MR. CHAMBERS: I think they change.
MR. NIXON: Sort of a blue-gray?
MR. CHAMBERS: Blueish-gray, you could say. In his walk, if you watch him from behind, there is a slight mince sometimes. MR. NIXON: A slight mince?
MR. CHAMBERS: Mince. Anybody could observe.
MR. NIXON: Does Mrs. Hiss have any physical characteristics?
MR. CHAMBERS: Mrs. Hiss is a short, highly nervous, little woman. I don’t, as a matter of fact, recall the color of her eyes, but she has a habit of blushing red when she is excited or angry, fiery red.
MR. MANDEL: A picture of Hiss shows his hand cupped to his ear.
MR. CHAMBERS: He is deaf in one ear.
MR. NIXON: Mr. Hiss is deaf in one ear?
MR. HÉBERT: Which ear?
MR. CHAMBERS: I don’t know. My voice is pitched very low and it-is difficult for me to talk and make myself understood.
MR. NIXON: Did he wear glasses at the time?
MR. CHAMBERS: I think he wore glasses only for reading.
MR. NIXON: Did he tell you how he became deaf in one ear?
MR. CHAMBERS: I don’t recall that he did. The only thing I remember he told me was as a small boy he used to take a little wagon—he was a Baltimore boy—and walk up to Druid Hill Park, which was up that time way beyond the civilized center of the city, and fill up bottles with spring water and bring them back and sell it.
MR. NIXON: Do you remember any physical characteristics of the boy?
MR. CHAMBERS: Timmie?
MR. NIXON : Yes.
MR. CHAMBERS: Timmie was a puny little boy, also rather nervous.
MR. NIXON: This is Mrs. Hiss’ son?
MR. CHAMBERS: Mrs. Hiss’ son by Thayer Hobson, who I think is one of the Hobson cousins, a cousin of Thornton Wilder. It is possible I could be mistaken about that.
MR. NIXON: Do you recall anything else about the boy? Do you recall where he went to school?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes; I do. I don’t know the name of the school he was attending then, but they told me that Thayer Hobson was paying for his son’s education, but they were diverting a large part of that money to the Communist Party.
MR. NIXON : Hiss told you that?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes, sir.
MR. NIXON : Did he say how much he was paying?
MR. CHAMBERS: No; I don’t know how much he was paying.
MR. NIXON: Did he name the Communist Party as the recipient?
MR. CHAMBERS: Certainly.
MR. NIXON: He might not have said simply “the party”? Could it have been the Democratic Party or Socialist Party?
MR. CHAMBERS: No.
MR. HEBERT: Hobson was paying for the boy’s education?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes; and they took him out of a more expensive school and put him in a less expensive school expressly for that purpose. That is my recollection.
MR. NIXON: When would that have occurred?
MR. CHAMBERS: Probably about 1936.
MR. NIXON: Did they change in the middle of the year?
MR. CHAMBERS: I don’t recall....
MR. STRIPLING: Do you remember anything about his hands?
MR. CHAMBERS: Whose?
MR. STRIPLING: Alger Hiss’.
MR. CHAMBERS: He had rather long delicate fingers. I don’t remember anything special.
MR. MANDEL: How is it he never wrote anything publicly?
MR. CHAMBERS: Well, he came into the underground like so many Communists did—this was a new stage in the history of American Communists.
MR. MANDEL: He was never in the open Communist Party?
MR. CHAMBERS: He was never in the open Communist Party, came in as an underground Communist.
MR. HÉBERT: Did he have any other brothers or sisters besides Donald?
MR. CHAMBERS: He had one sister, I believe, living with her mother in Baltimore.
MR. HÉBERT: Did he ever talk about her?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes; once or twice, and mentioned his mother. He once drove me past their house, which as I recall, was on or near Linden Street.
MR. HÉBERT: What did the sister do?
MR. CHAMBERS: I don’t think she did anything besides live with her mother. Whether he had any more than that I don’t know.
MR; HÉBERT: You know he referred to at least one sister?
MR. CHAMBERS: He did.
MR. HÉBERT: Do you recall her name?
MR. CHAMBERS: No.
MR. HÉBERT: And you don’t recall what the sister did?
MR. CHAMBERS: No; I don’t think she did anything.
MR. HÉBERT: Did it ever come up in conversation that the sister was interested in athletics?
MR. CHAMBERS: No.
MR. HÉBERT: Was he interested in athletics?
MR. CHAMBERS: I think he played tennis, but I am not certain.
MR. HÉBERT: With the sister now—it is very important—you don’t recall the sister?
MR. CHAMBERS: We merely brushed that subject.
MR. NIXON: You never met the sister?
MR. CHAMBERS: No; nor ever met the mother. My impression was his relations with his mother were affectionate but not too happy. She was, perhaps, domineering. I simply pulled this out of the air in the conversation.
MR. STRIPLING: Did he go to church?
MR. CHAMBERS: He was forbidden to go to church.
MR. STRIPLING: Do you know whether he was a member of a church?
MR. CHAMBERS: I don’t know.
MR. STRIPLING: Do you know if his wife was a member of a church?
MR. CHAMBERS: She came from a Quaker family. Her maiden name was Priscilla Fansler before she was married. She came from the Great Valley near Paoli, Pa.
MR. NIXON: Did she tell you anything about her family?
MR. CHAMBERS: No; but she once showed me while we were driving beyond Paoli the road down which their farm lay.
MR. NIXON : You drove with them?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes.
MR. NIXON: Did you ever go on a trip with them other than by automobile?
MR. CHAMBERS: No.
MR. NIXON: Did you stay overnight on any of these trips?
MR. CHAMBERS: No.
MR. NIXON: When did you meet Donald Hiss?
MR. CHAMBERS: Probably within the same week in which I met Alger Hiss.
MR. NIXON: Did you ever stay in Donald Hiss’ home?
MR. CHAMBERS: No, my relation with Donald Hiss was much less close. I can make that point now, if you will permit. My relationship with Alger Hiss quickly transcended our formal relationship. We became close friends.
MR. NIXON: Donald Hiss—what relation did you have with him?
MR. CHAMBERS: A purely formal one.
MR. NIXON: He knew you as Carl?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes.
MR. NIXON: Did you collect dues from him?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes.
MR. NIXON: Did you meet his wife?
MR. CHAMBERS: I think I met her once, not very often.
MR. NIXON: Where did you collect the dues from him, at his home?
MR. CHAMBERS: Probably in Alger’s house. He frequently came there.
MR. NIXON: He came there to see you?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes.
MR. NIXON : Do you recall anything significant about Donald Hiss, as to personal characteristics, hobbies?
MR. CHAMBERS: No. Something else is involved there, too. Donald Hiss was married, I think, to a daughter of Mr. Cotton, who is in the State Department. She was not a Communist, and everybody was worried about her.
MR. NIXON: Getting back to Alger Hiss for the moment, do you recall any pictures on the wall that they might have owned at the time?
MR. CHAMBERS: No; I am afraid I don’t.
MR. NIXON: Donald Hiss—do you know any other characteristics about him, can you recall any?
MR. CHAMBERS: Except I can give you the general impression. He was much less intelligent than Alger. Much less sensitive than his brother. I had the impression he was interested in
the social climb and the Communist Party was interested in having him climb. At one point I believe he was fairly friendly with James Roosevelt.
MR. NIXON: Did you have any conversations with him you can recall that were out of the ordinary?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes; one I think I can recall. He was working in the Labor Department, I believe in the Immigration Section, and it was the plan of the Communist Party to have him go to California, get himself sent by the Government to California, to work in the Bridges case.
At that moment he had an opportunity to go into the State Department as, I think, legal adviser to the Philippine Section, which had just been set up.
It was the opinion of the party that he should do that and not the Bridges matter. It was his opinion that he should continue in the Bridges matter and there was a fairly sharp exchange, but he submitted to discipline and went to the State Department.
MR. NIXON :. Did you make an affidavit concerning Mr. Alger Hiss?
MR. CHAMBERS: I made a signed statement. I should think it was about 1945. Before that I had reported these facts at least 2 years before to the FBI and 9 years ago to Mr. Berle and mentioned Hiss’ name.
MR. NIXON: Nine years ago, are you certain that you did mention Hiss’ name to Berle?
MR. CHAMBERS: I certainly mentioned Hiss’ name to Berle. I was there with Berle precisely because—may we go off the record ?
MR. NIXON: Off the record. ( Discussion off the record.)
MR. NIXON: Have you seen Hiss since 1938?
MR. CHAMBERS: No; since the time I went to his house and tried to break him away, I have never seen him since.
MR. NIXON: Thank you. I have no further questions.
MR. HÉBERT: I am interested in the houses he lived in. You said several houses. How many houses? Start from the beginning.
MR. CHAMBERS: As well as I can remember, when I first knew him he was living on Twenty-eighth Street and when I went to see Mr. Berle it struck me as strange, because Mr. Berle was living in Stimson’s house on Woodley Road near Twenty-eighth Street. From there I am not absolutely certain the order of the houses, but it seems to me he moved to a house in Georgetown —that I know; he moved to a house in Georgetown—but it seems it was on the corner of P Street, but again I can’t be absolutely certain of the streets.
MR. HÉBERT: It was on a corner?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes; and as I recall, you had to go up steps to get to it.
MR. MANDEL: How many rooms were there in that house? MR. CHAMBERS: I don’t know offhand, but I have the impression it was a three-story house. I also think it had a kind of a porch in back where people sat.
Then if I have got the order of the houses right, he moved to a house on an up-and-down street, a street that would cross the lettered streets, probably just around the corner from the other house and very near to his brother Donald.
MR. HÉBERT: Still in Georgetown?
MR. CHAMBERS: Still in Georgetown. I have forgotten the reason for his moving. That was a smaller house and, as I recall, the dining room was below the level of the ground, one of those basement dining rooms; that it had a small yard in back.
I think he was there when I broke with the Communist Party.
MR. HÉBERT: Three houses?
MR. CHAMBERS: But I went to see him in the house he later moved to, which was on the other side of Wisconsin Avenue.
MR. HÉBERT: Three houses in Georgetown?
MR. CHAMBERS: One on Twenty-eighth Street.
MR. HÉBERT: The last time you saw him when you attempted to persuade him to break away from the party—
MR. CHAMBERS: That was beyond Wisconsin Avenue.
MR. HÉBERT: Did you ever see their bedroom; the furniture? MR. CHAMBERS: Yes; but I don’t remember the furniture.
MR. HÉBERT: Did they have twin beds or single beds?
MR. CHAMBERS: I am almost certain they did not have twin beds.
MR. HÉBERT: In any of the four houses?
MR. CHAMBERS: I can’t be sure about the last one, but I am reasonably sure they did not have twin beds before that.
MR. HÉBERT: This little boy, Timmie—can you recall the name of the school that he went to?
MR. CHAMBERS: No.
MR. HÉBERT: But you do recall that he changed schools?
MR. CHAMBERS: Yes; as nearly as I can remember, they told me they had shifted him from one school to another because there was a saving and they could contribute it to the party.
MR. HÉBERT: What year?
MR. CHAMBERS: Probably 1936.
MR. HÉBERT: Or 1937, but probably ’36?
MR. CHAMBERS: It is possible.
MR. HÉBERT: We can check the year.
MR. CHAMBERS: The school was somewhere in Georgetown. He came back and forth every day.
MR. NIXON: Is there anything further? If not, thank you very much, Mr. Chambers. ( Whereupon, at 1:10 p.m., the sub-committee adjourned. )
The questioning had brought out two unforeseeable points, one of passing and one of lasting importance. The more important was the testimony about Hiss’s 1929 Ford roadster, which was to be the focus of the great August 25th public hearing. Hiss’s inability to explain the documentary evidence of that transaction was first to turn the tide against him.
The point of passing importance was that about the prothonotary warbler, a bird little bigger than a half-dollar whose name many people hesitate to pronounce, and which I have never seen. It was that beautiful bird, glimpsed in a moment of wonder, one summer morning some fourteen years before, that first clinched the Committee’s conviction that I must have known Alger Hiss. A mind might figure out ( and many minds were soon avidly figuring out) how I might have known the answers to the other questions. But not the prothonotary warbler. The man who volunteered that information ( in almost the same tone that a few days later Hiss himself would use in responding to it)—the man who knew that fugitive detail must have known Alger Hiss. Congressman McDowell grasped the meaning of that testimony before I did, and I believe, before his colleagues. When I mentioned it, his eyes flew open. For he, too, was a bird watcher and he had seen a prothonotary warbler.
There was another question that was also to have psychological importance in the Case. Toward the end of the hearing in the Federal Building, Congressman Nixon suddenly asked me: “Would you be willing to submit to a lie detector test on this testimony?”
I answered: “Yes, if necessary.”
NIXON: You are that confident?
CHAMBERS: I am telling the truth.
Hiss’s answer (in part) to the same question asked him nine days later:
MR. HISS: Would it seem to you inappropriate for me to say that I would rather have a chance for further consultation before I gave you the answer? Actually, the people I have conferred with so far say that it all depends on who reads, that it shows emotion, not truth, and I am perfectly willing and prepared to say that I am not lacking in emotion about this business.
I have talked to people who have seen, I think, Dr. Keeler’s own test and that the importance of a question registers more emotion than anything else. I certainly don’t want to duck anything that has scientific or sound basis. I would like to consult further.
I would like to find out a little more about Dr. Keeler. As I told you, the people I have consulted said flatly there is no such thing, that it is not scientifically established....
MR. NIXON: ... I might say also that the matter of emotion, of course, as you pointed out, enters into the test. One thing the members of the committee both remarked about is that Mr. Chambers is also a very emotional man.
MR. HISS: Have you ever had any experience with it yourself when you were practicing, Mr. Nixon?
MR. NIXON: No; I have not.
MR. HISS: But you do have confidence in it?
MR. NIXON: Frankly, I have made a study of it in the last week before I put the question. In fact, for the last two weeks I have been studying it and have been in correspondence with Mr. Keeler.
MR
. HISS: You do have confidence in it as a device?
In fairness, it should be noted that there is a difference of opinion about the accuracy of the lie detector test. I knew almost nothing about it and I am extremely skeptical of most scientific claims until they have been proved. Nevertheless, I did not believe it possible that a test which had been in use some time, could possibly be so far out that it would fail to show a preponderance of truth, when truth was spoken, over error. Therefore, I answered yes.
A few days later Alger Hiss submitted a written reply to the Committee on the lie detector question. Like his original response in the matter, it was inconclusive. But in effect he said no.
XIII
Between my executive hearing on August 7th and Hiss’s similar hearing on August 16th, a number of things had happened which, in big or little ways, deeply affected the developing Case and the actors in it.
The most important was the most unexpected, and to me, the most stunning. In answer to a newsman’s question at a White House press conference, President Truman replied that the Hiss Case was a “red herring” whose political purpose was to distract attention from the sins of the 80th Congress. For thousands of people, that automatically outlawed the Case. To me, it meant that I was not only deprived of official good will in testifying against Communism; I must expect active hostility among most powerful sections of the Administration.
At about the same time, Congressman Nixon informed me that the transcript of my secret testimony of August 7th had been requested by the Justice Department, and that someone in the Justice Department ( someone whose name I first learned from Robert Stripling, and later from Nixon ) had at once turned it over to Alger Hiss.35
I had already been warned by other sources—and was soon to be warned by the Committee—that the Justice Department was preparing to move against me, that it was actively making plans to indict me, and not Alger Hiss, for perjury on the basis of my testimony before the House Committee. I felt that my testimony had offended the powers that for so long had kept from the nation the extent of the Communist infiltration of Government, and the official heights to which it had reached. Not Alger Hiss (for denying any of the truth), but I (for revealing part of the truth) was to be punished. I became convinced then, and the immense mass of power that was tilted against me right up to the end of the first Hiss trial clinched my conviction, that the facts in the Hiss Case had come to light in the only way, time and place that they could have come to light. The very pressures that had made for their long suppression, once the facts reached the surface, contributed to the force with which, like a gusher, they burst out and filled the national landscape with a blackness malodorous and crude. I myself was only a chip in the play of that torrent.
Witness Page 70