Davis, was one of the first large publishing projects of the Vanguard Press. The Federated Press got $76,000 from the fund. The Russian Reconstruction Farms, under the direction of Harold Ware (son of Ella Reeve Bloor), received $34,000. The International Labor Defense was the fund's beneficiary in the sum of at least $54,000. Commonwealth College got a little less than $25,000, and Brookwood Labor College benefited to the extent of at least $115,000. Other Communists enterprises which received smaller sums from the American Fund for Public Service included International Publishers, Workers Library Publishers, Young Workers League (later known as the Young Communist League and still later as American Youth for Democracy), All America Anti-Imperialist League, Trade Union Unity League, Labor Research Association, Novy Mir, League for Mutual Aid, and Manumit School (headed by Nellie Seeds, the wife of Scott Nearing).

The Hillman-Communist collaboration which involved the RussianAmerican Industrial Corporation, the Jewish newspaper Freiheit, and the American Fund for Public Service extended roughly from 1922 to 1924. The Russian-American Industrial Corporation was eventually a complete flop, and after its liquidation Hillman turned aside from his coalition with Communists. That was not, however, to be his last excursion into alliances with the Communist enemies of the United States.

In the events which culminated in 1937 in the formation of the Congress of Industrial Organizations, Sidney Hillman and John L. Lewis were equally important as leaders. It has been held by many that Hillman was the superstrategist or the "brains" of the Č. I. Ő. in its early days. It is clear from the record that John L. Lewis did not outrank Hillman in importance in building the new labor federation. It is also clear that the C. I. O. represented a powerful coalition of Communists and non-Communists, which coalition gave the Communists opportunities for mischief which they had not possessed before in their history in the United States. Communist trade-union leaders, thanks largely to Lewis and Hillman, found themselves in strategic positions which for the first time in American history made communism a real menace to American industry. Among these Communist leaders who emerged into positions of greatly increased power were such as Joseph Curran, Lewis Merrill, Michael J. Quill, Lewis Alan Berne, Ben Gold, Donald Henderson, Abram Flaxer, Reid Robinson, Joseph Selly, Grant Oakes, Joseph F. Jurich, Morris Muster, and Harry Bridges. A clear majority of the most important unions affiliated with the C. I. O. were and are under the domination of an entrenched Communist leadership. This will be made clear from the evidence which is offered later in this report.

In two striking and sinister ways, the Communist leadership of C. I. O. international unions has already expressed itself; first, in the wave of sit-down strikes in which law and order bowed abjectly before mob violence; and, second, in the wave of political strikes which were aimed at the paralysis of American defense industries prior to the entrance of Russia into the war. In both the period of the sit-down strikes and the period of the political antidefense strikes, the Communists gave startling demonstrations of their classic and long-held theory that "strikes are merely rehearsals for civil war."

We come now to Sidney Hillman's latest collaboration with Communists, namely the C. I. O. Political Action Committee. If Hillman and the Communists succeed in this, their newest joint endeavor, both the sit-down strikes and the political strikes will have been shaded in their damage to American institutions. For the present Hillman-Communist coalition aims at striking a deadly blow at the Congress of the United States as an independent and coequal branch of our Government representing all the people of America.

In this

On January 14, 1944 (the day on which the C. I. O. Political Action Committee convened its national conference in New York), a group of leaders of the American Labor Party inserted a large advertisement in the New York Times in which they accused Sidney Hillman of "complete surrender to the New York Communists." advertisement, there appeared such phrases as "a conspiracy, hatched by the Communists and Sidney Hillman," "the Hillman-Communist coalition," "the Hillman plan for Communist control of the A. L. P.," and "the Hillman-Communist alliance." It is significant that these grave charges against Hillman were timed to appear on the very morning that he was delivering the keynote address at the national convention of the C. I. O. Political Action Committee.

In the advertisement referred to in the foregoing paragraph, there was included an editorial from the New York Post a paper which is generally admitted to be the journalistic voice of the American Labor Party. This editorial minced no words in its charges of a conspiracy between Sidney Hillman and the Communists. The text of the editorial follows:

The life of the American Labor Party as a progressive political organization of New York's liberal and labor movements is threatened.

This crisis was provoked by a conspiracy, hatched by the Communists and Sidney Hillman, to seize the A. L. P. in the April State Committee primaries. Hillman and the left-wingers have drawn up a joint slate of candidates for the election. If it wins the Communists will control the A. L. P.

Despite this danger there appears little inclination among the regular A. L. P. leaders to fight this Communist invasion of the labor party.

David Dubinsky, Alex Rose, George Counts, Dean Alfange, and other rightwing leaders are meeting today to decide whether or not to fight the Communist ticket in April. They have given the impression that they don't care what happens to the party now that the Communists have taken control of parts of it. The right-wingers are believed ready to quit the A. L. P. before the April primaries and brand the party as a Communist stooge front.

Nothing could be more disastrous to progressive politics. Such action would permanently destroy the A. L. P.-which since 1936 has been the only progressive opposition to the swift reactionary trend now apparent in both the Republican and Democratic Parties.

The right-wingers have no right to quit without a fight. The party is not the personal property of Dubinsky, Rose, or any of their colleagues or party functionaries.

The A. L. P. belongs to all the liberals, the labor people, and the many men and women who have spent long and dreary hours ringing doorbells, passing out literature, building local clubs in the hope that the A. L. P. would some day fulfill the promise of successful progressive political action.

If the right-wingers desert the party, if they fail to draw up a slate to buck the Communist ticket, if they fail to find the money and manpower to put up a tough fight, they will be deserting the honest liberal and labor movements which trusted them to take the lead years ago.

If the right-wingers quit, they would be turning labor's invaluable balance of power in the State over to the capricious Communists. A. L. P. policy would then be determined abroad and in 1944 its support would be thrown to any political force the Communists wanted to back. They would be responsible to

no one.

It is inconceivable that the right wing would permit the A. L. P.'s key 400,000 votes to go to the Communist Party by default.

Moreover, even if Dubinsky and his colleagues are rightfully angered by Hillman's complete surrender to the New York Communists, the right-wingers must realize that any premature smearing of the A. L. P. would disillusion the man in the street in every labor and liberal organization.

The average man will find it difficult to distinguish right from left in A. L. P. politics. He will not understand that the right-wingers actually are fighting a Communist Party invasion of the A. L. P. He will put a plague on both houses and back one of the old parties.

If the right-wingers quit they will retire from public life. If they fight they will be backed by every sincere labor leader, every liberal, every progressive publication, including The Post. We want to see decency win over undercover, back-room conspirators who seek to deny New Yorkers the right to run an independent, progressive political party.

In the left-wing political movement, broadly considered, there are both Communist and anti-Communist elements. This has been the situation ever since the rise to power of the Bolsheviks in Russia. These elements have engaged in numerous bitter struggles, and as a result have come to know each other better than the average citizen, who has not been on the inside of left-wing politics, knows either of them. In other words, a right-winger in radical circles usually becomes something of an expert in recognizing Communists and Communist conspiracies. Unusual importance is properly attached, therefore, to the assertions and accusations of these right-wingers when they bitterly condemn Sidney Hillman for "conspiracy," "coalition," and "alliance" with Communists, and of "complete surrender" to them.

The evidence is overwhelming which shows that Hillman is doing on a national scale, in the C. I. O. Political Action Committee, precisely what he is accused of doing in New York State, in the American Labor Party, namely, conspiring with Communists.

The Daily Worker itself, official spokesman of the Communist Party, interprets Hillman's action in New York as "the campaign of the C. I. O.'s Political Action Committee for a united 'American Labor Party' in New York." (Daily Worker, February 24, 1944, p. 6.) The Special Committee on Un-American Activities does not, of course, propose to defend one wing of the American Labor Party against another. The struggle between Hillman and the Communists on the one hand, and George Counts and Alex Rose on the other hand, is a family squabble (bitter as that squabble may be at times). But, if the parties to this struggle insist on washing their dirty linen in public, their charges and countercharges have certain evidential value of which this committee takes account.

On February 2, 1944, the right-wing leaders of the American Labor Party again charged Sidney Hillman with having entered into a coalition with the Communists. Coming from such a source, the charge carries extraordinary weight and merits extended quotation. For years, the Communists have put forth the greatest efforts to capture the entire American Labor Party throughout New York State. They succeeded in capturing the Manhattan and Brooklyn sections of the American Labor Party, but outside of New York City they have been unable to win control. In all of the maneuvering which has characterized the struggle for control of the American Labor Party, the right-wing leaders have learned the identity and

the methods of the Communists. They speak, therefore, with exceptional authority when they publicly identify the Communist Party leaders and fellow travelers.

These right-wing leaders of the American Labor Party, namely, the State chairman and the State secretary, included in their charges against Hillman the following:

Here is striking evidence of Mr. Hillman's coalition with New York Communists: The seven-man committee on vacancies on Mr. Hillman's nominating petitions consists of three officers of Mr. Hillman's union. Murray Weinstein, Hyman Blumberg, and Louis Fuchs, and four veteran followers of the Communist Party line, Michael Quill, Eugene P. Connolly, Joseph Cohen, and Hugh Thompson. These four were left-wing candidates in previous American Labor Party elections and for years fought Roosevelt's foreign policy, national-defense program, and Roosevelt's reelection in 1940.

Mr. Saul Mills, another veteran pro-Communist, is assistant campaign director of the Hillman-Communist committee for a United Labor Party. Mr. Mills campaigned actively last November for the election of official Communist Party candidates for City Council.

It is now obvious that Mr. Hillman has a working agreement to capture control of our party organization in the March 28 primary.

For five years Communists fought to make the American Labor Party their political home. They made no bones about it. In the last general election the American Labor Party left-wing candidates in Manhattan and Brooklyn, Eugene P. Connolly and Richard Mazza, urged the voters to give their second choices to the Communist Party candidates, Benjamin J. Davis and Peter V. Cacchione. Now Mr. Hillman has made a united front with the Communists and is assisting them in their efforts to achieve their objective.

Obviously, the Hillman-Communist coalition which is so evident in New York is also in effect throughout the national set-up of the C. I. O. Political Action Committee. The Communist Party may well disband as a political party, in accordance with the recently announced plan of Earl Browder to reorganize the party as the American Communist Education Association. In Sidney Hillman's C. I. O. Political Action Committee, the Communists have found a new party framework which gives them vastly greater influence than they have ever been able to wield when they called themselves the Communist Party.

22

JOHN TOUSSAINT BERNARD

John Toussaint Bernard, former Congressman from Minnesota, is at present an organizer for the Communist-controlled United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America and active in the work of the C. I. O. Political Action Committee. He has never openly declared his membership in the Communist Party, but subservience to the Communist Party line is demonstrated by the record of his activities.

May Day of each year has been the Communist Party's annual mobilization of strength. John T. Bernard was a featured speaker at a number of these meetings: one in Cleveland in 1937; another in Union Square, usually called "Red Square," in New York City in 1938; and a third at Pilsen Hall in Chicago, in 1940. The Daily Worker of May 1, 1937, carried special statements on the significance of this day by Earl Browder, general secretary of the Communist Party, and by John T. Bernard, "May Day, 1937, is a great day for American workers," Bernard declared in spite of the fact that it is. not so recognized by such representative labor bodies as theAmerican Federation of Labor.

In a statement issued by the central committee of the Communist Party in the Daily Worker of September 4, 1937, Bernard was mentioned among others as the "clearest voice" in Congress against reaction and fascism. He was written up in glowing terms by N. Bernick in an interview headed "Special to the Daily Worker," December 4, 1936, page 2. He was particularly commended for his support of the Lundeen unemployed, old-age, and social security bill, which was drafted by the Communist Party, and the American Youth Act, backed by the American Youth Congress, a Communist youth front organization.

In an article entitled "Give Us A Program," Bernard appealed for support to the readers of the New Masses, Communist weekly, in its issue of August 31, 1937, page 3:

Mass organizations like the Workers Alliance * * * and the League Against War and Fascism * * * must learn to act together, in support of their common interests

he declared. It should be noted that these organizations were wellknown Communist fronts.

Israel Amter, Communist candidate for Governor of New York State, in an article in The Communist of October 1937, enthusiastically commended Bernard's political analysis to the attention of his readers. Bernard and Amter both identify themselves with the so-called progressives, a misleading label often employed by the Communists. Bernard's remarks which were quoted in this article are significant particularly in comparison with his later policies, to show how closely he paralleled the gyrations of the Communist Party line. It should