i :00 P
7 :80 P
B :80 p
g ;30 r
2 :30 V
2 :80 I'
3 :30 P
6 :30 P
G :80 P
6 :80 r
9 :30 t
6 :00 P
9 :80 P
fi :30 P
8 :30 P
8 :30 P
8 :30 P
(Continued from Page 52)
between the two rooms. Al the end of
niy description he seiid: "I still cannol
recall it." Thru Dr. Oppenheimer asked
aboul other occasions when I saw him
I described the Kenneth Mei\ house-
"I miiy well have been there," seihl lir.
I hen I Intel eil.eiiil seeing him eil sr\
eral Communist-organized, fund-raising
affairs in the fall of 1941, eiml said the
lust occasion weis em affair to raise
fiimls for S|ieuiisli Communists the so-
called "loyalists" near the end of the
"I Heis ni tin* Spanish fund-raising affair: ii mis llu- nighl before Pearl Harbor," Dr. Oppenheimer sniil.
During the conversation, Dr. Oppen-
heimer admitted theit he heul been .ii
several Communist-organized affairs
•mil gatherings during 1941, siaiinfr lhal
one had been eil the home nf ll;eeik..ii
Chevalier, eiml thai William Schneiderman heul been presenl on ilieil occasion.
I ii.in this unexpected meeting with
Dr. Oppenheimer in Mr. Hilts' office I
Wenl directly to the grand jury room in
the same building the Washington.
D. I .. Federal Court.
The issue of Dr. .1. Roberl Oppenheimer overshadowed everything else,
including the defendant himself, al the
trial of Dr. Weinberg during the winter
of 1953. \l\ wife and I obviously could
""i testify eilmiii Steve Nelson eiml Dr.
Weinberg being together eit the house-
farming |ieirl\ withoul mention oi the
others present, including Dr. Oppenheimer. \\ e could nol testify aboul the
''* II special section meeting without
the facl being revealed in courl thai ii
*as en in Kenilworth Courl eiml thai ii
''us hi't'ti [earned iheil the house i.ei-
nii'ii occupied by Dr. Oppenheimer; nl-..
"'eit he wees presenl eil the meeting.
Dr. Oppenheimer or his attorneys
'"'' known to have indicated to the
Prosecution thai il these things were regaled l.\ testimony eit the trial thai he
*ould take the stand eis a defense w it-
»ess I,,, Dr. Weinberg.
Mr. Ilitts eiml Mr. Cunningham, in
''iieu'oi' of the- government's case, well
*"<'w thai such testimony by Dr. Oppen-
"'iiiii-i. then holding positions of the
■s'ft'eiii'si responsibility, would overshadow
'A'T\lliiiiu else eiml iheil they would
'[''' ;i real problem. A former Commu-
"lsl who heul been eil the \lee\ houses-fling and saw Dr. Weinberg, Dr.
. I'l'i'iiliiiniri. eiml Steve Nelson among
'"*'■ | resent, was flown from California
io Washington for testimony al the
opening of the trial. Richard E. Combs,
chiel counsel of the California state
committee, was among other witnesses
the governmenl planned to call to sup-
porl the testimony Sylvia and I would
\s the liieil opened, Mr. Hills and Mr.
Cunningham conferred daily with me
nul Sylvia. They tohl us iheil they had
been given "very little" information l.\
governmenl intelligence agencies on Dr.
Oppenheimer's past Communisl euti\i-
lies eunl associations lot' use' in cross-
examination. I iiilrr these circumstances
they made ei leist minute decision to try
to convict Dr. Weinberg on the limited
evidence iheil would remain after leaving out everything where Dr. .1. Roberl
Oppenheimer's name might enter the
"\\ »• do nol have the slightest ilouht of
ilir accuracy of your testimony," the}
ie.1.1 lis, "hut Dr. Oppenheimer, ..tile his
personal prestige, would have tremendous influence wilh the jury-"
If even half of the confidential information from governmenl intelligence
files lhal was made public in the 1954
\K< reports, heul been supplied to Mr.
Hills and Mr. Cunningham, the siluation would have been entirely different.
They could have then lold Dr. Oppenheimer hr could go righl ahead and be
ei witness for Dr. Weinberg, thai his
own record would be brought out on
cross-examination. One of the mysteries
mi io hr solved in the Oppenheimer
case is where responsibility should be
placed for failure to make all fills on
ihr scientist available to tin- prosecution
in the Weinberg trial. It should have
been obvious to everyone from ihe firsl
lhal there would It practically no pos-
sil.ililv of obtaining ei conviction in the
Weinberg trial withoul having the full
record of Dr. Oppenheimer ready if h«'
decided to It a defense witness.
Because of llu- sudden change in
strategy, dictated hv realities ol the situation, my wife, emd ihr ex-Communist
brought from California, Richard E.
Combs, and other scheduled witnesses
were nol called. I testified in llu- trial,
hut only as em expert witness on party
organization, and while I was on the
sieind Dr. Weinberg's name was nol
mentioned either by governmenl or de-
\l the lime I was inclined lo agree
with Mr. Hills and Mr. Cunningham,
believing lhe course they followed eit
thai lime was in lhe besl interest of lhe
country. Now. in 1955, I know they
weie right. If the\ had brought Dr. Oppenheimer's name' in withoul being
ready for him mi cross-examination, hi'
would have posed as a "victim' of an
attempted "frame-up," and lhe \EC
hearings of 1954 would never have
taken place. Dr. Oppenheimer would
still have aeeess lo all information on
the highest level.
Efforts lo obtain a conviction of Dr.
Weinberg with only a fraction of lhe
available evidence ended in failure, as
was lo hi' anticipated. The judge expressed disagreement with the jury's
verdict. But llie jurors could make a ele'
i ision only on the basis of lhe insufficient fragments nl evidence placed lie-
Joseph A. l-'iiiiclli. ol \\ ashington, D.
(... was attorney for Dr. Weinberg ai the
trial, and throughout nil developments
he is understood lo have been in close
touch with the attorneys for Dr. .1. Itoh-
The name of Mr. Fanelli should be
\ few monll
he is soon lo play a
new chapter of Ibis
narrative of the Op-
after the \\ einberg
before an executive
hearing of the I ,S. Senate Subcommittee on Investigation. Senator Joseph
McCarthy, lhe chairman, presided. I do
not recall lhe exacl dale, bul il was immediately after an article in Fortune
magazine" had revealed Dr. Oppenheimer's opposition lo making lhe hydrogen
bomb. Afler my testimony dealing with
Dr. Oppenheimer and with Communisl
activities in lhe alomie energy field, I
was advised hy lhe committee slaff thai
a full investigation and hearings would
he conducted. At the committee's request I spent several da\s dictating the
fails I knew lo slaff stenographers. In a
statement In lhe press during a nip lo
Havana, Senator McCarthy referred to
a "pending investigation ' as the "mosl
importanl ever conducted by lhe committee." This, of course, was in reference lo lhe planned investigations of Dr.
Oppenheimer and of lhe entire field of
So\ iet atomic espionage.
Plans for lhe hearings suddenly were
cancelled. I do nol know whal happened. During 1954, several press stories
reported lhal in the summer of 1953.
presumably around June, a meeting was
luld at lhe' \\ hiie House, attended In
Senator McCarthy, Vice-Presidenl Nixon and others, and lhat Senator McCarthy agreed to call off the hearings with
lhe guarantee thai a prompt and
thorough investigation would he made
by governmenl security agencies. I hem-
no personal knowledge eis to the' accuracy of those press stories. I only
know the scheduled investigation was
I now know that a month or two after
I testified aboul Dr. Oppenheimer, eiceiii-
"'Tlee' Hiilel.n Strum.'!.
for tin H-Bomb.
•■"ACTS FOIU'M NEWS, August, in.-,.-,