Investigation of Communist activities in Seattle, Wash., Area, Hearings, Part 2

In Short

This volume serves as an official record of the 1955 House Committee on Un-American Activities hearings in Seattle, Washington. Through the testimony of various witnesses—some cooperative, others invoking the Fifth Amendment—it maps the intersection of labor movements, political organizations, and the Communist Party during the 1930s and 1940s. It stands as a historical artifact, preserving the language, bureaucratic friction, and ideological pressures that defined a period of intense domestic scrutiny, offering a direct view into how congressional committees sought to expose and categorize political dissent in the post-war era.

The Story

The proceedings begin with the committee establishing its legal mandate, grounding its authority in Public Law 601, which tasks them with investigating un-American propaganda and subversive influence. The investigation centers on Seattle, a city with a robust history of union activity and maritime labor organizing. The narrative arc is driven primarily by the testimony of Eugene Victor Dennett, a former member of the Communist Party who provides a detailed, retrospective account of how the Party attempted to infiltrate and influence various regional organizations, including the Washington Commonwealth Federation, the maritime unions, and the pension union for the elderly.

Dennett serves as the committee's primary source for understanding the mechanics of Party influence. He details how Communists operated through "indirection," often seeking leadership roles in legitimate organizations to steer policy without officially acknowledging their Party status. He describes the creation of the Maritime Federation of the Pacific as a project consistent with Communist objectives to centralize control over waterborne commerce. He chronicles the internal struggles of the Party, such as the tactical disputes over political alliances and the eventual "hatchet job" performed on members who fell out of favor or disagreed with changing directives.

As the hearings progress, the focus shifts from Dennett’s broad narrative to the specific experiences of other witnesses. The committee questions individuals like Robert Miller, who struggles to recall specific details of his past involvement with the Communist Party at Boeing, and Lawrence Earl George, who repeatedly invokes the Fifth Amendment when asked about his union activities and his association with known Party members. The tone is often confrontational, with committee members pressing witnesses for names, dates, and organizational charts of local Party cells.

The testimony also touches upon the international dimension of the era. John Stenhouse, an insurance agent, is questioned about his time in China and his past membership in the Communist Party. The committee explores whether he observed Communist activities among American nationals abroad, while also probing his own political history. Another witness, Abraham Arthur Cohen, explains his path into the Party through trade-union involvement and his eventual resignation to avoid complications with the McCarran Act when applying for a passport.

The hearings conclude with the committee members expressing satisfaction with the cooperation they received in Seattle. The transcript captures the formal closing of the record, with expressions of mutual appreciation between the committee and local officials. There is no dramatic resolution or singular verdict; rather, the hearings end as a repository of accusations, denials, and detailed recollections, leaving the reader with a granular, if one-sided, view of how the government scrutinized the political lives of its citizens.

How It Unfolds

The legislative mandate The hearings open by establishing the legal authority of the committee to investigate subversive propaganda and its intent to aid Congress in drafting remedial legislation. This sets a formal, regulatory tone for the subsequent interrogation of witnesses.

The witness as informant Eugene Victor Dennett provides a lengthy, detailed account of the internal operations of the Communist Party in the Northwest. He describes the methods used to influence labor federations and the political maneuvering required to keep the Party’s involvement hidden from the public.

The wall of silence The committee confronts witnesses like Lawrence Earl George, who refuses to provide information regarding union affiliations or acquaintances. This creates a recurring rhythm of inquiry followed by the invoking of constitutional privileges, highlighting the adversarial nature of the proceedings.

The international connection The scope of the investigation expands to include the activities of Americans in China. This beat introduces questions about foreign policy, the Institute of Pacific Relations, and the potential for overseas political activity to influence domestic security.

The final assessment The sessions conclude with committee members praising the cooperation of Seattle authorities and participants. The record remains open as a static collection of testimony, marking the end of this particular series of hearings.

The People

Eugene Victor Dennett is the central figure, acting as a bridge between the committee’s questions and the history of the Northwest labor movement. He presents himself as a man reflecting on a past life, mapping out the Party’s influence in unions and federations with clinical detail. His testimony is essential to the committee's narrative of subversion, yet his own expulsion from the Party adds a layer of personal disillusionment to his account.

John Stenhouse provides a counterpoint, appearing as a man caught between his professional life as an insurance agent and his past, which the committee seeks to excavate. He struggles to remember the details of his political associations, offering a portrait of a witness whose memories have faded or who is wary of the implications of his answers.

Robert Miller and Lawrence Earl George represent the witnesses who are less forthcoming. Miller plays the role of the confused, aging former member unable to recall specific facts, while George stands as the defiant, silent participant, forcing the committee to rely on its legal power to compel answers that never come.

Morris Rappaport and William J. Pennock emerge as the off-stage, influential figures whom Dennett discusses. They are characterized as the "face" of the Party or the "tireless worker," serving as the targets the committee seeks to understand through the descriptions of their subordinates.

In Its Own Voice

When asked about the difficulty of recalling distant events, one witness challenges the committee’s premise regarding his memory:

“Sir, is it unreasonable to be vague on something that occurred nigh onto 12 years ago when I was between the age of 20 and 21, sir?”

Regarding the Party’s strategy in infiltrating the Washington Commonwealth Federation, the primary informant notes the necessity of secrecy:

“At that particular time the Communist Party had to exercise its influence by indirection.”

Regarding the internal discipline and the eventual expulsion of those who disagreed, the record provides a blunt summary:

“All Party members are warned against personal or political association with these expelled members and to give them no consideration or comfort.”

What It's Really About

The book is an inquiry into the tension between institutional security and individual political association. It asks how a democratic society should handle internal movements that appear to subvert its governing principles. Beneath the specific questions about union bylaws and Party membership, the text wrestles with the problem of "indirection"—how political influence can be exerted quietly within the framework of legitimate organizations. It forces the reader to consider the ethics of public interrogation and the extent to which the state can or should delve into the past affiliations of its citizens. The argument implicitly posited by the committee is that transparency is a requirement of civic duty, while the witnesses’ reluctance highlights the vulnerability of the individual when faced with such broad governmental scrutiny.

Why Read It Today

This book is for readers interested in the raw, unvarnished history of the Red Scare. It is not a polished narrative, but a transcript, which makes the experience of reading it feel like a slow, meticulous archival discovery. You will hear the cadence of 1950s congressional speech—the formal "sirs," the interruptions of counsel, and the bureaucratic language of legal proceedings.

It is challenging because of its length and the density of the union acronyms, which require close attention to navigate. The attitudes reflected in the hearings—the period-specific obsession with loyalty and the often dismissive treatment of certain political causes—can be jarring. However, the value lies in its authenticity. It captures a moment where the fear of "subversion" reshaped the lives of ordinary workers and professionals alike. What stays with you is the human element: the struggle of witnesses to reconcile their pasts with the present, the cold formality of the committee room, and the chilling, matter-of-fact way in which the mechanisms of political ostracism are described. It remains a stark, essential reminder of how fragile political discourse can become when it is funneled through the lens of national security.