
    Now, as far as these what are termed housekeeping details by Mr. Hiss are concerned it isn't the intention of the committee to hold Mr. Hiss to exact dates; it isn't the intention of the committee to hold him to exact details on matters that happened years ago, but it certainly is the intention of the committee to question both Mr. Hiss and Mr. Chambers very closely on the matter of their acquaintanceship, because it is on that issue that the truth or falsity of the statements made by Mr. Hiss and Mr. Chambers will stand or fall.
     Mr. HISS. May I say, Mr. Nixon, that that does not seem to me a very rational basis for determining credibility. Obviously, the committee may ask the questions it chooses.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, you are an attorney. I think you are aware probably of the standard instruction which is given to the jury on cases of credibility of witnesses.
     That instruction. as I recall it is that if any matter a witness is found to be telling an untruth on any question which is material and which is raised during the course of the court's proceedings, his credibility on other questions is also suspect.
     Now, as far as this matter is concerned, you, yourself, have made an issue of the fact as to (1) whether you knew Chambers at all--that issue has now been resolved; and (2) how well you knew Chambers and whether you knew him as a Communist.
     That is the purpose of this questioning now.
     Now, I would appreciate it if you would again comment upon the matter of this lease.
     Do I understand that May 1 to June 28 would be approximately the length of the rental agreement with Mr. Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. May I refer back to what I said earlier this morning, that my recollection in terms of an impression about these events is that I considered that I had the disposition or could assure the disposition of the Twenty-eighth Street apartment for a period of several months.
     Whether my lease overlapped--whether my legal lease overlapped my moving into the P Street apartment by several months, or whether it was somewhat less than that, and I was aware that anyone who wanted to get the apartment month to month or any other way after my lease expired during the summer, whether that was part of my thinking at
the time I frankly can't tell in terms of details.
     The significant thing in my memory is my recollection that I was in position to assure Crosley of several months' occupancy of the apartment which I had been living in on Twenty-eighth Street.
     Mr. NIXON. I think we can cut through it with these short questions:
     You did not lease the apartment to Crosley until you had moved into the other house; is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. That is my best recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. Your lease on the other house according to the records began on May 1. You will agree with that?
     Mr. HISS. That is what the records seem to show. I have not seen the records myself.
     Mr. NIXON. We have the letter which Mr. Stripling just handed you. If the records show that, you will agree that the records are correct on that point?
     Mr. HISS. I have no reason for questioning the records.
     Mr. NIXON. You suggested that we go to the records.
     Mr. HISS. I didn't hear you.
     Mr. NIXON. You suggested that we go to the records.
     Mr. HISS. I have, indeed.
     Mr. NIXON. That is what we have done, and it showed that lease began on May 1.
     Mr. HISS. I have been trying to go to them, too, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Certainly. The records also show that your lease on the apartment ran out on June 28. It is quite apparent, then, that the time Mr. Crosley could have stayed in this apartment was a period of approximately 8 to 9 weeks from May 1 and June 28.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I doubt if this is the occasion for any argumentation as to what the facts mean.
     Mr. NIXON. I am not arguing.
     Mr. HISS. But I think I heard Mr. Stripling read that the apartment, according to Randall Hagner--were they the agents?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes.
     Mr. HISS. According to their records was not leased to anyone during the month of July; so there could be a third month when, if Mr. Crosley had wanted to stay on in that apartment, he could presumably have done so by arrangements with Randall Hagner.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chairman, this might clarify that point. According to the records of the Potomac Electric Co., the electricity was turned off at the Twenty-eighth Street apartment on June 29, 1935.
     Mr. NIXON. When was the gas turned off in that apartment?
     Mr. STRIPLING. It was turned off on June 26,1935.
     Mr. NIXON. June 26. If Mr. Crosley did stay in that apartment another month up to August 1, he stayed there without gas or electricity.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, may I comment? I have not been testifying at any time as to how long Mr. Crosley stayed there. I have been talking about how long I thought I was in position to let him stay there, to facilitate his staying there, if he so desired.
    I do not know and I have not attempted to testify as to how long he in fact stayed there.
     Mr. NIXON. You will now agree, though, that it could only have been for 2 months?
     Mr. HISS. You mean how long he actually stayed there? On the basis of gas and electricity being turned off and this man's record I don't think I would want to say what he was doing or wasn't doing.
     Mr. NIXON. You think he might have stayed in the apartment even with the gas off?
     Mr. HISS. Let's not speculate.
     Mr. NIXON. With a small baby.
     Mr. HISS. Let's not speculate, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Proceed, Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. HISS. I don't know whether his wife and baby were with him at that time, or whether they were always with him or not.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Hiss, George Crosley, who you testified you first met in 1934--do you know of anyone here in Washington who knew him as George Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. In answer to that question, Mr. Stripling, I have naturally among the very many other things that I have been trying to check in the few days since Monday of last week, I have been trying to run down the list of staff members of the Senate Committee Investigating the Munitions Industry.
    As far as I can find out, there is no one single official list anywhere now available. I have recalled certain of the members of the staff. I recalled three names offhand of people that Crosley might have met in addition to me around the committee.
     I mentioned Mr. Raushenbush, the chief investigator. He is away on vacation. I have seen in the press that the press reached him and he doesn't have any recollection of Crosley. I want to talk personally to Mr. Raushenbush. I want to see if he can recall from my description of the circumstances under which I knew Crosley more than he has told
the press.
     I recalled the name of Robert Wohlford.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You gave both of these names to the committee in New York?
     Mr. HISS. Yes; I did-who was also a member of the staff. I recalled my off-the-cuff recollection. He is now in New York, I understand. I have asked friends of mine to talk to Bob Wohlford.
     I remembered also the name of Miss Elsie Gullender, who was, as it were, the chief receptionist of the committee. She was Mr. Raushenbush's secretary and acted as sort of an over-all chief of the secretarial staff.
     If Crosley had been referred to me by the central office of the committee-and our offices were scattered all over the Senate Office Building and we took what space was vacant, what we could get and what we could use-it would probably have been Miss Gullender who would first have sent him to me, although he could have come direct to me because I had been conducting hearings, my name was publicly known, the cases that I was working on were publicly known.
     I have been informed that Miss Elsie Gullender is now dead. I am not sure that is the fact. I want, if possible, to locate Miss Gullender. I have been trying to locate other members of the staff and trying to find out the names of some of the other members.
     I have a recollection of one man whose name I have not yet been able to recall, though I recall his personality. I would like to find out from him.
     I would hope that I will be able to find others than myself and my wife who remember George Crosley under the circumstances I have testified to. I shall certainly continue without rest to attempt to find out all the information I can on this subject and on this man, both as Crosley and as Chambers, and let the committee have whatever I can find out.
     I think we were just beginning the inquiry.
     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Hiss, is this a fair summary, then, of your position up to now?
     That as of today you have not found anybody other than your wife who ever knew this man over here under the name of George Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. I received a telephone call--rather, one of my counsel did-from someone, a woman, who said she had known George Crosley at this time, that she was fearful of getting her employer in Dutch or something by publicity. We were not able to trace the call. She may have been imagining.
     So far, the answer to your question is: I have not yet been able to find any witness other than my wife who remembers him as George Crosley.
     Mr. MUNDT. Let me ask this question. The possibility would seem very plausible to me that since Mr. Crosley, as you call him, lived in your home for awhile while he was getting his furniture transferred, that your brother Donald undoubtedly visited your home frequently.
     Have you ever conferred with Donald to see whether he knew this man as George Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. I have asked him and he has no recollection.
     Mr. MUNDT. He had no recollection?
     Mr. HISS. No; and I have tried to locate my neighbors in the apartment. My next door neighbor I have been unable to locate, though I have his name and we are doing our best to find him. It takes a long, time to reconstruct these details after a long time when one's resources are limited.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, Mr. Chairman, the three names the witness has mentioned-Elsie Gullender, Robert Wohlford, Stephen Raushenbush-were the three that he gave the committee in New York, and we asked him if he could furnish us the names of three people to corroborate his statement that Whittaker Chambers was known to him as George Crosley in 1934 and '35.
    The New York Herald Tribune carried a story which stated that they had communicated with Mr. Raushenbush and he had no recollection of it. As Mr. Hiss has stated, according to our investigation, Elsie Gullender died September 24, 1946. We have been endeavoring to locate Robert Wohlford. His office here at the Department of Justice had advised us that he was in. We have sent numerous telegrams, all of which have been returned.
     Now, because Mr. Hiss stated Mr. Crosley was a free-lance writer for American magazine and other publications--
     Mr. HISS. May I interrupt? What I think Mr. Stripling has been stating in summary is exactly my recollection of my testimony-- I did not testify as a fact that Mr. Crosley wrote for American magazine.
     I testified that my best recollection was that he had told me that American magazine was one of the magazines he hoped to sell his free-lance articles about the Munitions Committee to.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Well, Mr. Chairman, we asked the Library of Congress, Director of Legislative Reference Service, to check their files for any articles by George Crosley.
     The following letter was received from Ernest S. Griffith, Director, Legislative Reference Service, addressed to Mr. Benjamin Mandel, Director of Research:

    DEAR MR. MANDEL: In response to your request for any writings by George Crosley, the following sources have been examined with reference to George Crosley or Crosley. The results of the search are indicated.
    Readers Guide to Periodical Literature, January 1929-June 1941-No reference.
    Public Catalogue---Two references, one to a book of poems written by G. Crosley in 1905, the other to a scientific pamphlet on ultraviolet light by G. E. Crosley, M. D., in 1936.
    Copyright Division-No additional references.
    Any further searching you may suggest, we shall be glad to undertake.
     Sincerely yours,
    EUNEST S. GRIFFITH,
    Director, Legislative Reference Service.

    I also have a letter here, Mr. Chairman, from the American magazine, that states that they have never published any articles by George Crosley.
     Now, Mr. Hiss. I should like to read now from your testimony which you gave before the committee on August 16, page 53:

    Mr. STRIPLING. What kind of automobile did that fellow have?

     referring to Mr. Crosley.

    Mr. HISS. No kind of automobile. I sold him an automobile. I had an old, Ford that I threw in with the apartment and had been trying to trade it in and get rid of it. I had an old, old Ford we had kept for sentimental reasons. We got it just before we were married in 1929.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Was it a model A or model T?
     Mr. HISS. Early A model with a trunk on the back, a slightly collegiate model.
    Mr. STRIPLING. What color?
     Mr. HISS. Dark blue. It wasn't very fancy, but it had a sassy little trunk on the back.
     Mr. NIXON. You sold that car?
     Mr. HISS. I threw it in. He wanted a way to get around, and I said, "Fine; I want to get rid of it. I have another car, and we kept it for sentimental reasons, not worth a damn. I let him have it along with the rent.
     Now, would you give the committee the arrangements of this lease again, Mr. Hiss.
     Mr. HISS. Of the lease of the apartment?
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is right. And the car, the manner in which you threw the car in.
     Mr. HISS. My best recollection is that at the time, or shortly after we first talked about Crosley's subletting my apartment, he said that he wished to get a car because his family would be with him while he was in Washington. I think he asked if you could rent a car, and my best recollection is that I told him that I had an old car which I would let
     him have, a car which had practically no financial value. That is the best recollection I have on the car transaction after all these years.
     Mr. MUNDT. Was the reason that that car had no value to you the fact that you had another automobile at the time?
     Mr. HISS. My best recollection is that at some time, Mr. Mundt, I had both a Plymouth and this old Ford. Whether that overlap occurred prior to my letting Crosley use the Ford, I cannot recall with positiviness. I do have a very definite, although general, recollection that I had both a Ford and a Plymouth for a period of time, with the Ford of no use, deteriorating, being left outdoors.
     Mr. STRIPLING. .Now, Mr. Chairman, I should like to read from--
     Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Stripling, may I interrupt there to sort of pursue this a little further, with regard to what Mr. Mundt has asked Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. Hiss, you would remember if you had two automobiles at one time; would you not?
     Mr. HISS. I say I do remember that I did have two automobiles at one time. That made quite an impression on me.
     Mr. HEBERT. It made an impression on you that you owned two automobiles at one time?
     Mr. HISS. That is right. But, as to the particular time when I had the two automobiles, it was sometime during this general period. As to the particular time, without consulting the records, I am not able to testify with positiveness.
    Mr. HEBERT. I want to get this clear. In other words, you would not have given up the mode of transportation if you did not have any transportation yourself.
     Mr. HISS. Unless I was not going to need automobile transportation for a period of time.
     Mr. HEBERT. Then the logical assumption would be that you did have two automobiles at the same time that you gave this man Crosley your automobile.
     Mr. HISS. That is my best recollection. Whether it is accurate in detail I will know better when I get the records and can attempt to refresh my recollection, Mr. Hebert.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, Mr. Chairman, let me put the remainder of the testimony regarding the ownership of the automobile which is on page 56.
     Mr. NIXON. You gave this Ford car to Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. Threw it in along with the apartment and charged the rent and threw the car in at the same time.
     Mr. NIXON. In other words, added a little to the rent to cover the car?
     Mr. HISS. No.; I think I charged him exactly what I was paying for the rent and threw the car in addition. I don't think I got any compensation.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You just gave him the car?
     Mr. HISS. I think the car just went right in with it. I don't remember whether we had settled on the terms of the rent before the car question came up, or whether it came up and then on the basis of the car and the apartment I said, "Well, you ought to pay the full rent."
     On page 58 the record continues:

     Mr. STRIPLING. What kind of a bill of sale did you give Crosley?
     Mr. HISS--

     referring to the car--

     Mr. HISS. I think I just turned over-in the District you get a certificate of title, I think it is. I think I just simply turned it over to him.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Handed it to him?
     Mr. HISS. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. No evidence of any transfer. Did he record the title?
     Mr. HISS. That I haven't any idea. This is a car which had been sitting on the streets in snows for a year or two. I once got a parking fine because I forgot where it was parked. We were using the other car.

     Now, Mr. Hiss, is that the testimony, according to your best recollection? 
     Mr. HISS. That testimony was according to my best recollection at the time I gave it, and that is why I gave it. I have not yet been able to get the record, as my counsel has testified. We have not been able to ascertain from the Motor Vehicle Bureau people what their records show with respect to that car.
     Mr. STRIPLING. What did Mr. Crosley do with this Ford, do you know?
     Mr. HISS. I frankly do not recall. It is possible that he used it; it is even possible that he returned it to me after using it. I really would not be sure of the details.
     My impression and recollection was that I got rid of it by giving it to him, but if the records show that it bounced back to me from him, that would not surprise me either.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Well, as a matter of fact, Mr. Hiss, you sold the car a year later, did you not?
     Mr. HISS. Not to my recollection. I have no definite recollection of it.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You do not recall selling the car?
     Mr. HISS. I have no definite recollection.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you have a Plymouth during this period? Did you have another car?
     Mr. HISS. My recollection is that I did have a Plymouth during part of the same time that I had the Ford.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, Mr. Chairman, I have here an application for a certificate of title of the Motor Vehicles and Traffic Bureau of the District of Columbia, wherein it states that Alger Hiss, 2905 P Street, NW, purchased or acquired the above-described car: Plymouth, new, model; year, 1935; body, sedan. 

It gives the serial number, engine number, and states:

     How secured: Conditional sale; date, September 7, 1935, purchased from the Smoot Motor Co., Inc.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask a question at this point.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, your recollection is still that you gave the car--to Crosley as part of the apartment deal; is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. My recollection is as definite as it can be after this lapse of time, Mr. Nixon, that as I was able to give him the use of the apartment, I also and simultaneously, I think, although it could possibly have been a little later, gave him the use of the model A 1929 old Ford. That is my best recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. That was in the spring of 1935? 
     Mr. HISS. My best recollection is that the car and the apartment transactions were simultaneous. That I cannot be sure of without checking the records more thoroughly.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, there were facts, as I recall, just checking through the record, 18 occasions in which you were asked the specific question, specifically about this on Monday and Tuesday in the record, as to whether you had given him the car, sold him the car, threw it in, given him the title, and as to whether it was part of the apartment deal, and in each case you said, "Yes," and at that time you did not qualify your answers with "to the best of my recollection."
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon-excuse me.
     Mr. NIXON. Proceed; I am sorry.
     Mr. HISS. It is my recollection that on the 16th and on the 17th I informed the committee that I had not been able to check my records.
     Mr. NIXON. On the leases.
     Mr. HISS. At one point I said to the committee that for them to ask me questions about various personal details of long ago did not seem to me entirely fair to me, because of the various leaks that had been occurring with respect to supposed secret testimony.
    I said that in spite of those reservations, if the committee wanted me to testify as to the best of my recollection, unsupported by records, I would, of course, do so, and I remember Mr. Hebert particularly spoke up and said he did want me to, and so did you, and I said, on that understanding of what I had said, made no difference to the committee, they still wanted me to testify, and on the basis of recollection, after all these years, I was perfectly prepared to testify. I think the record would show that, Mr. Nixon, and I am glad the entire record is going to be made generally available to the public and not just excerpts, which, in the past, have somehow reached the press, and which today are being put in out of context by Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, in that connection, I think the record should show that you requested and have received, a full copy of your testimony that you have given before this committee, both in public and in executive session; is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. May I answer that question by saying it was a long, hard pull to get that testimony. I was promised it long before I got it. I remember the explanation of the committee that Mr. Banister, who was taking it, the stenographer, had not been able to transcribe it.
     It took me a long time, with my office here constantly calling both the committee and the stenographer, for me ever to get it. I got it quite belatedly.
     Mr. NIXON. When did you get it?
     Mr. HISS. You gave me part of it, a relatively small part, perhaps half of the 16th, on the 18th.
     Mr. NIXON. On the 17th; on the 17th, the day yon testified, 24 hours after you gave the testimony, you had the first half.
     Mr. HISS. Did yon give it to me the day I testified in New York?
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, you recall--
     Mr. HISS. Or was it some time--I am asking whether it was the day I testified or the day Mrs. Hiss testified?
     Mr. NIXON. You will recall it was the day you testified.
     Mr. HISS. Well, I do not challenge what you say. I do remember the difficulty with which I was pursuing getting it. I had been assured that it would be ready the first thing next morning, and it was not.
     Mr. NIXON. In other words, the first half of your testimony that you gave in your executive session on Monday you received 24 hours later on Tuesday, when I delivered it to you in New York.
     Mr. HISS. After very considerable inquiry and demand, and having heard a variety of stories out of the committee as to why it was not possible. There had to be a letter of approval, there had to be this, and that, and the rest of my testimony I got late Friday, only by having a messenger fly it up to New York to get it to me, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. The messenger received that testimony from the committee on Friday morning, did he not?
     Mr. HISS. I do not know the exact time. I know he was not able to get it to me in New York until about 5 or 5: 30 of the afternoon of Friday, and I know he flew in order to get it to me, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. That was 48 hours after the testimony had been completed; is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. The record will show exactly when the testimony was completed. If it is 48 hours, it is 48 hours.
     Mr. NIXON. That is right. In other words, you had the testimony for 5 days then?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, the way you put the question would indicate--that if I had done nothing it would have reached me 48 hours after. I had to move heaven and earth to try to get it.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, the point is, Mr. Hiss, that you got the testimony, didn't you, and you have had it for 5 days?
     Mr. HISS. I have had the testimony since Friday afternoon.
     Mr. NIXON. All the testimony that you have given before the committee.
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. That is correct.
     Now, returning to the automobile, did you give Crosley a car?
     Mr. HISS. I gave Crosley, according to my best recollection--
     Mr. NIXON. Well, now, just a moment on that point. I do not want to interrupt you on that "to the best of my recollection," but you certainly can testify, "Yes" or "No" as to whether you gave Crosley a car. How many cars have you given away in your life,
     Mr. Hiss? [Laughter.] That is a serious question.
     Mr. HISS. I have only had one old car of a financial value of $25 in my life. That is the car that I let Crosley have the use of.
     Mr. NIXON. This was a car that had a certain sentimental meaning to you, I think you said.
    Mr. HISS. And that is why I had not been prepared previously to accept merely $25 for it. 
     Mr. NIXON. That is right.
     Mr. HISS. I was more interested in having it used than in merely getting $25 for it.
     Mr. NIXON. And this car, which had a sentimental value to you, was the only car you ever gave away in your life?
     Mr. HISS. It is not only the only car that I ever gave away in my life, it is the only car of that kind that I have described that I ever had.
     Mr. NIXON. I see. And you cannot recall whether or not you did give Crosley that car?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, according to my best recollection I definitely gave Crosley the use of the car, as I was able to give him the use of my apartment.
     Mr. MUNDT. May I interrupt just a minute? On page 53 of these hearings which took place in New York, at which I was not present, the last 2 days, I, too, have read all of the testimony in this whole case, and you were asked the question "What kind of automobile did that fellow have," the man you called Crosley, and you said, "No kind of automobile. I sold him an automobile."
     Now, Mr. Hiss, I am trying to get at the truth of this, and I wish you would make a statement and stand by it. Once you say, "I sold him an automobile, period." Now. you come here and say "I gave him the use of the car," and then you say "I cannot tell whether or" not after he had the car he gave it back to me or not."
     Well, now, in 1934 and 1935 we were in a depression; automobiles were not so numerous and so plentiful that a Government employee would forget what happened to the cars that he had in his possession.
    You certainly know whether or not you gave Crosley an automobile; you know whether or not Crosley gave that car back, and we want the truth, that is all.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, I am as interested in getting at the truth of this matter as any member of this committee can be, and I shall do all I possibly can, whatever it costs me, within my means, to get at the truth.
     Mr. MUNDT. Then, tell us the truth.
     Mr. HISS. Now, what is the nature of your question? Will you repeat it, please, because I paid more attention to the embellishments
     Mr. MUNDT. Did you not testify in New York under oath to the effect that "I sold him-Crosley-an automobile?" I find it here in the printed testimony which we are now releasing to the public at the request of the committee, and it is your request.
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is page 58.
     Mr. HISS. What is the specific question? The embellishments to your question made more impression on me than the question.
     Mr. MUNDT. There are no embellishments, and I ask you: Did you testify under oath in New York--
     Mr. HISS. I certainly did.
     Mr. MUNDT. As follows: "What kind of automobile did that fellow have?" Pointing at Crosley. And you said, "No kind of automobile. I sold him an automobile."
     Did you say that or not?
     Mr. HISS. If the record says I said it.
     Mr. MUNDT. The record says that.
     Mr. HISS. I do not challenge the record.
     Mr. MUNDT. Your counsel can look at page 38; there it is, it is in the record.
    Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, there may be one or two inaccuracies in the record which we will have to correct.
    Mr. MUNDT. Is that an inaccuracy?
    Mr. HISS. That is not an inaccuracy in the record. I have complete confidence in Mr. Banister as a reporter.
     Mr. MUNDT. You also know whether or not Mr. Crosley gave you back the automobile you sold him. You said this car had a good sentimental value to you, you had kept it a long time. You certainly know, and we know that you know, whether you got that car back. We want you to tell us the truth, that is all. 
     Mr. HISS. You know a great deal, Mr. Mundt.
     Mr. MUNDT. It is very hard to know very much about this evasive type of testimony, but I am trying to get at the truth.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, you referred to the depression. It is also a fact that old second-hand cars had a not considerable value during the depression. If the depression is relevant to our question, it seems to me that an additional fact is also relevant. Now, what is the exact question you are asking me.
     Mr. MUNDT. You have answered it. I have asked it, and you have answered it.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Mundt, may I interpose a question at that point?
     Mr. MUNDT. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. As far as the value of Ford roadsters at that time go, I think it might be relevant to quote from the want ads which appeared in the Washington Evening Star in June 1935 as to the value of 1929 Ford roadsters. The value which is given here, the lowest cash value, is $59. In consulting the dealers in Washington, the committee investigators found that the trade-in value on a car would be more than $59. The lowest cash value of all the want ads that appeared at that time for '29 Ford roadsters was $59.
     I only bring this in to show that the car had something a little more than a sentimental value, even in 1935.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, as I have testified before, my recollection is that I was at no time ever told that that car, during this period, had a value of more than $25 or $30 or $35.
     Mr. MUNDT. Well, let us assume it was worth $35. Are you a man, or were you at that time a man, of such means that $35 meant nothing to you at all ?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, as I have also testified, I had a sentimental attachment to this car which transcended $35 or $20 or $25 or $30.
     Rather than simply see it go on the scrap heap through a trade-in, or a casual sale, I had hung on to it as it depreciated in value.
     Mr. MUNDT. Very well but it had depreciated down to $35, according to your testimony, or $59, according to the official Blue Book at the time, or something over $59, as a trade-in value.
     Now, you said you sold him the car, and you again repeated that today, and on page 58 of your statement.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, I think I also in the course of that same testimony, and with equal truthfulness, so far as I could recall, said that I gave it to him. I have not been through the record on this particular point. I think you will find various references to the
transaction on the 16th, the testimony of the 16th.
     Mr. MUNDT. That is right.
     Mr. HISS. And the testimony on the 17th.
     Mr. MUNDT. You testified originally--
     Mr. HISS. It may be--
     Mr. MUNDT. Wait a minute. It may be that you testified--
     The CHAIRMAN. Let us have one speaker at a time.
     Mr. MUNDT. Yes; you have something to say?
     Mr. HISS. It may be that you are pointing to the one place in the testimony where I said "sold." It may be I said "sold" more than once. I have not checked, Mr. Mundt.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Mundt, may I just, to clear this up, say that I have made a study of this record on the automobile, and I would like to read for the record at this time the references, all the references, which I have been able to find concerning what Mr. Hiss did say about this car. I want the committee to know the type of question and the type of answer.
     I also want the committee to know whether or not in these cases Mr. Hiss qualified his answers with the "to. the best of my recollection" statement.
    I want to say that before I do read this, that Mr. Hiss, as he has stated when he first began to testify said that he did not want to testify concerning his leases, and his apartments, without checking the leases, and that on that point he did want to testify to the best of his recollection.
    Now, let me read this just for the record at this point so that there will be no question in the minds of the members of the committee or of Mr. Hiss that we are reading only parts of the record on this automobile.
     The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, so ordered.
    Mr. MUNDT. That is a good idea.
    Mr. NIXON. The first reference comes on page 52 and I shall read:

     Mr. STRIPLING. What kind of automobile did that fellow have?
     Mr. HISS. No kind of automobile. I sold him an automobile. I had an old Ford that I threw in with the apartment and had been trying to trade it in and get rid of it. I had an old, old Ford we had kept for sentimental reasons. We got it just before we were married in 1929.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Was it a model A or model T?
     Mr. HISS. Early A model with a trunk on the back. a slightly collegiate model.
    Mr. STRIPLING. What color?
    Mr. HISS. Dark blue. It wasn't very fancy but it had a sassy little trunk on the back.
    Mr. NIXON. You sold that car?
     Mr. HISS. I threw it in. He wanted a way to get around and I said, "Fine. I want to get rid of it. I have another car, and we kept it for sentimental reasons, not worth a damn." I let him have it along with the rent.

     Mr. DAVIS. To make the record clear, I think you said page 52--I think it is page 53.
     Mr. NIXON. Page 53, you are correct; it is 53 that I am reading from.
     There is a strike-over on my page; it looks like 52.
     Mr. DAVIS. Mine, too.
     Mr. NIXON. I have that page:

    "I have another car, and we kept it for sentimental reasons, not worth a damn."
    I let him have it along with the rent.

    The next reference to the car comes on page 56 of the record, as I recall it, and I must say that there may have been one spot, two spots, that I have missed, but I have attempted to get them all here so that the record will be clear.
     Mr. NIXON. You gave this Ford car to Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. Threw it in along with the apartment and charge the rent and threw the car in at the same time.
     Mr. NIXON. In other words, added a little to the rent to cover the car?
     Mr. HISS. No; I think I charged him exactly what I was paying for the rent and threw the car in addition. I don't think I got any compensation.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You just gave him the car?
     Mr. HISS. I think the car just went right in with it. I do not remember whether we had settled on the terms of the rent before the car question came up, or whether it came up and then on the basis of the car and the apartment I said, "Well, you ought to pay the full rent."
     The next reference that I find in the record concerning the car is on page 58 starting at the bottom of page 57:
     Mr. STRIPLING. What kind of a car did you get?
     Mr. HISS. A Plymouth.
     Mr. STRIPLING. A Plymouth?
     Mr. HISS. Semisedan.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Four-door?
     Mr. HISS. I think I have always had only two-door.
     Mr. STRIPLING. What kind of bill of sale did you give Crosley?

     I should like to interpose at this point that when a bill of sale is discussed, a bill of sale refers to a transfer of title to an automobile.

     Mr. HISS. I think I just turned over--in the District you get a certificate of title, I think it is. I think I just simply turned it over to him.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Handed it to him?
     Mr. HISS. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. No evidence of any transfer. Did he record the title?
     Mr. HISS. That I have not any idea. This is a car which had been sitting on the streets in snows for a year or two. I once got a parking fine because I forgot where it was parked. We were using the other car.

    I turn now to the testimony--I think this is the next reference--to the testimony given on the following day, on the 17th, and I will refer the committee to page 13 of that testimony, and we again pick up the car at that point:

    In the course of the negotiation he referred to the fact that he also wanted an automobile.

    And then, turning again--that is Mr. Hiss' testimony--I will refer the committee to page 19 of the testimony on Tuesday, the 17th--we will start at the bottom of page 18 so that you can get the continuity:
     Mr. NIXON. So you agreed with him that he could move into your apartment for 3 months, approximately?
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
    Mr. NIXON. Which would be for a consideration of, say, $225, roughly?
     Mr. HISS. Whatever the actual cost to me was.
     Mr. NIXON. And then there was some conversation about a car. What was that?
     Mr. HISS. There was. Mr. Crosley said that while he was in Washington he wondered if he could. get a rented car or something, because he would like to have it while his family were with him, get out week ends, something like that. I said, "You came to just the right place. I will be very glad to throw a car in because I have been trying to get rid of an old car which we have kept solely for sentimental reasons which we couldn't get anything on for trade-in or sale." I would be very glad to let him have the car because we
    wanted somebody to make real use of it. We had had it sitting on the city streets because we had a new one.
    Mr. NIXON. It was a '29 Ford?
    Mr. HISS. One of the first model A Fords.
    Mr. NIXON. The year of this transaction would be 1935?
    Mr. HISS. That would be my best recollection.
    Mr. NIXON. A 6-year-old Ford?
    Mr. HISS. That is right.
    Mr. NIXON. You just gave him the car with his $225 rental?
    Mr. HISS. As part of the total contract. That is my best recollection.
    Mr. NIXON. The rent was simply the going rate, as you indicated?
    Mr. HISS. That is right.
    Mr. NIXON. And you just threw in this 6-year-old car with it?
    Mr. HISS. That is my best recollection. I don't think it figured as a financial element in the transaction.
    Mr. NIXON. Do you know the Blue Book value of a 1929 Ford in 1935?
    Mr. HISS. I certainly don't. I know what the going rate was with sellers of new cars. I think the most I had ever been offered for it was $25 or $30 at that time, a few months before that.
    Mr. NIXON. So you gave him this car?
    Mr. HISS. As part of the whole transaction.

    I now turn to page 40 of the record on Tuesday:

    Mr. NIXON. You never knew this man under the name of Carl?
    Mr. HISS. I did not.
    Mr. NIXON. You never paid this man any money for Communist Party dues?
    Mr. HISS. I certainly did not.
    Mr. NIXON. This is the man you gave the car to?
    Mr. HISS. Car?
    Mr. NIXON. Yes.
    Mr. HISS. C-a-r-yes.

    On page 41:

    Mr. NIXON. You have never given Crosley anything you recall besides the car?
    Mr. HISS. I have no such recollection. I don't consider I gave him the car, but threw it in with the whole transaction.
      Mr. Chairman, those are the references to the car, and there are these points that I think are significant:
     In the first place, we note that Mr. Hiss not only once but at least twice used the word "sold" in referring to the car.
     In the second place, we note that there was discussion concerning a title, a transfer of title. A transfer of title on a car is a matter which is discussed when you are selling a car to another person, and transferring it rather than a case where you are loaning the car to
another person; and Mr. Hiss discussed the transfer of title along that line. 
     Mr. Hiss, throughout this testimony, used the words "get rid of" and he used the words "threw it in," and in answer to a question concerning the words "You gave him the car," his answers were as the record has been read.
    Now, I have read those portions from the record because I think that Mr. Hiss is entitled to have the entire record on the car read in at this point, and I wanted the committee to know what the references were.
     I will say for myself that I am amazed to hear Mr. Hiss say this morning that he can only now testify to the best of his recollection as to whether he ever gave Crosley a car at all, that he is not sure as to whether or not he transferred the car to Crosley, that he might have given it to him for his use only, and that he is not even sure when the transaction occurred, and I think Mr. Hiss should be given every opportunity to explain just what his recollection was as to this car at the present time, and if he wants to change his testimony, that he change it, and tell us exactly what did happen to that car.
l    Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I am surprised if not amazed that you said just now that I testified this morning that I could not remember whether I had ever let Mr. Crosley have the use of my car. I don't think I did so testify, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. -Hiss, since you have raised that point, you will recall that when I asked you, did you give Crosley a car, you said:

    Mr. Nixon, to the best of my recollection, I did.

     Mr. HISS. Right.
    Mr. NIXON. And I said:

    Mr. Hiss, certainly on this point, you need not qualify your answer with the words "to the best of my recollection." If you gave him a car, you gave him a car, and you should be able to give a categorical answer to the question.

     Now, I ask you again, just so that the record will be clear, did you give Crosley a car? And if you can answer the question, "Yes" or "No," I think the committee would be glad to get the answer.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, it is evident that the committee has had access to far more record information than I have had.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, do you have to have records in order to know whether or not you gave a car away, the only car you ever gave away in your life?
     Mr. HISS. No; Mr. Nixon, I have testified, and I repeat my testimony, that my best recollection--and to have an exact recollection of trivial housekeeping details of 14 years ago, when I was a very busy man, doing more important things than these matters you are asking me to testify to about this morning, and I have been a relatively busy man since, it does not seem to me, being as objective as I can about it, that it is unusual for a man to preface his statements about the details by which he gave the use of a car, under the circumstances I have described, to a man who meant nothing in particular to him by the words "to the best of my recollection."
     Now, I do think that the committee has had access to more records. It has had a fuller staff than I.
     In reading over the record over the week end, I noticed one of your questions to me, after I had been testifying to the best of my recollection, that I lived on Twenty-ninth Street, and at one point you said, "Now, this apartment was on Twenty-eighth Street," and I, in my ignorance, corrected you, and said, "No, Twenty-ninth Street," and you
said, "Oh, no, Twenty-eighth Street."
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, there is not going to be any question about the committee raising a question as to whether you said Twenty-eighth or Twenty-ninth. That is something that any person could forget. But I do not think--
     Mr. HISS. But I think you knew, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. But I do not think--I have not raised the point this morning, and do not intend to.
     Mr. HISS. No; but I say I think you knew it was Twenty-eighth Street when you asked me. I think you already had access to records that I had not had time to have access to in order to refresh my recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. Certainly.
     Mr. HISS. That is all on that.
     Mr. NIXON. My point on the car is, is your testimony now that you gave Crosley a car, or is it that you did not give him a car?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, my testimony, I believe from the beginning, based upon the best recollection I have, is that I gave Crosley the use of the car, as I gave him the use of the apartment.
     Now, whether I transferred title to him in a legal, formal sense, whether he returned the car to me in connection with my upbraiding him for not having repaid various small loans, and the loans stick in my memory as of more significance than the rental of the house itself, because that rental did not involve anything that I was going to get from any other source in any event, a couple of months left over, a couple of months in the summertime, for an apartment in Washington-that was not a very great financial asset in those days.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, now, is your testimony this morning then that you did not give Crosley the car, that you gave him the use of the car?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I have testified, and I repeat it, that my best recollection is that I gave Crosley the use of the car. Whether I gave him the car outright, whether the car came back, I don't know.
     Mr. NIXON. You do not know whether you had the possession of this car after Crosley left you?
     Mr. HISS. That, I am afraid, I cannot recall. I do recall having a Plymouth and a Ford at the same time for some months, not just a few days. I do recall the Ford sitting around because it was not being used, the tires going down because it was just sitting on the street.
     Mr. NIXON. In fact, you have testified that that is the reason you gave Crosley the car, because you did have the two cars.
     Mr. HISS. I testified that that was the reason, I believe, the car was of no financial consideration to me, Mr. Nixon, during the period we are talking about.
     Mr. NIXON. Yes, Mr. Hiss. You will recall I had just read the testimony where you said "I gave Crosley the car because I had a new one."
     Mr. HISS. That is my best recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. In other words, this transaction in which you gave this car to Crosley occurred after you got your new car, is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. That is my recollection, Mr. Nixon. Whether my recollection is accurate or not, I frankly do not know without consulting records which are not available to me.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, is your testimony then that you did give Crosley the use of the car?
     Mr. HISS. That is my testimony, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. On that point you are sure?
     Mr. HISS. As sure as I can be of any of these details of 14 years ago, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss--
     Mr. HISS. Have you ever had occasion to have people ask you continuously and over and over again what you did on the night of June 5, 1934 or 1935? It is a novel experience to me, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, I will answer the question. I will tell you this: That if I had given anybody the use of a car for a period of 2 months, I would remember.
     Mr. HISS. Well, I have testified to you that I do recall that.
     Mr. NIXON. All right. Now, your testimony is that you did give Crosley the car for a period of 2 months. When did that occur?
     Mr. HISS. My best recollection is that it coincided with the sublease.
     I am not positive that it occurred then, rather than in the fall or some other time.
     Mr. NIXON. And you do not know whether it occurred at the time of the sublease or in connection with that transaction?
     Mr. HISS. My recollection is that it occurred because it is fixed in my memory in a rather vague way as connected with the lease. Whether it preceded or followed or was simultaneous, I am afraid I am not able to testify with exactness.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chairman--
     Mr. NIXON. Just a moment. Mr. Hiss, it is not likely that you would have given the car to Crosley after he failed to pay the rent, is it?
     Mr. HISS. I do not recall the details of when I concluded he was a fourflusher.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, now, you have testified that he went--
    Mr. HISS. It was sometime--not after this.
    Mr. NIXON. Your testimony was that you had seen Mr. Crosley after he failed to pay the rent.
     Mr. HISS. Yes; I feel quite confident I saw him some time after the sublease transaction.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, do I understand you to say that you might have loaned Crosley a car for a couple of months after he failed to pay the rent?
     Mr. HISS. I might have, if I had considered that his reasons for not paying were as plausible as his reasons had been for not paying back small loans, because the rent was not a major consideration in my mind. Of that I feel quite confident.
     Mr. NIXON. When were the small loans made?
     Mr. HISS. Again. Mr. Nixon, I am testifying from the best of my recollection, which I have certainly in the course of the last few days done my very best to go over and over again. I think I loaned Crosley a total, in small amounts, of $25 or $80. Whether they were made prior to the sublease, some of them after the sublease, I just frankly do
not recall with exactness. But at some stage I reached the conclusion that this had better be terminated, that I was being used, that my kindness was being abused.
     Mr. NIXON. And your testimony then is that the car-that you are not sure that the car was tied in to the rental transaction; you think it might not have been.
     Mr. HISS. It could have been tied in toward the end, it could have been tied in toward the beginning. My best recollection is that there is a connection between the two transactions.
     Mr. NIXON. Could it have taken place several months after the rental transaction?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, it could have.
     Mr. NIXON. You mean several months after he had refused to pay the rent?
     Mr. HISS. After he failed to pay the rent.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, didn't you ask him for the rent?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I don't recall at any time his ever refusing, ever saying, "I just am not going to pay." Quite the contrary, he was always going to pay at some time.
     Mr. NIXON. How long after he moved out of his apartment did you decide he was a dead beat?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I am not able to testify with exactness on that.
     Mr. NIXON. But you think it is possible that you loaned him a car or gave him a car after he failed to pay the rent?
     Mr. HISS. I may very well have given him the use of the car even though he had not paid the rent at that particular time.
     Mr. NIXON. And your testimony is that this man was simply a casual acquaintance.
     Mr. HISS. This man was an acquaintance. Under the circumstances this man was an acquaintance, under the circumstances to which I have testified.
     Mr. NIXON. You said he was not a guest in your home. You objected when Mr. Stripling used that phrase.
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. You objected when there was any suggestion that Mr. Crosley was a friend of yours, and you are now testifying that it is possible that you gave him a car after he failed to pay the rent.
     Mr. HISS. Yes, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. All right.
     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Chairman, I think we can resolve this matter of a car by a very simple question, and I want to say, first of all, that it is certainly inconceivable, Mr. Hiss, that you would not know some of the details of this automobile in the manner in which you have described it. You have described it as a car that was purchased about the time of your marriage, that you had a sentimental value connected with it, that, I say, is understandable. You say that it had been around for a considerable period of time, and you no longer had a need for it because you had another automobile. and so you either
sold or gave or loaned the automobile to the man that you identify as Mr. Crosley.
     Now, that is a correct summation, I believe, of your position up to now.
     Mr. HISS. It sounds to me quite correct.
     Mr. MUNDT. And I want to ask yon this question, and on this one, Mr. Hiss, you will not have to consult the records, and I certainly hope that you will not have to use the phrase "to the best of my recollection," which you have used over 75 times thus far before this committee. This one you should be able to say yes or no to. Did you ever dispose of that 1929 automobile to anybody else in any way besides to Mr. George Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, I would hate to disappoint you in any expectation.
     Mr. MUNDT. You have already done that, but answer the question.
    Mr. HISS. I am not able, without consulting the records, to testify with exactness or finality as to the way I ultimately completely disposed of my interest in that automobile."
    Mr. MUNDT. You have no memory at all of having disposed of the car in any other way except by this series of three possibilities by which you conveyed it to Mr. Crosley? Would you like to have this committee believe, Mr. Hiss, actually believe, that you cannot remember how you finally disposed of an automobile that had such a sentimental attachment to you, and which meant something to you?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, I have already testified that my recollection is that I let Crosley have the use of it: I may have let him have complete disposition. He may be the person who disposed of it.
     Mr. MUNDT. Yes; just a moment; may I interrupt you? As a matter of fact, whether you gave it to him or loaned it to him or made it part of the--a material part of the lease--unless, you had let him make final disposition of it, you certainly would know what you had done with the car after that.
     Mr. HISS. If the car came back to me, if he returned the car to me and I later disposed of it--
     Mr. MUNDT. You would know of it.
     Mr. HISS. I do not have a recollection of what I did.
     Mr. MUNDT. But you would have a recollection of it, of having it back.
     Mr. HISS. I would like to have an opportunity to consult the records, and I have been attempting to consult the records, and they are not available to me, Mr. Mundt.
     Mr. MUNDT. It is not necessary for anybody in this room to consult a record as to what he did with an automobile that he did not dispose of unless it happened to be an automobile dealer. Individual Government clerks, Mr. Hiss, do not have so many automobiles that they are giving them away, and loaning them, or disposing of them with no recollection, and certainly not one with a sentimental value like this 1929 Ford had for you and Mrs. Hiss.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, it may not be pertinent for the record, but I did not consider myself simply a Government clerk at the time. I don't know whether that is relevant or not.
     Mr. MUNDT. Maybe I misspoke.
     The CHAIRMAN. I think Mr. Hiss is correct there.
     Mr. MUNDT. But you did testify that you were not a man of means, with a whole fleet of automobiles.
     Mr. HISS. That is certainly correct.
     Mr. MUNDT. So the record shows, then, to the best of your recollection, you do not recall making any other disposition of that car finally except this transfer to Mr. Chambers or Mr. Crosley.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, we have been dealing in off-the-cuff recollections so long the importance which this committee is now evidently attaching to these details is such that I think I should recall with such aids to memory as I possibly can take.
     Mr. MUNDT. But you need no aids to your memory on a matter like that automobile. On your leases I can understand, and your address I can understand. From the standpoint of disposing of an automobile of that type you certainly would stretch the credulity of this
committee if you would have us believe that you have no memory at all of what happened to this automobile.
     Mr. HISS. I am not an expert on the credulity of this committee.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Vail.
     Mr. VAIL. Mr. Hiss, as a lawyer, don't you think it is a rather peculiar procedure for a tenant who is signatory to a written lease to sublease an apartment containing valuable furniture to a comparative stranger?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Vail, it so happens that I did exactly that same thing 3 or 4 years before I sublet, without any formal arrangement, a house I then had as the tenant in Georgetown on Thirtieth Street to a man who was then a casual acquaintance in Washington.
    I had his name recalled to me this winter through other circumstances. I have asked him or had him asked whether his recollection of that transaction of the summer of 1930, I think it was, is the same as mine, that it was done at the cost to me of my lease, that it was done informally and without writing, and he said to the best of his recollection it was done exactly the same way then.
     Last summer and this summer, the two places that I have taken for the summer, I have also taken without a formal lease from the owners of the premises, simply an informal understanding.
     Now, to me, Mr. Vail, it is not an unusual procedure, because I have done it on a number of occasions. It may be unusual to other people; it has not seemed so to me.
     Mr. VAIL. It would not, however, be a recommendation to a client on your part, as an attorney, would it?
     Mr. HISS. No; if I were thinking of protecting a client's interests, who was then handling property of sufficient value to consult an attorney, I would advise him to do it with more written records of the transaction. These, in all of the occasions that I have mentioned, the sums were not very large either from my point of view or from the point of view of the person with whom I was dealing. I have never myself attempted to write out leases, although I am a lawyer. .When I came to sell my house in Georgetown, where the sums were greater, I did not attempt to handle the written papers personally. I turned that over to counsel, to the title company.
     Mr. VAIL. But on this occasion, Mr. Hiss, you went a step further and took a further risk You gave to this subtenant the use of an automobile. You owned at the time two cars. Were both of those cars covered by liability insurance? 
    Mr. HISS. My recollection is that from the time I lived in Massachusetts I have had liability insurance. I think in Massachusetts it is obligatory, and I believe that I have had liability insurance.
     Mr. VAIL. Were the cars registered in Massachusetts, both cars?
     Mr. HISS. No; because I had only the Ford when I was living in Massachusetts.
     Mr. VAIL. But you believe that the Ford car at the time that you loaned it to Mr. Chambers was covered by insurance?
     Mr. HISS. I am sorry, I do not recall really.
     Mr. VAIL. Well, as a lawyer, would you not say that it was a highly important thing that a car that was registered in your name be covered, if operated by a comparative stranger, against liability?
     Mr. HISS. I think that is a very good point, Mr. Vail, speaking in terms of hindsight. It did not occur to me at the time.
     Mr. VAIL. You are a lawyer, Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. HISS. I am a lawyer, Mr. Vail.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, Mr. Hiss, I want to know if we can agree on something here. It was certainly in the spring or summer of 1935 that Mr. Crosley and his family occupied or sublet the apartment on Twenty-eighth Street.
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Is that correct? It could not have been the following year?
     Mr. HISS. Not so far as I can possibly recall.
     Mr. STRIPLING. It could not have been in the fall of 1935?
     Mr. HISS. Not so far as I can recall.
     Mr. STRIPLING. All right.
     Now, Mr. Chairman, I want to read from the testimony of Martha Pope, who was a maid in the home of Mr. Hiss during this period.
     Her testimony was taken yesterday, and I quote from the testimony:
    When Mr. Hiss was living at the apartment on Twenty-eighth Street, what kind of an automobile did he have?
     Mrs. POPE. A roadster.
     Mr. STRIPLING. What kind of a car was it?
     Mrs. POPE. It was with a back, you know, little coupe, with the back seat like--rumble seat.
     Mr. STRIPLING, A Ford?
     Mrs. POPE. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. A Font rumble seat, What color was it?
     Mrs. POPE, I think it was black with one of those tan tops, I think.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, when you moved to the P Street house, did he still have the Ford car?
     Mrs. POPE. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did he still have the Ford car?
     Mrs. POPE. That is the only one I remember.
    Mr. STRIPLING. Did he ever have anything else while you worked for him?
    Mrs. POPE. No.
     Mr. HISS, May I ask, Mr. Stripling, if you asked Martha Pope the dates when she worked for me?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes; we did.
     Mr. HISS. Would you mind giving them also?
     Mr. STRIPLING. She testified, Mr. Hiss, that she was working for you at the time you moved from the Twenty-eighth Street apartment and that when you moved to the P Street address, and, in fact, she testified that you did not move any furniture.
   Now, here is the testimony:
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, did you work for them at this apartment until they left?
     Mrs. POPE. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Were you there with them until they left the apartment?
     Mrs. POPE. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When you moved, when they left the apartment, they went over to P Street?
     Mrs. POPE. P' Street.
     Mr. STRIPLING. And moved into a house; did they not?
     Mrs. POPE. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Was that house on a corner?
     Mrs. POPE, I do not remember the corner house. I do not know whether it was a corner house or not.
     Mr. STRIPLING. But they did move into this house.
     Mrs. POPE. They moved to a P Street house.
     Mr. STRIPLING. And it was already furnished?
     Mrs. POPE. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. In this apartment on Twenty-eighth Street, when they moved out, did they take the furniture?
     Mrs. POPE. I do not remember them taking the furniture.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Do you remember their taking any furniture?
    Mrs. POPE. I do not remember taking any furniture. All I remember is their going to this P Street house.

     Mr. HISS. Mr. Stripling, you did not quite answer the question I asked. When did Martha Pope testify that she left my employ?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Well, she testified, Mr. Hiss, that she was in your employ during the period in question here. I will be glad to make her testimony available to you, but we are dealing here now with a specific period.
     Mr. HISS. But you do not know her testimony as to when she left my employ, the actual date; how long after we moved to P Street?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes; I will have that looked up. It is right here.
     In the meantime. Mr. Chairman. I should like now to refer to the testimony of Whittaker Chambers, which he gave on August 7 in New York City in the Federal Building.

     Mr. NIXON. Did they have a car--

    referring to Mr. and Mrs. Alger Hiss.

     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; they did. When I first knew them they had a car. Again I am reasonably sure, I am almost certain it was a Ford, and that it was a roadster. It was black, and it was very dilapidated, there is no question about that. I remember very clearly that it had bad windshield wipers. I remember that because I drove it one rainy day and had to work those windshield wipers by hand.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you recall any other car?
     MR. CHAMBERS. It seems to in 1936 probably he got a new Plymouth.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you recall its type?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It was a sedan. a two-seated car.
     Mr. MANDEL. What did he do with the old car?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Communist Party had in Washington a service station: that is, the man in charge or owner of this station was a Communist, or it may have been a car lot.
     Mr. NIXON. But the owner was a Communist?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The owner was a Communist. I never knew who he was or where he was. It was against all the rules of the underground organization for Hiss to do anything with his old car but trade it in, and I think this investigation has proved how right the Communists are in such matters, but Hiss insisted that he wanted that car turned over to the open party so it could be of use to some poor organizer in the West or somewhere. Much against my better judgment, and much against Peters' better judgment, He finally got us to permit him to do this thing. Peters knew where this lot was and he either took Hiss there or he gave Hiss the address, an Hiss went there, and to the best of my recollection of his description of that happening, he left the car there and simply went away, and the man in charge of the station took care of the rest of it for him. I should think the records of that transfer would be traceable.
     Mr. NIXON. Where was that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. In Washington, D. C., I have; certainly somewhere in the District.

    Now, Mr. Chairman, I have here a certificate of title, a photostatic copy of a certificate of title, District of Columbia, Director of Vehicles and Traffic. It shows that on July 23, 1936 Alger Hiss assigned the title of this car to the Cherner Motor Co. and I now ask that Mr. Hiss step aside, and that Mr. Russell take the stand.
    Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, before that happens, may I make a request of the committee?
     The CHAIRMAN. Yes.
     Mr. DAVIS. I would like to ask whether Mr. Chambers' testimony, a transcript of Mr. Chambers' testimony, can be made available to me at this time, so that as this hearing goes along we will have the advantage which the committee has of knowing what the entire testimony is.
     The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to make it available to you, but not at this time.
     Mr. DAVIS. You understand the importance of it. This hearing is apparently going to go on for some time.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Counsel, I will make the remark at this point that I think will clear it up, and you, as counsel, will agree.
     Mr. Chambers has not had a copy of Mr. Hiss' testimony. In fact, he has not seen a copy of his own testimony, and as far as this matter is concerned, as you can see, where the credibility of witnesses is concerned, it is important that we question the witness concerning these matters, so that we can get objective answers to objective questions, and, Mr. Chairman, I believe, under the circumstances that we should proceed in the usual order.
     The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, so ordered.
     Mr. Russell, would you take the stand, please. Stand and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
     Mr. RUSSELL. I do.

TESTIMONY OF ALGER HISS --Resumed

     The CHAIRMAN: All right, Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING: Mr. Hiss, I show you this photostatic copy of assignment of title, title No. 245647, for a Ford used, model A, 1929 Roadster, and the numbers are A-21888119-19-33- that was the date on the which it was originally registered in the District of Columbia.  The tag I believe, was 245647, in the name of Alger Hiss, 3411 O Street NW., Washington, D.C.
Now, Mr. Hiss, is this your signature which appears on the reverse side of this assignment of title?  [Showing witness photo static copy.]
     Mr. STRIPLING: No: I do not know.
     Mr. HISS. This is a Photostat.  I would prefer to have the original.  Do you have the original?
     Mr. STRIPLING: The original document, Mr. Chairman, cannot be removed from the Department of Motor Vehicles.  They keep it in their possession.
     Mr. HISS: They have it in their possession now?
     Mr. STRIPLING: I assume they do.
     Mr. DAVIS: Could it be subpoenaed?
     Mr. STRIPLING: It might be possible to subpena it here if they bring it up themselves.
    The CHAIRMAN: Well, Mr. Hiss, can't you tell from the Photostat what his signature is?  Whether it is your signature or not?
     Mr. HISS: It looks like my signature to me, Mr. Chairman.
     The CHAIRMAN: Well, if that were the original, would it look any more like your signature? [Laughter]
     Mr. HISS: I think if I saw the original document I would be able to see whether this Photostat is an exact reproduction of the original document.  I would just rather deal with originals than with copies.
     Mr. HERBERT: Mr. Stripling, may I interrupt?  In other words, in order to give Mr. Hiss every opportunity--if we recall what he did with the photograph, that he did not recognize Mr. Chambers for some time, and he finally recognized him.  I suggest that the committee issue a subpena duces tecum to the motor-vehicle people and let them come in here with the original, and it will be just a matter of hours, and he will have to admit it is his signature.
     Mr. HISS: The reason I asked was that we had not been able to get access to the original.  I just wondered what had happened to it.
     The CHAIRMAN: We will try, and Mr. Stripling, you try at noontime, if we ever reach noontime.
     Mr. STRIPLING: I think we can reach it this way.  Do you recall ever signing the assignment, Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. HISS: I do not at the moment recall signing this.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Is this your handwriting? There is written here, "Cherner Motor Co., 1781 Florida Avenue NW." Did you write that?
     Mr. HISS. I could not be sure from the outline of the letters in this photostatic copy. That also looks not unlike my own handwriting.
     Mr. MUNDT. Could you be sure if you saw the original document?
     Mr. HISS. I could be surer. [Laughter.]
     Mr.. STRIPLING. Now, Mr. .Hiss and Mr. Chairman, yesterday the committee subpoenaed before It W. Marin Smith, who was the notary public who notarized the signature of Mr. Hiss. Mr. Smith is an attorney in the Department of Justice in the Solicitor General's office.
     He has been employed there for 35 years. He testified that he knew Mr. Hiss; he does not recall notarizing this particular document, but he did testify that this was his signature.
     Mr. HISS. I know Mr. Marvin Smith.
     The CHAIRMAN. You know who?
     Mr. HISS. I say I know Mr. Marvin Smith.
     Mr. STRIPLING. The man who notarized this?
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, you knew Mr. Smith, the notary, who signed this in 1936, did you not?
     Mr. HISS. I did.
     Mr. NIXON. It is not likely that he would have notarized your signature unless you would have been there?
     Mr. HISS. It certainly would not.
     Mr. NIXON. On the basis-in other words, you would not want to say now that you question the fact that Mr. Smith might have violated his oath as a notary public in notarizing a forged signature?
     Mr. HISS. Definitely not.
     Mr. NIXON. Then, as far as you are concerned, this is your signature?
     Mr. HISS. As far as I am concerned, with the evidence that has been shown to me, it is.
     Mr. NIXON. All right; you are willing to testify now then that since Mr. Smith did notarize your signature as of that time, that it is your signature?
     Mr. HISS. On the basis of the assumptions you state, the answer is "Yes."
     The CHAIRMAN: Mr. McDowell.
     Mr. McDOWELL. I would like to say this, Mr. Chairman. While Mr. Hiss is on the witness stand I would like to make the following comment: That I have been present every time that Mr. Hiss has appeared before this committee and one other time, and in view of the many high and important positions he has held in our Federal Government,
I have treated him with every possible courtesy. However, he testified some time ago this morning that there was a rather heavy inference that the Committee on Un-American Activities was stalling in giving him the testimony, the copy of the-testimony that was given to him.
     I think the record will show that it was constantly through his efforts. I recall his efforts to get the testimony. I was a member of the subcommittee which went to New York, and I believe Mr. Hiss came to the Commodore Hotel at my invitation, and I presided there,
and I believe he was treated with all of the propriety which a witness should receive at the hearing.
     I recall we took along Mr. Banister, the stenographer, who had gotten that far only half of the testimony up, and we delivered the testimony to Mr. Hiss in New York.
     I would like to say, Mr. Hiss, that you got your testimony many, many hours before I got mine, and the heat and pressure that you were putting on the committee for the purpose of getting the testimony was nothing at all to the heat and pressure that I was putting on them and I want to say that there was no slowing down in anyway or in any fashion in getting that testimony to you. I think that should be, made a part of the record.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. McDowell, I am perfectly prepared to accept that
as an accurate statement. All that I was saying \vas that I had difficulty and delays in getting the testimony. I have no reason to think that those difficulties and delays were not explainable on the basis you so stated.
     Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Hiss, now that your memory has been refreshed by the development of the last few minutes, do you recall the transaction whereby you disposed of that Ford that you could not remember this morning?
     Mr. HISS. No; I have no present recollection of the disposition of the Ford, Mr. Hebert.
     Mr. HEBERT. In view of the refreshing of your memory that has been presented here this morning?
     Mr. HISS. In view of that, and in view of all the other developments.
     Mr. HEBERT. You are a remarkable and agile young man, Mr. Hiss.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chairman, before the committee recesses, I failed to put into the record a letter here which we received from Gerald P. Nye, regarding George Crosley.
The letter is addressed to Mr. Benjamin Mandel, director of research for the committee:

DEAR MR. MANDEL: Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of August 18 in-
quiring of any recollection that might be mine of a writer named George Crosley
who allegedly had been engaged in writing articles in connection with the
munitions investigations in 1934 and 1935 conducted by a Senate committee of
which I was chairman. The name of Crosley does not enter my recollection
in any way. shape, 01' manner...
Very truly yours,
Gerald P. Nye.

The letter is dated August 19, 1948.
     The CHAIRMAN. Are there any more questions from any members?
The Chair would like to announce that we will recess until 2: 30 this afternoon, and there will be an executive session downstairs in the committee room at :2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 1: 05 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at :2: 30 p. m. this day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

     The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order. The record will show that those present are Mr. Mundt, Mr. McDowell, Mr. Nixon, Mr. Hebert, and Mr. Thomas. A quorum is present.
     Mr. Stripling, the first witness.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Alger Hiss.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hiss, you, of course understands that you are still testifying under the oath you took this morning.
     Mr. HISS. I do.
     The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Stripling.

TESTIMONY OF ALGER HISS-Resumed

     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chairman, I would like at this time to introduce into the record certificate of examination and inspection made by the Department of Vehicles and Traffic, District of Columbia, of the Ford car in question.
This certificate, Mr. Chairman, was made by the Cherner Motor Co. to the Department of Vehicles and Traffic of the District of Columbia.
It says:
This certifies that this day the physical examination of used motor vehicle trade number Ford .1929, body roadster, discloses the following engine number, 2188811, and that these have been checked against information appearing on certificate of title issued by District of Columbia number 245647.
It is further certified that items of this motor vehicle as shown below have been mechanically inspected and tested and the "O. K." inserted opposite each item. It is noted that they comply with District of Columbia traffic regulations appearing on the first side and that the mechanical condition of this motor
vehicle is such as to permit its operation in compliance with general safety.

The items are then listed:
Brakes, headlight, horn, rear view mirror. windshield wiper, windshield glass. All are marked "O. K." The date is July 2, 1936.
It says:
The above engine and serial numbers were obtained by physical examination.
It is signed, stamped in, "Cherner Motor Co., by Edward S. Barton"-B-a-r-t-o-n.
The above engine and serial numbers were checked against the title by Cherner Motor Co."--stamped in--and then ;Harry L. Cohen.
"Items of motor vehicle mechanically inspected, Cherner Motor Co."--stamped in, and then--"Edward S. Barton."
     The CHAIRMAN. The record will show at this point that Mr. Vail is present.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Now, Mr. Hiss, do you know an individual in Washington by the name of Bialek, B-i-a-l-e-k?
     Mr. HISS. B-i-a-l-e-k?
Mr. STRIPLING. B-i-a-I-e-k.
     Mr. HISS. The name means nothing to me, Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Do you recall anything of the details concerning the transfer or sale of this car to the Cherner Motor Co?
     Mr. HISS. As I testified before lunch, Mr. Stripling, I do not have any present recollection of the transfer of title, a photostat of the certificate of which you showed me before lunch.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Nixon, do you have a question? Go right ahead.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, just to summarize this car transaction, what is your testimony now as to what you did with the car?
     Mr. HISS. Beginning with what date, what stage in the transaction?
     Mr. NIXON. Beginning with the stage when you gave the car to Mr. Crosley.
     Mr. HISS. My best recollection, Mr. Nixon, as I believe I have ,testified previously on several occasions, is that I made the car available to Crosley. Whether I gave it to him outright, whether it came back to me from him, whether at some later stage he or someone else came to me and said "You disposed of a car, there remains a technical transaction to be completed," I have no present recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. As I understand your answer then, you are sure that you gave the car to Crosley either for a loan or by transfer.
     Mr. HISS. I am. That is my best present recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. On that point. But you do not remember whether or not Mr. Crosley gave the car back to you and whether or not you transferred it later to the Cherner Motor Co.?
     Mr. HISS. No; I do not.
Mr, NIXON. You don't recall that incident at all?
     Mr. HISS. No; I do not.
     Mr. NIXON. You don't deny, however, that the notarization of your signature on the transfer to Cherner Motor Co, in July of 1936 is your signature?
     Mr. HISS. I certainly do not.
     Mr. NIXON. I see. But you don't recall that transaction?
     Mr. HISS. I do not recall it. I would want to talk to Marvin Smith to see what his recollection is. I have no recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. The committee took the testimony of Mr. Smith, who testified that he did notarize your signature, that he knew you and that had you not come before him for notarizing the signature, he would not have notarized the signature.
     Mr. HISS. I would have the same impression, because I know Mr. Smith.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, then, there is one point on which the testimony is clear. You have testified that you did give a car to Crosley but now you say it might have been a loan, that it might not have been simply an outright transfer of gift. Is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. .I say it may have bounced back or it may have been a loan. That is right.''
     Mr. NIXON_. All right. The possibilities are that you have transferred to him outright and it came back to you or that you may simply have loaned it to him.
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. That is right. Now, when did that transaction occur?
     Mr. HISS. The transaction of making the car available to Crosley?
     Mr. NIXON. That is correct, whether by loan or by gift.
     Mr. HISS. Again, Mr. Nixon, I think I have testified to this before. My best recollection is that that was connected with the subleasing transaction. Whether it was simultaneous, whether it preceded it, or whether it followed it I am not clear in my own recollection at the present time.
     Mr. NIXON. Your testimony is that you could have given him the car before, during, or after the subleasing transaction?
     Mr. HISS. To the best of my recollection I would not be able to be sure.
     Mr. NIXON. At the time you gave him the car did you have your new car?
     Mr. HISS. Again my recollection, Mr. Nixon, is that I had a Plymouth and the Ford at the same time. Of that I feel very confident.
     Mr. NIXON. Of that you are very confident?
     Mr. HISS. Whether I had them both at the time of the transaction with Crosley I cannot at this late date be absolutely certain.
     Mr. NIXON. Well Mr. HISS. My impression is I did and that was one of the reasons
why I was prepared voluntarily to make the Ford car available to him.
     Mr. NIXON. In any event, Crosley had the car according to your recollection for a period of say 2 months?
     Mr. HISS. A period of time, that is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. If he had the car for 2 months, it would seem quite obvious that you must have had another car at that time.
     Mr. HISS. It mayor may not be obvious.
     Mr. NIXON. It mayor may not be.
     Mr. HISS. It mayor may not be obvious.
"     Mr. NIXON. Do I understand you to say that you might have loaned the car to Crosley for 2 months and you didn't have a car during that period?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, if during that particular period I for some reason had no need of a car, either because someone had loaned me a car which was better than that one or because I was on a vacation when the car was of no use to me, there are many possibilities. I don't feel I have exhausted all the possibilities.
     Mr. NIXON. Then you wish to change the testimony that you gave on Monday and Tuesday that at the time you gave the car to Crosley you had your new car. Is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, so far as I am aware I am not changing any testimony. I am doing my best to amplify my testimony, to continue to answer questions asked by this committee.
     Mr. NIXON. So far as you are concerned you are not prepared to say whether or not you had a new car at the time you gave this car to Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. My recollection is there was a connection between the new car and the transaction with Crosley.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, Mr. Stripling, will you put in evidence at this time the registration for the new Plymouth which Mr.-
     Mr. STRIPLING. I believe you have that, Mr. Nixon.
(Short pause.).
     The CHAIRMAN. I suggest you look for that later.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Stripling
     Mr. STRIPLING. It was read into the record this morning; as I recall, it was September 6, 1935.
     Mr. NIXON. That was read into the record this morning?
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is right.
     Mr. NIXON. September 6, 1935.
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is my recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. That is the time when the new Plymouth was registered in Mr. Hiss' name?
     Mr. STRIPLING. That is right.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, Mr. Hiss, does that refresh your recollection as to when this transaction with Crosley occurred?
     Mr. HISS. No, I am afraid it does not.
     Mr. NIXON. Your testimony is, then, as I recall, that it is probable that at the time you gave this car to Crosley it was when you had two cars available?
     Mr. HISS. That seems probable.
     Mr. NIXON. Then it is quite probable, in your opinion, that this transaction took place after September 6, 1933?
     Mr. HISS. Again I am not able to recall in terms of actual present memory. I have done the best I can to give this committee all the recollection I have from the very beginning and I will continue to do so.
     Mr. NIXON. When did you last see Mr. Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. Again my best recollection is some time in 1935.  Whether it was the fall or not I am not sure.
     Mr. NIXON. How many times after Mr. Crosley's rental agreement expired on June 26 did you see him?
     Mr. HISS. I can't recall with exactness. I would think not more than a couple of times-two, three times. But I am not positive.
     Mr. NIXON. Not more than two or three times?
     Mr. HISS. I would think.
     Mr. NIXON. Did Mr. Crosley ever stay overnight with you on any of those occasions?
     Mr. HISS. I think I testified when that question was asked me before that he may have, that I have some recollection either before or after the sublease arrangement of Mr. Crosley saying he had been unable to get a reservation, had come into town late or something but I frankly don't recall his staying overnight except the days prior to his moving into the apartment.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, the documentary evidence which yourself suggested the committee should introduce and which we have introduced shows clearly that you had possession of this car for possibly 12 months and probably for at least 9 months after Mr. Crosley received possession of it. You don't recall having had the car during that
period?
     Mr. HISS. Excuse me, Mr. Nixon. I am not confident that the documentary evidence at the committee's disposal and at my disposal does demonstrate conclusively that I had possession of the car during that period.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you deny that you executed on ,July-in July 1936, this transfer of the car, the title, to Cherner Motor Co.?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I hadn't finished what I was saying. Shall I finish or answer that?
     Mr. NIXON. Answer that question and then proceed to the other, if you will.
     Mr. HISS. Proceeding in inverse order, the specific question you last asked, I do not deny and have no reason to deny that I executed the document, a Photostat of which was shown to me this morning.
     What I was saying was that it does not to my mind conclusively demonstrate that in between that date and the time we were talking about in the summer of '35 that I had possession of the car. It is conceivable to me that I did not have possession of the car during that time, that if I was asked to complete a mere formal legal technicality at a later date, I did so, and I am trying to look into that question at the present time. That is one of the reasons I want to talk to Mr. Marvin Smith and anybody else who could possibly have any information.
     Mr. NIXON. You mean the person that had possession of the car at that time might have asked you to complete this transaction?
     Mr. HISS. That is quite possible, and someone may have come into my office in the Department of Justice- Mr. Marvin Smith was in the same office where I worked in the Department of Justice-and may have said to me, "You disposed of a car some time ago. There is a technical legal step that needs to be taken. Would you simply sign a 
statement ?" That I have no present recollection of, Mr. Nixon, but I am doing my best to recall to get the evidence.
     Mr. NIXON. Did Mr. Crosley come in there and ask you to do that?
     Mr. HISS. I have no recollection of seeing Mr. Crosley after 1935.
     Mr. NIXON. He is the man you gave the car to?
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. He is the man that would have had possession?
     Mr. HISS. That doesn't necessarily follow, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Did you give the car to anybody else?
     Mr. HISS. You are leaving out some possible steps. He may have given the car to somebody else.
     Mr. NIXON. Are you testifying to that?
     Mr. HISS. I am not testifying. I am trying to answer your questions, Mr. Nixon, which you seem to think are pertinent and important questions.
     Mr. NIXON. They certainly are.
     Mr. HISS. And I am doing my best to be responsive to the questions and if you don't think the answers to the questions are evidence, I am afraid that is your fault because you are asking the questions.
     Mr. NIXON. Then you think then--your testimony is that at least the title of the car was in your name until July of 1936?
     Mr. HISS. The evidence that I have seen today certainly looks that way, Mr. Nixon. You are asking me to speculate and I am doing my best to comply with your request.
     Mr. NIXON. If you executed a transfer of title to the car that wasn't yours, that would be something quite unusual, wouldn't it, Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. HISS. Not if I was merely taking care of a formal detail of transfer.
     Mr. NIXON. I asked you if the title was in your name. Obviously the title was in your name or you wouldn't have had to take care of this formal execution. Can't you give me a yes or no answer to that question?
     Mr. HISS. The record, Mr. Nixon, as I have seen it today would indicate the title had remained in my name until the date Mr. Stripling has referred to in 1936.
     Mr. NIXON. You don't deny then you did execute this title?
     Mr. HISS. I do not, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Then the title was in your name at that time?
     Mr. HISS. The evidence would so indicate, Mr. Nixon. [Laughter.]
     The CHAIRMAN. You will say the evidence would indicate that the title was in your name?
     Mr. HISS. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
     The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe that the title was in your name?
     Mr. HISS.      Mr. Chairman, I have done my best to give you beliefs conjectures--
     The CHAIRMAN. There is no question about that.
     Mr. HISS. Speculations, whatever you ask. I am not prepared at this time to say what I believe about something 14 years ago where I don't have positive, definite recollection and where the evidence so far before us does not, to my mind, make it absolutely clear.
     The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that that car was in your name?
     Mr. HISS. To the extent that my thoughts are relevant and of interest to this particular committee, it would look to me as of now--I am not now testifying as to past recollection-it would look to me as though, on the record, the car was in my name.
I may have thought I had disposed of it before and may have been told in '36 that I had not completely disposed of it.
     The CHAIRMAN. Was the car in your name?
     Mr. HISS. The evidence before this--
     The CHAIRMAN. Never mind the evidence. You know whether the car was in your name or not. Was the car in your name?
     Mr. HISS. I do not know for certain, Mr. Chairman. I am testifying on the basis of the evidence that has been submitted here today.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, you are an attorney. You realize that under the law that if the title of the car was in your name, you would have been liable for damages in the event this man had an accident.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Vail asked me that question this morning. I certainly did not realize it. I don't know that I realized it then, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Would you repeat that answer?
     Mr. HISS, Mr. Vail asked me a similar question this morning; I certainly did not realize it. I am not sure I had it in mind at the time.
     Mr. NIXON, It is rather amazing to me that a man who stood extremely high in his class at Harvard Law School could say that he had gone through law school and wouldn’t know that when the title to a car was in his own name, that in the event an accident occurred to that car that he would be liable for damages. You are not testifying to that, 
are you?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I would like to testify right now that as of the present moment I really do not have a firm opinion as to what the law would be if someone were driving a car registered in my name and were guilty of negligence causing the injury of someone else. I am slightly surprised at your implication that that would automatically make me as the registered owner of the car liable.  Even now at this minute.
     Mr. NIXON. How much, Mr. Hiss--
     Mr. HISS. I would like to refer that to counsel.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, How much did you get from the Cherner Motor Co. when you transferred this car?
     Mr. HISS. I have testified that I have no recollection of transferring the car to the Cherner Motor Co. and I certainly have no recollection of receiving any payment.
     Mr. NIXON. In other words, you are testifying today at least to this fact: That you had never any recollection of receiving any money for this car, to whomever you may have transferred it is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. I have no present recollection of receiving any money for that car. That is correct.
     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Nixon, I think he said he wanted to refer that 
Question to his counsel.  I would like to have his counsel answer that question. You are an attorney in this city, How do you advise your clients as to the responsibility for an automobile registered in their names?
     Mr. DAVIS. No one has asked that question. If anyone asked the question, I would say I want to search the law in the District of Columbia, and if I were pressed for an answer I would say that the registered owner of the car in the District of Columbia was not liable for torts of the driver of the car unless that driver was acting as his agent. [Laughter.]
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Stripling, this car was transferred to one William Rosen.
     Mr. STRIPLING. It was sold to one William Rosen, or transferred from the Cherner Motor Co.
     Mr. NIXON. What was the address William Rosen gave?
     Mr. STRIPLING. -5405 Thirteenth Street. N.Y.
     Mr. NIXON. Who lives there now? 
     Mr. STRIPLING. You mean now or in 1936?
     Mr. NIXON. Who lives there now and who lived there then?
     Mr. STRIPLING. A man by the name of Merriam lives there at the present time.
     Mr. NIXON. Who lived there then?
     Mr. STRIPLING. In 1936?
     Mr. NIXON. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Bialek, B-i-a-l-e-k.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Bialek says he knows no William Rosen?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Benjamin Bialek.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Bialek says no William Rosen lived there in '36?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mrs. Bialek said that. Mr. Bialek is ill.
     Mr. NIXON.. How long did the Bialeks live there after '36, do you know?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes; I think we have that. They moved from there in 1937.
     Mr. NIXON. 1937. Well, now to summarize the situation concerning the car at this time for the record, it would seem that the facts which the committee has available through testimony and through documents are as follows:
     Mr. Hiss testified on Monday; the 16th, and on Tuesday, the 17th, substantially to the following facts: He testified that he had a 1929, Ford roadster and that some time in the spring of 1935 at the same time that he sublet an apartment to Mr. George Crosley, that he transferred the car to him. The testimony of Mr. Hiss on that point has been read so the committee could hear it. The testimony certainly left every member of the committee convinced of the fact that Mr. Hiss had conveyed the impression that the transfer was outright, that he didn't get the car back, that it was not a loan, since he had used the
words "sold," "get rid of," and that he had even discussed the matter of title when asked about title.
      The transfer, according to Mr. Hiss, took place contemporaneously with the making of the lease with Mr. Crosley. The lease with Mr. Crosley, it has been established this morning had to occur because of the rental contracts which Mr. Hiss had-it had to occur between May 1 and June 26,1935, because Mr. Hiss' contract for the apartment in which Mr. Crosley lived expired on June 26, 1935.
     Subsequent to Mr. Hiss' testimony concerning the automobile, the committee investigators want to the Department of Motor Vehicles and also to the dealer from whom Mr. Hiss had purchase the car, and as a result of investigation established these fads from the record:
      First, established that Mr. Hiss did not get a new Plymouth automobile, which as the first of the new automobiles that he purchased, until September of 1935, which is 5 months approximately after the time that he indicated in testimony on Monday and Tuesday that he had given the car to Crosley. It should also be said that in his testimony on Monday and Tuesday, Mr, Hiss, on three occasions, said that he gave the car to Crosley at that time because he had a new car and did not need the other car.
      It was also established in checking: the records that no transfer of any type of an automobile was recorded to Mr. Crosley from Mr. Hiss, either of the '29 Ford or of any other automobile, and it was established through the records that in July of 1936, 1 year after Mr. Hiss testified that he had given the car to Crosley and transferred the car to Crosley, 1 year later, he had transferred the car to the Cherner Motor Co. Also that the Cherner Motor Co. the same day had transferred it to one William Rosen who had given an address which, as the result of the committee's investigation so far, is a false address.
It was apparent to the committee therefore, laying the testimony of Mr. Hiss on Monday and Tuesday-and I might say I read from the record he was questioned concerning the car on at least 20 occasions-it was apparent from the record that Mr. Hiss could not have transferred the car to Crosley as he said he did in the spring of 1935.
      It is apparent that if the transfer did occur it occurred 4 months after Mr. Crosley must have moved out of the apartment, 3 1/2 months after Mr. Crosley must have moved out of the apartment.
      It is also clear that the transfer was a loan or that he transferred the car to Crosley and Crosley transferred it hack to him because Mr. Hiss later had to execute a document in order to transfer the title of the car to the Cherner Motor Co. in July of 1936.
Now, the question has been raised as to why the issue of the car is important. The issue of the car is important in this case for the reason that I stated during the morning session.
The issue before this committee today is whether or not Mr. Whittaker Chambers has falsely accused Mr. Hiss of being a member of the Communist underground during the period that he knew him from 1934 to 1937, Mr. Hiss came before the committee and based his denial on two grounds:
      First, he denied that he was a Communist or had ever been a Communist, and he denied it categorically and strongly.
      Second. He denied that he had ever known a man by the name of Whittaker Chambers, and ,when shown a picture of Mr. Chambers, he said he could not identify him at that time and that he would want to see the man himself before making an identification.
     By reason of that fact Mr. Hiss in effect cast doubts on the credibility of Mr. Chambers. The committee therefore took the testimony of Mr. Chambers and the testimony of Mr. Chambers on the car has been read into the record. We also took the testimony of Mr. Hiss on the ear on Monday and Tuesday with the results that I have just indicated.
     I should like to say again that in this connection Mr. Hiss when he identified Mr. Crosley, Mr. Chambers as the man he knew as Crosley, he necessarily did tell the committee that he did not know Crosley as a Communist and in attempting to prove to the committee that he did not know Crosley as a Communist he made these three important points:
     He said: (1), Mr. Crosley was a free-lance writer whom I knew at the Nye committee"; (2), "He was a man that I sublet my apartment to"; (3), "He was a man that I gave a car to"; and I should add another: (4), "He certainly was not to my knowledge a Communist."
The committee has been going into all of these points. We have now gone into the point about the car and it would appear to me, looking at the record objectively, that it is quite apparent that Mr. Hiss could not have been correct in his testimony on Monday and Tuesday concerning the time that he gave the car and of the type of transaction, that it was a gift--I mean, that it was an outright transfer rather than a loan.
     It is also quite apparent from the record that if Mr. Hiss did give Mr. Crosley a car at any time, he gave it to him after September 1936, 1935, when he had both of his cars--and in giving him the car at that time he obviously--it would obviously lead the committee to believe that Mr. Hiss knew Mr. Crosley 3 or 4 months after the period that Mr. Crosley, as Mr. Hiss said welshed on his rent.
     It also was apparent that he gave the car to him at a time--that he gave the car to him after Mr. Hiss had learned that Mr. Crosley was not financially responsible and that he had not paid his rent.
That is my summary of it, Mr. Chairman, and I have no further questions on the car.
     Mr. HISS. May I make a comment at this time, Mr. Chairman?
     The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead.
     Mr. HISS. I would like to say that the record which Mr. Nixon has attempted to summarize will, of course, speak for itself. I am glad that the record is now being made public by the committee so that others may make their own summary of it.
I do not accept the summarization that Mr. Nixon has just made.  But, of course that is his privilege.  It I s the privilege of anyone to summarize the record.
     May I at this time renew the request I made earlier to read into the record my statement? At the time I first appeared on the stand this morning you said the committee would reconsider my request.  May I at this time be permitted to read into the record--
     The CHAIRMAN. Yes. May I see your statement, please?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Chairman, you say you have already seen it. You said you read it in the papers.
     The CHAIRMAN. You said there were some changes from the last one.
     Mr. HISS. No; I said I have a few points I would like to add to it, Mr. Chairman.
     The CHAIRMAN. You don't mind if I look at it?
     Mr. HISS. I have them in notes. I also have some questions that I would like to address to      Mr. Crosley-Chambers.
     The CHAIRMAN. May I see the statement just the statement?
     Mr., HISS. The statement is the letter that was sent to you yesterday.
Do you want to see that?
     The CHAIRMAN: I thought you said this morning, though, that there were some changes from that.
     Mr. HISS: I said this morning and I say again, Mr. Chairman, in addition to reading that letters into the record I have a few other points I would like to make on which I merely have notes, and there are a few questions I would like to ask Mr. Chambers-Crosley.
     The CHAIRMAN. Just let the Chair see that statement and in the meantime Mr. Mundt will ask a question of the witness.
     Mr. MUNDT: You have no recollection at all of that?
     Mr. HISS: I have no recollection of the name Rosen.
     Mr. MUNDT: I want to go into a little different matter with you for a while because this strikes back to the first day you testified before the committee, at which time I was the acting chairman in the absence of Mr. Thomas due to illness.
At the time when you were first appearing before the committee you denied categorically that you ever knew Whittaker Chambers taken the day he appeared before the committee at your own request.  You will recall you telegraphed the committee that you would like to appear on Thursday morning, and we heard you at that time.
     Mr. HISS: That is correct.
     Mr. MUNDT: I have here the picture which you were shown at that time, which you will see is an exact likeness of the same Mr. Chambers who is now sitting over there in that corner of the room.
     Mr. HISS: May I see this picture?
     Mr. MUNDT: Yes; you may.  I am putting it down for that purpose.
     Mr. HISS: I don't wish to be technical, but this is not the picture shown to me on the 5th of August.
     Mr. MUNDT:  It may not be.  That was a picture taken on that day.
     Mr. HISS: I was not shown that on August 5.  I was shown one picture on that day.
     Mr. MUNDT: It is not my point that that was the particular picture, but that is a picture taken on the day he testified.
     Mr. HISS: What is the question,      Mr. Mundt?
     Mr. MUNDT: The question is whether you see any marked facial differences at all between      Mr. Chambers as he sits over there now and the      Mr. Chambers on the picture you now have before you.
     Mr. HISS: No marked differences; no      Mr. Mundt.
     Mr. MUNDT. You feel if you had seen that picture and then seen      Mr. Chambers come walking into the room, that you would identify the two as being the same?
     Mr. HISS.      Mr. Mundt, I would like to remind you- I think you were -not in New York on the day when I first saw      Mr. Chambers since this testimony of his had occurred.
     Mr. MUNDT. That is correct. I was not present.
     Mr. HISS. I identified      Mr. Chambers as the man I had known as Crosley on several different grounds. I said then and still say that I -can only regard his present features and picture and looking at him as having a certain familiarity.
     Mr. MUNDT. And you see no marked-
     Mr. HISS. I identified him on several grounds, which I think the record will show. One was that he himself had testified he had had major alterations in his teeth.
     Mr. STRIPLING. I can read the record on that.
     Mr. HISS. I have a recollection of Crosley as a man with notably -poor teeth. I also identified him on the basis of his statement in my presence that he had been in my apartment with my permission when I was not .there, but was living on P Street, and on the basis of his statement in my presence that with my permission he had spent several days in my house on P Street at about the same time. And finally because he admitted to the authorship of a tall tale which I remembered Crosley having told me and which I think I testified to the committee on either Monday or Tuesday that I did recall Crosley as having told; namely, that for local color purposes as a writer he had participated in laying the tracks of the first street railway in Washington, D.C.
     That struck me when I first heard it as a tall tale. It still does. Mr. Crosley-Chambers, in my presence, before the subcommittee--
     Mr. MUNDT. Why do you call him Mr. Crosley-Chambers?
     Mr. HISS. I first knew him as Crosley. What his name is today I am not prepared to testify to or what other names he may have had.
     Mr. MUNDT. Did you know him as Mr. George Crosley or Mr. Crosley-Chambers?
     Mr. HISS. I knew him as Mr. George Crosley.
     To complete the statement I was making. when I recited this tall tale in his presence, he spoke up and said, "It is true. I remember the name of the contracting firm I worked for."
     When members of the committee expressed some doubt, as I had, as to the credibility of that particular story, he said, "Oh, maybe it wasn't the first street railway; maybe it was the W. B. &, A."
     On the basis of all those facts I told your committee that I was prepared to identify Chambers as the man I had known under the circumstances I have testified to as Crosley. That is the record. That is the fact. Mr. Hebert accused me of agility. I accept no accusation except that of truth.
     Mr. MUNDT. Now, to get back to my question, do you find any major deviations between the picture which I have just shown you, which is a current likeness of Mr. Whittaker Chambers as we now know him, and Mr. Whittaker Chambers seated over there?
     Mr. HISS. No; it looks like a moderately good likeness, slightly flattering I would say. [Laughter]
     The CHAIRMAN. I will admit that answer called for some laughter, but I think we had better have more order.
     Mr. MUNDT. I happen to have here, Mr. Hiss two pictures of the same Whittaker Chambers which were taken in 1934 at the time he was living in your apartment and known to you. I want to hand those to you and see if you see any marked differences between the pictures taken then and the picture taken on the day Mr. Whittaker Chambers testified before the committee.
     Mr. HISS. I am afraid I wouldn't be able to recognize-you can only see part of the face there. Again you can only see part of the face.
     It would be very hard to say. I have no distinct recollection at this time of the facial appearance of George Crosley, and I have so testified.
     My strongest recollection is of the ball teeth. when I saw him for the first time a after these hearing began, I asked, as the record will show, if he would please open his mouth so I could look at his teeth.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, on that point there is considerable in the record which will be released today in which you did request Mr. Crosley to open his mouth and in which you eyen asked the name of his dentist and wanted to consult with his dentist before you made the identification positive.
     My question may sound facetious, but I am just wondering: Didn't you ever see Mr. Crosley with his mouth closed? [Laughter]
I am serious.
     Mr. HISS. The striking thing in my memory about Mr. Crosley-
     The CHAIRMAN. Are you going to answer the question or are you going to bring up another point? Because we want you to answer that particular question.
     Mr. HISS. I am attempting to answer the question, Mr. Chairman.
     The CHAIRMAN. Proceed.
     Mr. HISS. The striking thing in my recollection about Crosley was not when he had his mouth shut, but when he had his mouth open.
     Mr. NIXON. As far as you are concerned, the only way you can identify a person is when he has his mouth open? Is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I am talking about--
     The CHAIRMAN. Just a moment. The Chair would like to say we must have order in here and if you have got any very humorous remarks in the way of answers, call me out later on and give them to me because I always like a good laugh, but let's not have any more laughing in here if we can possibly avoid it.
     Mr. HISS. I understood the laughter to be at the question not at the answer, Mr. Chairman. Maybe you or Mr. Nixon would like to withdraw and tell your jokes.
     The CHAIRMAN. It makes no difference whether it is the question or the answer. We have to have order. Now proceed.
     Mr. HISS. Will you repeat the question, please?
     Mr. NIXON. As I recall the question, I asked whether or not in identifying a person you have known as you had known Mr. Crosley for several months, it was necessary for you to see him with his mouth open.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, my testimony with respect to Crosley has been with respect to one individual under the circumstances under which I knew that individual. I have not testified that I cannot identify anybody generally except by whether his mouth is open or not…

Skipped pp 1130-1135

     Mr. MUNDT.      Mr. Hiss, is it then your testimony that the first time ever heard of Whittaker Chambers in connection with allegation that you are a Communist was during this past winter?
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
     Mr. MUNDT. That would be the winter of 19--
     Mr. HISS. 1948.
     Mr. MUNDT. You never heard about it before?
     Mr. HISS. I did not.
     Mr. MUNDT. You are sure of that?
     Mr. HISS. I am confident of it. That is my very best recollection.
     Mr. MUNDT. Let me read this,      Mr. Hiss, because this is one of the disturbing parts of your testimony. Let me read what you told us in your prepared statement when you came here on August 5 of your volition, testifying under oath. Counsel will find it on page 357: 
To the best of my knowledge I never heard of Whittaker Chambers until in 1947
 when two representatives of the Federal Bureau of Investigation asked me
if I knew him and various other people, some of whom I knew and some of whom
did not know.

Now, what do you expect this committee to do with a fabric of contradictory evidence like that,      Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, may I say that I am profoundly shocked by our characterization of what you have just read. I think you will find in the record-if not, it is high time it got in the record, and I hope you can get from the FBI agents who interviewed me their account of the interview-I think I testified that when those two men came to see me, they asked me if I knew a long list of names--30, 40--I wouldn't remember how many-I would say according to my recollection there must have been 15 names that, I had never heard of before.
One of the names I had never heard of before was Chambers, Whittaker Chambers. I remembered the name, because of the way in which the name had come up in the conversation.
     Mr. MUNDT. That was in 1947?
     Mr. HISS. Just a moment, Mr. Mundt. They in no way indicated Chambers or anyone of the other names I had or had not heard of was making any charge against me. It was merely one of a number of names, some of which I knew and a considerable number of which I had never heard of before.
There is no contradiction, and I resent and protest your saying it was contradictory testimony.
     Mr. MUNDT. There is a contradiction because you just testified to Mr. Hebert that the first time you had ever heard of Mr. Whittaker Chambers was last winter.
     Mr. HISS. I do not--
     Mr. MUNDT. Now you say you heard about him in 1941. If that isn't a contradiction, I don't recognize it.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Mundt, I do not think I testified to Mr. Hebert that the first time I ever heard of Chambers was last winter. I understood Mr. Hebert to ask me when I first heard that Chambers had said I was a Communist, and those are two very different statements.
     Mr. MUNDT. We will have to let the record speak for that.
     Mr. HISS. We certainly will.
     Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Hiss, when the picture of Mr. Chambers was first presented to you here when you first appeared, at that time you said you would rather see the man to positively identify him.
     Mr. HISS. I did.
     Mr. HEBERT. Today you say, you told the committee that you did recognize some familiarity in the photograph.
     Mr. HISS. I did not testify today that I told the committee that on the 5th. It was in my mind. I do not find it in the record. I do recall having said that to a number of individuals on the 4th, the day before I testified. I did testify to it on the 16th.
The fact is, there was a certain familiarity in the features. I could not tell whether I was imagining it. There is still a certain familiarity.
     Mr. HEBERT. You told somebody before you appeared before the committee that there was a familiarity?
     Mr. HISS. I told several people.
     Mr. HEBERT. Several people?
     Mr. HISS. Yes, I did.
     Mr. HEBERT. Why didn't you tell the committee that?
     Mr. HISS. The committee did not specifically ask me. I was shown a photograph. I was asked if I could identify it.
     Mr. HEBERT. I will read from the record, Mr. Hiss, and you have read the record, too-you seem to have studied it pretty well.
Counsel, this is page 367: 

Mr. STRIPLING. I have here, Mr. Chairman, a picture which was made last
Monday by the Associated Press. I understand from people who knew Mr.
Chambers during 1934 and '35 that he is much heavier today than he was at that
time, but I show you this picture, Mr. Hiss, and ask you if you have ever known
an individual who resembles this picture.

It seems to me that is quite a direct question. To which you replied:

Mr. HISS. I would much rather see the individual. I have looked at all the
pictures I was able to get hold of in, I think it was, yesterday's paper which had
the pictures. If this is a picture of Mr. Chambers, he is not particularly unusual
looking. He looks like a lot of people. I might even mistake him for the 
chairman of this committee.

The chairman of the committee was Mr. Mundt at that time.
Mr. Mundt replied: I hope you are wrong in that.

     Mr. Hiss replied:

I didn't mean to be facetious, but very seriously I would not want to take oath that I have never seen that man. I would like to see him and then I think I would be better able to tell whether I had ever seen him. Is he here today?
Mr. MUNDT. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. HISS. I hoped he would be.

Now, the impression that was left with me--and I must join Mr. Hebert in this--I think the committee left with the press and I have read most of the stories that appeared in the newspapers the following day--was that you testified you had never seen his man.
     Mr. DAVIS. This page was 365:
     Mr. NIXON: 365.
     Mr. DAVIS. And the page Mr. Hebert was reading was what?
     Mr. HEBERT. 367.
     Mr. DAVIS. The picture had not been shown at this time. It was a question of names rather than pictures.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss had previously testified he had seen the pictures the day before. Mr. Hiss testified he had been studying the pictures the day before. He knew what we were. referring to and he still said, "As far as I know, I have never seen him." I can only say that the impression left with the committee was that he had never seen this man.
Now, I understand his testimony now is that he did recognize a certain familiarity and told friends the day before that he did recognize that familiarity.
     Mr. HISS. That is correct, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. But you didn't tell this committee that.
     Mr. HISS. You have referred to the impression not only of the committee but to the impression of the press. My recollection is that Mr. Stripling at one of the hearings in New York also referred to the impression of the press and I replied to him that perhaps he had helped create the impression of the press, which did not have any basis that I could see simply from the record to have any such basis.
     Mr. MUNDT. At that point, if he will yield--
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hebert has the floor.
     Mr. HEBERT. Of course, Mr. Hiss, the record speaks for itself. Your replies were heard by the press and the people in this room and Mr. Stripling, as a matter of fact, had nothing to do to create any impression except by what you said.
     Mr. HISS. Well, now--
     Mr. HEBERT'. Let me finish. I might also say, Mr. Hiss, that you created a most favorable impression the first day you appeared.
     Mr. HISS. Thank you, Mr. Hebert.
     Mr. HEBERT, And when anybody had an opportunity, however, to read the cold record, they didn't get the same impression from the record as they thought they had gotten when you were testifying orally because as I told you before, you are a very agile young man.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Hebert
     Mr. HEBERT. Wait just a minute. I will let you make all the speeches you want. Let me get mine in now. I repeat you are a very agile young man and a very clever young
man and your conduct on all appearances before this committee has shown that you are very self-possessed and you know what you are doing and you know yourself why you are answering and how you are answering.
     Now, that is the reason why I am trying to find out exactly where the truth lies. I can't understand and I can't reconcile and resolve the situation that an individual of your intellect and your ability who gives to casual people his apartment, who tosses in an automobile, who doesn't know the laws of liability, who lends money to an individual
just casually, is so cautious another time.
     It seems to me it is a demonstration of a very remarkable ability.
No, that is the reason why I want to be sure in repeatedly asking these questions that there can be no doubt in anybody's mind about what you mean to say as contrasted to what you say.
     Now, the impression was definite that you had never seen that picture--and, incidentally, these pictures have been shown to several people, innumerable people, of Chambers taken in '34 and the picture today. Without hesitancy every individual has remarked about the striking similarity between the two men, which are naturally the same man. And yet you and you alone-you, and you alone-sit here today and stand out as alone individual who hedges and resorts to technicalities that you can't tell.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Hebert, that was a very loaded statement.
     Mr. HEBERT. I hope it was because I want you to get the full impact it. [Applause.]
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Hebert, we will see people's judgment of the photograph; when the photographs are made public. I don't know how many people have seen them.
     Now, your specific question of me, I understand, again relates to the question of why I was unable to identify a picture, a single picture that was shown. to me,. and I think it would be wise if the record showed the particular picture which was shown to me.
My recollection is it was a picture taken at a candid-camera angle from under the chin. I don't know whether Mr. Stripling still has or marked as an exhibit the particular picture shown to me. I think that picture is relevant.
     Mr. CHAIRMAN. May I see those pictures again?
     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the pictures shown Mr. Hiss that day be put in the record. I think you were shown two pictures.
     Mr. HISS. I think just one picture. My recollection is only one picture. 
     Mr. MUNDT. It should be in the record.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Hebert, the name Crosley was not in my mind at all when I was testifying before the committee. There was not remote connection in my mind between that man, the transactions I had had with him, and the charges that a man named Chambers was now talking against me.
     Why should I have connected the two people at that time? Perhaps you knew more connections between them than I did. I knew of no connection.
     I first thought of Crosley after various accounts apparently from his own secret testimony of his having personal knowledge about me came to my attention, while I was on the train coming down here voluntarily, willingly, and promptly in response to a telegram from he chairman of your committee as to whether I would appear in executive session on Monday, the 16th.
     Now, all the confusion might very well have been avoided if you had had him here the first day. I hoped he would be. I remarked on the fact that he was not here the first day.
     Mr. HEBERT. Of course, that is mere speculation on what you would lave done the first day.
     Mr. HISS: You said I could continue after you had finished,      Mr. Hebert.
     Mr. HEBERT. Certainly. I apologize.
     Mr. HISS. Thank you. You have compared what you term my caution in testifying on what to me was a very important fact: Who was my accuser on such a serious charge? You have compared that in importance to trivial transactions of 14 years earlier. I do not think that is a fair comparison. I do not think it is fair to say that because I acted in that particular case, acted with what I have said before seems to me ordinary kindness in dealing with people on relatively unimportant matters, that that is inconsistent on such an important matter as my public testimony on such a charge as has been made.
I said I would want to see the man face to face. You are privileged to have your own interpretation, Mr. Hebert, and, thank goodness, I am privileged to have mine.
     Mr. HEBERT. I always respect your interpretation of anything the same as I think the committee wants its interpretation respected here, and we are only trying to get to the truth. As I told you the other day in executive session, I told you that either you or Mr. Chambers was the damnedest liar that ever came on the American scene.
     Mr. HISS. And I am just as anxious to get at the truth as you are.
     Mr. HEBERT. And whichever one of you is lying is the greatest actor we have ever seen in this country.
     The CHAIRMAN.      Mr. Vail.
     Mr. VAIL. Mr. Stripling, the name Bialek is a rather unusual one and one that rings a bell in my memory. About a year ago four students of the DePaul University in Chicago came into my office and said they were down here for the purpose of lobbying in behalf of the GI subsistence bill and certain things had occurred that they thought merited congressional attention.
     They said when they arrived in Washington, they were met at the train by a man named Robert Bialek. Mr. Bialek undertook to find them housing and he took them to the home of a man named Lichtenstein. Mr. Lichtenstein proved to be a very cordial host. One of the things they noticed when they entered the hall in going up the stairs was a large framed picture of Joe Stalin. and when they reached the rooms to which they were assigned, they found a table in the center of each room loaded with communistic literature. Subsequently they were escorted to parties where they were subjected to communistic propaganda.
     So they reported the incident and we held a hearing and went into the matter quite thoroughly, and it is a matter of the committee records. I think this particular phase of this matter, in view of the fact that the automobile we are discussing found its way into the hands of a man named Rosen who resided at this same address of Robert Bialek, is sufficient of a coincidence to justify some exploration.
     Have you any information, M. Stripling, as to whether or not there was any relationship between Robert Bialek and Benjamin Bialek?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Robert is the son of Benjamin Bialek.
     Mr. VAIL. That is all.
     The CHAIRMAN. That is all…

Skips pp 1141-1149

     Mr. NIXON It has been established. in other words that you two knew each other.      Mr. Chambers said he knew you as a Communist and that it was in that connection that his acquaintanceship with you occurred, and he has indicated the circumstances of the acquaintanceship as he recalled them.
You, on the other hand, have indicated that your acquaintanceship with Mr. Chambers was with a man named Crosley, a man with whom you had only a casual acquaintance, that he was not a friend in that sense, that he was not what we would term even a guest in your house at the time he stayed there, but it was a business relationship at most, and that in the end      Mr. Chambers had been a man who had failed to pay his debts and with whom you built up relations because of his failure to pay his debts.
     Now, just to get the record straight today as to those points on which you are sure on your recollection of this conversation with Mr. Chambers, I would like to go through four or five points to be sure the record is straight.
     We have your testimony of Monday and Tuesday which is pretty clear on these points, but you have indicated today in the case of the car that the testimony of Monday and Tuesday should not be accepted at face value, that at least the interpretation placed on that testimony would have to be changed in view of the facts that have been brought
to your attention.
     Mr. HISS. It should be accepted on the basis on which I gave it, as my best recollection under the circumstances, without access to records.
     Mr. NIXON. You don't mean to say now that you are still insisting that you transferred title of this car to Chambers in May of 1935? .
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I am insisting that at all times I have testified to this committee to the best of my then recollection. That is what I am insisting.
     Mr. NIXON. I see. Now, in regard to the lease on the. apartment, as you testified previously, It was at the going rate--that is, whatever the apartment was to you.
I might say that the investigation of the committee has brought forth the fact that the apartment at that time was leased to you at $60 a month.
     Mr. HISS. My recollection was it was a moderate rental. I don't remember.
     Mr. NIXON. You testified in New York that it was somewhat less than $75. Now, as we have indicated from the records, Mr. Chambers could have been in the apartment from May 1 to June 26. That was the point at which you had jurisdiction of the apartment.
From that, then, it would appear that Mr. Chambers owed you approximately $120 in rent at the conclusion of his tenancy in the apartment.
Now, I do understand that you are testifying today that you did lease the apartment to Chambers. There is no question about that.
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. And it was a financial transaction.
     Mr. HISS. That is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. And it was agreed he was to pay you for the apartment?
     Mr. HISS. That is correct. I have also testified, Mr. Nixon, that the apartment did not seem to me then and does not seem to me now to have been a very significant financial value on the market, on the market at the time. I had some more time to go after I moved out there.
     It was not a readily lease able asset or readily disposable asset at the time.
     Mr. NIXON. My point is that Chambers owed you $120 approximately when he left the apartment.
     Mr. HISS. My recollection is that the arrangement was at cost. I wouldn't want to say, though, that it hadn't been somewhat less than cost, but I just don't recall.
     Mr. NIXON. I see. Now, is it your recollection that previous to the time when Mr. Chambers went into the apartment, Mrs. Chambers, Mr. Chambers, and their infant daughter visited you and your wife in your house on P Street?
     Mr. HISS. That is my recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. Are you sure on that point or are you not sure?
     Mr. HISS. I am not sure of the exact time. That is my best recollection. It is fixed in my recollection in connection with the subleasing of the apartment.
     Mr. NIXON. Could the visit have taken place after the lease on the apartment expired?
     Mr. HISS. It could.
     Mr. NIXON. You mean it is possible you might have had Chambers and his wife and child in your house for several nights after he welshed on the rent?
     Mr. HISS. I cannot recall any reason why that would have happened. My recollection, as I have testified to already, is that it was in connection with his not having adequate furniture to move into the apartment. I am not able to testify at this late date with absolute certainty about where I was on the night of May something, 1934 or 1935.
I have told you to the best of my recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. Could it have occurred 6 months after the lease on the apartment expired?
     Mr. HISS. I don't see how it could.
     Mr. NIXON. Can you testify on that point?
     Mr. HISS. I will testify to the best of my recollection it could not.
I will testify to the best of my recollection it could not.
     Mr. NIXON. Then as far as your answer to that question is concerned, you think      Mr. Chambers was in your house as a guest with his wife for 2, 3, or 4 days, as you testified, before he went into the apartment?
     Mr. HISS. That is right, spring or early summer of 1935, if that is the date.
     Mr. NIXON. But you have indicated it might have been afterward?
     Mr. HISS. Might, only in the sense of a possibility. I have no recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. But you don't want to indicate positively that it was before?
     Mr. HISS. It is my best recollection that it was before and was in connection with the circumstances I have testified to.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, is it your testimony Mr. Chambers told you his furniture van was coming down and that is why he was waiting?
     Mr. HISS. That is my best recollection and that is why they couldn't move into the apartment; something that he needed.
     Mr. NIXON. Where was it coming from, do you recall?
     Mr. HISS. My best recollection, as I think I have already testified is that I had the impression that Mr. Chambers, Crosley, came from New York; that I had seen him three or four times; that he came to Washington in order to get material and information for the articles he was writing. He may have been living in Washington for all I know positively. I had the impression that he was coming from New York that he returned to New York after his business.
     Mr. NIXON. Your recollection is the conversation was Mr. Chambers was bringing down his furniture in the van for the 8-week period he was subletting the apartment? 
     Mr. HISS. My recollection is he told me he wanted to complete the research he had been doing on the munitions case, that he wanted to stay in Washington for quite a period, which further confirms my recollection that he hadn't been living in Washington to my knowledge before.
     Mr. NIXON. He was bringing furniture for that 8-week period?
     Mr. HISS. He was bringing his wife and child and I think he was bringing some furniture, not complete because I left some furniture behind.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, we have already touched upon the car and I think it has been summarized, my statement is in the record and your statement is in the record on that.
Do you have anything to add on the car?
     Mr. HISS. Not at this time, Mr. Nixon. I hope I will have something to add in the future.
     Mr. NIXON. In any event, as far as your testimony given in New York is concerned, the answers which, as I indicated, were quite categorical on the nature of the transaction and the time of the transaction, you now wish to qualify to the best of your recollection; is that correct?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I would like to reply to that that the record should speak for itself. My testimony then and my testimony today--.
     Mr. NIXON:' The answers weren't qualified then, Mr. Hiss. Do you want to qualify them now? You have right to.
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I thought that at all times I had qualified my answers by saying I was testifying to the best of my recollection. Without having had access to records.
     Mr. NIXON. You are not yet prepared to say what kind of a transaction this was?
     Mr. HISS. I have tried to indicate to the committee-and the record will show, Mr. Nixon-my best recollection of the nature of the transaction. 
     Mr. NIXON. But you are sure you gave Chambers a car for a period of time?
     Mr. HISS. I am confident according to my best recollection I gave him the use of the car for at least a period of time, as I gave him the use of my apartment.
     Mr. NIXON. How many times did you see Chambers before he went into the apartment?
     Mr. HISS. I would estimate four or five. I am not confident at all that I can tell the exact number.
     Mr. NIXON. Your testimony in New York was 10 or 11.
     Mr. HISS. That is my recollection. If that is my testimony, that is my recollection of how many times I saw the man altogether.
     Mr. NIXON. Is your testimony now you have seen Chambers 10 or 11 times altogether?
     Mr. HISS. That would be my impression.
     Mr. NIXON. I see. and that you only saw him four or five times before he moved into the apartment.
     Mr. HISS. It could have been more than four or five times. It could have been five or six, six or seven.
     Mr. NIXON. Did you take him to lunch on any of those occasions?
     Mr. HISS. I think I remember occasions when we went out to lunch in the Senate Office Building while we were talking about the munitions investigation.
     Mr. NIXON. Were you always alone with him at those times?
     Mr. HISS. I do not recall whether anyone else on the staff was with me. I am doing my best to get in contact with former members of the staff who may have known him at the same time I did.
     Mr. NIXON. You know of no persons at the present time who were with you at the time you had those luncheon engagements with him?
     Mr. HISS. I have not found anybody.
     Mr. NIXON. Nobody visited him at the time Mr. and Mrs. Chamber were at your house?
     Mr. HISS. I have attempted also to check with my friends, any friends who saw him go into the house when he was there.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, in regard to the rental agreement, I should like--to refer you to the testimony of--and, Mr. Counsel, if you will get your testimony out--concerning the matter of payment. On page 82 of the testimony on Monday, the 16th, in the middle of the page--     Mr. Counsel, when you have it, you will let me know. Page 82:

     Mr. NIXON. Did he pay any rent all the time he was in your house?
     Mr. HISS, My recollection is he paid $15 or $:20, and he gave me a rug which I have still got.

Now, the following day, 24 hours later, on page 15 of the testimony on Tuesday
     Mr. DAVIS. Just a minute, Mr. Nixon. What page is that?
     Mr. NIXON. Page 15, a little above the middle of the page.
     Mr. DAVIS. Thank you.
     Mr. NIXON (reading):

Mr. NIXON. Did he ever pay any rent at all?
Mr. HISS. My recollection is that he paid no cash, that he once paid in kind.

Now, which is the true statement?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I think I have testified that my recollection is that in addition to the apartment transaction I loaned Crosley, perhaps, over a period of time as much as $20 or $25. Whether my recollection is also that he paid some money, some nominal amount back to me, never the full amount-whether I regarded whatever he may have returned as paying the $15 or $20, I remember lending him, or for rent. I would not recall, and I am not sure that he ever paid anything.
     Mr. NIXON. Then your testimony today is-- 
     Mr. HISS. If I testified that he paid something, that was my best recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, one day you testified he paid nothing; the next you testified--I mean, the first day you testified that he paid $15 or $20 and the next day you said nothing. Now, I want to know which is which.
     Mr. HISS.      Mr. Nixon, the main recollection is the fact that he--
     Mr. NIXON. Paid anything?
     Mr. HISS. And did not pay in full; and my recollection, as best as I recall it now, is that I got nothing from the transactions I had had with him. I would not want to take an absolute, positive oath that he never paid back a single cent. My recollection is I got nothing except something in kind.
     Mr. NIXON. Then, since Monday when you said, "My recollection is that he paid $15 or $20," you wish to tell us now that he paid nothing; is that right?
     Mr. HISS.      Mr. Nixon, if I testified on Monday, I did so to the best of my recollection then. The record will have to show what it shows. I do not have a definite present recollection of receiving anything from Crosley.
     Mr. NIXON. How many loans did you make to him?
     Mr. HISS. Again, my recollection is that it was over a couple of transactions, two or three. I think I recall letting him have $10 or so at the time that he was moving into the apartment in connection with expenses then.
     Mr. NIXON. Was that the first loan you made to him?
     Mr. HISS. I do not recall that. I may have let him have $5 or so on occasion. I am sorry I do not recall that.
     Mr. NIXON. When was the last loan you made to him?
     Mr. HISS. I do not recall the last date of the last loan.
     Mr. NIXON. Did you make any loans to him after he moved out of the apartment?
     Mr. HISS. That, I do not recall. What I do recall is the succession favors requested and obtained, and the cumulative effect, and the recession that this had better be put an end to.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, did he make some loans after you moved out of apartment?
     Mr. HISS. I am unable to testify with positiveness as to whether he or not.
     Mr. NIXON. You might have? 
     Mr. HISS. I am trying to go back to my old checks and records. If I were to find a check as of, say, September, I certainly would accept it.
     Mr. NIXON. At the end of the first month did you dun him for the rent? 
     Mr. HISS. I do not recall, frankly, the nature of the dunning process. I do recall making it plain to him that he owed me money, and was paying it, and I do recall his indicating that he was going to in good time. When he marketed these articles, when he could do that,
and so on, he would pay me.
     Mr. NIXON. You testified, Mr. Hiss, that on one occasion you gave Mr. Chambers a ride to New York from Washington.
     Mr. HISS. I think I recall an occasion when I was going to New York, and when Mr. Crosley went along with me, either because I mentioned that I was going, and he asked for the ride, or some other reason. I have taken other people. I have picked hip hitch-hikers, I have frequently taken people on ride when I was driving from one place to another.
     The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentleman yield to me?
     Mr. NIXON. Yes.
     The CHAIRMAN. Did anyone else go on that trip to NEW York?
     Mr. HISS. I am unable to recall. I had asked my wife whether she went. I do not think she is clear in her own mind as to whether she did or did not.
     Mr. NIXON. What car did you use?
     Mr. HISS. It would depend on the date; it would depend on the car I had.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, if you used the Ford, it would have taken a long time.
     Mr. HISS. If I used the Ford it would have taken as long as a model A Ford would take to get there.
     Mr. NIXON. It would be about 9 or 10 hours.
     Mr. HISS. I do not recall how long it took a model A Ford to go from Washington to New York.
     Mr. NIXON. In any event, your testimony is that you spent anywhere from 7 to 10 hours, depending on the automobile, with Mr. Chambers, in a car.
     Mr. HISS. If we were in fact driving to New York together--if we, in fact, drove to New York together, that is correct.
     Mr. NIXON. Let me get this clear. Are you testifying that you did go to New York with him or you did not go to New York with him?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon. I am testifying that I think I recall driving him to New York. I am not testifying that I remember clearly that I positively did. I have told the committee over and over again that these were matters of no consequence to me at the time they occurred.
That I have no fixed. vivid recollection of them.
     Mr. NIXON. You are not sure that you took him to New York?
     Mr. HISS. I would not be prepared to swear positively that I did. The committee asked me if I ever had, and I said I might have.
     Mr. NIXON. How many times did you see him after the rental agreement was over?
     Mr. HISS. I could not testify with certainty that I did see him at all. I could not testify with certainty that I did, or if I did, just how many times I did. I would be surprised if I saw him in all more than 10 or 11 times.
     Mr. NIXON. As I read your testimony, Mr. Hiss, you said that you might have stayed overnight with him.
     Mr. HISS. With him?
     Mr. NIXON. I am sorry-that he might have stayed overnight with you after the rental agreement expired.
     Mr. HISS. You asked me if it could have been possible, and my recollection of my reply is that it could have been possible.
     Mr. NIXON. What did you call Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. I think I just called him Crosley.
     Mr. NIXON. You had known this man by that time about 9 months, and you just called him Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. I would not be surprised if I called him George. News paper men have a way of themselves being quite informal, and of expecting informal treatment. I have known a number of news-papermen not too intimately, who called me by my first name and, whom I called by their first name rather quickly in one acquaintance.
     Mr. NIXON. Then, as I understand from this testimony, the only thing you are willing to testify for sure to is that you did let him have your apartment, and that he did see you at the Nye committee; is that right?
     Mr. HISS. Well, "is that the only thing," that is a rather hard question to answer just that way, The record will show just exactly what I have testified to, and what I have not, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. The record will be very clear on that point.
     Mr. HISS. An attempted summation in a few words is difficult to do with exactness.
     Mr. NIXON. What else are you sure of? You are sure of the lease, you are sure of the Nye committee. What else are you sure of?
     Mr. HISS. I am sure that I let him have the use of the car. I am reasonably sure.
     Mr. NIXON. You do not know when, how or why?
     Mr. HISS. I think it must have been in connection with the lease transaction.
     Mr. NIXON. Even though you did not have two cars at that time?
     Mr. HISS. During, before, or after. The question of what cars I had available to me will certainly have a bearing upon my final determination of my own recollection. If I find that some friend lent me a car during the summer, that will have a bearing. If I find that I acquired another car earlier than the one that Mr. Stripling has referred to, that will have a bearing.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, how many times in the last 15 years have you borrowed a car from a friend for the summer?
     Mr. HISS. I would want to search my recollection and the recollection of friends.
     The CHAIRMAN. Well, the Chairman would like to intercede right there.
     Mr. NIXON. I have no more questions, Mr. Chairman.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Vail.
     Mr. VAIL. In the interest of accuracy of the record, in connection with my remarks a few minutes ago, I refreshed my memory by referring to the record, and I find that two of those boys stayed at the home of Lichtenstein, of them at the, home of a man named Hyde, and the picture to which I refer was a picture of Karl Marx instead of Joe Stalin. Thank you very much.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Mundt.
     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Hiss, you said that if you could find a check issued to George Crosley in September, in the nature of a loan, that that would help you very much, and it would certainly help this committee very much.
     Mr. HISS. Yes, Mr. Mundt.
     Mr. MUNDT. You made a series of loans to this Mr. Crosley.
     Mr. HISS. I do not recall, and one of the reasons I am trying to my old checks and stubs is to find out.
     Mr. MUNDT. You think you might have given him one by check?
     Mr. HISS. I might have.
     Mr. MUNDT. Now, Mr. Hiss, these hearings are drawing to a close, and I want to review with you briefly, as briefly as I can, the reactions of just one member of this committee to the testimony in which you are involved, and after I conclude my statement, which I shall make without interruption, you then make the statements that you have to make without interruption. But I wish you would take notes on what I am going to say so that you can correct me in your statement where you think I am in error, or where you set my trend of thinking right, where you think it is deviating from a logical course.
     We started out in these hearings simply to get at the truth concerning espionage activities in Government. One of our early witnesses, Mr. Whittaker Chambers, mentions your name and the name of your brother, Donald Hiss, in connection with other individuals, most of whom have refused under oath to deny the charges or to deny the
fact that they are members of the Communist Party.
     You suggested when you first came before the committee that in an effort to get at the facts that we take certain steps, one of which was to go to the records, wherever the records are available. We have done that, and we have spread those records wherever available into this testimony.
     You suggested that you be confronted with your accuser. We have done that, both in executive session and in open session. 
     You suggested that we check all the verifiable details, which we have done.
     Your testimony that first day was that, to the best of your recollection, you did not know Whittaker Chambers, and that the picture which was presented to you by counsel, Mr. Stripling, did not bring back the memory of anybody whom you had seen by that picture.
     The next step in this proceeding was, and I might say here that you made a very fine impression on me, as acting chairman, that first day. I was inclined to be in your corner from the standpoint of accepting the validity of what you said. You were given every consideration by the committee and not cross-examined very dearly or carefully by the committee on that first day, and that despite the fact, that as a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, I had frequently heard the name of Alger Hiss bandied around as having possible Communist connections in years past. I never had seen you; I never had met you; I do not believe your name had ever passed my lips or had been written by me in any correspondence up to that time. But it was, as you have later testified, rather common scuttle-but, should we say, around Washington that one Alger Hiss had been labeled by some as a fellow traveler or Communist. The most recent
indication of that is a statement in the morning paper, by George E. :Sokolsky. I will read you just two paragraphs from his column,
These Days. It says:

Way back in 1941 I came across the existence of the Ware group 
that is the Harold Ware whom you testified that you knew the Ware 
group in Washington, who were engaged in placing Communists in
the most critical positions in the Federal Government. I was then told who
the original 10 were, and among them was mentioned Alger Hiss.

In spite of that, after hearing your testimony, I was convinced that either Whittaker Chambers must have been falsifying before this committee or else there was a mistaken identity.
     So, I asked a subcommittee to go to New York for the purpose of interviewing Mr. Chambers to see whether by some chance, he had confused Alger Hiss with someone else, whether or not he could substantiate his statement that he knew Alger Hiss, and, if so, how well, and what details he could supply, which are verifiable. He supplied a great many details, all of which are in the executive testimony, which been released to the press today.
     Then you were again interviewed in Washington, and at that time you verified these same details, which were given us by Mr. Chambers, intimate details about your family, about your hobby, about your pets, about the decorations in the room, and after verifying a number of these details, you said, "I might have known a man who had access to that information," and you said that man, if you knew him at all, was one George Crosley.
     The next day the committee went to New York City and brought you and Mr. Chambers together, at which time you identified him positively; you identified him as the George Crosley, but you said then that you sublet him your apartment. You said then that you gave or sold him an automobile. You said then that you had him living with you several days in your own home. You said then that you had also seen him at sometime -later than the time when he occupied your apartment, and you said then that you had made a series of small loans.
     We have tried since then to verify further the testimony of both yourself and Mr. Chambers. We have been unable to find anybody who knows or who has seen George Crosley. You have been unable to produce anybody for us who knows or has seen George Crosley.
     Therefore, in summary, it would seem to me that you have left me, as one member of the committee, in this position-and I came back from South Dakota by air to get at the facts of this case, because, as I say, when you first appeared before the committee. you left me with the feeling that you were telling the truth and that you were not concealing or evading information which we needed to have in this Committee.
     Now, I find that while you said earlier that you did not know Mr. Whittaker Chambers or any man answering that description or looking like him, it is now established testimony that you did know him and that you do know him.
     There is some doubt about the name, but there is no question about your having known the individual, and I find that while you said in the testimony that you were sure anybody who could have lived in your house over a period of time would be somebody whose picture you would be able to identify, but I find that you were unable to identify from the picture, although you now testify that this man did live in your home over a period of days.
     You said that you gave Chambers your car, that you sold or traded it to him, and now the written records show that you signed a transfer of your car to the Cherner Motor Co. or else to one William T. Rosen.
     You testified that you had given money to Crosley in the nature of a loan. He testified that he had received money from you in the nature of payment of Communist dues. The points in agreement, as they looked to me, are these: 
     You knew this man; you knew him very well. You knew him so well that you even trusted him with your apartment; you let him use your furniture; you let him use or gave 
him your automobile. You think that you probably took him to New York. You bought him lunches in the Senate Restaurant. You had him staying in your home when it was inconvenient for him to stay in the apartment, and made him a series of small loans. There seems no question about that.
      In other words, there seems no question about your associations with a man who told this committee that he associated with you.
     The points in disagreement, as I see them are these:
     Were you or were you not a Communist. This committee never had any illusions that we would be able to prove definitely whether or not you are a Communist because, in dealing with people charged with being Communists over a period of years, we have found that those who are guilty, refused to admit it and dodged the question, or deliberately lied.
     We know that we cannot get the records of the Communist Party. We cannot get their membership cards, but that was a point we could not hope to establish by verifiable evidence, and it is now a point in dispute.
     The second point in dispute is that were you a member of the so-called Ware group who are alleged to have worked together to promote their associates into key positions of Government. You say you were not. Mr. Chambers says that you were. Mr. Chambers said that you were and that you were associated in this activity with John Abt, Lee Pressman, Nathan Witt, Henry Collins, Harold Ware, and Charles Kramer. You admit that you knew John Abt, Lee Pressman, Nathan Witt, Henry Collins, Harold Ware, and Charles Kramer. but you did not know whether or not they were Communists and that whether or not they were, that you were not associated with them in an effort to promote your associates into key Government positions.
     There is one other point in dispute, and that is while you both admit this association at the time when it was supposed to have taken place, Mr. Chambers said that you knew him as Carl, and you say that you knew him as Crosley. To me, that is not a very important distinction. The important thing is how close your associations were with this man, who .is admittedly a Communist at that time.
    He is a Communist functionary. Whether he was living in your home as George Crosley or Carl or Whittaker Chambers is comparatively immaterial. The important thing to me, Mr. Hiss, is that he was living in your home, that you were associating with him, that you were taking him out in the car, that you were letting him use your car, that you were letting him use your apartment and making him loans and having associations with him of that nature.
      In an endeavor to determine the credibility of two witnesses whose testimony conflicts on so many of these points, which are still in dispute. we endeavored to establish that by checking. first, Mr. Chambers' testimony to see whether or not it would stand up, to see whether or not you were an ornithologist. to see whether or not you had a car which had a hand windshield wiper, to see whether or not he had this rather intimate association with you. which the testimony of both of you now conclusively proves did exist.
     We also endeavored to check the fact as to whether he lived in your home or spent time in your home, as he said he did. Now. both of you testify to the fact that that actually took place.
      We endeavored to verify other aspects of his testimony, about transfers that your son made in school, about certain intimate details of the furniture and material in your home, and on every point on which we have been able to verify, on which we have had verifiable evidence before us, the testimony of Mr. Chambers has stood up. It stands
unchallenged. Most of it you admit, although you place understandably a different interpretation upon it from what he has.
      You, on the other hand, have also supplied some verifiable data. You have talked about an automobile; you have talked about these pictures of identification; you have described the conditions under which he occupied your home; but in the matter of the car your testimony is clearly refuted by the tangible evidence of the sales slips from the Cherner Motor Co., by the registration material.
      On some of the other items your testimony is clouded by a strangely deficient memory. You can recall vividly certain very specific details, but you cannot recall at all whether this automobile that meant so much to you was ever given to Crosley and returned to you, whether you sold it to him, or what the actual disposition of this car was;
and that car plays a very important part, as does the subletting of the apartment in the whole testimony, because in testing the credibility of your testimony and that of Mr. Chambers we have to rely on those pieces of evidence which are verifiable, and those happen to be verifiable ones.
     We proceed on the conclusion that if either one of you is telling the truth on the verifiable data, that you are telling the truth on all of it. And if either one of you is concealing the truth from the committee on verifiable data, it points out that you are concealing from us the truth on obviously the points that we cannot prove.
     I wanted you to have that reaction, Mr. HISS, from one member of the committee who, as I say, came in cold, with no predisposition as to your conduct or reputation whatsoever; who, after you first testified, was very frankly inclined to accept it at its face value.
     I said something to that effect in the written testimony. I gave a statement to the press.
Now, I have set before you the mental processes of one member of the committee, which I wanted you to have before you make your statement, and I will be glad to have you refute them in detail, or challenge them or correct them in any way you see fit.
           The CHAIRMAN. Now, Mr. HISS, you have heard Mr. Mundt. You may have all the time you will require to answer Mr. Mundt. You may read your statement at this time, and just take as much time as you want.
(At this point, Mr. Hiss attempts to consult with Mr. Davis.)
          Mr. MUNDT. No; I want Mr. Hiss to talk now, and you may talk later. I want Mr. Hiss to talk now.
          Mr. HISS. Commenting on Mr. Mundt's so-called summation, I would like to point out that the man who calls himself Chambers has by his own testimony, been peddling to various Government agencies for 10 years or so stories about me.
     During that time he has had an opportunity to check on all sorts of details about my personality. 
     You referred to my interest in ornithology. I am only an amateur ornithologist, but that fact, that is one of my hobbies, appears in Who's Who.
     I have had no chance to see Chambers' testimony, which you have characterized as standing up in verifiable details. 
     I am very anxious to see that testimony to see how verifiable they are.
     From the questions asked me on the 16th, I got the impression that he had testified also from some newspaper reports, that I had transferred my stepson from one school to another in order to save money, which I could donate to the Communist Party.
     The facts are, the personal facts are, that my stepson's educational expenses were paid by his own father. I could not possibly have saved any money by sending him to any cheaper school. At no time did I transfer him from one school to another for any purpose, except to benefit his education.
     As a matter of fact, he was in Washington, he went, after only 1 year at the Friends School, to another more expensive school, and, when I concluded that he should go to a boarding school, his own father was not then in a position to meet the full expenses and I paid part of the expenses.
     I am anxious to examine other points. I may be erroneously informed as to what he has testified about on this particular point.
     I notice that the committee did not ask me questions about my step-son's education today, only about certain other points.
     You referred to the fact that I, since Monday, when the name of Crosley first came to me in connection with these hearings, as possibly being involved, have not produced witnesses who are able to say that they, too, knew him as Crosley. I shall do my very best to produce such witnesses.
     The time has been very short. If this man actually was a Communist at the time, as he testifies--and, so far as I know, you have only his unsupported testimony for that particular allegation-it is not surprising that that is true, that he was secretive. It is not surprising that it is difficult to get information about him.
I have found it very difficult, with my resources, to get information about him, even during the past 10 years, when he has been, I understand, a member of the staff of Time magazine.
     I would want to read Mr. Mundt's summation carefully against the record. I do not, for a minute, want to make this impromptu response to what Mr. Mundt has said my final answer to Mr. Mundt.
     I would appreciate, if I could now read into the record, as I understood the chairman permitted me to, the letter which I sent to the chairman yesterday, and which is not now a part of the record.
     The CHAIRMAN. Just a minute. Everybody is trying to talk to me here at the same time. What is it now that you want, Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. HISS. I understood that you were going to give me the permission I asked for at the beginning of this session to read into the record the letter which I sent you yesterday, and some additional points. 
     The CHAIRMAN. That is perfectly all right. Go ahead.
     Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, may I?
     Mr. MUNDT. I object, Mr. Chairman. I want Mr. Hiss to finish his statement without any interruption by counsel. You may speak afterward.
     The CHAIRMAN. Just a minute. Now, counsel has asked to bring up a point, and what is it you want to ask?
     Mr. DAVIS. I want to make a reference to the record in connection with the statement that may have been made. I do not wish to do more than--I will do no more than read what is in the record or make the reference. I would rather read it so that the significance will be brought out.
     The CHAIRMAN. It is agreeable with Mr. Hiss that you read that-first, and then you make your statement later?
          Mr. HISS. I do not know the points he is going to make, but I will be glad to have him go ahead...
     Mr. MUNDT. With that understanding, I will promise him no interruption.
     The CHAIRMAN. Just go ahead, Mr. Hiss, and read your letter, and you wait, Mr. Counsel, until he gets through.
     Mr. HISS. We are doing this at your choice. I do not know what you prefer.
     The CHAIRMAN. You wanted to get started, and everybody was getting in your way. Go ahead.
     Mr. HISS. The letter which I sent to the chairman yesterday afternoon is as follows:

Tomorrow--

that is now today--

will mark my fourth appearance before your committee. I urge, in advance of that hearing, that your committee delay no longer in penetrating to the bedrock of the facts relevant to the charge which you have publicized-that I am or have been a Communist.
This charge goes beyond the personal. Attempts will be made to use it, and the resulting publicity, to discredit recent great achievements of this country of which I was privileged to participate.
Certain members of your committee have already demonstrated that this use of your hearings and the ensuing publicity is not a mere possibility, it is a reality. Your acting chairman,      Mr. Mundt, himself, was trigger quick to cast such discredit.

      Although he now says that he was very favorably impressed with my testimony.
  Before I had a chance to testify, even before the press had a chance to reach me for comment--
after Chambers' testimony--
before you had--
so far as I am aware--

one single fact to support the charge made by a self-confessed liar,
spy, and traitor, your acting chairman pronounced judgment that I am guilty as charged, by stating that the country should beware of the peace work with which I have been connected.
. I urge that these committee members--

your committee members--

abandon such verdict-first-and-testimony-later tactics, along with dramatic confrontations in secret sessions, and get down to business.
First, my record should be explored. It is inconceivable that there could have been on my part, during 15 or more years in public office, serving all three branches of the Government, judicial, legislative, and executive, any departure from the highest rectitude without its being known. It is inconceivable that the men with whom I was intimately associated during those 15 years should not know my true character far better than this accuser. It is inconceivable that if I had not been
of the highest character, this would not have manifested itself at some time or other; in at least one of the innumerable actions I took as a high official, actions publicly recorded in the greatest detail.
During the period cited by this accuser, I was chief counsel to the Senate Committee Investigating the Munitions Industry, at a great many public hearings, fully reported in volumes to be found in libraries in every major American city. During my term of service under the Solicitor General of the United States, I participated in the preparation of Briefs on a great many of the largest issues affecting the United States. Those briefs are on public file in the United States Supreme Court, in the Department of Justice, and in law libraries in various American cities.
As an official of the Department of State, I was appointed secretary general, the top administrative officer, of the peace-building international assembly that-created the United Nations. My actions in that post are a matter of detailed public record. The same is true of my actions at other peace-building and peace-strengthening international meetings in which I participated--at Dumbarton Oaks and elsewhere in this country, at Malta, at Yalta, at London, and in other foreign cities. All my actions in the executive branch of the Government, including my work in the Agricultural Adjustment Administration on farm problems, are fully recorded in the public records.
  In all this work I was frequently, and for extensive periods, under the eye of the American press and of the statesmen under whom or in association with whom I worked. They saw my every gesture, my every movement, my every facial expression. They heard the tones in which I spoke, the words I uttered, the words spoken by others in my presence. They knew my every act relating to official business, both in public and in executive conference.
Here is a list of the living personages of recognized stature under whom or in association with whom I worked in the Government (there may be omissions which I should like to supply in a supplemental list) :
1. Men now in the United States Senate:
Senator Tom Conally, one of the United States delegates to the San Francisco Conference which created the United Nations, and to the first meeting of the General Assembly of the United Nations in London where I was present.
Senator Arthur Vandenberg, a member of the Senate Committee Investigating the Munitions Industry--under whom I served--and a member of the San Francisco Conference and London General Assembly delegations.
Men now in the House of Representatives:
Representative Sol Bloom, a member of both the San Francisco and the LondonDelegations, 
Representative Charles Eaton, also a member of both the San Francisco and the London delegations, although his health kept him from making the trip to London.
Next--
Former Secretaries of State: Cordell Hull, Edward Stettinius, James Byrnes.
Former Under Secretaries of State--under whom I served-- Joseph Grew, also a member of the Dumbarton Oaks delegation, Dean Acheson, and William Clayton, 
United States Judges:
Stanley Reed, Associate Justice now of the United States Supreme Court, who as Solicitor General was my immediate superior during my service in the Department of Justice.
Homer Bone, former Senator from Washington, who was also a member of the Munitions Committee.
Bennett Clark, a former Senator who was a member of the Munitions Committee.
Jerome Frank who as general counsel of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration was my immediate chief in the Department of Agriculture.
Men formerly in Congress:
Former United States Senator Gerald Nye, chairman of the Munitions Committee, who appointed me as the chief attorney of that committee.
Former United States Senator James Pope, who was a member of the Munitions Committee.
Former United States Senator John Townsend, a member of the London delegation.
Others at international conferences where I assisted their labors to build the peace: Isaiah Bowman, member of Dumbarton Oaks delegation, president of JohnsHopkins University.
John Foster Dulles, a chief adviser of the San Francisco delegation, and a-member-of each delegation to the meetings of the General Assembly. .
Lt. Gen. Stanley Embick, a member of the Dumbarton Oaks delegation.
Charles Fahy, former legal adviser of the Department of State and member
of the United States delegation to the General Assembly.
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 theDumbarton 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 achievements of our Nation in recent times.
These men I have listed are the men with whom and under whom I worked intimately during my 15 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 thiscommittee, the undocumented statements of the man who now 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 counsel called me to identify the accuser, not by producing him under your subpena 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 on 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 cheek 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 notice 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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 all 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. HEBERT. 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 1. .
     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. HERBERT. I would like to, Mr. Chairman.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hebert.
     Mr. HEBERT. With this impromptu rebuttal of Mr. Mundt's statement, there were just three facts or three statements which he made which I think merit attention. One was the reference to his stepson's father paying for the boy's education.
     It is interesting to note that Mr. Chambers told us that himself in the conference in New York. He told us that your stepson s education was paid for by the boy's father.
     Mr. HISS. I do not know what Mr. Chambers said.
     Mr. HEBERT. I know; I know you don't. You will find out a lot that he said before these hearings are over, indicating that the man did know you at a time when you denied ever having known the man. We were trying to find out whether he knew you. That was a very intimate thing, that only a man who knew you could testify.
      Mr. HISS. Unless he was checking very carefully on me in the last 10 years.
      Mr. HEBERT. That is correct; unless he was checking on you in the last 10 years. That is the one thing I have not resolved in my own mind. What motive could the man have to go into such detail as to know all about your private life and to come before this committee and tell us these things? That is the unsolved riddle, as far as I am concerned at this time. 
     This man was confronted by us within 48 hours after you appeared, and, as I told you in executive session last Monday, the committee literally ran out of questions. He had no occasion to know, and he had no indication at all as to what fields we would explore and he unhesitatingly answered every question within minutest of details which, as Mr. Mundt has indicated, comes back and checks even down to the automobile sale.
     Mr. HISS. Who would remember--how would any man remember all those details about any other man after 14 years?
     Mr. HEBERT. Unless he knew him extremely well.
     Mr. HISS. Unless he was studying up on it.
     Mr. HEBERT. Unless he knew him extremely well. You made mention here before that you are an ornithologist.
     Mr. HISS. Amateur.
     Mr. HEBERT. Amateur. And that information could be obtained in Who's Who. Now, to anybody reading that or hearing that, why, that is a very plausible statement.
     Mr. HISS. It is a factual statement.
     Mr. HEBERT. I am not saying it is not a factual statement, but the implication that you leave, as I tried to indicate before, Mr.. Hiss--and we understand each other; you know we do--the implication that you leave is, why, anybody could look in Who's Who and see that you are an ornithologist.
     Mr. HISS. That is certainly the case.
     Mr. HEBERT. But nobody could read in Who's Who's that you found a rare bird, which I will ask Mr. McDowell to describe.
     Mr. STRIPLING. A prothonotary warbler.
     Mr. HERBERT. A warbler, and the other day, in executive session, we asked you about that particular bird, and you said, "Yes." Now, that is not from Who's Who.'
     Mr. HISS. I have told many, many people that I have seen a prothonotary warbler, and I am very, very proud. If Mr. McDowell has seen it, he has told very, very many people about it.
     Mr. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT: But you do not know whether any of these people were Communists or not.
     Mr. HISS. I do not.
     Mr. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. Hebert, 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. 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. HEBERT. I did not ask that.
     Mr. HISS. Whether I departed from rectitude in their opinion?
     Mr. HEBERT. I asked you a question: Can any of them testify whether or not you are or are not a Communist?
     Mr. HISS. That is for them to say.
     Mr. HEBERT. 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. Hebert. 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. HEBERT. Well, their testimony would not be worth any more than your testimony would be against Ware, Collins, Abt, Pressman.
     Mr. HISS. That is your opinion. I have told you why I think their testimony as to my character would be relevant.
     Mr. HEBERT. But they could not testify whether or not you are a Communist.
     Mr. HISS. That is up to them, Mr. Hebert.
     Mr. HEBERT. That is all. Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Vail.
     Mr. VAIL. No questions.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McDowell.
     Mr. McDOWELL. I have no questions and no objections to these questions that he wants us to ask Mr. Chambers with the single exception of No. 10, which I consider to be none of the committee's business, nor pertinent to this inquiry.
     The CHAIRMAN.      Mr. Nixon.
Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, when did you last see Crosley?
     Mr. HISS. Are you talking about that individual there?
     Mr. NIXON. I am talking to you, and I am asking when did you last see Crosley.
     Mr. HISS. The man I knew as Crosley, I see, over there now. What do you mean?
     Mr. NIXON. Now, Mr. Hiss, I realize that you are trying to be facetious. It is a serious question. I am attempting to find out the terminal date on your acquaintanceship with Mr. Crosley. Now, when did you last see him during the thirties?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon, I have testified repeatedly that to the best of my recollection I think I must have last seen him sometime in 1935.
     Mr. NIXON. In the fall of 1935?
      Mr. HISS. Whether it would be the fall or the summer, I am not absolutely confident of my recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. Did you see him in 1936?
     Mr. HISS. Not to the best of my recollection, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Can you say positively that you did not see Crosley in 1936 ?
     Mr. HISS. It could be very difficult for me to say positively that I had not seen anybody in 1936, Mr. Nixon. I do not believe I saw Crosley in 1936.
     Mr. NIXON. But you are leaving open the possibility that you might have seen Crosley in 1936, do I understand you correctly?
     Mr. HISS. I think you understand me correctly.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, how about 1937? Did you see Crosley in 1937?
     Mr. HISS. Not to the best of my recollection, and I would be confident that I did not. I would be absolutely confident that I did not see him at anytime under the circumstances he has testified to.
     Mr. NIXON. Your question is: Are you positive you did not see Crosley in 1937?
     Mr. HISS. I am reasonably positive that I did not see or lay eyes on Crosley in 1937.
     Mr. NIXON. Will you testify to the effect that you did not see him in 1937?
     Mr. HISS. I'll testify that to the best of my knowledge and recollection I did not.
     Mr. NIXON. Then, you are leaving the implication that it is possible that you could have seen him in 1937?
     Mr. HISS. Mr. Nixon. it seems to me I must leave that implication. I cannot be sure that I did not see anybody.
     Mr. NIXON. Did you see Crosley in 1938?
     Mr. HISS. I would like to reply exactly the same way to that. I feel confident I did not.
     Mr. NIXON. But it is possible that you might have?
     Mr. HISS. It is certainly conceivable and possible.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, the committee is going into a matter very carefully with various witnesses which bears on the next question that I want to ask you, and I want you to pay particular attention to this question. Have you ever seen George Crosley, Whittaker Chambers, or Carl, or Crosley under any other name in the apartment of Henry Collins?
     Mr. HISS. To the best of my recollection, I am confident I have not. There is no reason why I should have. I have no recollection whatsoever of ever seeing Crosley except under the circumstances I have testified to.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss, you mean to tell me you are leaving open the possibility that you could have seen Crosley in the apartment of Henry Collins?
     Mr. HISS. I would not wish to leave that open as anything other than a physical possibility in the sense of what are infinite possibilities. I am confident that I have never seen Crosley in the apartment of Henry Collins.
     Mr. NIXON. Wil1 you testify that you did not see Crosley in the apartment of Henry Collins?
     Mr. HISS. I will testify that to the best of my knowledge and recollection I have never seen Crosley in the apartment of Henry Collins.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, of course, you are leaving open the possibility that you might have seen him in the event that that should come out in the proof before the committee.
     Mr. Hiss. You can put it that way if you choose, Mr. Nixon. 
     Mr. NIXON. Well, do you wish it to be left that way?
     Mr. HISS. I wish it to be left as I have just stated it, that to the best of my knowledge and recollection I am very confident that I never seen Crosley in the apartment of Henry Collins.
     Mr. NIXON. But you won't say categorically that you did not see him in the apartment of Henry Collins?
     Mr. HISS. I do not see how one can say categorically that one has not seen anybody. If he was attending social functions, if there were a large number of people at some occasion, and he was present, I could not testify with absolute positive finality.
     Mr. NIXON. I am not questioning you concerning social functions. I am questioning you as to whether you have seen this man in the apartment of Henry Collins in the presence of others.
     Mr. HISS. You mean when a relatively few people were gathered to together for an occasion when they were all as a small group among themselves in the apartment of Henry Collins? I testify positively that that did not occur.
     Mr. NIXON. When you speak of a relatively small group, what do you mean? 
     Mr. HISS. What do you mean? I would say up to 7 or 8, 9, 10, 11 people.
     Mr. NIXON. Then, you are testifying positively now that you have never seen Crosley in the apartment of Collins when as many as 11 people were there?
     Mr. HISS. I am.
     Mr. NIXON. You are testifying positively to that fact?
     Mr. HISS. Yes, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, have you ever seen Crosley in any of the-in the house that you lived in on Thirtieth Street?
     Mr. HISS. I have no recollection whatever of ever having seen Crosley in that house.
     Mr. NIXON. Can you testify that you have never seen him in that house?
     Mr. HISS. I would testify that to the best of my recollection I am confident I never saw him in that house.
     Mr. NIXON. But you won't testify categorically that you did not see him in that house?
     Mr. HISS. Only for the .reasons that I have already given, that it is impossible to testify with absolute finality on such a point, Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, Mr. Hiss, you took this Thirtieth Street house, as you will recall, yourself, in July of 1936?
     Mr. HISS. Well, if that is what the records show that is when I took it. I do not have it in mind at the moment.
     Mr. NIXON. That is a year after this lease, over a year after this lease with Crosley expired. Now, do you want to leave this committee with the impression that there is a possibility, even a remote possibility, that you were still seeing Crosley over a year after he had welshed on the rent?
     Mr. HISS. I would put it the other way. I cannot testify positively to the possibility that Crosley did not come to see me.
     Mr. NIXON. Then, it is possible that he did see you in that apartment?
     Mr. HISS. That I would not be able to testify to with absolute finality.
     Mr. NIXON. You will recall your testimony, which was final on Monday before this committee, that Crosley definitely had seen you in only two apartments or dwellings that you know.
     Mr. HISS. That is the best of my recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. Did you say "to the best of my recollection" on Monday?
     Mr. HISS. Whatever the record says is what I said.
     Mr. NIXON. You want to stand by that record?
     Mr. HISS. I do not question the record as to what I said. I am testifying now in specific answer to your specific question, that to the best of my recollection I never saw Crosley except at the Twenty-eighth Street apartment, my office in the Senate Office Building, my house on P Street, and when I went to lunch with him, and perhaps
if I drove him to New York.
     Mr. NIXON. I understood you to say that you have found it difficult to check Mr. Whittaker Chambers during the last 10 years, his record during the last 10 years. What did you mean by that?
     Mr. HISS. The check that I was making was not made during the last 10 years. The check I have been making is within the last few days.
     Mr. NIXON. I assumed that.
     Mr. HISS. I found it difficult to find where he lived, who knew him, what his habits were.
     Mr. NIXON. I would also find it difficult to find out what your habits were.
     Mr. HISS. I would not think so. I have lived a normal, open, public life in Washington, and the last year or so in New York.
     Mr. NIXON. The total amount that George Crosley owed you, as you have testified, and the leases which of course, as you yourself have said, are the best evidence, could not have been over $150.
     Mr. HISS. I should not think that it would have been more than that.
     Mr. NIXON. Two months. We have established that, and I think there can be no argument on that, and your loans, you said you did not think exceeded $30, as I recall your testimony.
     Mr. HISS. That is my best recollection.
     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 ahs 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 wit 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 yet.  I shall continue to search for evidence.

Skips the rest of page 1174 

     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Counsel, you have something there that you wanted to bring up some time ago. What is that? 
     Mr. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Will you bear with me? It won't take but just a minute. It seems as if it is ancient history now, but after Mr. Mundt made his statements, I felt I wanted to refer the committee to a statement made by Mr. Mundt during the hearing, the first public hearing, at which Mr. Hiss' name came up, and I would like to just read the two paragraphs:

     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Chambers, I am very much interested in trying to check the
career of Alger Hiss. I know nothing about Donald Hiss, but, as a member of
the Foreign Affairs Committee, the personnel committee, I have had some occasion
to check the activities of Alger Hiss while he was in the State Department. There
is reason to believe that he organized within the Department one of the Com-
munist cells, which endeavored to influence our Chinese policy, and bring about
the condemnation of Chiang Kai-shek, which put Marzani in an important
position there and, I think, it is important to know what happened to these people
after they leave the Government. Do you know where Alger Hiss is employed
now?

     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a statement.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Mundt.
     Mr. MUNDT. I am glad you read that, Mr. Counsel, because I was just going to make that statement now, and I won't have to do it, in connection with a statement in the letter of Mr. Hiss in which he implied or gave the impression that my disagreement with American foreign policy was because he had been connected with it and I would not want it to go out that my only disagreement with some of these policies is because of your connection with them.
     As far as I am concerned, Mr. Hiss, our policy toward China, the political agreement at Yalta, which you said you helped write, and the Morgenthau plan, you mentioned three of them, are hopelessly bad, and I shall continue to consider them hopelessly bad even though you prove yourself to be the president of the American Daughters of the Revolution.
     The fact that you were connected with them may or may not. When these hearings have terminated, increase my skepticism about their wisdom.
     It is true, as I said in my summation, that as a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee I have had brought to my attention several times the mention of the name Alger Hiss in connection with our Chinese policy.
     It. is also true that after listening to him testify the following day I said publicly, and I said in the record, that he had been a very persuasive and convincing witness, and had very well convinced me of his reliability.
     In fact, I advised Mrs. Mundt at dinner that night, and she said I had been taken in by his suavity. Perhaps a woman's intuition is better than a man's, I do not know, but at all events, I am willing to again state that Mr. Hiss was a willing and persuasive witness as far as I am concerned.
     I would like to say just one other thing with regard to that part of the letter, Mr. Chairman, which says it is inconceivable that he, Mr. Hiss, could have worked in the Government for these many years and still have been a member of the Communist Party or disloyal. That is not inconceivable to me without in any way attempting at this time to indict the credibility of Mr. Hiss. But I wish to point out that John Peurifoy, Assistant Secretary of State in charge of security, has notified congress that 134 members of the State Department had weasled their way into the State Department alone, and had been removed from the Department for disloyalty reasons.
     So it is not at all inconceivable that the number could just as well have been 135 as 134.
    The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. No questions.
     The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions? Mr. Hiss, you have had a trying day, and you may sit back there among the comfortable seats. We are going to recess for 7 minutes.
(A short recess was taken.)
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Stripling, the next witness.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Whittaker Chambers.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Chambers, you have been sworn, but I might as well swear you again.
     Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I do.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Sit right down there and talk in the microphone.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. This one?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes.

TESTIMONY OF WHITTAKER CHAMBERS-Resumed

     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chambers, would you state your full name for the record?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. My full name is J. David Whittaker Chambers.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When and where were you born, Mr. Chambers?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was born in Philadelphia in 1901, April 1.
     Mr. STRIPLING. What is your present occupation?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am senior editor of Time magazine.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Were you at one time a member of the Communist Party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was.
     Mr. STRIPLING. How long were you a member of the Communist Party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was a member of the Communist Party from 1924 until about 1937 or 1938, early '38.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Would you detail to the committee the various positions which you held in the Communist Party.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes. I was at one time a writer on the Daily Worker, later foreign news editor of the Daily Worker, later, in fact, managing editor of the Daily Worker, editor of the New Masses, and a functionary in the underground.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chambers, when you were with the New Masses, were you known as Whittaker Chambers?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was.
     Mr. STRIPLING. I show you a copy of the New Masses of May 1932, No. 11, volume 7, and on the masthead it says: "Editorial board." The first name is that of Whittaker Chambers. The next name is Robert Evans, the next name is Hugo Gellert, the next name Michael Gold, and the next name is that of the managing editor. I show you a photostatic copy of the New Masses, and ask you if you are familiar with the men who are listed here as members of the editorial board [showing document to witness].
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I recognize all except Robert Evans, which is very likely a pseudonym. I recognize all the names except Robert Evans, which I suspect is a pseudonym for Joseph Freeman.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You were associated with all of these people on the editorial board of the New Masses?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was.
     Mr. STRIPLING. And could you identify the New Masses? Was it the official organ of the Communist Party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; it was not the official organ of the Communist Party. It was the intellectual organ of the Communist Party.
     Mr. STRIPLING. The intellectual organ of the Communist Party. That was in 1932?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The distinction I would make is that it did not assert its Communist affiliations at that time, but of these men, one, two, three, four, five, were either open or concealed Communists.
     Mr. STRIPLING. And you were a member of the Communist Party at that time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you contribute other articles to the New Masses?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I contributed a number of short stories just prior to this period.
     Mr. STRIPLING. I have here, Mr. Chairman, a photostatic copy of the New Masses of December 1931, an article by Whittaker Chambers, Death of the Communist, a story.
     Also an article in New Masses for March 1931, by Whittaker Chambers, Can You Make Out Their Voices?
     I have also the New Masses of October 1931, an article by Whittaker Chambers, Our Comrade Munn, a Story.
     Did you ever serve as the editor in fact of the Daily Worker?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The editor in fact; yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Who was listed as the editor?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Robert Minor, I believe.
     Mr. STRIPLING. And during what period was that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It was probably between 1927 and 1929.
     Mr. STRIPLING. I have here Mr. .Chambers, the original of a copy of the New Masses of July 1931, which contain a picture of Whittaker Chambers, with the caption--

Whittaker Chambers was born in Philadelphia, 1901: boyhood in eastern United
States; youth. as, periodically, a vagrant laborer in the deep South, Plains,
Northwest; brief college experience, ending with atheist publication. Formerly
member of Industrial Union 310, IWW.

Would you mind stating what that is, Mr. Mandel?
     Mr. MANDEL. IWW -Industrial Workers of the World.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Industrial Workers of the World.

Joined revolutionary movement in 1935; contributed to numerous publications;
former staff member of Daily Worker; contributing editor of the New Masses.

     Is that a picture of you, Mr. Chambers [showing photograph to witness]
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It is.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Do you know when this picture was taken or about when?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It was taken just about this date, which is July 1931.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You testified, Mr. Chambers, that you were a member of the underground, of the Communist Party.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I did.
     Mr. STRIPLING. During what period were you a member of the underground of the Communist Party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. From 1932, roughly, through 1937.
     Mr. STRIPLING. During that period, did you meet the person who was on the witness stand today, Alger Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I did meet Mr. Alger Hiss.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Would you now give to the committee a chronological resume of your meeting with Mr. Hiss, and how long you knew Mr. Hiss and the circumstances under which you met him?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I believe that I was first introduced to Mr. Hiss by Harold Ware and J. Peters, who was the head of the underground of the American Communist Party.
     The meeting took place in Washington, and I believe in a restaurant. I then continued to know Mr. Hiss until I broke with the Communist Party in early 1938, and I saw him once again toward the end of 1938.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you ever meet Mr. Hiss at the offices of the Nye Investigating Committee in the Senate Office Building?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I never did.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You never did?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you ever meet Mr. Hiss at his apartment on Twenty-eighth Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I did.
     Mr. STRIPLING. How many times did you meet Mr. Hiss, would you say at the address on Twenty-eighth Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I could not state accurately, but I should say a number of times.
     Mr. STRIPLING. About how many times: over 50?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Not at Twenty-eighth Street. I would think-well, let's say 20 times.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Twenty times at Twenty-eighth Street. Were you ever known or did you represent yourself to Mr. Hiss, when you first met, as being an individual by the name of George Crosley?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I did not.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You did not. Did Mr. Hiss ever sublease an apartment to you on Twenty-eighth Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. He did not.
     Mr. STRIPLING. He did not. Did he ever permit you to live in an apartment on Twenty-eighth Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. He did.
     Mr. STRIPLING. He did. Did Mr. Hiss, at any time, sell you a Ford automobile model A, 1929 model?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. He did not.
     Mr. STRIPLING. He did not. Do you have a question, Mr. Nixon?
     Mr. NIXON. Not at this time.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you and your family, your wife and child, ever visit or were you ever guests in the home of Mr. Alger Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. We were.
     Mr. STRIPLING. When?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. My recollection is-we are now talking about the house on P Street. I take it.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Were you ever guests, you and your wife, in his apartment on Twenty-eighth Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. We were guests in the apartment for the period after Mr. Hiss moved to his house on P Street. My recollection of that period is 3 or 4 weeks, I should think; at the utmost, five weeks.
     Mr. NIXON. Just a moment, Mr. Stripling. You have not made the question clear.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes; I will clarify it. I will repeat the question, Mr. Chambers. Were you ever-you and your family, were you ever guests at Mr. Hiss' apartment while he and his wife were living in the apartment on Twenty-eighth Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; I do not believe that we were. My recollection is that we came in after the Hisses moved into their new house. I could be mistaken about that, but I do not believe I am. 
     Mr. STRIPLING. You do not recall ever visiting him on Twenty-eighth Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I personally visited him.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You personally visited, but not with your family?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. But I do not believe my family did until after the Hisses moved out.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you ever have an oral agreement with Mr. Hiss regarding a sublease of an apartment on Twenty-eighth Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. There was no talk of a sublease, no question of a sublease.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Why did you move into the apartment on Twenty-eighth Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I wanted to have my family with me in Washington.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did Mr. Hiss volunteer to loan you the apartment?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It is my recollection that he made the suggestion.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Do you recall when this was?
.     Mr. CHAMBERS. I should have thought it was during the early summer of 1935.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Early summer of 1935?
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Chambers, may I interpose there?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. Going back a moment to when you first met Mr. Hiss, do you recall approximately when that was; what year?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I had originally thought that it was early in 1935.
The testimony of Mr. Hiss seems to put it in 1934 which is quite possible.
     Mr. NIXON. What is your recollection on it?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, I can only-
     Mr. NIXON. Apart from his testimony.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I can only assume that it was probably in 1934.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, now, what was the occasion of that? You had come to Washington in what capacity?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I had come to Washington as a functionary of the Communist Party. Shall I describe the set-up of the Communist Party here in Washington?
     Mr. NIXON. Yes.
     Mr. .CHAMBERS. Mr. Harold Ware, who is the son of Ella Reeve Bloor, a well-known Communist, had gone down to Washington, to the best of my knowledge, about 1933. He was chiefly interested in farm activities of some kind, but he discovered, after he got there, that he could recruit a large number of people in the Government for the 
Communist Party. It is possible that some of the people were Communists already, and he simply came in touch with them; others, I am sure, he recruited himself.
     He set up, perhaps with the help of J. Peters, an apparatus consisting of a number of organizations, a number of cells, each cell being led by a man who formed part of a committee, and an underground committee which met regularly at the home of Henry Collins in St. Matthews Court.
The CHAIRMAN. What was the last name?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Henry Collins.
     The CHAIRMAN. After that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. At St. Matthews Court.
     The members of that group, when I. first came to know them, were Henry Collins, Alger Hiss, Donald Hiss, Charles Kramer or Krevit-sky, Victor Perlo, John Abt, Nathan Witt--It seems to me I have forgotten one--Lee Pressman, of course.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, now, when you came to Washington in the latter part of 1934, you came as a Communist functionary; is that your testimony?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is true.
     Mr. NIXON. You say then that you were introduced to Mr. Hiss at that time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was introduced to all these people sooner or later. I think I was introduced to most of them separately, individually, before I met them among this group.
     Mr. NIXON. Where did you meet them all in a group?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I met them at Henry Collins' in St. Matthews Court.
     Mr. NIXON. Have you seen all these individuals at Henry Collins' apartment?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I have.
     Mr. NIXON. At St. Matthews Court?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. Are you sure of that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Quite, sir.
     Mr. STRIPLING. I failed to let the record show that Mr. Chambers is here in response to a subpena which was served on him by Louis J. Russell on August 17. to appear here today at 10 o'clock. You are here in response that subpena; are you not?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am.
     Mr. NIXON. Now. you were introduced to Mr. Hiss, as you recall, by Harold Ware, and J. Peters.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I believe so.
     Mr. NIXON. Who is J. Peters?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. J. Peters was the head of the underground section of the American Communist Party.
     The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Nixon; you may proceed.
     Mr. NIXON. Was J. Peters your immediate superior?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. He was.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, on how many occasions, approximately, do you recall having been in the apartment of Henry Collins when Mr. Hiss was there?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I would say.
     Mr. NIXON. Was it more than once?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; more than once, but perhaps not more than--five times, because we separated Mr. Alger Hiss from that group rather early.
     Mr. NIXON. What do you mean by "separating from that group"?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The intention was to set up a parallel group of men whose opportunities for penetrating into the Government and arriving at positions of power and influence seemed best.
     Mr. NIXON. Was it then that you saw Mr. Alger Hiss individually; do I understand ?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No: I think I had been introduced to him before I actually went to Henry Collins' house.
     Mr. NIXON. When did you first go to Alger Hiss' house, his apartment; do you recall? 
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Very shortly after I met him.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you ever recall having stayed overnight in his apartment by yourself, not when your family was there?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No. I do not, and I do not believe I did, but it is barely possible.
     Mr. NIXON. I see. Now, you have indicated, at least the assumption has been in your testimony, that Mr. His was introduced to you as a Communist. How do you know that he was a Communist?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The assumption was in the whole set-up J. Peters was the organizer of the underground section of the Communist Party. :He was dealing with party comrades, and these were dues-paying -members of the Communist Party.
     Mr. NIXON. J. Peters introduced Alger Hiss to you as a member of the Communist Party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That was understood.
     Mr. NIXON. I see. Do you have any other information on which to base your statement that Mr. Hiss was a member of the Communist Party, other than J. Peters told you he was?
      Mr. CHAMBERS. Mr. Hiss obeyed party discipline in every respect.
     Mr. NIXON. Did you yourself have occasion at any time to take dues from Mr. Hiss for the Communist Party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I did.
     Mr. NIXON. You did?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. On one occasion or more occasions than one?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. At least on one occasion, and I would think on at least three occasions.
     Mr. NIXON. Could it have been more or less than that?
    Mr. CHAMBERS. It could have been more than that.
     Mr. NIXON. It could have been more than that. Who collected dues for Mr. Hiss generally?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Henry Collins.
     Mr. NIXON. Henry Collins?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Henry Collins was the treasurer of that group.
     Mr. NIXON. Did J. Peters ever collect dues from Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes, he did.
     Mr. NIXON. To your knowledge?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. To my knowledge.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, did you and your family spend some time with Mr. Hiss in his house on P Street?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I think we spent a few days there, sometime after we had moved out of the apartment on Twenty-eighth Street--
     Mr. NIXON. Now, going back to the apartment for a moment, did you bring any furniture with you?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I did not.
     Mr. NIXON. You did not bring any furniture. Where did you come from?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I came from my mother's house on Long Island.
     Mr. NIXON. In New York?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Outside New York.
     Mr. NIXON. And how long was the stay, to the best of your recollection?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think, not longer than 6 weeks. I would think that was on the outside.
     Mr. NIXON. Could it have been less?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It could have been less.
     Mr. NIXON. Could it have been more?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It could have been possibly more.
     Mr. NIXON. You are sure you did not bring any furniture?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Absolutely, sure.
     Mr. NIXON. You are sure there was no agreement for rental?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. There was no agreement for rental.
     Mr. NIXON. Why would Mr. Hiss let you go in there for nothing?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Because Mr. Hiss and I were Communists, and that was a comradely way of treating one another. There is nothing unusual in such a procedure among Communists.
     Mr. NIXON. You say it is not unusual?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It is not at all unusual.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, going to this automobile, at the time that you went into this apartment, did Mr. Hiss sell you an automobile?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; he did not.
     Mr. NIXON. Did he loan you an automobile for the period that you were in the apartment?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; he did not.
     Mr. NIXON. Did he at any time sell you an automobile?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. He never sold me an automobile.
     Mr. NIXON. Did he loan you an automobile for a period of 8 to 10 weeks at any time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; he did not.
     Mr. NIXON. Are you certain of that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Absolutely.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you know what kind of an automobile Mr. Hiss had at that time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The first car, the car that Mr. Hiss had when I first knew him, was a Ford. 
     Mr. NIXON. What did he get after that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. A Plymouth.
     Mr. NIXON. Have you ever ridden in that Plymouth?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I have.
     Mr. NIXON. Where did you ride to?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think we made one trip together in that Plymouth.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, you think. Do you know whether you made that trip? Do you recall that trip?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. We made a trip to New York in the Plymouth.
     Mr. NIXON. You can state that you did make a trip to New York?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I can state that.
     Mr. NIXON. You recall that trip specifically? Who was along?
You were along, Mr. Hiss, and who else?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I believe Mrs. Hiss was there also.
     Mr. NIXON. Mrs. Hiss was along?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I believe so.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you know approximately when that trip occurred?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That would be difficult to say, but I should think sometime in 1936 or 1937.
     Mr. NIXON. As far as the car is concerned, the Ford car, did Mr. Hiss have that car after he acquired this Plymouth?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; he had it for some time afterward, I believe, for some time; I would think some months.
     Mr. NIXON. For some months. Well, how do you know that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, to the best of my knowledge and recollection.
     Mr. NIXON. I mean, have you seen it there, have you seen his car?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Certainly.
     Mr. NIXON. You saw his car. Then, in other words, you are testifying as a matter of fact that you did see that car after he had the Plymouth?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; that is right. I am merely trying to be circumspect.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you know what became of that car?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I do.
     Mr. NIXON. Tell the committee what became of that car.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Mr. Hiss was a devoted. and at that time a rather romantic Communist. According to the organization of the underground, there should be no communication between the open Communist Party and the underground Communist Party, except through people delegated by either of those sections.
     Mr. Hiss, however, insisted. that his old car should be given to the open Communist Party to be used by some poor Communist organizer in the West or elsewhere.
I was very much opposed to this. J. Peters was also very much opposed to it, but Mr. Hiss prevailed on us because the question of morale was always involved in these groups, and Peters told me that in Washington or somewhere in the District, the Communist Party
had an individual who owned or worked in a service station, and old-car lot.
     The -plan was for Mr. Hiss to take the Ford and leave it at the car lot which he did.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, how do you know that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I know that both because Mr. Hiss told me, and because I heard it through Mr. Peters, who told me that.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss and Mr. Peters both told you that is what happened to the car. Do you recall when that occurred?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I should think in 1936. 
     Mr. NIXON. And your recollection is that the visit that you and your family paid to Mr. Hiss was after you lived in the apartment?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think so.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, did you see Mr. Hiss any time after 1935?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I saw Mr. Hiss constantly through 1931, until I broke with the Communist Party.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, how many times?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. By constantly, I mean at least once a week.
     Mr. NIXON. You saw him once a week?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. After 1935?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Certainly.
     Mr. NIXON. You saw Mr. Hiss-during 1936 you saw him, and through the whole year?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I saw him through 1936, 1937, up until the time I broke with the Communist Party.
     Mr. NIXON. Where did you see him on these occasions?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. After our first meeting together, I saw him nearly always at his home.
     Mr. NIXON. Nearly always in his home?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Nearly always in his home.
     Mr. NIXON-. Did you ever stay overnight in his home?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I stayed overnight frequently in his home.
     Mr. NIXON. When you say "frequently," do you mean twice or more than that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I mean that I made his home a kind of headquarters.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss' home was a kind of a headquarters?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is true.
     Mr. NIXON. And you stayed in his home overnight on several occasions in 1936, did you?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Certainly, and also in 1937.
     Mr. NIXON. And also in 1937. On these occasions when you stayed in his home, what did you discuss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, we discussed a variety of subjects, including Mr. Hiss' prospects in Government, the actual conditions of his work, the world revolution, Russian foreign policy, the Spanish Civil War, and ornithology.
     Mr. NIXON. Are you an ornithologist?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; I am a very amateur bird watcher.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, are you an amateur ornithologist?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I would not say that. I am simply a bird watcher, and not on a par with Mr. Hiss, but I am interested in birds.
(Laughter.)
     The CHAIRMAN. We are, too.
     Mr. NIXON. Did you. ever take a meal with Mr. Hiss during that period?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I did, indeed.
     Mr. NIXON. I mean on the occasions when you stayed overnight. Is that when you took the meal?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I would certainly take a meal with him at that time.
     Mr. NIXON. What arrangement was made for paying Mr. Hiss at the time of staying overnight?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. There was no question of payment involved at any time.
     Mr. NIXON. You mean you never paid him for the occasions you did stay with him?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Quite so.
     Mr. NIXON. What is the reason for that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Mr. Hiss considered it a privilege to have a superior in the Communist organization at his home.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, you definitely say that you did see Mr. Hiss then in the P Street house, you had been there?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes: I have.
     Mr. NIXON. What house have you been in since the P Street house?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The house on the street which crosses P Street, which I have never identified by its correct name.
     Mr. NIXON. Well. where is it in relation to the P Street house?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It. I think, was about two or three blocks away, but it is up and down street in Georgetown.
     Mr. NIXON. And you have been in that house as well?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I have indeed.
     Mr. NIXON. On several occasions?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. On several occasions.
     Mr. NIXON. Would von describe your recollection of that house?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes. As nearly as I can recall it. It was a considerably smaller house than the P Street house, It was on the right-hand side of the street as you go up. The entrance was a flight of brick steps, and I think there were steps going up on both sides a little iron railing at the stage. The dining room was downstairs in the rear of the house. As I recall he had a particular--
     Mr. NIXON. Have you ever stayed in that house overnight, can you recall? 
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes: I am sure I have.
     Mr. NIXON. And your testimony is that you have seen Mr. Hiss during 1936 and 1937, as often as once a week?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes: I think that would not be an exaggeration. Let us say once a fortnight, to be on the conservative side.
     Mr. NIXON. You are sure that it was once a fortnight?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Absolutely.
     Mr. NIXON. You will testify to that absolutely?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Absolutely.
     Mr. NIXON. Not to the best of your recollection, but absolutely?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Absolutely, with this one qualification, that once in awhile Mr. Hiss went on a vacation.
     Mr. NIXON. Except for the periods when he was not there.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. NIXON. You did see him there?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I absolutely state that as a fact.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, I have covered some of the questions that Mr. Hiss has asked that I ask you, and I am going to go into some of the rest of these questions. I think that for the record you should state for the committee where your present residence is.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The committee understands the difficulty about that, I believe. I do not want to expose my family or myself to possible attempts on my life. I do not want to inject any sensationalism at this point.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would like to make this statement. As I understand it, your present address is known to our station.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I believe it is.
     Mr. NIXON. Yes.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes; we have his present business address, as well as his home address, and have had it for some time.
     The CHAIRMAN. Well, I would suggest then, Mr. Nixon, that that question not be pressed at this time, because the committee staff has the address.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Let me ask this. Mr. Chambers, do you have any objection to telling Mr. Hiss your present address?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. To me that seems tantamount to telling the Communist Party. However, I will tell my address and get rid of this question right away.
     Mr. McDOWELL. Wait a minute. I am not sure that this is a wise thing to do.
     Mr. MUNDT. I do not think so, Mr. Chairman. We know of previous attempts that Communists have made on the lives of people whom they detest, and I see no reason for subjecting him to increased hazards. We know what his address is. It is not a question of pertinency in here, and I see no reason to be exposing him to continuous attempts upon his life, which have been made in the past. It does not serve any purpose.
     The CHAIRMAN. The chairman will rule that the question be not asked at this time, and the answer not be given.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chambers, you have no objection to giving your business address?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. None at all.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Give your business address.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. My business address is Time Magazine, 9 Rockefeller Plaza, New York City.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You can be reached there several days during the week, can you not?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I could until recently, and shall in the future.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Chambers, the next question we have covered to an extent. Do you recall where you were living in 1930?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I was probably living on a farm in Hunterdon County, N. J.
     Mr. NIXON. Yes; and about how long did you live there?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think we were there almost a year, perhaps more than a, year.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you recall where you moved from there?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think I moved next to Staten Island.
     Mr. NIXON. Staten Island?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you recall how long you lived there?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Around a short time, I think, only a few months.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you recall your next residence, your next residence after that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Perhaps I was living at my mother's house in Long Island, I am not sure. I would have to make a careful list of those things in order to answer that question.
     Mr. NIXON. But did you live at your mother's house for a considerable length of time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I think for a year at least.
     Mr. NIXON. Then did you live in Washington? You have indicated that you lived at the apartment of Mr. Hiss.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. Where did you go from the apartment here?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I went back to Long; Island, I believe.
     The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentleman yield to me?
     Mr. NIXON. Yes.
     The CHAIRMAN. When did you live in Hunterdon County?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I would think in 1932. I was still living there.
     The CHAIRMAN. What towns were you living near?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I live near a place called Glen Gardner.
     Mr. NIXON. Where did you move from there? I do not mean from Hunterdon County, I mean your mother's home?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think we moved to Baltimore from there.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you recall how long you lived in Baltimore?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I would think a couple of years.
     Mr. NIXON. A couple of years. Then, from Baltimore, do you recall where you moved next?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. From Baltimore, I fled from the Communist Party and went into hiding.
     Mr. NIXON. You fled from the Communist Party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. And I went into hiding.
     Mr. NIXON. You went into hiding. In other words, you were living in Baltimore at the time you left the party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is true.
     Mr. NIXON. That is true. And then, what was your next residence after that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I decided that the Communist Party would expect me to try to get as far away as possible, so I moved a very short distance from Baltimore.
     Mr. NIXON. You did. And that is in the vicinity of Baltimore?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; on Old Court Road.
     Mr. NIXON. And you lived there for how many years?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Oh, I did not live there for years; it was a matter of months, I think, not more than 6 months.
     Mr. NIXON. And then, from there where did you go?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. From there I decided at that point that I must try to come up above ground and establish an identity, having been underground, and I was a faceless man, and I could always be.
     Mr. NIXON. It was then that you moved there, when?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Then I bought a house on St. Paul Street.
     Mr. NIXON. In Baltimore?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes, sir.
     Mr. NIXON. From there where did you go?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. From there we went to my present address.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, we have already covered your employment record in the Communist Party. Since you left the Communist Party, what have you done?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I have translated a book, and written for and edited Time Magazine.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, you translated the book at what time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. At the time I was in hiding from the Communist Party.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you recall the type of translation or what sort of book it was that you translated?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; it was a novel on the Spanish Civil War.
     Mr. NIXON. It was what?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It was a novel on the Spanish Civil War, published by Longmans Green.
     Mr. NIXON. Did you do any other translation than that one, do you recall?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I do not recall.
     Mr. NIXON. And your next occupation was what?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Writer for Time Magazine.
     Mr. NIXON. When did you go with Time Magazine?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. In 1939, the early part of the year.
     Mr. MUNDT. I take it that this translation and this employment with Time was all under your name, Whittaker Chambers; is that right?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It was.
     Mr. NIXON. This is after you were above ground?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The name is in the Hyleaf of the book.
     Mr. NIXON, The next question is a bibliography of your writings. I will ask you to submit that for the committee. I am not going to ask you to submit it now, because of the time it would take to get it.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I do not believe there is a bibliography of my writings. I have translated a number of books.
     Mr. NIXON. You have never written a book?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I have never written a book.
     Mr. NIXON. You have just written for periodicals?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I have written for Time Magazine.
     Mr. NIXON. You have written for Time Magazine and the Daily Worker?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. For Life.
     Mr. NIXON. And the New Masses. We have introduced in evidence several of the pieces which you have written.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, Mr. Chambers, you heard the charge made here that you had been treated for a mental illness. Do you have any comment on that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I have never been treated for a mental illness period.
     Mr. NIXON. You have never been treated in a mental institution?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Never.
     Mr. NIXON. Never. Have you been treated for a mental illness or been in an institution during the past 4 years, which was the charge made?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Of course not; and anyone at Time Magazine can tell you that.
     Mr. NIXON. In that connection, Mr. Chairman, I might say the committee took in executive testimony-in executive session-the testimony of Mr. Nelson Frank, who has known Mr. Chambers since he went with Time magazine and who knew him when Mr. Chambers was on the staff of the Daily Worker, and Mr. Frank testified categorically
that he had known him during that time and that Mr. Chambers had never been in a mental institution, had never been treated for a mental illness during the time that he had known him.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you identify Mr. Frank? Mr. Nixon, did you identify Mr. Frank?
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Nelson Frank is with the New York World-Telegram at the present time.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. you are married?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am. This is my first and only wife.
     Mr. NIXON. This is your first and only wife?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. Have you any children?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I have two, a boy and a girl.
     Mr. NIXON. A boy and a girl. Would you give us their ages?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The boy has just turned 12, and the girl is-will be 15 in the fall.
     Mr. NIXON. And your wife resides with you?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Of course.
     Mr. MUNDT. I think, Mr. Nixon, you overlooked one question, and I would like to ask you about the question with regard to crime. Have you ever been charged or convicted of a crime?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No.
     Mr. MUNDT. There are no particulars which can be supplied then for a crime you did not commit.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am afraid not.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, the next question is to describe the circumstances under which you came in contact with the committee and make public all written memorandum which you have handed to any representative of the committee.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Just a moment. Mr. Chairman, I should like to state that Mr. Chambers never got in touch with the committee. The committee did, however, send two agents to New York to see him sometime ago. When we began this investigation, we sent two agents. He gave these two agents an interview. When this investigation of espionage in the Government began, a subpena was issued and served upon Mr. Chambers, without any prior knowledge on his part.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, Mr. Chambers, you have testified that you know of your own knowledge that Mr. Hiss is a Communist and a member of the Communist Party. You have also testified that you base that statement on the fact that you were introduced to him as a Communist and that you, yourself, on at least three occasions have collected party dues from Mr. Hiss; is that correct?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is true.
     Mr. NIXON. From Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. And Mr. Hiss fully understood I was a Communist. Our relationship was the party relationship.
     Mr. NIXON. And you, I understand, categorically deny this business relationship which Mr. Hiss has testified to, concerning this apartment.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. There was never any business relationship of any kind between Mr. Hiss and me.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, will you describe for the committee, Mr. Chambers, the last time you saw Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. About 1938, toward the end of 1938, I tried to break away from the Communist Party a number of people. It seemed to me that the time was coming when I would have to do something about this problem. It also seemed to me proper that they should have an opportunity to break away themselves. I had once been a Communist, and I broke away, and the possibility was always there. I went to Mr. Hiss. He was then living on Dent Place, and I had supper with him there, and with his wife, and in the course of that meeting I tried to raise my doubts, and detach him from the Communist Party. I failed.
     Mr. NIXON. Well, now, will you describe for the committee how you happened to go to his apartment? I mean, how you happened to go to his house. Did you go to the door, do you recall, or what was the occasion?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I went to the door, I suppose. about 7 o'clock at night, perhaps. I was afraid of an ambush, but when I got there, only a maid was at home.
     Mr. NIXON. What is that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Only a maid was at home.
     Mr. NIXON. What did you do?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I waited nearby, and very shortly Mrs. Hiss drove up, and we went into the house together, and--
     Mr. NIXON. Well, how did you get Mrs. Hiss? Do you remember that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Not particularly; I do not recall.
     Mr. NIXON. You met her at that time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. What is that?
     Mr. NIXON. You say you met Mrs. Hiss as she drove up.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. She drove up, and stepped out of the car.
     Mr. NIXON. I see.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. And we went in together.
     Mr. NIXON. And you discussed breaking away from the party at that time with Mr. HISS?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I did.
     Mr. NIXON. And what was his reaction?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. As I testified before when I left him Mr. Hiss cried, but he would not break away from the Communist Party.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Chambers, you said that you felt that there was some risk in going to Mr. Hiss at that time. 
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I did.
     Mr. NIXON. Why did you go to him? Did you go to all the others that were in this group?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; I went to two or three others.
     Mr. NIXON. Why did you go to see Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was very fond of Mr. Hiss.
     Mr. NIXON. You were very fond of Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Indeed I was; perhaps my closest friend.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hiss was your closest friend?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Mr. Hiss was certainly the closest friend I ever had in the Communist Party.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Chambers, can you search your memory. now to see what motive you can have for accusing Mr. Hiss of being a Communist at the present time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. What motive I can have?
     Mr. NIXON. Yes, I mean, do you-is there any grudge that you have against Mr. Hiss over anything that he has done to you?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The story has spread that in testifying against Mr. Hiss I am working out some old grudge, or motives of revenge or hatred. I do not hate Mr. Hiss. we were close friends, but we are caught in a tragedy of history. Mr. Hiss represents the concealed enemy against which we are all fighting, and I am fighting. I have testified against him with remorse and pity, but in a moment of history in which this Nation now stands, so help me God, I could not do otherwise.
     Mr. MUNDT. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chambers, I think the record should show at this point that you did not come to this committee voluntarily for the purpose of testifying against Mr. Hiss or anybody else, but you are subpenaed without advance notice by the committee. Is that correct?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I had been to what I considered to be the proper governmental authorities at a much earlier date, and I had been in connection with them on more than one occasion and more than one agency. I could scarcely wish to jeopardize the position which I had gained among the good men by such an appearance as this. Nevertheless, I had long supposed it would come and I decided that when it came I would take the opportunity to act as I should.
     Mr. MUNDT. In fact, I think that the present speaker was probably the first person to advise the committee about the existence of Whittaker Chambers, and I got that information from a source which, due to a very ridiculous and unsound Executive order, I cannot reveal, but I hesitated even to suggest that you be subpenaed, but did so because I
felt that the country and the committee was entitled to all the information available, and, as I said, when you testified--I know it is not an easy job for a man in your position to testify as you have. and I certainly hope that no ill comes to you for any true statements that you have made before this committee and this committee is going to continue to press forward to find out whether you have made any false ones or whether Mr. Hiss is the gentleman who is falsifying.
     Mr. STRIPLING.      Mr. Chambers. did you ever have a conference with Mr. Adolf Berle. who was the Under Secretary of State during this underground apparatus?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I did.
     Mr. STRIPLING. -When was that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That was. I originally testified 2 days after the Hitler-Stalin pact was signed. I now learn that it was 5 days afterward.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Five days after the Stalin-Hitler pact. That was in 1939?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. 1939.
     Mr. STRIPLING. And give the committer the circumstances of this meeting with Mr. Berle.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I had insisted that my testimony be made before President Roosevelt; I had insisted that my testimony be made to President Roosevelt. Mr. Isaac Don Levine. whom I had gone to see, went to the President's secretary, Mr. Marvin McIntyre. Mr. McIntyre advised Mr. Levine that Mr. A. A. Berle, the Assistant Secretary of State, was the President's man in matters of intelligence. Therefore, Mr. Levine arranged a meeting between Mr. Berle and me, which took place at the home of the Secretary of War, Mr. Stimson. 
     Mr. STRIPLING. Do you recall the section of town or the address of the home of the Secretary of War, Mr. Stimson?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; I believe it was on Woodley Road.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Go right ahead.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, I have nothing to add.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You went there. Did you have dinner with Mr. Berle?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Oh, yes. You want me to tell you that?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes; I want you to give the committee the full details regarding your turning in this information to a responsible official of the Federal Government.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Mr. and Mrs. Berle and Mr. Levine and I had dinner together, and I then laid before Mr. Berle in Mr. Levine's presence the information which I have given this committee.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you mention the name of Alger Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I mentioned the name of Alger Hiss and Donald Hiss.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Nixon, did you take the testimony of Mr. Levine in New York City on August 17?
     Mr. NIXON. I took the testimony of Mr. Levine in New York City on August 17, and I questioned him concerning this meeting about which Mr. Chambers has just testified with Mr. Berle, and Mr. Levine testified, in effect-the testimony will be made public and, of course, will speak for itself; but as I recall the testimony, Mr. Levine testified that
he did accompany Mr. Chambers when they had the discussion with Mr. Berle and when I asked him specifically as to the names that were mentioned, Mr. Levine said that there was no question whatever but what Mr. Chambers had mentioned the name of Mr. Alger Hiss and the name of Mr. Donald Hiss. I might also say that Mr. Levine submitted for the record a memorandum which he had made immediately after that meeting on the stationery of the Hay-Adams House where he was staying, on which these names, among others, were jotted down.
The CHAMBERS. What was the date of the meeting at the Hay-Adams House?
     Mr. STRIPLING. It was not at the Hay-Adams House.
The CHAMBERS. What was the date of the meeting with Berle?
     Mr. STRIPLING. He testified that it was 5 days after the signing of the Hitler-Stalin pact in 1939. What date was that, Mr. Mandel?
     Mr. MANDEL. August 26.
     Mr. STRIPLING. It was August 26, 1939, on which the pact was signed August 26, 1939.
Mr. Chambers, going back for a moment to the occupancy by you and your wife and child of the apartment on Twenty-eighth Street, Mr. Hiss has testified that you spent several days in his home on P Street, awaiting the furniture which was to come down by a van.
At that time, did you and your wife have any furniture?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. We had so little furniture that it could scarcely be
called furniture.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Had you previously lived at the home of your mother?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you have any furniture brought down by van or otherwise?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. We did not.
     Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Chambers, did you last see Mr.-was it J. V. Peters?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. J. V. Peters, I believe.
     Mr. MUNDT. What?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. J. Peters.
     Mr. MUNDT. When did you last see Mr. Peters? 
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Shortly before I broke. It was in the early 1938 period.
     Mr. MUNDT. Do you think you would be able to recognize Mr. J. Peters?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I would have no difficulty in recognizing Mr. J. Peters.
     Mr. MUNDT. I think you probably have been notified by the Commissioner of Immigration, Mr. Watson B. Miller-or will be-that you are going to be called for the deportation hearings on Mr. J. Peters for the purposes of identification.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I expect I will.
     Mr. MUNDT. And you think you can identify him if he is there?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I have no doubt about it.
     Mr. MUNDT. You have no doubt about it.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chairman. I have here a picture which was taken off a passport of the person we think to be J. Peters, who traveled for the Soviet Union on and under the name of Isidore Boorstein. I show you this picture, Mr. Chambers, and ask you in you can identity it as being J. Peters [showing photograph to Mr. Chambers].
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is J. Peters.
     Mr. MUNDT. You say it is J. Peters?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It is.
     Mr. MUNDT. You are sure or that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am sure or it.
     Mr. MUNDT. You can recognize it from the photograph?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No doubt about it.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Chambers, did Mr. Hiss knew that your name was Whittaker Chambers during the period that you knew him?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; he did not.
Mr. NIXON. By what name did he know you?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. By the name of Carl.
     Mr. NIXON. What did he call you?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Carl.
     Mr. NIXON. Always?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Always.
     Mr. NIXON. What name did Mrs. Hiss call you by?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Carl.
     Mr. NIXON. She always called you Carl?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Always.
     Mr. NIXON. And you were not called by any other name while you were with them, other than the name of Carl?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was not.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you know whether or not Mr. Hiss knew what your real name was before your acquaintance with him ended?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Mr. or Mrs. Hiss, at that last meeting in 1938, told me Peters had told them or the party had told them who I was, so I assumed that they knew my name, my name Whittaker Chambers.
     Mr. NIXON. But they did not tell you what the name was?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. MUNDT. I think, in looking over this list of questions, Mr. Chambers, that were proposed by Mr. Hiss or his counsel, that you have answered all of them of any pertinency except perhaps for one which was not asked, and that is the question No. 3, which reads:

What name were you given when you were born, and what names have you used at any time since your birth for any purpose?
I would like to ask you those questions at this time. What name were you given when you were born? 
     Mr. CHAMBERS. When I was born I was given the name J. Vivian Chambers.
     Mr. MUNDT. J. Whittaker Chambers?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. J. Vivian Chambers.
     Mr. MUNDT. I see. What names have you used at any time since your birth, for that purpose?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, I came of age, I got rid of the "Vivian" as quickly as possible.
     Mr. MUNDT. I don't blame you for that.
[Laughter.]
     Mr. CHAMBERS. And I took my mother's family name of Whittaker. I was baptized under that name. Other names I have used?
     Mr. MUNDT. Yes; what other names have you used at any time since your birth for any purposes? You have testified that you went by the name of Carl for a time.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was for a while named Dwyer.
     Mr. MUNDT. Is that one of your Communist underground names?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Dwyer
     Mr. STRIPLING. Do you remember that period you used that name?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes. I used it while I was living at Staten Island.
     Mr. STRIPLING. While you were living on Staten Island.
     Mr. MUNDT. Are there any other names?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I once used the name of Cantwell.
     Mr. MUNDT. Was that used also as one of your Communist undercover names?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; these were names that I lived under.
     Mr. MUNDT. At the time you were a Communist?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right; while I was in the underground.
They were not my undercover names within the organization. The name that I was known by to all the people in Washington, and the only name I was known by was Carl.
     Mr. MUNDT. Carl. In other words, these other names were names you used to confuse people who were not Communists.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Quite so.
     Mr. MUNDT. Did you ever use any pseudonyms or fictitious names for any other purpose than simply to disguise your identity as a Communist?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I do not think so. I do not know whether I quite understand the meaning of the question.
     Mr. MUNDT. Well, I gather from Mr. Hiss that he was interested in whether you had written under any assumed names.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Now, wait. I do not believe I ever wrote under assumed names.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did you ever write under the name of Crosley?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No.
     Mr. MUNDT. May I put the question as to whether at any time in your life when you were not operating as a Communist did you use the name of-any other name than Chambers?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. When I was working for the street railway.
     Mr. MUNDT. What name did you use?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I have forgotten. I used that name, and I did not want--
     Mr. MUNDT. That is when you were laying railroad in the street railway?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Of course. it was not the first street railroad in Washington. It was a matter of a repair job, one that took a good many years.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Chambers, you were instructed when you appeared before the committee on each occasion, as I recall, that the answers to material questions if given false would subject you to perjury charges.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I understood that.
     Mr. NIXON. You understood that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. NIXON. Now, you realize, in other words, that by reiterating the charges that you have made previously today that these statements also, if proved false, will subject you to perjury?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I can do nothing about that. I have only to tell the truth.
     Mr. NIXON. Do you wish--you do not wish to qualify the answers that you have given because of that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. None that I have given so far. I might want to make reservations in answering a question, but I have no qualifications.
     Mr. NIXON. You want to stand by your testimony as you have given it?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Of course.
     Mr. NIXON. That is all.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Mr. Chambers, have you requested any copy of any testimony that you have given before the committee in executive session or otherwise?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; I have not.
     Mr. STRIPLING. Did I communicate with you and ask you if you wanted your executive session testimony which you gave in New York?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am not sure whether you did or not. In any case, I did not want it.
     Mr. STRIPLING. You did not want it?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I did not need it.
     Mr. MUNDT. Have you requested counsel to appear with you?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; of course not.
     The CHAIRMAN. Do you have any more questions, Mr. Stripling?
     Mr. STRIPLING. Yes; I have a few questions about the apartment of Henry Collins. But Mr. Hebert wants to ask some questions.
     Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Chambers, let me make myself perfectly clear before I ask you any questions.
You look to me just like anybody else before this committee, and if I can impeach your testimony, I will do it, because I am only seeking the truth, and what I am trying to tell you is this, that as far as I am concerned, there is no such thing as a committee witness. By that, I mean there are no witnesses, so far as I am concerned, who are going to be put on this stand to prove what some members of the committee think or might think. I am only interested in finding out the facts and the truth in the case.
I told Mr. Hiss that also in executive session last Monday, and I will try just as hard to impeach you to find out whether you are lying or not, as I will Mr. Hiss or anybody else.
I want to make myself perfectly clear before I start asking you these questions.
Now, let us take it chronologically.
How old are you now?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am now 47.
     Mr. HEBERT. Where were you born?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was born in Philadelphia.
     Mr. HEBERT. What year?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. 1901.
     Mr. HEBERT. What were your parents' names?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. My father's name was J. Chambers, and my mother's name was A. Chambers.
     Mr. HEBERT. What business was your father in?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. My father was a commercial artist.
     Mr. HEBERT. Where did you go to school?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I went to school in Lynbrook. Long Island, and Rockville Centre, Long Island.
     Mr. HEBERT. When did you move to Long Island?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. My family moved when I was perhaps 2 or 3 years old, and they still live in the same house.
     Mr. HEBERT. Your father and mother still live?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. My mother. My father is dead. My mother still lives in the same house.
     Mr. HEBERT. Your mother still lives in the same house. What school did you go to?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I went to a school called South Side High School.
     Mr. HEBERT. Public school. Where did you go to high school?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Rockville Centre.
     Mr. HEBERT. What was the name of the school?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. South Side High School.
     Mr. HEBERT. Where did you go to college?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I went for a short time to Columbia University.
     Mr. HEBERT. How long?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think for 2 years.
     Mr.. HEBERT. What did you study?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Liberal arts.
     Mr. HEBERT. How did you become a writer?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Impulse, I guess.
     Mr. HEBERT. You never had any formal training as a journalist?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No, I did not.
     Mr. HEBERT. In so-called schools of journalism?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No, I did not.
     Mr. HEBERT. Then, you just wrote by impulse?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I wrote because I felt a need to write.
     Mr. HEBERT. Because you wanted to write?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. HEBERT. Did you ever have any journalistic employment outside of Time magazine?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Only on the Daily Worker, New Masses.
     Mr. HEBERT. The first time you wrote a public article was for the Daily Worker?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I believe so.
     Mr. HEBERT. You wrote it under the name of Whittaker Chambers?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I do not believe they were signed.
     Mr. HEBERT. They were not signed. But, of course, it is a common practice among journalists and reporters to use pseudonyms and nom de plumes; and other names.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I never did use those names.
     Mr. HEBERT. You never did use that, but that is a common practice.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It is.
     Mr. HEBERT. Then, from the Daily Worker you went to Time magazine. Now, you are not in the Communist Party then ?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was in the Communist Party all that period.
     Mr. HEBERT. What were the circumstances surrounding your employment by Time magazine?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I do not quite understand the question.
     Mr. HEBERT. Did you just walk in there and tell the man, "Here I am for a job. I want to work for you?" How did you get the job on Time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; I had a friend at Time.
     Mr. HEBERT. Who was the friend?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Robert Cantwell.
     Mr. HEBERT. And you went to him and told him you would like to work on Time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. HEBERT. What position did you start in on at Time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. As a writer.
     Mr. HEBERT. At what salary?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It is very hard for me to remember.
     Mr. HEBERT. What year was that?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. 1939.
     Mr. HEBERT. In 1939?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Robert Cantwell had you employed by Time just as a writer?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, he did not have me employed.
     Mr. HEBERT. Well, you went to him?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. HEBERT. And then you steadily rose to be a writer on Time, and to what is known now as the senior editor?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. HEBERT. That is the highest editorial position that you can rise to on Time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Next to the highest.
     Mr. HEBERT. What is the highest?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Managing editor.
     Mr. HEBERT. How many senior editors are there on Time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think six.
     Mr. HEBERT. What is your salary now?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. My salary is about $25,000 a year.
     Mr. HEBERT. And since 1939 to 1948 you rose from just the regular routine writer on Time--
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. HEBERT. To be a senior editor on Time at a salary of $25,000 a year?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is true.
     Mr. HEBERT. Can you search your mind at this time and tell this committee what possible motives you could have in jeopardizing your position on Time by making the statements that you are making?
Of course, you realize that if they are false, you are finished.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I could not imagine such a motive. Besides, it is not just my position on Time.
     Mr. HEBERT. What is that, please?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. What I am jeopardizing is not just my position on Time. It is my position in the community.
     Mr. HEBERT. Because you feel that you could get another position anyway?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, I could very likely make a living.
     Mr. HEBERT. I think a man making $25,000 a year writing pieces could make a living some place. Then, there is no motive that you can possibly suggest to this committee that you would have then to defame the character of an individual who is highly respected, such as Alger Hiss.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I would have no such motive with respect to anyone.
     Mr. HEBERT You said you were born J. Vivian Chambers.
     Mr. CHAMBER. That is correct.
     Mr. HEBER. Then, I understood you to say that you were baptized Whittaker Chambers.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is right.
     Mr. HEBERT. What is the differentiation ? You were born J. Vivian Chambers.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was given the name legally at birth, or shortly afterward. And I was later baptized.
     Mr. HEBERT. In which church? 
     Mr. CHAMBERS. In the Episcopalian Church, of which I was a member.
     Mr. HEBERT. Are you a member of any church?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am.
     Mr. HEBERT. What church?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am a Quaker.
     Mr. HEBERT. You are now a Quaker?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. HEBERT. Mrs. Hiss is a Quaker.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. She is a birthright Quaker.
     Mr. HEBERT. You are what?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am a Quaker by convincement.
     Mr. NIXON. Mr. Hebert, may I interpose there? Mr. Chambers means by "birthright Quaker" that is-his testimony is that Mrs. Hiss was born a Quaker, her parents were Quakers, whereas a Quaker by convincement means that he became one and his parents are not Quakers.
     Mr. HEBERT. In other words, we would say a Quaker who would be a convert to the Quaker faith.
     Mr. MUNDT. I think the record should show that Mr. Nixon is a Quaker, so he speaks with authority.
     Mr. HEBERT. Now, Mr. Chambers, you heard Mr. Hiss on the stand here today, all day long. What is your reaction to his denials?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Mr. Hiss is lying.
     Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Hiss is lying?  In other words, his story is a pure fabrication out of the whole cloth?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I would say that it is 80 percent at least fabrication.
     Mr. HEBERT. He never knew you by any other name except Carl?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I do not believe so.
     Mr. HEBERT. And you became attached to him in a personal way through your activities in the Communist Party with Mr. Hiss?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is true.
     Mr. HEBERT. Now, referring back to these questions, in order that we may have the record right, perhaps it may be repetitious, Mr. Chairman, but let us get it straight, that Mr. Hiss is asking these to be asked, and I will ask them to be sure there has been no deviation from them.
No. 1. Where do you reside? That has already been explained and we will not press that.
No. 2. List the various places where you have lived since 1930, indicating the length of time you lived at each place, and the name you have used at that place. Mr. Nixon has questioned you in that connection with them and you endeavored to give that.
Would you search your memory and supply the committee with the answer to that question?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I will be happy to.
     Mr. HEBERT. What name were you given when you were born? What names have you used at any time since your birth for any purpose? You have answered that.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. HEBERT. No. 4, Give your complete employment record during your membership in the Communist Party, and since your resignation from the Communist Party, stating the name of your employer, your occupation, and your compensation. Also state the name by which you were employed in each instance. You have given that.
No. 5, Give a complete bibliography of your writings under any and every name you have used. Yon have given that.
No. 6, Have you ever been charged or convicted of a crime? Give full particulars as to where, when, and for what. I put particular emphasis on this because this indicates a record that can be checked, Mr. Hiss seems interested in records. Have you ever been charged or convicted of a crime?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No.
     Mr. HEBERT. No. 7, I asked you in New York whether you were ever treated for a mental disease, and you told me "No" at that time, and repeated it today.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I urged the committee to check all possible records.
     Mr. HEBERT. Well, if you were, the committee could easily find it out.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Very easily.
     Mr. HEBERT. No. 8, When, where, and to whom were you married?
You have given that.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, I think I did.
     Mr. HEBERT. That is that.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think I did.
     Mr. HEBERT. Have you any children? Do you now reside with your wife? You have answered that.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes.
     Mr. HEBERT. No. 9, Describe the circumstances under which you came in contact with the committee, and make public all written memoranda which you have handed to any representative of the committee. You have also answered that.
Now, there is one additional charge which Mr. Hiss makes in his written letter which he gave to the press last evening, and which appeared in the paper today, and which we again heard read before the committee, and that-- was the fact that you are a confessed liar, a confessed traitor, whose word cannot be taken. By "confessed liar" I presume he means your activity in the Communist Party. By "confessed traitor" I think he refers to the fact that as a member of the Communist Party you were a traitor to your country.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Perhaps he means that as a renegade from the Communist Party I was a traitor to the Communist Party.
     Mr. HEBERT. You are almost as quick on your feet as Mr. Hiss.
Now, Mr. Chambers, with that background, and let us acknowledge, let us for the sake of the moment, say that Mr. Hiss is correct in that you have been a traitor to your country, and I think you admitted that in your opening hearing the first time we heard you, you admitted frankly that you knew what you were doing, and then had a change of mind, and decided to be loyal to your country, and do what you could to make amends, and your knowledge and your education of history and religion. Isn't it a fact that there are many saints in Heaven today who were not always saints?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I believe so.
     Mr. HEBERT. We would not take their sainthood away from them after they have become saints and repented, not saying, you understand, that you are a saint, now mind you.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I am not a saint, indeed.
     Mr. HEBERT. But I want to draw the analogy and I want to draw the logical conclusion, and the inferences given. Do you know of any time that the committee or anybody else could learn of Communists through a Communist himself who was loyal to the party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; it is impossible.
     Mr. HEBERT. Isn't the only method that we have of ferreting out these Communists is through people like yourself who repent and come to us and tell us their story?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think so, sir.
     Mr. HEBERT. There is no other way. Do you know any police department in this country that is an efficient police department that does not operate without the assistance of informers?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No.
     Mr. HEBERT. If it is a good police department, they rely a good deal on informers, do they not?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes, sir.
     Mr. HEBERT. So, therefore, Mr. Chairman, I make this observation, that let's admit the witness was what he admits frankly that he has been. But let us also recognize the fact that he has had the change of heart, and in himself has the courage to come before us to give us this information, and that, without prejudging whether you or Mr. Hiss are telling the truth at this time, because I would like to check more of what you said, too, to determine which one of you is telling the truth. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Vail.
     Mr. VAIL. I have no questions.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McDowell.
     Mr. McDOWELL. I have a very general question. Mr. Chairman, this very difficult and very sinister matter before us appears to me as being built up on very small things, going all the way from the gift of Mr. Hiss of an old jalopy to Mr. Chambers, with a loan of Mr. Mr. Chambers testified to, and reaching all the way up to the man who wrote the Yalta agreement, which we feel here in America is now responsible for our difficulties in Europe.
Somewhere along the line of the testimony it was testified that Mr. Chambers was a bird lover and Mr. Hiss is identified--he has identified himself as an amateur ornithologist.
I might say, Mr. Chairman, that so is the chairman of the committee, a bird lover, at least. That in order to--
The CHAIRMAN Well, we have got a Quaker and a bird lover.
     Mr. McDOWELL. In order to further the intimacy with which these men had with each other, I would like to refer to the testimony of both of them.
     Mr. Chambers has testified in executive session that Mr. Hiss and Mrs. Hiss were bird lovers, as was he, and it was their custom in the few spare moments they got here in Washington, to observe the birds and to go bird watching.
I would like to point out, Mr. Chairman, that, as you well know, to discover a rare bird or an unusual bird or identify a bird that many other people have seen is a great discovery in the life of an amateur ornithologist. You can usually recall almost everything around it.
It is like winning the ball game or the yacht regatta. You can recall the time of day, how high the sun was, and all the other things.
But it was testified to by both Mr. Chambers and Mr. Hiss that on one occasion, the three of them, walking together, saw a small bird called a prothonotary warbler.
     Mr. STRIPLING. No; that is not the testimony, Mr. McDowell. If you like for me to look it up, I will be glad to do so.
     Mr. McDOWELL. If I recall the testimony, it was testified to that she saw a prothonotary warbler on their walk.
     Mr. STRIPLING. The testimony, Mr. McDowell--and I will be glad to refer to it--Mr. Chambers testified before the executive session in New York that Mr. Hiss had told him that he and Mrs. Hiss had taken a walk on the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal in Washington down the Potomac.
     Mr. McDOWELL. That is all right. Now, I would like Mr. Chambers to just briefly describe what he told the subcommittee that day. That will be the whole question.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think I told them that Mr. Hiss was fond of going bird walking out toward Glen Echo, out on the Potomac, across the canal. One morning, Mr. Hiss told me he saw a prothonotary warbler, which is a very beautiful bird, rather an unusual one. I do not recall that I told anything else about it.
     Mr. McDOWELL. That is all.
     Mr. STRIPLING: For the record, will the witness spell prothonotary 
     Mr. CHAMBERS. P-r-o-t-h-o-n-o-t-a-r-y.
     The CHAIRMAN. How many member; can you estimate were in the Communist underground in Washington?
     Mr. .CHAMBERS. It would be difficult for me to say. I knew a relatively small handful. There were behind them others, and I do not know how many. There were also parallel apparatuses; that is, other apparatuses operating independently to the one that I knew. There were, perhaps, several of them. I do not know, but I have reason to think there were perhaps more than one.
     The CHAIRMAN. And were those members in the Communist under ground mostly in the Government service?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think that they were, most of them, in the Government service.
     The CHAIRMAN. Would you say they were in any special agency or were they in all the agencies?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think the preponderance were in the New Deal agencies.
     The CHAIRMAN. Well, that would cover quite a few. I mean by that, were there in, we will say. the War Department or the Navy Department or--
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No; I cannot offhand tell you that. I do not know anyone who was in War and Navy.
     The CHAIRMAN. What agencies would you include?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is a very tough one because I cannot remember the names of the New Deal agencies. There were some in the AAA at one time. Mr. Hiss was in the AAA at one time. Lee Pressman was in AAA. Donald Hiss was in the Labor Department. I believe, the Immigration Service. Nathan Witt was in the National Labor Relations Board. I forget where Kramer was. Collins was in the Department 
     The CHAIRMAN. I do not think I made myself clear,. What I wanted to find out was what agency of the Government or agencies of the Government had most of these members of the Communist underground? Were they mostly in any one agency or were they scattered over a number of agencies?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No: I think they were widely scattered.
     The CHAIRMAN. What was the contact between the Communist underground and the Communist Party in the District of Columbia?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The groups that I knew had their contacts through me, through Peters, and that contact was kept as sketchy as possible.
The CHAIRMAN. And was the Communist Party under the discipline of the Communist underground here?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. The Communist underground was under Communist discipline.
     The CHAIRMAN. Well, who was on top, the Communist Party functionaries or the Communist underground?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. When, they operated side by side, without very great contact for obvious reasons. But, the head of the underground was J. Peters. Peters was, I believe, a member of the central committee of the Communist Party. I may be mistaken about that. Therefore, on, that level he had contacts with the top of the Communist Party.
The CHAIRMAN. And on the question of espionage, would J. Peters indicate to members of the Communist Party or members of the Communist underground just what material, what information was required?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, he did not, to my knowledge.
     The CHAIRMAN. He did not?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No.
     The CHAIRMAN. Who would do that in Washington?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That I do not know.
     The CHAIRMAN. Now, to get back to New Jersey, when you lived up in Glen Gardner, that was in what year, did you say?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. 1932, I think; probably, perhaps, 1931, too.
The CHAIRMAN. And I have forgotten what the record shows, but were you a member of the Communist Party at that time?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think it was that period of about a year or two when I was out of the Communist Party. I was in for--I went out in about 1929 and I came back in again.
The CHAIRMAN. Where did you live outside of Glen Gardner 
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I lived on a farm.
     The CHAIRMAN. Where?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. About 6 miles from Glen Gardner.
     The CHAIRMAN. Can you locate that farm?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, all I can locate-I do not know whether I can locate it exactly now. In fact, I have forgotten about it.
     The CHAIRMAN. But you do not remember what road it was on?
     Mr. CHAMBERS, I do not.
     Mr. CHAIRMAN. What influenced you to join the Communist Part originally?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It is a very difficult question. As a student, I went to Europe. It was then shortly after the First World War. I found Germany in chaos, and partly occupied; northern France, and parts of Belgium were smashed to pieces. It seemed to me that a crisis had been reached in western civilization which the society was not able to solve by the usual means.
I then began to look around for the unusual means.
I first studied for a considerable time British Fabian socialism, and rejected it as unworkable in practice.
I was then very much influenced by a book called Reflections of Violence, by George Sorrel, a syndicalist, and shortly thereafter came out to the writings of Marx and Lenin. They seemed to me to explain the nature of the crisis, and what to do about it.
     The CHAIRMAN. Well, I can understand how a young man might join the Communist Party, but will you explain to us how a person who has made a real living in this country, a person with a large income, some of the witnesses we have had before this committee, over a period of time, what, in your mind, would influence them to join the party here in this country?
     Mr.. CHAMBERS. The making of a good living does not necessarily bind a man to a critical period in which he is passing through. Such people, in fact, may feel a special insecurity and anxiety. They seek a moral solution in a world of moral confusion. Marxism, Leninism offers an oversimplified explanation of the causes and a program for action. The very vigor of the project particularly appeals to the more or less sheltered middle-class intellectuals, who feel that there the whole context of their lives has kept them away from the world of reality.
I do not know whether I make this very clear, but I am trying to get at it. They feel a very natural concern, one might almost say a Christian concern, for underprivileged people. They feel a great intellectual concern, at least, for recurring economic crises, the problem
of war, which in our lifetime has assumed an atrocious proportion, and which always weights on them. What shall I do? At that crossroads the evil thing, communism, lies in waiting for a simple answer.
     The CHAIRMAN. Then you mentioned the strict discipline within the party itself. That discipline is probably even more strict in time of war than in time of peace, is it not?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It might be; it is always strict.
The CHAIRMAN. Yes; and a Communist would have to blindly execute any order given to him.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Yes; they would.
     The CHAIRMAN. Then would you not say that every Communist in the United States-and this has been asked other witnesses from time to time-every Communist in the United States would be a probable spy or saboteur?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Every Communist in the United States is a potential spy or saboteur and a permanent enemy of this system of government.
     The CHAIRMAN. Would a Communist-if a Communist remained, wanted to remain in good standing with the party, could a Communist disobey one of those orders to bring about some sabotage? Could a Communist do anything but do the thing that was for the good of Russia in time of war?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, the Communist Party makes human allowances also. It might not assassinate a man because he failed to carry out an order the first time. Nevertheless, the substance of what you are saying is correct.
     The CHAIRMAN. But you believe that if this country got into a war with Russia that every Communist would be an ardent member of the Russian fifth column.
     Mr. CHAMBERS. In a war with Russia, I think a certain number of Communists would have a sudden revulsion, and perhaps break away, but the mass of the party would be a fifth column.
     The CHAIRMAN. From your own experience and knowledge of the party, how well do you think the investigative of the Government, even including this committee, have got a line on the number and kind of Communists in this country?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Well, it is quite impossible for me to answer that. I really do no not know.
     The CHAIRMAN. Well, do you think we are keeping up with the business, or do you think communism is gaining in this country?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I think undoubtedly In the last few years considerable strides have been made to control it, and what is perhaps quite as important a problem is understanding it. It seems to me that this committee is getting toward the heart of the matter at this point.
     The CHAIRMAN. Getting what?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Toward the heart of the matter at this point. That should not blind anyone to the knowledge that there are groups beyond groups, beyond groups, beyond groups. Nevertheless, progress is being made.
     The CHAIRMAN. Who would you say is the leading Communist in the United States today?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I really do not know.
     The CHAIRMAN. That is all I have.
     Mr. MUNDT. You testified that you visited Alger Hiss probably fortnightly over a period of 1 or 2 years in 1935 and 1936, I believe it was-maybe it was 1936 and 1937-and talking to him about his progress in this war group toward strategic spots, collecting Communist dues from him, and what not.
At that time when you were having these fortnightly conferences with Mr. Hiss, were you living then in Washington or New York, or where were you living?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. I was probably living at one time in New York, staying in Washington at the Hisses or in Baltimore.
     Mr. MUNDT. When you lived in Baltimore or New York, did you live there known among your neighbors by the name of Carl?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. No.
     Mr. MUNDT. What is that? Under what name?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Whittaker Chambers.
     Mr. MUNDT. The only place where you used the name Carl then was in your Washington Communist contacts?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. In those Washington groups.
     Mr. MUNDT. From your knowledge of communism is it possible for a committee like this, or any other agency of Government, or a court of law, to prove conclusively whether a man is or is not a Communist without access to the files of the Communist Party?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It is extremely difficult, I think.
     Mr. MUNDT. And from your knowledge as a high functionary in the Communist Party, is it the general practice of that party to conceal from the non-Communist world the identity of its members, after, of course, they are members, so that when witnesses come before this committee, as they so frequently do, and deny under oath that they
are Communists, they can do that without difficulty and with comparative impunity, even though they are, in fact, Communists? Is that right?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. That is true.
     Mr. MUNDT. From your knowledge of the Communist operations in Washington in Government where you were contact man for a period of years, would it be your belief that Communist cells are still functioning in Government now or that they have terminated them at the conclusion of the war?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. It is unquestionable that they are still functioning in Government, and will continue to function until they are rooted out. It may be during a period like this when a number of investigative agencies are looking into the matter, they are resting on their oars for a while, but they remain in being.
     Mr. MUNDT. But it would be your firm conviction that they are here, and will stay here until they are ferreted out by hearings like this, or by the FBI, or by grand jury proceedings, or some other legal methods?
     Mr. CHAMBERS. Certainly.
     Mr. MUNDT. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Nixon.
     Mr. NIXON. I have nothing.
     The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Stripling.
     Mr. STRIPLING. I have no further questions.
     The CHAIRMAN. Are there any more questions of Mr. Whittaker Chambers?
You are excused then, Mr. Chambers.
And you are excused, Mr. Hiss.
The committee stands adjourned, and the committee will meet in executive session at 10:30 tomorrow, and there will be no public hearing tomorrow.
(Whereupon, at 8 p. m., the committee adjourned.)