Evening star., 1939-12-17
District Court Case May Affect
i. S. Relations With Russia
Conviction of Alleged Agents Would Mean Sovets
Have Violated Pledges Which Were
Condition of Recognition
By Garnen D. Horner.

SAAS ASASA6A PAAA1NAPdA OuSA VI dA
agent" working to spread Communism
in this country to be the Soviet gov
ernment or any one having its sanction
in operating from its territory, it would
be prima facie evidence of violation by
Russia of her pledge against fostering
communist propaganda here.
The pledge is contained in an ex-
change of letters between President
Roosevelt and Maxim Litvinoff, former
peoples commissar for foreign affairs of
the U. S. S. r.. that formed the basis
for our recognition of the Soviet regime
in 1888.
Mr.. Litvinoff wrote Mr.. Roosevelt
then that it would be the fixed policy
of the Soviet government ito respect
scrupulously the indisputable right of
the United States to order its own life
within its own jurisdiction in its own
way and to refrain from interfering in
any manner in the internal affairs of
the United States, its territories or pos
sessions
Among other detailed pledges that fol-
lowed in the same letter, the most peril
nent is considered the paragraph in
which the Soviet promised:
Not to permit the formation or resi-
dence on its territory Of any organization
or group-and to prevent the activity on
its territory of any organization or group,
or of representatives or officials of any
organization or group-which has as an
aim the overthrow or the preparation
for the overthrow Of, or the bringing
about by force of change in, the politi-
cal or social order OF the whole or any
part of the United States, its territories
or possessions"
Violation Charged in 1895.
The United States almost came to the
point of breaking of relations with Rus
sia for violation of that pledge in 1885,
when at the Seventh All-World Congress
of the Communist International in
! Moscow policies were formulated to be
carried out by the Communist organi-
cation in the United States.
William C. Bullitt Ambassador to
France, who then was our Ambassador
in Moscow, presented to the Soviet for
eign Office on August Is, 1885, most
emphatic protest against this fragrant
violation of the 1888 pledge.
The note pointed out that The Amer
lean people resent most strongly inter-
ference by foreign countries in their in.
ternal affairs" and added:
The Government of the United States
| considers the strict fulhllment of the
pledge Of non-interference an essential
prerequisite to the maintenance of nor
NAL and friendly relations between the
United States and the U. S. S. R.
The Government of the United States
would be lacking in candor if it failed
to state frankly that it anticipates the
most serious consequences if the govern
ment of the u S. S. r. is unwilling. or
unable, to take appropriate measures to
prevent further acts in disregard of the
solemn pledge given by it.
Friendship Seen Prevented.
THE development OF friendly relations
between the Russian and American
peoples will inevitably be precluded by
the continuance on territory of the u S.
S. r. of activities involving interference
in the internal affairs of the American
people"
The Soviet replied to this note with a
denial It told Mr. Bullitt that there
are contained no facts of any kind in
| your note which could be considered as
violation on the part of the Soviet gov
ernment of its obligations" 1t attempted
to justify this stand by adding that the
U. S. S. R. government cannot take
| upon itself obligations of any kind with
regard to the Communist International"
The incident ended with a statement
by Secretary of State Hull on Septem-
ber /, 1885, that almost in so many
| words called the Soviet government
| liar and said the status of our relations
upon it would depend upon its attitude
in the future.
The Secretary's statement declared
that the Soviet pledge not to permit
activities on its territory aiming to
spread Communism here irrefutably COW
cred activities of the Communist Inter-
national, and that in its reply to Mr..
| Bullitts note the Soviet almost, in so
many words, repudiates the pledge ="
'Clear-cut Disregard Seen.
THAT the language of the pledge" he
said, "is absolutely clear and in no way
ambiguous and that there has been a
clear-cut disregard and disavowal of
the pledge by the Soviet government is
| obvious"
BY indicating an intention to disregard
its promise, the Soviet struck severe
blow at the fabric of friendly relations"
with us, he continued, asserting that If
the Soviet pursued such a policy "the
friendly and official relations between the
two countries can but be seriously i'm
paired"
The Secretarys statement also pointed
out that the United States had with
held recognition of the Soviet regime
for 16 years mainly because of Moscow
interference in our affairs through Com
munist propaganda, and that the pledge
against such activities was one of the
main factors leading to recognition.
There was widespread speculation that
the 1885 incident would result in sever
ance of diplomatic relations with the
Soviet, but the administration decided
then there still might be something to be
gained by trying to carry on normal rela-
tions and so contented itself with going
on record with the strong protest and
warning.
The very existence of this record