Individual Details

Not All Who Wander Are Lost

Naming NamesOn the first day of the HUAC hearings, the news reports centered on the testimony of Arthur Paul Strunk and Leothar “Oakie” Wornstaff, both men were friendly witness and avowed anti-Communists. Strunk was the older man mentioned in the introduction; he was an FBI undercover agent and essential to HUAC’s investigation. He could name specific people as Communists. His testimony listed the presence of 76 hardcore communists within the Dayton area. The other witness, Wornstaff, was there to add veracity to parts of Strunk’s list, especially those connected to the notorious 1948 UNIVIS strike, which he had been a part of. Thus, both men were perfect image-wise and knowledge-wise for helping HUAC convince the public that the men and women named were Communists.[xxiii]Strunk was a German immigrant, which may be why it was easy for him to infiltrate Dayton’s CP. He fit the stereotype of the Communist “other,” foreigner. He initially was an interpreter for the FBI, starting with the bureau after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Nearly two years later, he mentioned to his FBI co-workers that his roommate was a Communist. At hearing this the FBI repurposed him and had him slowly join the local CP. Over the next few years he worked himself up to the position of dues collector, which privileged him to the names of local “hardcore” Communists, as well as Ohio Communists. He spent 8 years as the FBI’s mole Dayton’s CP between 1944 and 1952; in ’52 he lost his anonymity serving as an informant in the court trial of a communist.[xxiv]The other friendly witness, Wornstaff, was the leader of Local 768, International Union of Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers (IUE), and was instrumental in leading the right-wing takeover of the union during the 1948 Univis Strike. He was originally from Springfield, OH, and was a consummate laborer organizer since his youth in the ‘20s and ‘30s. Now in his late 40s, he had a positive air to him that made him trustworthy and knowledgeable.Strunk and Wornstaff’s testimonies were typical of HUAC’s trials. Strunk did not hand over evidence, nor did he have all his facts together.[xxv] This was commonly seen from FBI agents.  Moreover, for each person Strunk named, he gave their name or names, their profession, how much dues they paid, and how active they were in Dayton’s CP. The Dayton Daily News listed that the very same information Strunk reported. The newspaper was essentially an accomplice of HUAC’s circumvention of civil rights and due process, and in the promotion of anti-Communist movement.[xxvi]The naming show ended and the inquisition of the 16 of the 76 named began. I Plead the First and FifthThe tactics HUAC employed during hearings were often just back and forth efforts at trying to get the witness to incriminate themselves, so they could try them in the Justice system. Most commonly HUAC had the accused reveal just enough to catch them in a lie and find them in contempt of Congress when they plead the First and Fifth Amendments. Congressmen Kit Clardy of Michigan and Congressmen Gordon H. Scherer of Ohio both used this tactic as they took on the accused Communists. The naming of names during the first day took so much time they only heard from one of the 16. The list below contains the names of the 16 in the order heard:1.      William C. Notz2.      Hugh DeLacy3.      Donald Rothenburg4.      Lemuel Markland5.      Virginia Hipple6.      Charles E. Sims7.      Lillian Brill Clott8.      Charles H. Clott9.      Lee Lorch10.  Robert M. Metcalf11.  John Ober12.  Bebe Ober13.  Norton Anthony Russell14.  John Romer15.  Joseph K. Glatterman16.  Dwight W. Williamson The next day, September 14th, in Dayton’s City Commission Room, Virginia Hipple, a stator inserter for Master Electric and president of Local 754, UE, swore on the Bible and took the stand in front of a sub-committee of the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). One of the committee’s self-proclaimed purposes was to throw “light upon the nefarious and subtle activities of those individuals who are promoting the Communist conspiracy.”[xxvii]  The committee’s counsel, Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., began his interrogation of Hipple with some general questions. “Where do you reside?” “How long have you lived here?” “How are you employed?” Her answer to the last question changed the direction of her inquisition. Hipple’s employment in her current position as UE Local 754 president and prior position as recording secretary led to new questions meant to expose her “subtle” subversion. Mr. Tavenner queried, “As an official of and president of Local 754, UE, you were required to sign a non-Communist affidavit, were you not?” She answered, “Yes, I was.” Mr. Tavenner already knew her answer; he had three copies of her signed affidavits from between 1950 and 1953 that he presented to the 150 plus onlookers. The affidavits we legally instituted nationwide as required by the anti-union, anti-labor Taft-Hartley Act of 1948; therefore, they were important in creating the legal means at framing the witch-hunt.[xxviii]Mr. Tavenner continued his probe, “Will you tell the committee, please, whether at the time you signed each of those affidavits you were not a member of the Communist Party?”  Hipple confidently retorted, “Mr. Tavenner, I could go through all of the other things that the other witnesses have gone through in trying to tell you the affidavit speaks for itself. I don't care to get into that kind of an argument, so because of the makeup of this committee and because what I feel it is trying to do to my union, I don't say I am forced to, but I wish to invoke the first and fifth amendments and decline to answer.” Mr. Tavenner demanded the chairman of the sub-committee and U.S. House Representative from Ohio, Mr. Gordon H. Sherer, to force her to answer the question. Representative Sherer directed her to do so; again she invoked the first and fifth amendments. Tavenner reminded her why she was here, “You have been identified in the course of testimony here as having been a member of the Communist Party and having paid dues….”[xxix] Again,  Hipple declined to answer in accordance with her constitutional rights. Mr. Tavenner continued to catechize her until committee member and U.S. House Representative from Michigan, Mr. Kit Clardy, decided to take the task of revealing her communist affiliation.[xxx]Representative Clardy took a more palaverous and dictative approach with Hipple. Redundantly, one-by-one, he cross-examined her about her Communist Party membership during the dates of her three affidavits Mr. Tavenner had presented and questioned her about earlier; once again,  she pleaded the first and fifth. Unable to get anywhere, he switched to make it seem like the committee was giving her the benefit of the doubt and had offered a chance for her “to say what you wish.” Without pause and without giving her a chance to speak, he tried cajoling her guilt with a closing question made to corner her to admitting her membership in the Communist Party of America. He tested her, “Now, I have a final question for you,” he paused for effect, “Have you ever at any time taken part in any of the strategy planning of the Communist Party in connection with any of its interventions in labor activities here or anywhere else?” She asked him to restate the question.[xxxi]He did, but not without prefacing it with a superfluous speech about HUAC’s findings and actions made around the country. This talk seemed to aggrandize HUAC’s importance to those listening; the speech highlighted some of the accomplishments HUAC had made recently in its pursuit and battle against communist. Also, the speech functioned as a notice to those “Mr. Average American” in Dayton of the creeping of communistic ideology in their communities and society.[xxxii] For what Hipple thought was the final time, she sought protection from this “judge” under her First and Fifth Amendment rights. Believing Representative Clardy had finished, she inquired about her opportunity to make a statement Rep. Clardy had mentioned earlier. The congressman quickly and soberly remarked, “You do not have the opportunity to make,” and followed it with, “You do not have an opportunity, nor does any other Communist witness, to make a stump speech before this committee until and unless they answer questions.”[xxxiii] The Michigan congressman made one last attempt at exposing her strategic involvement in the Communist front. He was again denied the opportunity.  Hipple survived the trial, her inquisitioners moved on to the next commie. She ended making the statement that was withheld from her in Dayton’s newspaper the Journal Herald, which had also printed the aforementioned criticisms of HUAC anti-anti-Communists clergy. She wrote in her op-ed:[xxxiv]The attack of the un-American activities committee upon my union (UE) and me is a disgrace and a farce.My ancestors did not come over on the Mayflower, but greeted it – and the fact that I spent ten years of my life in actively preaching Christian principles – which I still believe and practice – proves my statement.I wanted to further state that I am proud to be a member of UE and president of UE Local 754. The political and religious principles that I believe are carried out in the UE policy and program of fighting for democracy, peace, and decent standards of living for all people under the government free from fear and intimidation.[xxxv]    Conclusion               After the trials the majority of Daytonians lived life as before, maybe happier to know that HUAC had swept the city for Communists and exposed them. Some area papers reported the hearings findings as good news. The Yellow Springs, for instance, claimed the community was “cleared of subversive charges” pointing out the committee investigation hinged on the years of ’46 and ’48. The Dayton Daily News and the Xenia Daily Gazettes reported that Arthur Paul Strunk had been threatened by a Communist, because the woman that threatened him over the phone called him a “rat.” And like before the media reported red-baiting stories page after page.[xxxvi]               HUAC had accomplished its anti-Communist goal to alert the city of the threat of Communism. It had educated the city in Communist threat from within and exposed what they deemed radicals to their neighbors for the community to blacklist and ostracize. Their propagation of the Master anti-Communist Frame in their language, and in the majority of papers shows the community was absorbing their movement’s interpretation of the world. While most papers ran HUAC’s message without question, one periodical gave voice to HUAC’s critics, making a case that some Daytonians rejected the anti-Communists movement simplification of the world          .               However, due to the length requirements of this paper and the brief period of time required to complete it. I was unable to pursue other questions like: who truly called the investigation, how did Strunk work with in the Dayton CP, what Dayton industrialists were anti-Communists had potentially involved themselves in the attack of left-wing laborers to rid themselves of the inefficiency of negotiations? Find out more about the activities of the other FBI undercover agent and his findings? Cover more of the purported Communists’ testimonies and dive deeper into their personal histories to add more to their lost stories that are not remembered like Wornstaff’s with columns over decades and obituaries for his part in quelling the Communists and creating the politically conservative IUE. ENDNOTES [i] “Troops Use Tanks To Quell Strikers: Tear Gas Also Used at Dayton Univis Plant – Union Leader Jailed,” New York Times, August 4, 1948.[ii] “Afterthoughts On The Strike,” Dayton News, August 8, 1948.[iii] Joseph Lawrence Mason, Radicalism in American Industrial Unions: The United Electrical Workers in Dayton, Ohio, 1937-1955, (Dayton: Wright State University, 1998): 70.[iv] Ellen Schrecker, Many Are the Crimes: McCarthyism in America, (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1998): 8-9,209-218, and 326-330.[v] Ellen Schrecker, The Age of McCarthyism: A Brief History with Documents, (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2002): 5.[vi][vii] Schrecker, Many are the Crimes, 11.[viii] Schrecker, Many are the Crimes, 11-12.[ix] Shrecker, Many Are the Crimes, 13-15[x] Shrecker, Many Are the Crimes, 13-15. Shrecker, The Age of McCarthyism, 8-9.Albert Fried, The Great American Red Scare: A Documentary History, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997): 12-13 [xi] Albert Fried, The Great American Red Scare, 17-18.[xii] Albert Fried, The Great American Red Scare, 25-26.[xiii] Albert Fried, The Great American Red Scare, 1-9.[xiv] John A. Noakes, “Official Frames In Social Movement Theory: The FBI, HUAC, and the Communist Threat in Hollywood,” The Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 4 (Autumn, 2000): 658-661.[xv] Noakes, 660-661.[xvi] Noakes, 661-666.[xvii] U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Un-American Activities, 1954, Investigation of Communist Activities in the Dayton, Ohio,  83rd Cong., 2nd sess: 6801.[xviii] “Afterthoughts On The Strike,” Dayton News, August 8, 1948.[xix] [xix] U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Un-American Activities, 1955, Annual Report for the Year 1954,  84th Cong., 1st sess: 1.Campell Gibson, Population of the 100 Largest Cities and Other Urban Places in the United States: 1790 to 1990, U.S. Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027/twps0027.html (accessed 12/6/2013).[xx] Tom Arnold, “Instigation, Strike Support Commie Goal Here – Strunk: Undercover FBI Agent Is First on Stand at Hearing on Reds,” Dayton Daily News, September 13, 1954, final edition. Tom Arnold, “FBI Agent 1st Probe Witness: Red Activity Hearing Begins Here Monday,” Dayton Daily News, September 13, 1954, home edition. “Open Hearings Here Today,” Journal Herald, September 13, 1954, final city edition. “Dayton Hearing Are Opened; Reds Named,” Xenia Daily Gazette,September 13, 1954.[xxi] Dorothy Thompson, “Co-Existence Or No Existence,” Dayton Daily News, September 13, 1954.[xxii] Bruce Hilton, “14 Clergymen Urge Probers Here To Respect Rights: Letter Says Red Hearings Opening Today Duplicate Agency Efforts,” Journal Herald,September 13, 1954. [xxiv] Congress, House, Committee on Un-American Activities, 1954, Investigation of Communist Activities in the Dayton, Ohio,  83rd Cong., 2nd sess: 6803 - 6841.[xxv] Sarah Hart Brown, “Congressional Anti-Communism and the Segregationist South: From New Orleans to Atlanta, 1954-1958,” The Georgia Historical Quarterly, Vol. 80, No. 4 (WINTER 1996):[xxvi] “Daytonians On Strunk Reds List: Ex-Undercover Man Tells Congress of Activities Here,” Dayton Daily News, September 13th, 1954.[xxvii] U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Un-American Activities, 1954, Investigation of Communist Activities in the Dayton, Ohio,  83rd Cong., 2nd sess: 6801.[xxviii] Ellen Schrecker, “McCarthyism's Ghosts: Anticommunism and American Labor,” New Labor Forum, No. 4 (Spring - Summer, 1999): 11.[xxix] Investigation of Communist Activities in the Dayton, Ohio,83rd Cong., 2nd sess: 6928-6932.[xxx] Ibid[xxxi] Ibid[xxxii] Investigation of Communist Activities in the Dayton, Ohio,83rd Cong., 2nd sess: 6928-6932.[xxxiii] House, 6931.[xxxiv] “Letter From Hipple,” Journal Hearld, September 16th, 1954.[xxxv] Photo credit: Journal Herald, September 15th, 1954, p. 16.[xxxvi] “Hearing Uncovers No Subversive Activity Here,” Yellow Springs News,September 16th, 1954.Bibliography Brown, Sarah Hart. “Congressional Anti-Communism and the Segregationist South: From New Orleans to Atlanta, 1954-1958.” The Georgia Historical Quarterly, Vol. 80, No. 4 (WINTER 1996): 785-816. Fried, Albert. The Great American Red Scare: A Documentary History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. Noakes, John A. “Official Frames In Social Movement Theory: The FBI, HUAC, and the Communist Threat in Hollywood.” The Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 4 (Autumn, 2000): 657-680. Mason, Joseph Lawrence. Radicalism in American Industrial Unions: The United Electrical Workers in Dayton, Ohio, 1937-1955. Dayton: Wright State University, 1998. Schrecker, Ellen. The Age of McCarthyism: A Brief History with Documents.Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2002. Schrecker, Ellen. Many Are the Crimes: McCarthyism in America. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1998. Schrecker, Ellen. “McCarthyism's Ghosts: Anticommunism and American Labor.” New Labor Forum, No. 4 (Spring - Summer, 1999). U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Un-American Activities. 1954, Investigation of Communist Activities in the Dayton, Ohio.  83rd Cong., 2nd sess. Posted 29th January 2014 by Luis LuiggiLabels: Cold War Communism Dayton FBI Framing House Un-American Activities Committee HUAC McCarthyism Politics Smith Act Social Movement Theory  0 Add a comment