Neither will the committee permit the photographing of witnesses with members of the committee in the hearing room, nor the photographing of witnesses in the hearing room without the permission of the witnesses. The committee has made these decisions because we are seeking facts, not publicity. We want to make a record, not to make headlines. Furthermore, we want to make it clear that no witness who is called here will be subjected to undue publicity against his will. The committee has also discussed the matter of the submission of questions by Senators who are not members of the Internal Security Subcommittee. It is the order of the committee that any such questions should be submitted in writing to the chairman presiding at the hearing, to be asked by him at his direction. Any witness called here may have the privilege of being accompanied and advised by counsel of his choice; but witnesses' counsel will not be permitted to testify nor to ask questions. This is not a trial, but an inquiry, and we intend to proceed in an orderly way. In the interests of expediting these hearings, members of the committee have agreed to refrain from filling the record with their own observations; and witnesses will be asked to limit their testimony to responsive answers to questions. However, after the conclusion of his testimony, any witness may file, for the record, any such supplementary statement as he may desire to make; and a reasonable time limit will be allowed, in any case, for the submission of such a statement. The committee will proceed. Mr. Morris, you may proceed with the witness. The witness will be sworn. You do solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before the subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States, will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? TESTIMONY OF EDWARD C. CARTER, NEW YORK, N. Y. Mr. CARTER. I do. Mr. MORRIS. Will you give your name and address to the reporter? Mr. CARTER. Edward C. Carter, 215 East Seventy-second Street, New York. Mr. MORRIS. What is your present occupation? Mr. CARTER. Retired. I am an educator retired, teaching part time at the New School at 66 West Twelfth Street. Mr. MORRIS. You hold no position other than that of a teacher? Mr. MORRIS. Did you ever hold a Government position or a position with the United Nations? Mr. CARTER. I have held no position with the United States Government. For 21/2 months I served as a senior consultant to a United Nations organization in the Far East. It is called the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East. That was a consultancy for about 10 weeks with reference to technical training of industrial workers in the underdeveloped countries of Asia and the Far East. Mr. MORRIS. You say that was in 1948? Mr. CARTER. I think it was in 1948. Mr. MORRIS. Are you now associated with the Institute of Pacific Relations? Mr. CARTER. I am one of its roughly 50 board of directors of the American section of the Institute of Pacific Relations. Mr. MORRIS. What position have you held with the Institute of Pacific Relations in the past? Mr. CARTER. Shortly after it was founded in 1925 I served for a year or two as honorary secretary of the American IPR. Then I became an executive secretary. Then in 1933 I think it was I became secretary general of what was called the Pacific Council, namely, the governing body of 10 or 12 national councils in the Pacific countries, similar to, in a general way, the American section. Then in 1946 I retired as secretary general of the international organization and became executive vice chairman of the American section, the American IPR, which position I held until roughly, 22 years ago when I retired. Since then I have been one of 50 trustees of American IPR. Mr. MORRIS. Do you still maintain an active interest in IPR work? Mr. CARTER. Yes. Mr. MORRIS. Attend the board meetings? Mr. CARTER. So far as possible, if I was in the country. Mr. MORRIS. I wonder if you would give us very briefly in paragraph or so the construction or function of the Institute of Pacific Relations. Mr. CARTER. It would have to be a long paragraph, Senator, but 1 will do my best. Mr. MORRIS. As briefly as you can. Mr. CARTER. The institute, as I have said a moment ago, is a loose federation of some 10 or 12 national institutes devoted to the study of the problems of the Pacific-economic, social, political, and so on. To take as a sample of those 10 or 12 councils, I will mention the structure of the American IPR which has grown from rather small beginnings in Hawaii in 1925 into an organization in a way you might compare it with the American Geographical Society or the Brookings Institution, of some fluctuating twelve to sixteen or eighteen hundred members, businessmen, journalists, academic people, a few labor, and so on, researchers, and the aim of the American IPR being to carry on competent research and discussion on America's interest in the Pacific and the whole of southern and eastern Asia. Its principal channels are publications. It might pretty nearly fill one of those larger cases over there, four or five hundred volumes over the years, and then two or three periodicals-the Far Eastern Survey, et cetera. Then every 2 or 3 years years the American IPR participates in international conferences which the Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, and the Europeans who have an interest in the Pacific meet, not for a week end but for 12 to 14 full days, living together, eating together, in an attempt to get some integration of the various points of view for people who have interests in the Pacific area. The American IPR has maintained a research staff of varying size over the years, and similarly the international secretariat has had a staff over the years, being unofficial and not endowed with great funds. It has had nothing the size of the personnel of, say, the United Nation. We have tried always, except in wartime, to keep Japanese, Chinese, Filipinos, Australians, New Zealanders, Frenchmen on the staff, but we never have had the money. We have always had people of several nationalities on the staff so as to get as many points of view as possible and serve all the member councils impartially. Our principal failures have been our inability to get sufficient funds to do as good a job as we would have liked to do. Mr. MORRIS. What was your annual budget? Mr. CARTER. It varied from around $90,000 to $150,000 for the American IPR, and there was a similar spread for the international secretariat. Then the Royal Institute in London, which was the British chapter, has its own budget. The China IPR was one of the most generous supporters and had its budgets, and so on around the different countries. I think the figures probably have been made available to the committee. I suppose altogether the IPR internationally and the various national councils have raised and expended $2 million or $3 million over the whole period, a very small budget compared with the budgets we hear about these days, Senator. Mr. MORRIS. We have heard a great deal about the fact that Mr. Field, Frederick V. Field, was a large contributor to the institute. I wonder if you could tell us the extent to which he did contribute to the financing of the IPR. Mr. CARTER. The IRP could give you the exact details. I looked over the figures some time ago and gathered from the figures in the New York office that it totaled around $60,000 during the whole period of his active connection. In one or two publications a considerably larger sum has been mentioned, but I think the sum of around $60,000 would stand up. Mr. MORRIS. Was it his practice to make up the deficit for certain years? Mr. CARTER. I am not quite certain that he made up the deficit for the American section for several years. You would have to consult the New York office as to which years and how much. That was not over the whole period. I remember 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. So Mr. Field was not the only such person. Mr. MORRIS. I would like to offer you a carbon copy of a letter, sent reportedly by you, to Mr. W. L. Holland. I would like in particular to call your attention to the third paragraph from the end which reads: 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. I offer you this and ask you if you can recall sending that letter, Mr. Carter. Mr. CARTER. The third of June 1940-which paragraph is that? Mr. MORRIS. The third from the end on the second page. Mr. CARTER (reading): 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. Senator, this clearly is a letter I wrote in 1940. Clearly we were in the midst of one of our periodic doldrums when we were short of money, and Mr. Field had helped out as others had. Apparently from this he had told me that he just couldn't be sugar daddy for year after year and unless we got money from other sources we would have to contract. Happily, we did find other sources. I have forgotten, in what amount, and survived. The CHAIRMAN. What was the expression you used? Mr. CARTER. Sugar daddy. I was afraid you would pick me up on that. Mr. MORRIS. I would like to offer this in evidence, and have it marked as "Exhibit 1." (Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 1," and is as follows:) W. L. HOLLAND, Esq. EXHIBIT No. 1 [Private and confidential] Care Giannini Foundation, 129 EAST FIFTY-SECOND STREET, University of California, Berkeley, Calif. DEAR BILL: With the unsettlement in the minds of potential contributors and the May 10 news from the Carnegie Endowment that it would not renew its contribution to Amco and the news a few days later that the Carnegie Corp. could not respond favorably to Amco's appeal, Field decided that, in addition to the salary cuts which I have already reported to you, very radical reductions should be made in rent, library purchases, and staff. Field and the whole American council staff has been going through a terribly painful 10 days of group self-examination and reduction. Half a dozen plans have been proposed. The latest plan which was, I believe adopted at a meeting of the union on Friday afternoon, called, among other things, for giving notice and paying severance pay to Lasker's secretary, Shiman's secretary, Miss Taylor's secretary, and in addition Lasker, Mrs. Barnes, and Helen Wiss. About half the office space is to be given up. About half of the library is to be stored. Catherine Porter is to become field secretary and is to be responsible for regional conferences. She is also to be office manager. The number of pages of the Far Eastern Survey is to be reduced and Kurt Bloch will probably be added to the staff in order that Amco may have someone who can cover a half a dozen fields at the same time. The present thought, I believe, is to cut the American Council contribution from $10,000 to $5,000 a year; to look for a successor to Fred; and to ask all of the research staff to do their own typing and recondition the entire staff so that in the future they will cooperate in membership and financial work and public relations generally. This letter to you is unofficial and off the record. It is intended for you alone and nothing that is herein contained should be passed on to Alsberg, Wilbur, Oakie, or anyone else. In due season Field will be communicating, I assume, to all of these people in their American Council capacity and it would be unfortunate if any of them got the slightest hint of the reorganization that is taking place from you or me. At this juncture I simply wanted you to know that after the 15th of June Lasker and Mrs. Barnes would presumably be open for university appointments. Lasker is, I think, entitled to 6 months' severance pay and Mrs. Barnes 3 months. I haven't the faintest idea what their plans for the future are. It may be that it will be much sounder for the American council and for the institute as a whole if these two gifted staff members find their future careers entirely outside the framework of the IPR. Thus, though for humanitarian reasons I would like to propose one or two minor temporary international secretariat assignments to Lasker and Mrs. Barnes, my thought at the moment is that such proposals might be a disservice to both of them in that it would postpone just by so many weeks or months their facing up to the realities of the new situation that they unfortunately have to face. My present thought is that the biggest service we can do them is by commending them to other societies and to universities where their qualifications would be of very special value. Would you write me privately your reaction to what I have written. I need hardly say that practically the whole staff of the American council at the moment has been in a state of pretty nearly complete collapse. Everyone has suffered fearfully all along the line. 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. In connection with my future responsibility as pro tem part-time secretary of the American council, I have been more concerned with a study of the failure of the staff to secure the necessary income. I would have preferred to see the staff reorient itself completely to the problem of public relations and income production rather than engage in drastic curtailment of expenditure. I feel confident that the present plight could have been avoided if the entire staff had cooperated intelligently and loyally with those responsible for income production. However, there is no use in crying over spilt milk, and my objectives on this point can better be contributed orally rather than in writing. Please send me your best thought on all these matters at the earliest possible moment. Sincerely yours, EDWARD C. CARTER. Mr. MORRIS. Did Frederick Field write for IPR publications? Mr. CARTER. Yes. He wrote several articles for the Far Eastern Survey, the fortnightly of the American IPR. He may have written for the International Quarterly, Pacific Affairs. I can't remember specifically, but the office could tell you and he did two major research volumes, one on American participation in the Chinese consortium. We had the late Thomas W. Lamont read that carefully and he felt that it was an exceedingly competent piece of work. Then Mr. Field edited a very large volume, the Economic Handbook of the Pacific, and Chinese, Japanese, and others worked on it. That was a standard economic handbook for several years. Mr. Newton D. Baker has studied it and wrote the foreword. As I remember it, those were the only two books, in addition to the other articles you have inquired about. Mr. MORRIS. Mr. Carter, while you were secretary general and executive vice chairman, did you know Frederick Field was a member of the Communist Party? Mr. CARTER. I did not, no. Mr. MORRIS. When did you first learn that? Mr. CARTER. In the Saturday Evening Post a few years ago. I knew that while he was active in the IPR he wrote for the New Masses and Daily Worker, and when I inquired I was told that those two militant Communist publications frequently asked nonparty members to write. I checked up on it and found that was true, and so I did not at the time think that his writing for his publications, later I think he served on the editorial board of one, constituted him as a party member. The CHAIRMAN. That expression "later"-I did not catch what you said after the word "later." You said "Later he served," on something. Mr. CARTER. My impression, Senator, is he contributed an occasional article to either New Masses or Daily Worker before he went on the masthead as a member of the editorial board of one or the other. I can't from memory give you the exact dates. Mr MORRIS. When you say you checked, exactly how would you check on this affiliation? Mr. CARTER. I didn't do it very scientifically the way the Senator would have, but I, in talking to people about the country, asked a |