Mr. DOYLE. How much did you pay for it?

Mr. ERWIN. I think I paid about $3.50 for it. I don't remember precisely, but I was told this was a very important text and I should definitely study this carefully.

Mr. DOYLE. Who is the author of it?

Mr. ERWIN. There isn't a single author. I will read from the title page. The "History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Bolsheviks, Short Course. Edited by a Commission of the Central Committee of the C. P. S. U. (B)." And "Authorized by Central Committee of the C. P. S. U. (B.). 'International Publishers, New York." The copyright date is 1939.

Mr. TAVENNER. International Publishers of New York was a Communist press?

Mr. ERWIN. So I understood. I don't know.

Mr. DOYLE. Is that an American copyright?

Mr. ERWIN. I just says "copyright." It says, "Printed in the U. S. A." But the quotation from the introduction, which I think pretty well crystallizes the over-all character of the book, and my reasons for being a little aghast at the thing, describes what this book does for the Communist.

The study of the history of the C. P. S. U. (B.), the history of the struggle of our party against all enemies of Marxism-Leninism, against all enemies of the working people, helps us to master bolshevism and sharpens our political vigilance.

The study of the heroic history of the Bolshevik Party arms us with a knowledge of the laws of social development and of the political struggle, with a knowledge of the motive forces of revolution.

The study of the history of the C. P. S. U. (B.) strengthens our certainty of the ultimate victory of the great cause of the party of Lenin-Stalin, the victory of communism throughout the world.

This book sets forth briefly the history of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks).

Mr. DOYLE. How many pages in that book, please?

Mr. ERWIN. I will check it for sure.

Mr. DOYLE. Is it a bound volume?

365.

Mr. ERWIN. Yes; a cloth-bound volume. It is the short course, incidentally.

Mr. TAVENNER. What was the effect of that type of doctrine being sponsored by the Communist Party, when you had such conflicting representations made to you when you joined the party?

Mr. ERWIN. Well, the first, of course, was quite utter confusion, because the people I had known, several of the people whom I now met in the party for some time, and I wondered if they were as confused as I or if they were actually sinister characters, or just exactly what it was. But my main reaction at that time was, "Get out and stay away from them," which I did.

Luckily, coincident with it, my work was keeping me on a night shift, mainly, which prevented my attending meetings, and I had been told and heard the reference made that if you once were connected with the party and got out, that not either side would trust you and your name would be mud in general everywhere. And that it was a very bad move, to get in and get out again.

So I just let it go at that and was told finally, in rather patronizing terms, I was on a leave of absence and at such time as my schedule changed they would expect me back.

Mr. TAVENNER. Under such representations it made it very difficult for a person to make the decision to get out?

Mr. ERWIN. It made it very difficult, yes; very difficult, particularly someone just starting in the business, so to speak.

Mr. TAVENNER. Having gotten into it, did you feel that the fact that you had gotten into it would be used against you in your business, if you tried to get out?

Mr. ERWIN. That was the inference that I drew.

Mr. DOYLE. Where did you draw that inference from?

Mr. ERWIN. Well, from the general statement, for instance, a very definite statement against Mr. Dwight Hauser in meetings after he no longer appeared. This was definitely considered to be a dangerous person and that he was not to be considered as a very trustworthy man in anything after that.

Then in other references to other people whom I didn't even know at the time, who had gotten in and gotten out, that I heard that the consequences were rather dire on this sort of a move. I was not personally threatened, but the inference was quite clear.

Mr. DOYLE. In other words, you are telling me that the inference was that such persons as who had gotten in and then gotten out were more or less blacklisted?

Mr. ERWIN. I would say that that could be the conclusion drawn. Mr. DOYLE. That is the conclusion you drew?

Mr. ERWIN. Yes; that is the conclusion I came to myself.

Mr. DOYLE. You mean they were blacklisted by the Communist Party, from which they had withdrawn?

Mr. ERWIN. That is right. And subsequently I have heard of a number of cases where they were blacklisted in general by even such tactics as spreading the word around the persons who had gotten out were Communists and they were blacklisted among those that had

Mr. DOYLE. Let me see if I understand. They were blacklisted by the Communists themselves who set forth propaganda that these people they were blacklisting were Communists?

Mr. ERWIN. They would even go to that extent, I had heard, because I did know that at that time there was some, even some rumblings around the industry that Dwight Hauser was a Communist and that had never been said before he got out of the party.

Mr. DOYLE. That knowledge of blacklisting, naturally, created a fear you might be blacklisted in your endeavor to earn an honest livelihood?

Mr. ERWIN. That is true, Mr. Doyle.

Mr. TAVENNER. After learning of that attitude on the part of the Communist Party toward persons who had left the Communist Party, did you welcome the opportunity to be in a state of leave from the party?

Mr. ERWIN. I welcomed it very heartily, and, in fact, asked I be kept on a night schedule so there would be no excuse for them getting me back.

Mr. DOYLE. You mean you deliberately asked your employer to be kept on a night schedule so you wouldn't be expected to attend the Communist cell meetings?

Mr. ERWIN. I didn't tell my employer my reasons.

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you.

Mr. TAVENNER. How long did you remain on leave from the Communist Party?

Mr. ERWIN. Until the fall of 1947.

Mr. TAVENNER. What occurred at that time?

Mr. ERWIN. At that time, in the late summer of 1947, in a conversation with a close friend, I revealed the fact I had been in the Communist Party and the circumstances of my extended leave of absence, at which time he asked me if I might be interested in giving the information or in aiding the Government in any way with the possible knowledge and information that I had, or would I be willing, even possibly to going back into the Communist Party for this organization, and I said I would.

This man, incidentally, was not an agent of the Government himself. I just understood that he would make some sort of contact and he asked me if I would be willing to do this.

Subsequently, I was contacted by a man from the Government, who then outlined the fact that anything I did was strictly of my own volition, the Government held out no promises of any particular privileges or anything else, and I was perfectly free to refuse to do so and to let it go at that.

I had solicited the contact by the agent myself and-all I am getting at is that they were extremely fair, extremely clear in their representation to me. At that time I said that I certainly understood it, and I considered the Communist Party a definite threat to this country in what little I had learned at that time through texts such as this and other representations in party meetings, and so on, in which the word "revolution" appeared a great deal.

I must say this was pointed out to the cultural group in general and our group in particular, that this did not necessarily mean armed revolt; that this shouldn't be taken that way, but still, nonetheless, the revolution was still uppermost in there, and there were sufficient vagaries there that it frightened me even all the more.

Mr. TAVENNER. As a result of your conference with an agent of the Government, what did you do?

Mr. ERWIN. I reentered the party. By this time my schedule had changed and reentered the party again, contacting Mr. Klowden and reentered the radio branch of the Communist Party.

Mr. TAVENNER. Now, what was your principal purpose in reentering the party?

Mr. ERWIN. Well, of course, my principal purpose was in getting as much information as possible about the radio group. In particular, for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which is the agency named, and also of doing as much-this was decided in conversations with my contact with the FBI, of getting as much information on the party line, what the cultural group was doing.

Perhaps I should right now state what the purpose, the considered purpose of the cultural group is. It is distinctly different within the party from the rank and file workers' groups, in that we were considered to be the sort of commissioned officers of the group. I suppose that term was never used, certainly, but helping to make policy and to interpret policy. The talent in general, then, would be used for propaganda and agitation at all times, particularly, of course, of revolutionary circumstance.

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, counsel, the fact this witness keeps on repeating and emphasizing that the revolution was uppermost, and such language, and he said the word "revolution" appeared a great deal in the text, I think it falls upon me to again call attention to the fact that this is exactly what the United States Congress declared in Public Law 831, which I have read a short portion of 2 or 3 times.

I think it is appropriate for me to just read this one paragraph again. This, you will recall, is a declaration by the United States Congress in Public Law 831, and I read section 2:

As a result of evidence adduced before the various committees of the Senate and House of Representatives, the Congress hereby finds that:

There exists a world Communist movement which, in its origins, its development, and its present practice, is a worldwide revolutionary movement whose purpose it is, by treachery, deceit, infiltration into other groups (governmental and otherwise), espionage, sabotage, terrorism, and any other means deemed necessary, to establish a Communist totalitarian dictatorship in the countries throughout the world through the medium of a worldwide Communist organization.

That is all of that declaration I will read.

Mr. TAVENNER. I would be very happy for you to explain what you understood about the revolutionary teachings within the party as you observed them.

Mr. ERWIN. Well, I probably had better go into a little bit of my history, of how I came in contact with this information.

Shortly after my reentry into the party under the circumstances outlined, I was assigned to a new members' class, which was by this time well organized. In this class, we were given a solid basis in Marxism. One of the main texts again was the history of the CPSU. Another was Socialism, What Is in It for You? And that was by A. B. Magil. I also have that pamphlet, if you would like it.

Value, Price, and Profit, an excerpt, naturally, from Marx.

On the Theory of Marxism, with excerpts from Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin.

A brief résumé of the Constitution of the U. S. S. R.

And that was about the sum total of actual text used in this particular new members' class. Those weren't taken in their entirety. These were assignments as much as in any class with a text.

Mr. TAVENNER. According to your time, that was in 1947.

Mr. ERWIN. Yes; that is true, this is 1947. We were then taught a little of the basis of Marx, but there was much more stress, I noticed now, on the revolution itself; again that word appears. And on the methods of studying the works of Stalin and Lenin on revolution. Although there was no indication that anyone was going to start throwing bombs at any time, the emphasis was on a clear dialectical approach to world problems.

Current events were brought in and analyzed from a Marxist viewpoint. And at that time the Berlin crisis was on, the airlift at that time was going on, I believe, and the analysis of problems was made overall at that time from a Marist viewpoint, and keeping abreast with the current events. And at that time several new members asked the question also of how it so happened if the Communist Party which had been represented to us, the Communist Party of the U. S. A. was not taking its cue from the Moscow, how did it happen that everything Russia did, according to this analysis, was explained away in

one form or another, or everything this country did was deemed pretty much wrong-not everything, but at least most things.

Where there was a definite choice between Russia and the United States, that Russia seemed to come out on top from a dialectic standpoint. This was explained by the so-called fact that any students of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, et al., viewing a particular set of contradictions or circumstances would come to the same conclusion. And, in fact, I made a rather unpopular statement at that time in the new members' class, that if that was the case, could Tito be considered a poor student of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, et al., which he obviously did not, and he didn't seem to be going along with the Cominform at that time. There were certain other contradictions, as I say, with statements like this being rather unpopular and being discouraged.

Mr. DOYLE. Were any of those people that you just named American authors or authorities?

Mr. ERWIN. Oh, yes.

Mr. DOYLE. These 3 or 4 Marx and Lenin

Mr. ERWIN. I will have to refer to that. I believe A. B. Magil is American, I am quite sure. The others are not. A. B. Magil I believe is an American.

Mr. JACKSON. Do you have any knowledge of any occasion when the Communists, as you knew them during your association with them, departed in any way from the Soviet foreign policy?

Mr. ERWIN. I remember no specific instance.

Mr. JACKSON. In the event of war, do you think that the sympathies of an American Communist would be with this country or the Soviet Union?

Mr. ERWIN. Oh, I believe the hierarchy and the overall policy would definitely be with the Soviets, unless serious change, a complete change, would occur. I am sure the Communist Party line would. As to officials and members and ex-members of the Communist Party, I couldn't venture to say.

Mr. DOYLE. When you say the Communist Party you refer to the Communist Party in the United States?

Mr. ERWIN. I do. By this I do not necessarily mean the rank and file cell level member. I believe the people I came in contact with, there are practically none of those that I think would actually take up arms against the United States, in the event of a war with the Soviet Union. I think a number of them would be abhorrent to any such action.

As to the Communist Party official line, I have little doubt their sympathies would definitely lie.

Mr. DOYLE. In other words, the Communist Party leadership in the United States, allegedly underground, would, in your judgment, follow the interests of Soviet Russia as counterdistinctive to the best interests of the United States.

Mr. ERWIN. I think that is basically actually right, because the Communist Party is only for convenience sake broken down into the Communist Party of various countries, because they say the problems naturally are different in different countries, yes.

But the aim of the Communist Party in general, overall, the basic aim is for world communism, as I quoted from the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.