Richard Nixon, Hiss is your life

Larry Adler

It was 1948. Richard Nixon, a young Congressman, had staked his political career an nailing Alger Hiss, then President of the Carnegie Endowment, as a Communist agent. Hiss denied the charge, and was put on trial for perjury. After two jury-trials, Hiss was convicted and sent to prison. It was the beginning of Richard Nixon's rise to national prominence. In this two-part interview, Larry Adler, the American writer, discusses the rise and fall of President Nixon which Hiss unwittingly started.

I met Hiss in 1959. I was in cabaret in New York at the Village Gate and had been invited to lecture at the New School for Social Research. After my lecture, Hiss, who I hadn't known was in my audience, introduced himself. I invited him to come as my guest to the club. He said he would but didn't show up.Three days later I met him on the street; that in itself was odd. I'd never met him in my life before and then I meet him twice in three days. I asked him why he hadn't come to my show. "I thought you were just being polite," he said, "I didn't think you really meant it."

Now that he was convinced the invitation was genuine he came that very evening, bringing with him his son, down from Harvard, and the son of Ralph Bunche, the US representative at the United Nations. We got along very well and have continued to do so ever since. Recently he was in London, just a week or so after Nixon's resignation, and I asked him if he'd be willing to talk about how he .felt over the whole Watergate business. He was quite agreeable to the interview being recorded and I might say that the only expletives worth deleting were my own. Hiss doesn't swear, not, I'm sure, through prudishness — it is simply that he shows respect for the language. My questions are put in italics.

Larry Adler: When I had lunch with you a few years ago / said, and I said it kiddingly but with a ring of truth in it, that I blamed you for Richard Nixon Alger Hiss: A lot of people have said that — What do you think of the validity of that (laughs) theory?

Well, for one thing you give me too much blame not credit, blame. If it had not been for two assassinations he never would have become President. JFK's assassination meant that he was succeeded by poor old Lyndon, and if JFK had not been assassinated, he would obviously have been re-elected. He had already beaten Nixon once: he would have beaten him handily the next time. But after Johnson's discomfiture over Vietnam, that gave Nixon a chance to run against Hubert Humphrey, who is nobody. Hubert was emasculated politically by LBJ, so there was the first thing. The second thing is that by that time Bobby Kennedy was a leading contender, Had Bobby not been assassinated, and had he been nominated to run instead of Humphrey, he would have beaten Nixon hands down. With these two assassinations, Nixon's an accidental president.

Except this what made him a vice-presidential candidate?

I think a combination of Jerry Voorhis, me, and Helen Gahagan Douglas. It seems to me he only came to national attention on your case.

But after that he fell. And who brought him back? He fell completely.

You mean in the California campaign for governor After he was defeated by JFK, he then ran against Brown and was roundly defeated. So I didn't bring him back. He didn't make any use of the Hiss case.

But remember this when you say there were two assassinations, there's a very strong theory that Nixon might have legitimately won the election against JFK.

Oh, you mean the crookedness in Illinois and probably Texas but he made up for that the next time by having his own crookedness, particularly in '72.

From what I know about the man I can't understand why he didn't make an issue out of Illinois.

I think the answer is, no matter how legitimate his case, he knew that politicians don't permit that kind of recount, and therefore he'd better take his loss and count on another chance. And it helped him, especially with the lower echelons of his party, that he hadn't complained because they did the same kind of thing. There's a great deal of crookedness in American politics.

One fascinating thing about Nixon he strikes me as a genuine schizoid. In the last tape he released the one that preceded his resignation he says to Haldeman, "that sonofabitch Hiss he made just one mistake he didn't tell the truth to his lawyer."

I thought for one manic moment, my God, the man's got a sense of humour!

Well, before you write this article, you ought to read Garry Wills, He has really researched Nixon as nobody else has. I don't know Nixon. I've never even had occasion to shake hands with him.

But you've been interviewed by him?

Adversary interviews. Not like I'm talking to you now. When you're on the opposite side of the dais from a man who is hounding you, you don't get much insight into him.

Did you sense any personal antagonism?

None at all. Oh no, this was pure opportunistic politics. He would have done the same thing to somebody else. He didn't know me.

Well, why do you think he hopped on you? The rest of the committee were willing to let you go.

The

Spectator September 28, 1974 He had to hop on somebody if he was going t°_, climb. Now what you may not know he ils° been fed — improperly — leaks from the FBI fa, r, a -whole year. He says in his book that he 0 never seen or heard of Chambers or me, before those hearings. This is • — less than accurate. Because it is clear now that a Father Cronin did you know about Father Cronin? Father Cronin was is still a Catholic Pri,..es,.,t; violently anti-Communist, and through rp. friends of his, he was given leaks. Father Cronin was adviser to the bishops, to the hierarchy. Fle, was also adviser to the National Association pi Manufacturers, he did a lot of anti-Communist work for them, and he was introduced to Nixop, then quite a young man, who could be useful III anti-Communism; this was before Nixon ha°, made any kind of a name. Cronin told Garry Wills of receiving secret reports from 03,1 members past members, agents who weren supposed, of course, to reveal their material. It was done illegally, improperly, And Chambers was one of their chief informants, like Lows Budenz and the others. They were obviou.al, encouraged to make up things and I thin; that's why Nixon picked on me. Here he hau Chambers as a tame member of the stable, 01! FBI. he was being fed Chambers's reports ab0. me, so by the time Chambers made his first appearance, he was able to get all ready.

How long had the FBI been doing that? Revealing private sources?

Oh, they've always done it. I hope they're not doing it now. Maybe things have changed.

Probably we're going to have a clean adminia" tration all -around for the next ten years.

I hope so, and certainly they're acting that W. aY now. You see, J. Edgar Hoover was a kiqmaker and it's very clear that that part of his power well, I can tell you what Senathri Vandenberg said to me at the end of the war.: met him, I knew him 'very well from ra2 Carnegie Foundation days. Fine man. And. said to me, this was at a party at the Brats'. Embassy, he said, "Alger, why don't you NeW Dealers leave Hoover alone? Nobody'll toncilf. him. He has a dossier on every member ci Congress, so you'll never have Congressrnen getting after him." It was his secret. One reason why presidents liked him, it's now come, 00t was that he gave juicy reports to the Presider', on all the political friends and enemies, some °' it salacious, some of it useful politically, but feW presidents didn't want this kind of private private eye.

Johnson got reports on Martin Luther King' didn't he?

I don't know if LBJ wa,s interested in theril• Hoover was, because he hated King. King hr, defied him and Hoover did not like people vo!'" defied him. So he set.out to try to ruin Martin Luther King.

Do you think there was any element of fear in Kennedy's relationship to Hoover?

I would rather doubt it. Bobby Kennedy, Y°Lcii know, fell out with Hoover, certainly shoWe no fear of him. Hoover became very hostile t,t3 Bobby Kennedy simply because Bobby didn t treat him as a sacred object. Nixon, strangelY, enough, though he owed a lot of his politica,' strength to Hoover's support, for his help an' so on, we know from the tapes that Nixon Was quite suspicious of J. Edgar Hoover. I guess he knew that if Hoover was telling him things aubout others, the same thing could be done by 'blinOver about him. That's really why the rr;umbers was started. Nixon couldn't trust Ii Hoover had so many secrets on so ,Ina,nY people, I guess Nixon didn't want Hoover ,to nave any secrets about him. But actually ,112°Ligh there's no mention of Hoover this is 'lie thesis of Wills's piece. Nixon's need for secrecy.

Intnte Intnte ioned before that I at first thought Nixon f'tcici a sense of humour when he said you didn't ',ea the truth to your lawyers. Do you think he nnows that he is capable of split thinking?

wish I knew more about psychology. A friend 1111 the States who is a psychoanalyst, and who vas been a Nixon-studier from the time of the oorhis campaign far back as that says he nced even then signs of psychic imbalance.

Very difficult for Nixon to recognise reality. thinks that Nixon is divorced from reality, 'nut he really doesn't know what's happening Outside, which is the explanation of why the tapes were not destroyed.

I've never been able to figure that out.

Re

IlleMber it's now clear that he was advised by

Pat Pe • '

t„, -tichanan, who wrote him a memorandum ,i7e' or three days after Alexander Butterfield "Ivulg'ed the fact that there were tapes, and he destroy them. Nixon never did it, Wills has 6011e into that why, in his opinion, Nixon ,ditin't destroy the tapes. It was because of a -,Inse of omnipotence I suppose if you don't "`-n'gnise reality it's because you think you co wantrol reality he also suggests that Nixon nted to have various people who might this•

is again his secrecy, his passion for secrecy any People who might betray him, might turn Against him to get them committed on tape. if ever they started to threaten him, he

;d say, "I've got you saying so-and-so, ?Oorded." He was playing the game J. Edgar tioover had played against others.

hi,'-ddrl't he realise that he was putting rjelf on tape at the same time? He was rnfling himself irrevocably.

I

think he thought he could always control who raid hear the tapes, that he could selectively °Y whatever he wanted to. But then his 1,3-"„ Mechanics got too big for him, he could no di"dger control it. You know, at the end, he w...n't have control of his tapes. Extra copies cu'e rnade by the Secret Service who now were th,!t?nlians of the tapes, and they were afraid 1„1,'-aPes might be destroyed. So Nixon was Work might from copies only.

At what Point were those copies made?

This h

last . asn't come out. I would say within the

Six months.

thought for a long time that one possible

reo. the tapes weren't destroyed was that it

Plasense to destroy them because

nth°Pres aiready existed. It's the easiest thing in

e World to copy a tape.

tn out.

hi iasr were the tapes that really caught The kw. that one was the one it was quite clear "e WaS heavily involved one year before he -ure he knew nothing about it.

Hayp • You ever met Nixon? This ought to be a Joint interview. (To be concluded next week)