It was Mr. Carter who testified to that effect. He also testified that he remembered a similar case where a partner of the bank firm of Lee, Higginson & Co. made up a deficit of around $17,000 or $19,000.

He does not indicate what years it was in which Field made up the deficit, but I think he says somewhere here, or there was introduced in the McCarran committee hearings-yes, it is here. Mr. Morris of the committee introduces a paragraph of a letter saying: It is impossible for Field to go on paying each year's deficit. I think he now feels that contraction should have been effected 2 years ago.

This is a letter sent apparently by Mr. Carter to Mr. Holland. This is the 3d of June, 1940. This was at the period which I spoke of a few moments ago where Field undertook a reorganization of the American Council, which was praised by Mr. Frederick Kapple, the president of the Carnegie Corp., as a contraction of the organization in order to save money. It resulted in the reduction of the staff and accordingly the reduction of the budget.

Senator BREWSTER. That was the time you were chairman?
Ambassador JESSUP. I was chairman from 1939 to 1940.

Senator BREWSTER. And that was naturally a matter, I presume, of concern to all alike, that the budget was getting pinched and there had to be some measures taken and I assume the man acting as an angel in a sense in making up those deficits did have certainly respectful attention in the activities?

Ambassador JESSUP. If I may just comment on an aspect of your question, Senator, it is perfectly clear in my recollection and knowledge that the question of how much money a person contributed to the budget had no influence on the policies of the organization any more than our policies were influenced by the fact-let us say the Chase National Bank, or Standard Oil, or International Business Machines, or any other corporation, contributed a large sum or a moderate sum at any particular time, any more than the policies of a university are controlled by the fact that an individual may contribute a considerable sum to the endowment.

At least I can speak of Columbia University, that the policies are not influenced by the donors.

At this particular time we are talking about, 1940, where, according to this record, Carter tells Holland that Field cannot go on contributing as much as he had been, a reorganization is effected by Field to cut down the budget.

The organization was never rich. It also had financial problems, as most of these private organizations of a research character do. We were always faced with the question of raising a normal budget. As has been pointed out, our chief support canie from the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations.

I would like to continue along that line by pointing out that in connection with the total donations as estimated of Field over 20 years, it is $60,000. Incidentally, I would like to point out those 20 years cover a period much longer than my own official participation in the institute in any kind of an official position.

Senator BREWSTER. It is also clear that you do not know how those were distributed so it may have been that the substantial contributions were during the more limited period.

That is why I think it would be helpful if it were clarified, but I do not know how important the committe feels it is.

AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS REPORT, JUNE, 1951

Ambassador JESSUP. I do not have those records. I assume the McCarran committee has them. They seem to have taken all the files of this period and perhaps they will introduce that.

I would like to point out in that connection if you wish to consider influence in terms of the amounts, although actually no such influence was exerted in connection with the formation of policy, that the total amount of the budgets of the institute during this period is shown by a report of the institute which I have reproduced at page 36of my statement, which gives this résumé. This is the June 1951 report. This is a résumé of the financing of the American Institute of Pacific Relations.

It says:

The American Institute of Pacific Relations derives its funds from membership subscriptions, gifts from individuals and corporations, and grants from foundations. From 1925 through 1950, its total net income was $2,536,000, of which 50 percent came from foundations-chiefly the Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Corp., and Carnegie Endowment-33 percent from individual and corporate contributions, 12 percent from sales of publications, and 5 percent from miscellaneous sources. Leading contributors to the American IPR today include the Standard-Vacuum Oil Co., International General Electric Co., National City Bank, Bankers Trust Co., International Business Machines Corp., International Telephone & Telegraph Co., Electric Bond & Share Co., and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Lever Bros., London, is a major contributor to the international IPR.

That is taken from page 9 of the June 1951 report of the American Institute of Pacific Relations.

It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that puts in proper perspective the question of the financial contributions which Field made to the American Council.

I would like to say, sir, that as far as I know even in terms of various allegations which have been made about Mr. Field-personally I do not intend to discuss the truth or falsity of various allegations about various individuals. But so far as I am aware, and in accordance with the record, the allegations in regard to Mr. Field do not say that as far back as 1928 he was already a Communist. I do not know whether Mr. Field contributed a large or small sum of money in 1928.

I do venture to say that the rather sweeping statement that Senator McCarthy made that all of this estimated $60,000 was Communist money is rather a broad generalization which is not to my mind. established by any evidence.

Furthermore, I would like to point out that Senator McCarthy states that this $60,000 was given to Jessup's organization. That, I take it, is not meant to be a flattering remark, but in any case this organization was not "my" organization. Certainly it was not my organization by any stretch of the imagination over 20 years, even if one chooses to call it "my" organization, when I happened to be chairman of it for 1 year.

PACIFIC COUNCIL, THE INTERNATIONAL BODY

Now, Mr. Chairman, I am aware that at various times during the past 2 years charges have been lodged against the staff of the Pacific Council of the Institute of Pacific Relations. This is the Pacific Council, the international body.

As pointed out, this was not an organization of Americans, citizens of the United States. It was an international organization, a governing body in which 11 countries were represented.

The chairman of the Pacific Council, as I pointed out, could be from any of these countries and, as I have given the list here, they were either Canadians or Americans as it happened so far through the history.

I have pointed out that I succeeded Mr. Baker, Mr. Ray Lyman Wilbur, and Mr. J. W. DaFoe.

Now, I inherited from these gentlemen a permanent secretariat, headed by a permanent secretary-general, Mr. Edward C. Carter, who had been with the organization since it was founded in 1925.

As was the case in many organizations of an international character, the responsibility of employing and supervising personnel centered in the secretary-general who was a full-time salaried official. I saw no reason to question the integrity of the secretary-general or the staff which I inherited from my predecessors, nor did I see any reason to impose any close supervision on the secretary-general with respect to his recruiting of personnel for the secretariat.

I might point out here, Mr. Chairman, that as chairman of the council I was a volunteer, giving such time as I could to the work of the organization. During all of this period I was a professor at Columbia engaged from time to time in various other activities and positions.

I was not a full-time official and never a salaried official.

THE INQUIRY

The type of supervision which I felt it appropriate to exercise over the paid staff was one of seeing that their work satisfied high standards of scholarship.

We started a research project known as The Inquiry and this illustrates how the matter was handled.

The Inquiry-I think the name was copied from a series of volumes gotten up under Colonel House at the close of the peace conference for the first war.

It started in about 1939, as I recall, to gather data as to the solution of the Sino-Japanese conflict. The authors were selected with the greatest care and the manuscripts subjected to meticulous review and reviewed a second time by three eminent scholars. These scholars were selected, I may say, by the Pacific Council for this purpose as consultants on this project.

One of them was Prof. H. F. Angus, of the University of British Columbia, who served as special assistant, Under Secretary for External Affairs of Canada from 1941 to 1945.

Second was Prof. J. B. Condliffe, University of California, who was chairman of the International Research Committee, IPR, from 1942 to 1945.

The third was M. Etienne Denery, who was director of the École des Sciences Politiques in Paris. He is now in the French Foreign Office. The same standard of objectivity and balance has been applied in selecting people to attend the various conferences held by the IPR.

SELECTION OF PEOPLE TO ATTEND CONFERENCES

At this point, Senator Smith, I am coming to the questions you raised about the selection of people for these conferences. The objective at these biennial or triennial conferences which we had-the dates varied from time to time-was to get people who were interested in Pacific affairs and who would present a variety of points of view. The letter to which you referred, sir, I mentioned here-the letter sent to Mr. Raymond Dennett, secretary of the American Council. On August 1, 1944, that was sent. I think that was the one to which you referred.

Senator SMITH of New Jersey. That may be the one. The date is not given in the McCarran hearings here, although they refer just before this to the Mont Tremblant gathering in 1942. This may be the Hot Springs one. The point is that you have suggested certain persons to be included and that is the point of my question.

Ambassador JESSUP. Yes. I would like to give the facts in regard to that.

As you say, the insinuation which has been made is that here was a list of persons I suggested and that a number of these have been accused of Communist leanings or something of that kind.

Now, the fact was that, as I think I have already stated or indicated, it was standard operating procedure to select a delegation to a conference in terms of broad representation, both as to the geography of the United States—that is, to get people from various parts of the United States-and also in terms of fields of activity.

Now, my correspondence with Mr. Dennett at this period, leading up to my letter of August 1, 1944, shows this process.

He had written me on July 31, following up previous consultations, giving a list of names classified according to their activity in Government, business, labor, military, press, academic and professional life. My letter of August 1 is obviously in reply to Dennett's letter of July 31 and the previous discussions of which I have no record, but which I am sure took place.

Now, I would like, Mr. Chairman, to insert for the record the full list of the delegation at the Hot Springs Conference of January, 1945. Senator SPARKMAN. That insertion will be made at this point in the record.

(The list of delegates referred to appears in the record, as follows:)

DELEGATION AT HOT SPRINGS CONFERENCE, JANUARY 1, 1945

AMERICAN DELEGATION

NOTE.-President R. G. Sproul of the University of California was to have headed the American group, but when he was prevented from coming, Dr. Jessup was substituted.

Jessup, Philip C. (1933, 1939, 1942) professor of international law, Columbia University, chairman

Hart, Admiral T. C., Navy General Board, Navy Department, Vice Chairman. Allen, Edward W., member, Allen, Hilen, Froude & DeGarmo, attorneys at law, Seattle

Bolton, Hon. Francis P., Representative, Twenty-second Ohio District, United States Congress

Bunche, Ralph (1942), area specialist, Office of Special Political Affairs, Department of State

Calkins, Robert D., dean, School of Business, Columbia University

Coe, Frank (1942) Assistant Administrator, Foreign Economic Administration
Coons, Arthur G., dean of faculty and professor of economics at Occidental
College, Los Angeles

De Caux, Len (1942) publicity director, Congress of Industrial Organizations;
editor of the CIO News

Dennett, Raymond, secretary of American Council of the IPR

Emerson, Rupert, Director, Liberated Areas Branch, Foreign Economic Ad-
ministration
Fahey, Col. Daniel C., Jr., member of the Operations Division, War Department
General Staff, assigned as working member with Civil Affairs Division
Field, Frederick V. (1929, 1931, 1933, 1936, 1939, 1942) executive vice chairman,
Council for Pan American Democracy

Gerbode, Mrs. Frank A. (1929), member, executive committee, San Francisco Bay
Region, American Council, IPR

Gilchrist, Huntington, executive, American Cyanamid Co.

Johnstone, William C., director of Washington study program, IPR

Keesing, Felix M. (1931), professor of anthropology, Stanford University, California

Kirk, Grayson, research associate, Institute of International Studies, Yale Uni-
versity

Lattimore, Owen (1933, 1936, 1939, 1942), director, Walter Hines Page School of
International Relations, Johns Hopkins University

MacKey, J. A., vice president, National City Bank, New York, in charge of far
eastern district.

McCoy, Maj. Gen. Frank R., United States Army retired (1939, 1942), president,
Foreign Policy Association, member of Wood-Forbes special mission to the
Philippines, 1921

Morison, George Abbot, vice-chairman, Bucyrus-Erie Co., Milwaukee
Salisbury, Laurence, editor, Far Eastern Survey, American Council, IPR
Staley, Eugene (1939), School of Advanced International Studies, Washington,
D. C. American member, international research committee, IPR, 1945
Thompson, Laura, coordinator of research in administration, Society for Applied
Anthropology

Van Zandt, J. Parker, research associate, the Brookings Institution

Vincent, John Carter, Chief, Division of Chinese Affairs, Department of State:
member, board of trustees, American Countil, IPR
Waymack, W. W., of the Des Moines Register

DISCUSSING DELEGATION OF 1945

Ambassador JESSUP. I would like to call attention to the inclusion of such people as Admiral Thomas C. Hart. My manuscript here has a misprint. He was later Senator from Connecticut and not vice chairman of Delaware as stated here. He was Senator from Connecticut after he had retired from the United States Navy. He was the vice chairman of our delegation at Hot Springs and not vice chairman of Delaware. I do not know that there is any such post.

However, I do point out that he was on our delegation and he was the vice chairman. I was the chairman of the delegation and he was the vice chairman.

We also have here Representative Frances P. Bolton. We have Maj. Gen. Frank R. McCoy. We have Mr. Ralph Bunche. We have Mr. W. W. Waymack. I will not read the entire list, but I will insert it in the record. I think there were some 30 people.

Senator SMITH of New Jersey. Dr. Jessup, the names you have mentioned here do not appear on the list that I read before so I am wondering if this was the same meeting. The list I read before does not have any of these names. That was probably a different group because I see you say here later, "I would also like to put in the record a list of the delegates to some of the other conferences I have attended," and so forth.