Eastland v. the Times

A fresh wave of subpoenas swept info Manhattan in mid-November in a Senate investigation of Communism in the press, radio and TV. They were prompted by the testimony last summer of CBS Correspondent Winston Burdett that he had been a Communist spy (TIME, July 11). Of 35 subpoenas to secret hearings by the Internal Security Subcommittee, 26 went to past or present employees of the New York Times. Last week the Senate investigators called up 18 witnesses for open hearings--and nine of them were on the Times, and two had just left it. The Times promptly accused the subcommittee's leaders of trying not so much to hunt Communists as to harass the Times for editorial views hostile to their own.

"A Lunkhead." For its opening witness in three days of Washington hearings, the subcommittee, headed by Mississippi Democrat James O. Eastland, called slight, white-haired James Glaser, 56, a copyreader on the Fair-Dealing New York Post. Glaser said that he was a Communist when he worked on a copy desk of the Times, which he quit in 1934 to become managing editor of the Daily Worker at a 35% cut in salary. He told a vivid story of his buffeting in that job (see below). Two years later he worked up "the strength" to quit both the party and the paper, and to stop being "a lunkhead," "chump" and "poor, miserable, tragic fool." A completely cooperative witness, Glaser nevertheless protested that "the sole benefit" of his presence at the hearing was "to make a sort of public spectacle of me, because of the dreadful, terrible mistake I made more than 21 years ago."

Another cooperative witness was Clayton Knowles, 46, who from 1947 to 1954 had been one of the Times's most respected Washington correspondents. Testifying in the marble-columned chamber where he had often worked at the press table, Knowles pleaded "extreme naivete" in having joined the Communist Party in 1937 while working for the Long Island Daily Press. He quit two years later.

Knowles told how he had gone to the FBI with his story in 1954 after his name had been mentioned to the subcommittee.

At that time the Times shifted him from Washington to his present job in New York, where he assembles a daily news summary and index. Though he gave the subcommittee names of his Communist cell mates at the Daily Press in 1937-39--the list was not made public--Knowles said that he knew no Communists on the Times. Missouri's Senator Tom Hennings broke into Knowles's testimony to praise his work as a Washington reporter. Later, Hennings taxed Counsel J. G. Sourwine with not giving subcommittee members advance notice of witnesses, and questioned whether any "useful purpose" was served by embarrassing such long-rehabilitated onetime Communists as Knowles.

A "Tragic Mistake." Most prominent of the Times witnesses was Benjamin Fine, 50, education editor since 1941 and recipient of seven honorary degrees. Fine admitted to the "tragic mistake" of party membership for about a year in 1935-36 while he was a graduate student at Columbia University's Teachers College. He volunteered that his advice to young people today would be to "keep away from anyone who talks the Communist line to you on the campus." Fine's appearance as a witness was the only clue to why the subcommittee two days earlier had called his brother, David Fine, a New York movie exhibitor specializing in Russian films. He was the only non-newspaper witness, and the only one nobody bothered to ask about any Communist ties.

Senator Eastland complimented Editor Fine on his candor and praised him as "a fine citizen." But the newsman's appearance again provoked Senator Hennings into criticizing subcommittee colleagues. He objected "strenuously" that the group had put Fine on public display after his "full disclosures in executive session."

Cell at the Trib. Other witnesses were less cooperative. Alden Whitman, 42, a Times copyreader since 1951, admitted having been a Communist from 1935 through 1948, but refused to name any other party members. After tough questioning, Counsel Sourwine pried out of him the admission that he had belonged to a Communist cell with "perhaps a half-dozen members" on the New York Herald Tribune while working there as a copyreader from 1943 to 1951. The Trib, which had been giving the hearings the splashiest play in town, grabbed Sourwine right after the session and later quoted him: "We have no evidence or information of any activity by Communists on the Herald Tribune now."

Seymour Peck, 38, a desk man on the Times Sunday Magazine who joined the paper in 1952, also fought shy of naming onetime Communist associates, while he admitted his own party membership from 1935 to 1949. Like Whitman, he did not claim the refuge of the Fifth Amendment to protect himself against selfincrimination. Peck, a onetime staffer of the now defunct Communist-line New York Compass, simply refused to answer, despite the subcommittee's repeated warnings that he was risking a contempt citation.

Another Timesman, Copyreader Robert Shelton, 29, who joined the staff in 1951, refused to answer any questions about his possible Communist associations. He tried to claim the protection of the First Amendment's guarantees of free speech and freedom of the press--but Eastland refused to recognize his claim, ruled that it had no legal standing in this case.

Six other Times employees invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering at least some questions: P: Jack Shafer, 44, foreign-desk copyreader for nearly seven years, who testified that the Times fired him before the hearings started, when he indicated that he would duck behind the Fifth. P: Nathan Aleskovsky, 43, assistant to the editor of the Sunday Book Review section, where he worked for five years. He denied that he is now a Communist, but would not say if he had belonged to the party. He said that the Times had demanded and got his resignation.

P:Samuel Weissman, 46, supervisor of indexers on the Times Index, a reference aid to its files. He denied present Communist Party membership. P: Matilda Landsman, 37, now a Linotype operator, who had worked as a stenographer in the news and Sunday departments and as secretary to Joseph Barnes, onetime editor of the defunct New York Star.

P: Proofreader Jerry Zalph, 45. P: Proofreader Otto Albertson, 45.

Of the other five newsmen who appeared before the subcommittee, all but one took the Fifth Amendment. The five were:

P: John T. McManus, 50, general manager of the Communist-line National Guardian, who worked for the Times from 1921 to 1937.

P: James Aronson, 40, executive editor of the National Guardian, who worked for the Times in 1946-48. P: Richard 0. Boyer, 52, free lancer who has contributed profiles to The New Yorker and also written for the Daily Worker. P: William A. Price, 35, police reporter who has worked for the New York Daily News since 1940 except for 4 1/2 years as a wartime Navy flyer. He refused to answer questions on Communist activities--or to take the Fifth. Daily News Executive Editor Richard Clarke promptly fired Price by telegram, charging that his conduct at the hearing had "destroyed [his] usefulness" to the News.

P: Dan Mahoney, 38, a rewrite man who has worked for the New York Daily Mirror for nearly 22 years. He denied present membership in the party or that he had ever performed "any subversive act," but refused to testify whether he had ever been a Communist. Next day Hearst's Mirror fired Mahoney.

Full Coverage. The Times gave the hearings the kind of full, deadpan coverage its readers expect, letting the story run from 4 to 5 1/2 columns a day. But on the editorial page it angrily attacked the Eastland subcommittee and Counsel Sourwine, a protege of Nevada's late Senator Pat McCarran, with the kind of fighting words its readers rarely see. The editorial, "The Voice of a Free Press," brought hundreds of letters from readers (8 to 1 in favor). Excerpts:

"It seems to us quite obvious that the Eastland investigation has been aimed with particular emphasis at the New York Times ... It seems to us to be a further obvious conclusion that the Times has been singled out for this attack precisely because of the vigor of its opposition to many of the things for which Mr. Eastland, his colleague [Indiana Republican Senator William E.] Jenner and the subcommittee's counsel stand--that is, because we have condemned segregation in the Southern schools; because we have challenged the high-handed and abusive methods employed by various Congressional committees; because we have denounced McCarthyism and all its works; because we have attacked the narrow and bigoted restrictions of the McCarran Immigration Act; because we have criticized a 'security system' which conceals the accuser from his victim; because we have insisted that the true spirit of American democracy demands a scrupulous respect for the rights of even the lowliest individual, and a high standard of fair play."

The Times also stated that "we would not knowingly employ a Communist Party member in the news or editorial departments." As for former Communists, or employees who plead the Fifth Amendment "for reasons of their own," the Times said it would "judge each case on its own merits," taking into account the employee's job and how well he performs it. Said the Times: "We do not believe in the doctrine of irredeemable sin. We think it possible to atone through good performance for past error." At week's end, though the hearing transcript was still under scrutiny by its executives, the Times had made no further dismissals.

The blast against the Eastland subcommittee was hailed by newspapers around the U.S. The Denver Post called the hearings "The Big Floperoo" and a "puerile attempt ... to smear the New York Times."

Would the subcommittee go on with its investigation of Communism in the U.S. press? Yes, said Senator Eastland. Would it investigate the Washington press corps? No, he quickly assured a questioner. Had the investigation shown any Communist effort to influence the content of any recognized metropolitan daily? Said Eastland: "No." But as the hearings ended, he and Senator Jenner maintained that the sessions had disclosed "a significant effort on the part of Communists to penetrate leading American newspapers." They added: "We feel confident that the American press will prove fully competent to deal with the problem in its own American way."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.