On the eve of Washington's entry into World War II, 18 leaders of the SWP and the Minneapolis Teamsters union were tried and found guilty of "conspiring to advocate the overthrow of the U.S. government." These were the first convictions under the notorious Smith "Gag" Act.

The defendants were campaigning against Washington's drive to drag workers and farmers in the United States into the slaughter of World War II. Many of the 18 were central leaders of the 1934 Minneapolis Teamsters strikes and subsequent organizing drives in the Midwest.

Despite the wartime atmosphere, the defense effort gained nationwide publicity and support. Tens of thousands backed the defendant's civil liberties; unions representing over two million workers endorsed the defense committee.

The 18 were convicted on December 8, 1941, the same day Washington declared war on Tokyo, and served 12- to 18-month sentences in prison during 1944-45.

Cannon gave his testimony exactly 54 years ago. Yet it remains highly relevant today.

The portions below are from the first two sessions of Cannon's court appearance, which began on November 18, 1941, and ended three days later. Albert Goldman, who is questioning Cannon, was the chief defense attorney and one of the defendants.

These excerpts are copyright © 1970 Pathfinder Press and are reprinted by permission.

Testimony by James P. Cannon

District Court of the United States,

District of Minnesota, Fourth Division. Tuesday, November 18, 1941

Afternoon Session

JAMES P. CANNON was called as a witness on behalf of the defendants, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

By MR. GOLDMAN:

Q: Will you please state your name for the reporter?

A: James P. Cannon.

Q: Where do you live, Mr. Cannon?

A: New York.

Q: And your present occupation?

A: National secretary of the Socialist Workers Party.

Q: How old are you, Mr. Cannon?

A: Fifty-one.

Q: Where were you born?

A: Rosedale, Kansas.

Q: How long a period is it since you began your career in the Marxist movement, Mr. Cannon?

A: Thirty years.

Q: What organization did you first join that was part of the working-class movement?

A: The IWW, Industrial Workers of the World.

Q: And did you join any other organization subsequent to that one?

A: The Socialist Party.

Q: And after that?

A: In 1919, at the foundation of the Communist Party, I was one of the original members, and a member of the National Committee since 1920.

Q: How long a period did you remain in the Communist Party?

A: Until October 1928.

Q: Now, will you tell the court and jury the extent of your knowledge of Marxian theory?

A: I am familiar with the most important writings of the Marxist teachers - Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, and the commentators on their works.

Q: Have you ever read any books against the Marxian theory?

A: Yes. In general I am familiar with the literature against Marxism, particularly the most important book.

Q: Which one is the most important book?

A: Hitler's Mein Kampf.

Q: Have you ever edited any labor papers, Mr. Cannon?

A: Yes, a number of them. In fact, I have been more or less a working journalist in the movement for about twenty- five years.

Q: Do you recollect the names of any of the papers that you edited?

A: The Workers' World in Kansas City. The Toiler, published in Cleveland, Ohio. I was at one time editor of The Militant. I was editor of the paper called Labor Action published in San Francisco, and I have been on the editorial board of numerous other papers and magazines published in the movement.

Q: Have you ever delivered lectures on the theory of socialism and other aspects of the Marxist movement?

A: Yes, I have done that continuously for about thirty years. Expulsion from Communist Party

Q: Tell us the reasons why you severed your connection with the Communist Party, Mr. Cannon.

A: Well, at the time of the controversy that developed in the Russian party between Trotsky on the one side, and Stalin and his group on the other, a controversy that touched many of the most fundamental principles of socialism, this controversy gradually became extended in the Communist International, and became the subject of concern in the other parties of the Communist International. I and some others here took a position in support of Trotsky and that led to our expulsion from the Communist Party of the United States.

Q: Can you give us in brief an idea of the nature of the controversy?

A: It began over the question of bureaucracy in the governmental apparatus of the Soviet Union and in the staffs of the party in Russia. Trotsky began a struggle for more democracy in the party, in the government and unions, and the country generally. This struggle against what Trotsky - and I agree with him - characterized as an increasing bureaucratization of the whole regime, this controversy originating over this point, gradually developed in the course of years into fundamental conflicts over virtually all the basic principles of socialist theory and practice.

Q: And as a result of this controversy, the expulsion took place?

A: As a result of that, the expulsion of our group took place here in the United States, as was the case also in Russia.

Q: In what year was that?

A: 1928.

Q: Tell us what happened to the group that was expelled.

A: We organized ourselves as a group and began to publish a paper called The Militant.

Q: And give us some idea of the size of that group, Mr. Cannon.

A: Well, there were only three of us to start with. Eventually we got supporters in other cities. Six months later, when we had our first conference, we had about one hundred members in the country.

Q: And subsequent to that, was there any party organized by this group? Communist League of America

A: Yes, this group called itself originally the Communist League of America, and considered itself still a faction of the Communist Party, attempting to get reinstated into the party, with the provision that we would have a right to hold our views and discuss them in the party. This proposal of ours was rejected by the party, so we developed as an independent organization.

In 1934 we came to an agreement with another organization, which had never been connected with the Communist movement, which had grown out of the trade unions. This organization, originally known as the Conference for Progressive Labor Action, took the name of the American Workers Party. In 1934, in the fall of that year, we had a joint convention with them and formed a common organization which we called the Workers Party of the United States.

Q: And how long did this Workers Party exist?

A. From the fall of 1934 until the spring of 1936.

Q: And what happened then?

A: At that time our party joined the Socialist Party as a body. The Socialist Party had had an internal discussion and controversy, which culminated in the last month of 1935 in a split, in the withdrawal of the more conservative elements. The Socialist Party had then issued an invitation for unaffiliated radical individuals and groups to join the Socialist Party.

We accepted the invitation and joined the party in 1936, again with the express provision which we had originally contended for in the Communist Party, that we should have the right to maintain our particular views and to discuss them in the party - that is, when discussion was in order, and we on our part obligated ourselves to observe discipline in the daily work and common action of the party.

Q: How long did your group remain in the Socialist Party?

A: Just about a year.

Q: And what happened then?

A: Well, the Socialist Party began to impose upon us the same kind of bureaucratism that we had suffered from in the Communist Party. There were great questions disturbing the minds of socialists in that period, particularly the problems of the Spanish Civil War.

Q: And that was in what year?

A: That was in the year 1936, but it became very acute in the spring of 1937. We had a definite position on the Spanish question. We studied it attentively and we wanted to make our views known to the other party members. This was permitted for some time, and then the National Executive Committee issued an order prohibiting any further discussion, prohibiting even the adoption of resolutions by branches on the subject, and we revolted against that provision and insisted on our rights.

At the same time, a big dispute arose in New York over the election campaign - this was the second campaign of La Guardia, and the Socialist Party officially decided to support the candidacy of La Guardia. We opposed it on the ground that it was a violation of socialist principles to support the candidate of a capitalist party. La Guardia was a candidate of the Republican and Fusion parties as well as of the Labor Party.

We also insisted on making our views on this question known and this led to the wholesale expulsion of our people. Founding of SWP

Q: When was the Socialist Workers Party organized?

A: The last days of December 1937 and the first day or two of January 1938.

Q: Who participated in its organization?

A: The branches of the Socialist Party which had been expelled - these were banded together under a committee of the expelled branches and this committee was instructed by a conference to arrange a convention, prepare it, and the expelled branches of the Socialist Party sent delegates to the foundation convention of the Socialist Workers Party.

Q: Did this committee of the expelled branches publish any paper?

A: Yes, it published a paper following the expulsions, which began in May or June 1937. We published the Socialist Appeal, and that became the official organ of the party after the convention. Later, about a year ago, we changed the name back to our original name, The Militant.

Q: To the best of your recollection, how many delegates were present at the founding convention of the Socialist Workers Party?

A: I think about a hundred.

Q: And they came from all over the country, did they?

A: Yes, from about thirty cities, I think - twenty-five or thirty cities.

Q: Now, what did that convention do?

A: The most important decisions of the convention were to set up its organization, adopt a Declaration of Principles, and some collateral resolutions on current questions, and elect a National Committee to direct the work of the party on the basis of the Declaration of Principles....

Q: What did the convention, the founding convention of the Socialist Workers Party, adopt as the fundamental aim of the party?

A: I would say that the fundamental aim of the party then and now is to popularize the doctrines of Marxian socialism and to aid and lead in the work of transforming society from a capitalist to a communist basis. What is socialism?

Q: Give us the meaning of the term socialism.

A: Socialism can have two meanings, and usually does among us. That is, socialism is a name applied to a projected new form of society, and it is a name also applied to the movement working in that direction.

Q: What is the nature of that projected society?

A: We visualize a social order that would be based on the common ownership of the means of production, the elimination of private profit in the means of production, the abolition of the wage system, the abolition of the division of society into classes.

Q: With reference to any government for the purpose of instituting such a society, what would you say is the purpose of the Socialist Workers Party?

A: We have set as our aim the establishment of a workers' and farmers' government, in place of the existing government which we term a capitalist government. The task of this government would be to arrange and control the transition of society from the basis of capitalism to the basis of socialism.

Q: When you say "capitalist government," what do you mean?

A: We mean a government that arises from a society that is based on the private ownership of the wealth of the country and the means of production by the capitalists, and which in general represents the interests of that class.

Q: And in contradistinction to this government you propose to establish a workers' and farmers' government?

A: Yes, we propose in place of the capitalists' a workers' and farmers' government, which will frankly represent the economic and social interests of the workers and the producing farmers.

Q: Well, what would happen to the capitalists?

A: Under the workers' and farmers' government, the main task of the government will be to carry out the transfer of the most important means of production from private ownership to the common ownership of the people.

Q: Well, what would happen to the individual capitalists who would lose their wealth?

A: What do you mean, "happen to them," in what way?

Q: Would you kill them or put them to work or what?

A: Well, under our theory, citizenship participation in the benefits of society would be open to everybody on a basis of equality. This would apply to former capitalists as well as to workers and farmers.

Q: When you use the term "productive wealth," do you mean any property that an individual owns?

A: No - when we speak of the means of production, the wealth of the country, we mean that wealth which is necessary for the production of the necessities of the people. The industries, the railroads, mines, and so on. We don't propose - at least, Marxist socialists have never proposed anywhere that I know - the elimination of private property in personal effects. We speak of those things which are necessary for the production of the people's needs. They shall be owned in common by all the people....

Wednesday, November 19, 1941

Morning Session

JAMES P. CANNON

DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) Causes of modern war

Q: (By Mr. Goldman): Mr. Cannon, will you tell us the position of the Socialist Workers Party on the causes of modern war?

A: Modern wars, in the opinion of our party, are caused by the conflict of imperialist nations for markets, colonies, sources of raw material, fields for investment, and spheres of influence.

Q: What do you mean by "imperialist," Mr. Cannon?

A: Those capitalist nations which directly or indirectly exploit other countries.

Q: What is the party's position on the inevitability of wars under the capitalist system?

A: As long as the capitalist system remains, and with it those conditions which I have mentioned, which flow automatically from the operation of the capitalist and imperialist system, wars, recurring wars, are inevitable.

Q: And can anybody's opposition, including the opposition of the Socialist Workers Party to war, prevent wars under the capitalist system?

A: No. Our party has always stated that it is impossible to prevent wars without abolishing the capitalist system which breeds war. It may be possible to delay a war for a while, but eventually it is impossible to prevent wars while this system, and its conflicts of imperialist nations, remains.

Q: Then is it true that the party is of the opinion that wars are caused by international economic conflicts, and not by the good will or bad will of some people?

A: Yes. That does not eliminate the possibility of incidental attacks being caused by the acts of this or that ruling group of one country or another; but fundamentally wars are caused by the efforts of all the capitalist powers to expand into other fields. The only way they can get them is by taking them away from some other power, because the whole world has been divided up among a small group of imperialist powers. That is what leads to war, regardless of the will of the people.

We do not maintain that the ruling groups of any of the imperialist powers now at war really desired the war. We have stated many times that they would have been glad to have avoided it; but they could not avoid it and maintain the capitalist system in their country.

Q: What is the attitude of the party towards a war which it designates as an imperialist war?

A: Our party is unalterably opposed to all imperialist wars.

Q: And what is meant by opposition to imperialist wars?

A: By that we mean that we do not give any support to any imperialist war. We do not vote for it; we do not vote for any person that promotes it; we do not speak for it; we do not write for it. We are in opposition to it.

Q: How does the Socialist Workers Party oppose the idea of the United States entering into the war?

A: We do it as every other political party promotes its ideas on any foreign policy. We write against it in the paper; we speak against it; we try to create sentiment in any organization we can approach, to adopt resolutions against the war. If we had members in Congress, they would speak in Congress, in the Senate, against it. In general we carry on public political agitation against the entry of the United States into war, and against all measures taken either by the Executive or by Congress which in our opinion lead towards active participation in the war.... Opposition to imperialist war

Q: If the United States should enter into the European conflict, what form would the opposition of the party take to the war?

A: We would maintain our position.

Q: And that is what?

A: That is, we would not become supporters of the war, even after the war was declared. That is, we would remain an opposition political party on the war question, as on others.

Q: You would not support the war?

A: That is what I mean, we would not support the war, in a political sense.

The Court: May I ask you to develop the significance of that last statement?

Mr. Goldman: Yes.

Q: When you say, "nonsupport of the war," just exactly what would the party do during a war, which would indicate its nonsupport of the war?

A: Insofar as we are permitted our rights, we would speak against the war as a false policy that should be changed, in the same sense, from our point of view, that other parties might oppose the foreign policy of the government in time of war, just as Lloyd George, for example, opposed the Boer War in public addresses and speeches. Ramsay MacDonald, who later became prime minister of England, opposed the war policy of England during the World War of 1914-1918. We hold our own point of view, which is different from the point of view of the two political figures I have just mentioned, and so far as we are permitted to exercise our right, we would continue to write and speak for a different foreign policy for America....

Q: Will you state the reasons why the party would not support a war conducted by the present government of the United States?

A: In general, we do not put any confidence in the ruling capitalist group in this country. We do not give them any support because we do not think they can or will solve the fundamental social problems which must be solved in order to save civilization from shipwreck.

We believe that the necessary social transition from the present system of capitalism to the far more efficient order of socialism can only be brought about under a leadership of the workers. The workers must organize themselves independently of the capitalist political parties. They must organize a great party of their own, develop an independent working-class party of their own, and oppose the policy of the capitalist parties, regardless of whether they are called the Democratic or Republican, or anything else.... How to fight Hitlerism

Q: What is the party's position on the claim that the war against Hitler is a war of democracy against fascism?

A: We say that is a subterfuge, that the conflict between American imperialism and German imperialism is for the domination of the world. It is absolutely true that Hitler wants to dominate the world, but we think it is equally true that the ruling group of American capitalists has the same idea, and we are not in favor of either of them.

We do not think that the Sixty Families who own America want to wage this war for some sacred principle of democracy. We think they are the greatest enemies of democracy here at home. We think they would only use the opportunity of a war to eliminate all civil liberties at home, to get the best imitation of fascism they can possibly get....

Q: Is it true then that the party is as equally opposed to Hitler as it is to the capitalist claims of the United States?

A: That is uncontestable. We consider Hitler and Hitlerism the greatest enemy of mankind. We want to wipe it off the face of the earth. The reason we do not support a declaration of war by American arms is because we do not believe the American capitalists can defeat Hitler and fascism. We think Hitlerism can be destroyed only by way of conducting a war under the leadership of the workers.

Q: What method does the party propose for the defeat of Hitler?

A: If the workers formed the government I spoke of, if the workers' form of government were in power, we would propose two things:

One, that we issue a declaration to the German people, a solemn promise, that we are not going to impose another Versailles peace on them; that we are not going to cripple the German people, or take away their shipping facilities, or take away their milk cows, as was done in the horrible Treaty of Versailles, starving German babies at their mothers' breasts, and filling the German people with such hatred and such demand for revenge that it made it possible for a monster like Hitler to rally them with the slogan of revenge against this terrible Treaty of Versailles. We would say to them:

"We promise you that we will not impose any of those things upon the German people. On the contrary, we propose to you a reorganization of the world on a fair socialist basis, where the German people, with all their recognized ability and their genius and labor, can participate equally with us." That would be our party's first proposal to them.

Second, we would also say to them, "On the other hand, we are going to build the biggest army and navy and air force in the world, to put at your disposal, to help smash Hitler by force of arms on one front, while you revolt against him on the home front." I think that would be the program, in essence, of our party, which the workers' and farmers' government of America would advance so far as Hitler is concerned, and we believe that is the only way Hitlerism will be destroyed.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home