posed of teachers' unions from Seattle, Snohomish County, Tacoma, and Bremerton, when they convened in Seattle last Saturday to form their organization.

The new federation supersedes the smaller informal Washington Joint Council of Teachers, a committee formed a year ago to coordinate the program of teachers' unions in the public schools, the university, and the workers' education projects.

After adopting a constitution the group voted in Hugh DeLacy, councilmanelect and discharged university instructor, as president and Hallie Donaldson, of the West Seattle High School, as vice president

Resolutions adopted asked release of Tom Mooney; King Ramsey Connor; selection of State Superintendent of Public Instruction Stanley Atwood as speaker at the American Federation of Teachers' national convention; civilservice laws for teachers; and equalization program for State schools; repeal of the Washington, D. C., loyalty oath bill; continuation of WPA projects at union wages; a referendum on war.

The American Federation of Teachers is affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. Delegates to the Seattle AFL Central Labor Council for the teachers union were Selden Menefee, of the University of Washington, and Victor Hicks, of the WPA educational project.

Comment: Affiliation of Local 401, U. of W. Teachers' Union with the American Federation of Teachers; the Washington Commonwealth Federation and resolutions passed as indicated above, show the beginning of the pattern to be followed by them as their program adjusts to the changing pattern of the Communist Party line. The Washington State Un-American Activities Committee, as well as other agencies, have voluminous files on the radical activities of Selden Menefee, Victor Hicks, and Hugh DeLacy. The Sunday News was the official organ of the Washington Commonwealth Federation and its editorial board, according to its masthead on the above date, included among its members Prof. R. G. Tyler, Prof. Harold Eby, and ex-Prof. Hugh DeLacy, all of the University of Washington.

[Pp. 346 and 347]

[April 28, 1938, Daily Worker, statement by American Progressives on the Moscow trials]

(This statement also appeared in the May 3, 1938, issue of New Masses.) Appendix IX, section 1-6, page 1617. The statement was obviously a document concocted in defense of the line of the Communist Party and undoubtedly originated in the headquarters of the Communist Party. The following excerpts from the statement seem significant: "We the undersigned, are fully aware of the confusion that exists with regard to the Moscow trials and the real facts about the situation of the Soviet Union * * *. The measures taken by the Soviet Union to preserve and extend its gains and its strength therefore find their echoes here, where we are staking the future of the American people on the preservation of progressive democracy and the unification of our efforts to prevent the Fascist from strangling the rights of the people. American liberals must not permit their outlook on these questions to be confused, nor allow their recognition of the place of the Soviet Union in the international fight of democracy against fascism to be destroyed. We call upon them to support the efforts of the Soviet Union to free itself from insidious internal dangers, and to rally support for the international fight against fascism, the principal menace to peace and democracy."

Comment: Among Seattle persons whose names were signed to this statement were the following: Dr. Garland Ethel, Selden Menefee, Albert Ottenheimer, Burton James, and Florence B. James.

[Pp. 359 and 360]

[August 31, 1941, Seattle Times]

An article in this issue reveals that Dr. Ralph H. Gundlach of the University of Washington was a visitor in Washington, D. C., the past week end. He attended

sessions of the American Federation of Teachers Convention at Detroit before going to Washington D. C. He will go from Wasington to Chicago to read a paper on peace movements before the annual sessions of the American Psychology Society. While in Wasington, D. C., Dr. Gundlach has been a guest at the home of Professor and Mrs. Selden Menefee, former University of Washington faculty members.

Comment: The files of the Washington State Un-American Activities are replete with information relative to activities and affiliations of Selden Menefee.

Mr. SOURWINE. I offer and ask that it be inserted in the record, a photostatic copy of a document, and I ask Mr. Vincent if this is a photostatic copy of the State Department's publication of the text of this radio program.

Mr. VINCENT. I would have to compare it with this. [Examining document.]

The CHAIRMAN. It will be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 386" and filed for the record and is as follows:)

(NOTE.-Department of State press release No. 732, text of broadcast appears in appendix.)

[Department of State Bulletin, October 7, 1945]

OUR OCCUPATION POLICY FOR JAPAN

PARTICIPANTS

JOHN CARTER VINCENT, Director, Office of Far Eastern Affairs, Department of State, and Chairman, Far Eastern Subcommittee, State, War, Navy Coordinating Committee

Maj. Gen. JOHN H. HILLDRING, Director of Civil Affairs, War Department Capt. R. L. DENNISON, United States Navy, Representative of the Navy Department on the Far Eastern Subcommittee, State, War, Navy Coordinating Committee

STERLING FISHER, Director, NBC, University of the Air

[Released to the press October 6]

ANNOUNCER. Here are headlines from Washington:

General Hilldring Says the Zaibatsu, or Japanese Big Business, Will Be Broken Up; States We Will Not Permit Japan To Rebuild Her Big Combines; Promises Protection of Japanese Democratic Groups Against Attacks by Military Fanatics.

John Carter Vincent of State Department Forecasts End of National Shinto; Says That the Institution of the Emporer Will Have To Be Radically Modified, and That Democratic Parties in Japan Will Be Assured Rights of Free Assembly and Free Discussion.

Captain Dennison of Navy Department Says Japan Will Not Be Allowed Civil Aviation Predicts That Japanese Will Eventually Accept Democracy, and Emphasizes Naval Responsibility for Future Control of Japan.

ANNOUNCER. This is the thirty-fourth in a series of programs entitled "Our Foreign Policy," featuring authoritative statements on international affairs by Government officials and Members of Congress. The series is broadcast to the people of America by NBC's University of the Air, and to our service men and women overseas, wherever they are stationed, through the facilities of the Armed Forces Radio Service. Printed copies of these important discussions are also available. Listen to the closing announcement for instructions on how to obtain them.

This time we present a joint State, War, and Navy Department broadcast on "Our Occupation Policy for Japan". Participating are Mr. John Carter Vincent, Director of the Office of Far Eastern Affairs in the State Department; Maj. Gen. John H. Hilldring, Director of Civil Affairs in the War Department; and Capt. R. L. Dennison, U.S.N., Navy Department representative on the Far Eastern Subcommittee of the State, War, Navy Coordinating Committee. They

will be interviewed by Sterling Fisher, Director of the NBC University of the Air. Mr. Fisher

FISHER. No subject has been debated more widely by the press, radio, and general public in recent weeks than our occupation policy in Japan. That debate has served a very useful purpose. It has made millions of Americans conscious of the dangers and complications of our task in dealing with 70 million Japanese.

Publication by the White House of our basic policy for Japan removed much of the confusion surrounding this debate. But it also raised many questionsquestions of how our policy will be applied. To answer some of these, we have asked representatives of the Departments directly concerned-the State, War, and Navy Departments-to interpret further our Japan policy.

General Hilldring, a great many people seemed to think, until recently at least, that General MacArthur was more or less a free agent in laying down our policy for the Japanese. Perhaps you would start by tell us just how that policy is determined. HILLDRING. Well, although I help execute policy instead of making it, I will try to explain how it is made. The State, War, Navy Coordinating Committee— SWINC, we call it-formulates policy for the President's approval, on questions of basic importance. On the military aspects, the views of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are obtained and carefully considered. Directives which carry the approved policies are then drawn up, to be transmitted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to General MacArthur. As Supreme Commander of our occupation forces in Japan, he is charged with the responsibility for carrying them out. And we think he is doing it very well.

FISHER. Mr. Vincent, the Far Eastern subcommittee of which you are chairman does most of the work of drafting the policy directives, as I understand it. VINCENT. That's right, Mr. Fisher. We devote our entire energies to Far Eastern policy and meet twice a week to make decisions on important matters. We then submit our recommendations to the top Coordinating Committee, with which General Hilldring is associated and with which Captain Dennison and I sit in an advisory capacity.

HILLDRING. The key members of the Coordinating Committee, representing the Secretaries of the three departments, are Assistant Secretary of State James Dunn, the Assistant Secretary of War John J. McCloy, and the Under Secretary of the Navy, Artemus Gates.

FISHER. Mr. Vincent, I'd like to know whether there is a-shall we saystrained relationship between General MacArthur and the State Department.

VINCENT. NO; there is absolutely no basis for such reports, Mr. Fisher. There is, as a matter of fact, no direct relationship between General MacArthur and the State Department. I can assure you that General MacArthur is receiving our support and assistance in carrying out a very difficult assignment.

FISHER. There have been some reports that he has not welcomed civilian advisers.

VINCENT. That also is untrue. A number of civilian Far Eastern specialists have already been sent out to General MacArthur's headquarters, and he has welcomed them most cordially. We're trying right now to recruit people with specialized knowledge of Japan's economy, finances, and so on. We expect to send more and more such people out.

FISHER. AS a Navy representative on the Far Eastern subcommittee, Captain Dennison, I suppose you've had a good opportunity to evaluate the situation. Some people don't realize that the Navy Department has a direct interest in, and voice in, the policy for Japan.

DENNISON. We have a vital interest in it. The 2 million men and the 5,000 vessels of the United States Navy in the Pacific and the vital role they played in the defeat of Japan are a measure of that interest. Japan is an island country separated from us by 4,500 miles of ocean. Its continued control will always present a naval problem.

FISHER. What part is the Navy playing now in that control?

DENNISON. Our ships are patrolling the coasts of Japan today, and in this duty they support the occupation force. Navy officers and men will aid General MacArthur ashore, in censorship (radio, telephone, and cable) and in civilaffairs administration. The Navy is in charge of military government in the former Japanese mandates in the Pacific and also in the Ryukyu Islands. FISHER. Does that include Okinawa?

1 Bulletin of Sept. 23, 1945, p. 423.

DENNISON. Yes.

FISHER. That's not generally known, is it?

DENNISON. No; I believe not. I'd like to add-besides these immediate duties the United States Navy will have to exercise potential control over Japan long after our troops are withdrawn.

FISHER. NOW, I'd like to ask you, Mr. Vincent, as chairman of the subcommittee which drafts our occupational policy, can you give us a statement of our over-all objectives?

VINCENT. Our immediate objective is to demobilize the Japanese armed forces and demilitarize Japan. Our long-range objective is to democratize Japanto encourage democratic self-government. We must make sure that Japan will not again become a menace to the peace and security of the world. FISHER. And how long do you think that will take?

VINCENT. The length of occupation will depend upon the degree to which the Japanese cooperate with us. I can tell you this: The occupation will continue until demobilization and demilitarization are completed. And it will continue until there is assurance that Japan is well along the path of liberal reform. Its form of government will not necessarily be patterned exactly after American democracy, but it must be responsible self-government, stripped of all militaristic tendencies.

FISHER. General Hilldring, how long do you think we'll have to occupy Japan? HILLDRING. To answer that question, Mr. Fisher, would require a degree of clairvoyance I don't possess. I just don't know how long it will take to accomplish our aims. We must stay in Japan, with whatever forces may be required, until we have accomplished the objectives Mr. Vincent has mentioned.

FISHER. To what extent will our Allies, such as China and Great Britain and the Soviet Union, take part in formulating occupation policy?

HILLDRING. That is not a question which soldiers should decide. It involves matters of high policy on which the Army must look to the State Department. I believe Mr. Vincent should answer that question.

FISHER. Well, Mr. Vincent, how about it?

VINCENT. Immediately following the Japanese surrender, the United States proposed the formation of a Far Eastern Advisory Commission as a means of regularizing and making orderly the methods of consulting with other countries interested in the occupation of Japan. And Secretary of State Byrnes announced recently that a Commission would be established for the formulation of policies for the control of Japan. In addition to the four principal powers in the Far East, a number of other powers are to be invited to have membership on the Commission.

FISHER. Coming back to our first objective-General Hilldring, what about the demobilization of the Japanese Army? How far has it gone?

HILLDRING. Disarmament of the Japanese forces in the four main islands is virtually complete, Mr. Fisher. Demobilization in the sense of returning disarmed soldiers to their homes is well under way, but bombed-out transport systems and food and housing problems are serious delaying factors.

FISHER. And what's being done about the Japanese troops in other parts of Asia?

HILLDRING. It may take a long time for them all to get home. Demands on shipping are urgent, and the return of our own troops is the highest priority. Relief must also be carried to the countries we have liberated; the return of Japanese soldiers to their homes must take its proper place.

FISHER. Captain Dennison, how long do you think it will take to clean up the Japanese forces scattered through Asia?

DENNISON. It may take several years, Mr. Fisher. After all, there are close to three million Japanese scattered around eastern Asia and the Pacific, and for the most part it will be up to the Japanese themselves to ship them home. FISHER. And what is being done with the Japanese Navy?

DENNISON. The Japanese Navy has been almost completely erased. There's nothing left of it except a few battered hulks and these might well be destroyed. FISHER. NOW, there are some other, less obvious parts of the military systemthe police system, for example. The Japanese secret police have been persecuting liberal, anti-militarist people for many years. Mr. Vincent, what will be done about that?

VINCENT. That vicious system will be abolished, Mr. Fisher. Not only the top chiefs but the whole organization must go. That's the only way to break its

'See p. 545.

hold on the Japanese people. A civilian police force such as we have in America will have to be substituted for it.

DENNISON. We've got to make sure that what they have is a police force, and not an army in the guise of police.

HILLDRING. As a matter of fact, Mr. Fisher, General MacArthur has already abolished the Kempai and political police.

FISHER. It seems to me that a key position in this whole matter, Mr. Vincent, is the relationship of our occupation forces to the present Japanese Government, from the Emperor on down.

VINCENT. Well, one of General MacArthur's tasks is to bring about changes in the Constitution of Japan. Those provisions in the Constitution which would hamper the establishment in Japan of a government which is responsible to the people of Japan must be removed.

FISHER. Isn't the position of the Emperor a barrier to responsible government? VINCENT. The institution of the Emperor-if the Japanese do not choose to get rid of it-will have to be radically inodified, Mr. Fisher.

DENNISON: The Emperor's authority is subject to General MacArthur and will not be permitted to stand as a barrier to responsible government. Directives sent to General MacArthur establish that point.

FISHER: Can you give us the substance of that directive that covers that point, Captain Dennison?

DENNISON: I can quote part of it to you. The message to General MacArthur

said:

"1. The authority of the Emperor and the Japanese Government to rule the state is subordinate to you as Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers. You will exercise your authority as you deem proper to carry out your mission. Our relations with Japan do not rest on a contractual basis, but on an unconditional surrender. Since your authority is supreme, you will not entertain any question on the part of the Japanese as to its scope.

"2. Control of Japan shall be exercised through the Japanese Government to the extent that such an arrangement produces satisfactory results. This does not prejudice your right to act directly if required. You may enforce the orders issued by you by the employment of such measures as you deem necessary, including the use of force." " That's the directive under which General MacArthur

is operating.

FISHER. That's clear enough. * * * Now, General Hilldring, you have to do with our occupation policy in both Germany and Japan. What is the main difference between them?

HILLDRING. Our purposes in Germany and Japan are not very different. Reduced to their simplest terms, they are to prevent either nation from again breaking the peace of the world. The difference is largely in the mechanism of control to achieve that purpose. In Japan there still exists a national Government, which we are utilizing. In Germany there is no central government, and our controls must, in general, be imposed locally.

FISHER. Are there advantages from your point of view in the existence of the national Government in Japan?

HILLDRING. The advantages which are gained through the utilization of the national Government of Japan are enormous. If there were no Japanese Government available for our use, we would have to operate directly the whole complicated machine required for the administration of a country of 70 million people. These people differ from us in language, customs, and attitudes. By cleaning up and using the Japanese Government machinery as a tool, we are saving time and our manpower and our resources. In other words, we are requiring the Japanese to do their own housecleaning, but we are providing the specifications. FISHER. But Some people argue, General, that by utilizing the Japanese Government we are committing ourselves to support it. If that's the case, wouldn't this interfere with our policy of removing from public office and from industry persons who were responsible for Japan's aggression?

HILLDRING. Not at all. We're not committing ourselves to support any Japanese groups or individuals, either in government or in industry. If our policy requires removal of any person from government or industry, he will be removed. The desires of the Japanese Government in this respect are immaterial, Removals are being made daily by General MacArthur.

DENNISON. Our policy is to use the existing form of government in Japan, not to support it. It's largely a matter of timing. General MacArthur has ha to feel out the situation.

Bulletin of Sept. 30, 1945, p. 480.