Professor Murray

Transcription

1 Professor Murray BY MR.. JUSTICE RUMPFF: And that evidence will consist of evidence., reports of speeches. BY MR.. DE VPS: Of reports of speeches, of the Accused and co-conspirators, BY MR, JUSTICE RUMPFF: You mean all the evidence is not (5 before the Court. BY MR. DE VCS: No, that is so. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF; Now, should we deal with this matter then now? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, it is a question of convenience, (10 I don't propose to take up very much time of the Court in dealing with this. The expert is available to have his opinion on these documents, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: In regard to this particular aspect of the case, the orld Federation of Trade Unions? (15 BY MR. DE VCS: Yes. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: The topic which you have raised now; how long will the evidence last, according to your estimate? BY MR. DE VPS: A few hours, Milord. The rest of the day, I suppose, would he more r less the position. The (20 other organisations I intended dealing with seriatim, several front organisations on the same basis. They will take rather less time than this one, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: "Yhat other aspect are you going to put to this witness on the same basis? (25 BY MR. DE VCS: Milord, I intended putting a certain number of selected documents on every one of the front organisations that is to say the " /,F.T.U., the W.F.D.Y., (The World Federation cf Democratic Youth), the International Union of Students and the './orld Peace Council. (30 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Well, may I put it to you on this

2 _ Professor Murray "basis. Will the Crown rely on the possession of the documents and the contents of the documents, and speeches still to "be dealt with in regard to this part of the case? V/ill it call no further evidence in regard to the existence of those organisations? (5 BY MR. DE VPS: No, Milord, no further evidence apart from that, BY ME. JUSTICE RUMPFF: And how long will the reading of the documents take that are covored by this particular heading, in connection with all the organisations that (10 you rely on? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, I should say approximately a day, possibly a day and a half. I'm not quite sure. 3Y MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is that now in regard to documents concerning certain organisations? (15 BY MR. DE VPS: Certain front organisations, those five I have mentioned. The 7/.F.D.Y., the I.U.S., the l.f.d.y. and the World Peace Council. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Two days? BY MR. DE VPS: Yes, I doubt whether it would come to quite(20 two days. BY MR. WELSH: Milord, am I correct in understanding the purpose of asking these questions cf Professor Murray is to obtain his opinion as to the character of the "TorId Federation of Trade Unions? My learned friend didn't make that (25 quite clear, BY MR. DE VPS: Yes, after ha wig read these extracts, I want him to indicate to the Court what his inferences are as to ths character of this particular organisation, the existence of which will have to be proved otherwise. (3C BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: You mean the inference which he makes

3 Professor Murray from that document? 3Y MR. DE VPS; Prom that document, plus the other documents, on that particular organisation, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: In other words, I take it that the question will he: Assuming that there exists a certain (5 organisation "/.F,T.U #, and assume the only thing you know about it is to he found in the document which we put before you, what is your opinion about that organisation? BY MR. 7ELSH; Milords, the submission I want to make is quite simple, that unless my learned friend undertakes (10 to lead direct and admissible evidence of the fact that this speech was made, Your Lordships should now execute this evidence, because it will be completely irrelevant and inadmissible unless that is proved. All we would have is a hearsay report. The only connection with this case (15 is that it was found in the possession of one of the coconspirators. It is hearsay evidence, reports of a speech made in China, and from that hearsay, Milord, this witness is asked to give his opinion as to the character of this body, the. orld Federation of Trade Unions. Now, Milord, (20 in my submission the indispensable sub-structure, if I may use that word, which must underly evidence of this kind, is that there must be admissible direct evidence of the facts upon which the witness is asked to comment. Let me give a very simple illustration. There aremany documents (25 in this case which emanate from the African National Congress and the South African Indian Congress. Now, Milords, the Crown has, I think, already proved in many cases, that those documents emanated from the African National Congress or from the S.A. Indian Congress. Here it would be(30 impossible to attack similar evidence if the Crown

4 Professor Murraysought to lead it from Professor Murray on this basis. It would he perfectly entitled to say: "These are the facts that have heen proved, and I express an opinion as to the charactar of the organisation." But Milords, what is essential, is that there should he primary evidence of what the (5 organisation or its president said or did. And the mere i ac t... BY MR. JUSTICE BEKTZER: Mr. Wels, to what extent does the fact that this document was found in the possession of a particular Accused to what extent does that relieve the(10 Crown of the "burden of having to prove the actual speech? BY MR. WKLSK: Not at all. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: May it not he assumed that because a document was found in possession of an Accused, that that speech was made? BY MR. WELSH: Milord, with respect not at all, (15 COURT ADJOURNS: COURT RESUMES 2.15 p.m.: BY MR. WELSH: Milords, my learned friend Mr. De Vos has now said that his purpose in attempting to lead this evidence is to place evidence before the Court as to the character(20 of the World Federation of Trade Unions. Now, secondly, it seems apparent from what my learned friend has said, that he does not intend to lead any direct evidence to prove that this speech was in fact made by the President of the World Federation of Trade Unions in Peking, and (25 indeed, Milords, there is no indication at all in the record of the Preparatory Examination that the speech would be proved at the trial. BY MR. DE VOS: Milord, I was wondering merely on the question of saving time whether I would be permitted just to amplify(30

5 Professor Murray to some extent the statement I made on the position of the Crown, to give a clearer indication of what exactly the Crown intends doing. I have made a statement up to a certain point, but possibly I could further indicate what the Crown has in mind, and that might assist my learned friend(5 and the Court to indicate the best procedure under the circumstances. BY MR. WELSH; Milord, I would "bo glad to hear my learned friend indicate that to Your Lordships.' BY MR. PS VPS: Milords, very shortly,.,.. (10 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF; Well, you started off with the heading of the 7.F.T.U, So you propose to lead evidence concerning that Union? BY MR. DE VPS; That is so, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF; Concerning the existence? (15 BY MR. DE VPS; No, Milord. If I may clarify that point first of all. The submission of the Crown is that at this stage though further evidence might be added in the form of speeches made by the Accused, at this stage, the Crown has (2C proved as against the Accused, (a) the existence of an organisation by the name of.».f,t.u., and (b) the acceptance by the Accused of that organisation to mean what is reflected in the selection of documents I intend putting to the experts So that (c) also, there is a mass of evidence showing that is really part of what I have already said a mass (25 of evidence showing contact of the Accused with the W.F-.T.U, Contact is really the part, possibly, showing their acceptance and indicating as against the Accused, the existence, of the W.F.T.U. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: What do you mean the acceptance (30 by the Accused of the organisation to mean what is reflected

6 Professor Murray in the document? BY MR. 133 VCS: Y/ell, exactly what I say, these documents were selected to provide a basis for (a) the expert opinion, to interpret them, and (b) for the stand of the Grown, that th t organisation, the Y/,F,T,U, is accepted to be what (5 prima facie those documents indicate it to be, BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: Yes, now I don't know what other documents you have in mind, but have you considered the question of whether this witness is entitled to express an opinion on the nature of this organisation on the (10 documents which you propose putting to him? Take this present document. Do you contend that he is entitled to look at that document and give an opinion as to the character of this organisation? BY MR. DE VPS: I submit Milord that on this position I (15 am entitled to ask him to look at that document, and first of all interpret that particular document..., BY MR. JUSTICE BEKK3R: Well, what I want to know is this: do you contend that on this one document which we know about, GN.47, this witness is entitled to say "In my (20 opinion as an expert, the character of the organisation is the following..." BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, I will have to put the question in a different way to the witness at the end of several documents, I will ask him: Y/hat do you contend purely on the(25 documents you have seen so far, is the character of this organisation. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKL'lR: Mr. De Vos, you see my difficulty is this. I don't know what other documents you hove in mind. But using these documants as an example, the diffi- (30 culty I foresee is this, in your case. This document re-

7 Professor Murrayfleets a report of a speech "by a person said to possess certain qualities* It is found in the possession of an Accused or an alleged collaborator. It is entirely hearsay. And the question which immediately arises : Is this witness entitled to express an opinion cn hearsay evidence. (5 BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, my reply to that is this, that on the basis that against the Accused in not appearing from this particular document, the existence of the W.F.T.U. has been proved. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: I am not talking about exitence, (IP I am talking about this witness isn't going to say 'there existed. 1 It is on the assumption..., BY MR. DE VCS: Quite. Cn the assumption, yes. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: So I am on the narrower point; you stated that you were going to ask this witness an (15 opinion as to the character of the W.F.T.U., on this document. Have you invistigated the question of whether, if this is entirely hearsay evidence, he is entitled to express any such opinion, BY MR. DE VCS: Yes, Milord, in the first place, that docu- (20 ment is, as Your Lordship says, found in the possession of the Accused. In the second place..,, BY MR. JU3TICE BEKKER: Yes, it is still hearsay. BY MR. DE VPS: Well, I am leaving that for the moment. Secondly BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: I don't want to leave it. You want t 0 leave it, I don't want to leave it, BI MR. DE VPS: No, I am trying to show the inference I attempt to draw from their possession, for the moment. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER:./ell, whatever inference you want (30 to draw from mere possession, if a document found in pos-

8 Professor Murraysession as far as this witness is concerned is antirely hearsay evidence, can you ask him to express an opinion on it. BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, hut that Accused, is one of a series of co-conspirators, who hy many other documents (5 falling outside the amhit of the few I am putting to the expert now, will he shown to have accepted the existence of the W.F.T.U. in a certain sense. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: /ell, thatmay he so. BY MR. DB VPS: Now this is merely an interpretation of (10 the..f.t.u. in a certain sense we allege they have been accepted hy the Accused, up to this stage. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: May I ask you what are the allegations of the Crown in regard to this organisation, in the charge 3heet, the particulars. Mr. Welsfy you referred to (15 a patje... 3Y MR. WELSH: Milords, that I have since disoovered is a private numbering. of Facts. It is actually page 4 of the Summary BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Not the Violence Summary. (20 BY MR. WELSH: Your Lordships will remember the Summary of Facts, Annexure 1. Sub-paragraph 4 on that page... BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Under the World Peace Council. BY MR. WELSH: Yes, and it says if Your Lordships turn back to page 3, that since its establishment in 1949 the World (25 Peace Council has sought to achieve certain objects by various means, including through the activities of these organisations. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: That was the reference you intended to make? (30 BY MR. WELSH: Yes, Milord,

9 Professor Murray BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF; Mr. De Vos, have you got the summary there? BY MR. DE VPS: Milords, that is unfortunately the one document I haven't got; it has he en filched from me. BY MR. WELSH: Page 4 of the Summary of Facts. (5 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Well, if you start at the beginning of lecture 1, the Crown intends to prove the existence of a conspiracy set forth in part B of the indictment by way of inference from the facts set forth in part A. In part A, 1A deals with the liberatory movement. There (10 is an allegation of fact. Then in regard to the "<orld Peace Council, there is an allegation, paragraph 2A at page 2. BY MR. DE VPS: That is so. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: That is an allegation of fact. (15 BY MR. DE VPS: That is so. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: And under this heading at page 4, there is the allegation, read with sub-paragraph (2) on page 3., "since its establishment in 1949 the World Peace Council has sought to achieve this object:(l) through the activi-(2c ties of peace councils, etc...(4) through the activities of certain international communist sponsored organisations, BY MR. DE VPS: That is so, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Such as the World Federation of Trade Unions, the.orid Federation of Democratic Youth, etc. BY MT;. DE VPS: That is so, Milord. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: That is your allegation. BY MR. DE VCS: That is so. That is the allegation. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Then the onus is on the Crown to prove this allegation. (30 BY MR. DE VPS: Correct, Milord.

10 Professor Murray BY ME. JUSTICS RUMPFF: Now, in regard to the existence of the World Federation of Trade Unions, you first of all say if we may deal with that your argument is that the Crown has produced evidence to show the existence of that Federation? (5 BY MR. DID VPS: That is so. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is that your submission on the document which has been handed in? BY MR. DE VPS: Yes, the documents handed in so far. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Now, do you make that broad sub- (IP mission, or do you rely on particular documents. BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, I'm afraid I am not in a position to argue that point. I think, I submit there are very many documents... BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: What documents are you thinking of.(15 BY MR. DE VCS: For instance, there is the matter of correspondence purporting to emanate from the W.P.C., and received by these people, the Accused concerned, and replied to by them, copies of the replies being handed in as well as the letters received. That is one aspect of it. (20 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: You say there are documents, correspondence which purports on the face of it, to emanate from an organisation called the,/orld Federation of Trade Unions? BY MR. DE VCS: That is so. And there are documents purporting to be drawn up by Accused and co-conspirators indicating(25 their version, shall I say, of what they believed the W.F.T.U. to be. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes, well, that is one matter. Now, if we leave the existence then on this submission of yours, for the time being, we come to the point raised. (3C The allegation is then that the World Peace Council sought

11 Professor Murray > to achieve the objects which are stated through the activities of the World Federation of Trade Unions, which it is alleged is a communist sponsored organisation? BY MR. DE VPS; Yes, That is so. It is mentioned as a communist sponsored organisation here, it is also men- (5 tioned in Schedules 2 and 4 to the indictment as being a Communist sponsored organisation and as indicating that certain documents emanate from, inter alia, the W.F.T.U. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Now, if I may refer to this particular paragraph for the time being; do you say there is (IP evidence now that the World Peace Council existed and that it operated through this organisation? BY MR. BE VPS: There is evidence of the World Peace Council and of its links with this organisation. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: What is the reference to the World(15 Federation of Trade Unions that you made just now, as communist organisations. BY MR. DE VCS: Milord, it is referred to in Schedules 2 and of the indictment. In this particular paragraph - In regard to the documents sat forth in column 3 hereof, (20 the Crown relies upon the possession of the said documents by the respective organisations merely as showing association with any one or more of the following communist sponsored organisations, and the nature and activities of the said organisation. So there again the Crown has assumed (25 responsibility of indicating the nature of that organisation as being communist sponsored. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: That is to comply with the allegation in this particular sub-section at page 4. Now, it is linked then, this Federation is linked then, firstef all with the(30 World Peace Council, that is the allegation of the Crown,

12 - Professor Murray and secondly it is said to be Communist sponsored. BY MR. DE VPS: Yes, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPPF: Now, do you now propose to ask this witness to deal with quality of this Federation? BY MR. DE VCS: Thatis correct. (5 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes, now what evidence have you got in support, at this stage, of this allegation, by the Crown, that the ;Yorld Federation of Trade Unions, is a communist sponsored organisation, and what evidence have you got that the Peace Council operated through the World(IP Federation of Trade Unions? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, on the question of this being a communist sponsored organisation, I intend leading the witness on these documents, the selection of documents, and asking his expert opinion, as an expert on communism, on (15 these documents, as to the nature of the organisation which purported to be the organisation these documents deal with. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: What documents are they? BY MR. DE VPS: Shall I give the names of the documents, or the type of documents? (2P BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes. BY MR. DE VPS: They are GN.4-7, Seventh All-China Congress of Trade Unions; that is the one we have dealt with. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: That is a document purported to have been published by the Foreign Languages Press, Peking, (25 and it purports to contain a speech by Saillant on behalf of the.7.f.t.u. BY MR. DE VPS: Ttet is so. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Now, that is your first document. Now, my brother Bekker has pointed out to you that that (3C is hearsay evidence of that speech on which you asked the

13 Professor kurraywitness to express an opinion, in connection with your allegation of fact, in your further particulars. BY MR. DE VPS: That is correct, Milord, except... BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Apart from this opinion evidence which you seek, is that document evidence against the (5 W.F.T.U.? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, in my submission, prima facie, that document is what it purports to he, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is any document what it purports to he in this Court? (10 BY MR. BE VPS: Prima facie, Milord. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is it? Why? BY MR. JUSTICE BEKK^: All it purports to he is a report of the speech made by somebody. BY MR. JUSTICE KENNEDY: A t the All-China Trade Union Con- (15 gress. BY MR. DE VPS: But its contents, Milords, are of a certain nature and... BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes, but who is Mr. Saillant. BY MR. DE VPS: That again is merely stated in the document(20 itself; but I am unable to argue on the factual aspects of where a document exactly fits in, because it is to be read with a mass of other documents of similar nature... BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: No, but unless other documents which are produced properly refer to this documents, the (25 other documents can't assist you in regard to the nature of this document? BY MR. DE VPS: No, that is so. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: The existence of other documents which are unrelated to this document, does not make this (30 document an admissible document.

14 Professor Murray BY MB. DE VPS; so, Milord. No, not in the ordinary sense, that is BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: In what sense, other than the ordinary sense do you,«... BY MR. DE VCS: Milord, not...i submit that this document (5 is admissible merely on the point of indicating that literature to that certain effect was in the possession of the Accused. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes, that is correct. not the purpose for which you are using it, But that is (IP BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, I am reading this document in conjunction with other documents, to put the material to the Accused I'm sorry, to the expert, and to ask him to give that a tag, a certain qualitative tag. And the rest of the argument will be directed subsequently to the Court (15 to indicate that this material is representative, or is the material accepted by the Accused, as being an indication of what they accepted..f.t.u. to be. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: But that is not the Crown's case as set out in the further particulars, (2C BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, to the extent that possession of a certain document connected with communism indicates hostile intent, that is apart from the question of the conspiracy itself, is always relevant. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: But we are not concerned here with that broad issue. Y/e are concerned with the narrow issue.(25 As stated in your further particulars, BY MR. DE VPS: That is so, but when once this particular organisation has been labelled, it can be used in argument as indicating the type of organisation it is, and the way the other Accused link in with that particular type of (30 organisation.

15 Professor Murray BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: You say once it has been labelled. We are now in the process of considering the labelling, BY MR. BE VPS: Yes. That is so. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: How does that affect it? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, I can take it no further than (5 saying that the picture of the..f.t.u, as presented by these documents is... BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: No, but I want you to deal with your own particulars. " I BY MR. DE VCS: We could leave that; that is the first (IP of a series of documents, and that is not the only document. I'm sorry, Your Lordship referred to the particulars about the indictment. I thought your Lordship referred to the par ticulars about the document, which I intend leading evidence BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: on now. /Isn't your point really this, that you now say (15 the allegation by the Crown is that the W.F.T.U. is a Communist sponsored organisation, BY MR. DE VPS: That is so, Milord. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: And I am going to prove that? BY MR. DE VPS: That is so. (2P BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: By asking this witness to comment on a document which was found in the possession of either an Accused or a co-conspirator, and which is said, or which contains a speech reported to have been made by a certain person in 1953, according to the document, on behalf of (25 that organisation. Now, is that evidence^ that document, on which you can ask the witness to express an opinion? How is that document evidence in connection with the W.F.T.U.? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, forgetting for the moment that it is supposed to be a speech by somebody? BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Why should I forget? document. That is the

16 Professor Murray 3Y MR. DE VPS; Well, because Milord, I want to put the argument on this basis, the contents of that document, apart from the fact that it is the speech of somebody, reflects tye typical feature of the W.F.T.U. as the Crown alleges that the Accused accepted it. (5 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Where did you allege that? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, that will be the argument of the Crown when it comes to the existence, proving the existence of this organisation. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes, but on these particulars, (10 ou must prove that first, before you can argue the acceptance. BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, it must be proved first that it could hardly be argued, but the difficulty is that we are,...it is difficult to put'a full argument to the Court on this (15 particular factual basis at the stage mid-way in the case; and on the other hand, we have to lead expert evidence on certain material. The Crown is in this difficulty that it is a very complex case, and everything based on a series of inferences. So every fact that has to be proved is (2C something that has to be finally argued in the last instance and I am not in a position really to present any BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: The facts must be proved. BY MR. DE VPS: Yes, that is so. But the fact is, the basis of numerous inferences from certain documents, (25 from a great number of documents, I am quite unable at this stage, I am afraid, to present a coherent argument to the Court to show exactly how I arrive at the conclusions BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Well now, you have dealt then with GN.47. That is your submission on that document. What (3P are the other documents; are they of the same type?

17 Professor Murray BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, the other is PJM.12, "Under the Banner," and it purports to he published hy the W.F.T.U, It is called "Under the Banner of Unity and International Solidarity," It is mentioned in column 3 of Schedule 4 to the indictment, and those documents were indicated... (5 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes, hut what is this document? BY MR. DE VPS: It says it is published by the./.f.t.u. It is a printed document, ostensibly published by W.F.T.U, Publications Ltd. That appears on the document itself. And it says it is published on the occasion of the Third (IP World Trade Union Congress Pctoher BY MR. JUSTIPERUMPFF: And that is a document you also were going to put to the witness? BY MR. DE VPS: Thatis so. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: What other documents have you got? (15 BY MR. DE VPS: The third document, C.262, "The World Trade Union Movement," is the title of the document. It is a publication in the form of a magazine. It is published by W.F.T.U. Publications, according to the document itself. It ie the-iasr* of f :optemberl955. I have mentioned the (2P publishers, published by W,F.T.U, and printed in London. And it purports to deal with matters, the property of the W.F.T.U. For instance, the editorial says... BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes, I.just want the list of documents in this particular instance. (25 BY MR. DE VPS: A further document is C.263, World Trade Union News, "Bulletin published by the World Federation of Trade Unions." Published in Vienna, Austria. There is a further docum3nt, the title is"...f.t.u. Supports Your Ini tiative, and there is a note appended "A letter from the (30 Secretariat of the W.F.T.U. -;o the organising committee of

18 Professor Murray the Conference of Workers and Trade Unions of all European countries. The cover seems to have heen lost, so there is no further information on it, It is Exh. No. D.74. The next one is AMK.28. It is again in the form of a magazine, "World Trade Union movement," called a fortnightly review (5 and hears on the front page, World Federation of Trade Unions, printed in on the front page, and hack page, published hy W.F.T.U. Publishers. A second issue of exactly the same magazine being one of December 1953, under the same exhibit number. The first issue in the exhibit was(lo in January A further document, D.73, entitled "The World Federation of Trade Unions on the front page, and entitled also "Constitution adopted by the./orld Trade Union Conference," October 3, l?>-5, and where the publisher's name usually is there --'-^- 'i,, "Secretariat Uneral, (15 Paris, France." The next document is GN.88, It is a roneod document, "Speech of Brother Allan Lalia^ General secretary of the French C.G.T., presumably a trade union organisation GM.22 is a further document, entitled it appears to be printed on the front page,,/ith roneod contents, in the(20 form of a magazine. On the top stands Secretariat Budapest Hungary, and the full title is Bulletin of the Trade Unions. Chemical I^f rrinti-tnal of the/allied Workers. In brackets underneath stands ".T.D.", I think it means "For Trades Department." "T.D. of the World Federation of Trade Unions." That is (25 the sub-title. There is no publisher mentioned. The reference to Secretariat, Hungary, Budapest, and the address is incomprehensible Hungarian, possibly is the only indication of a publisher or a printer, These are the documents. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Now, ycu have made your submission (30 in regard to GN.47. What is yeur submission in regard to

19 Professor Murray PJM.12? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, that again is a printed publication prima facie emanating from the World Trade Union Congress and from the World Federation of Trade Unions. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is th;re any rule which says that (5 when a document purports to have been printed by somebody it is prima facie vidence that it has been printed by them. BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, as at present advised, I have no lqgtl rule to that effect. It is merely a de facto inference I submit that the Court can draw under certain circumstances (10 from printed material. I submit that it is de facto prima facie evidence of the correctness of the source. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Why? BY MR. DE VPS: Prima facie, it purports to emanate let me putit this way. It is a document purporting to emanate {15 from,,.. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: But why is that prima facie evidence? BY MR. DE VPS: W.F.T.U. sources. BY 13. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes, why is that prima facie evidence. BY MR. DE VPS: Merely on the practical position that you (20 could hardly assume that a document of this particular type is counterfeit unless there is some indication. BYMR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: But why? I don't see why. BY ICR. DE VPS: Milord, there may, as a matter of fact I could not show Your Lordships on this particular point, but...(25 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Have you got any authority for it? BY MR. DE VCS: No, Milord, none. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Are there any authorities or any decided authorities. BY MR. DE VPS: No, I'm afraid not. There may be I'm ncrt<30 quite sure, but there is a mass of correspondence, and there

20 Professor Murray - I may be correspondence referring to this particular document, but I am not in a position to assure the Court on that point at present. in isolation. I have to deal with the document as it stands, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF; This applies too then, to the other(5 documents, C.262, 263, and so on. BY MR. DE VPS: That is so, Milord, and that plus the fact that the expert BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: It is 262, 263, D.74, and AMK.88 and D.73 BY MR. DE VPS: Yes, that is so. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: What does that section say in the amendment to the Procedure... something about documents reflecting policy, BY MR. DE VPS: That is a document found in the possession(15 of a certain organisation or a member of that particular organisation, and indicating the policy of that organisadocument tion in that of the policy of that organisation, (IP. as so indicated to.be prima facie proof, BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: Are you not relying on that? (20 BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, no, I cannot rely in this instance on that. These documents obviously were not found in the possession of.,.. BY MR. JUSTJ-CE RUMPFF: I am just thinking; that deals with printed matter? Act. is there an Act Is there anything in that(25 BY MR. DE VCS: Milord, frankly I haven't attempted to do intensive research on that particular Act. would permit me I would... If Your Lordship BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: I don't know. I have never looked (3C at that, as far as I can remember.

21 _ Professor Murray BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: Mr. De Vos, and inside these hooks and these documents, what is it on which you are relying? BY MR. DE VOS: On the... BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: Is it a speech; is it a report of something that took place; is it an editorial article? (5 BY MR. DE VOS: In some instances an editorial. I would have to specially look. In one instance, these tabs indicate the correct position as to the extracts. It is simply an article in the one instance, dealing with W.F.T.U., and that is for instance in the document headed "Under the (10 Banner of Unity and International Solidarity," an article dealing with the W.F.T.U., and indicating what its aims are. I'm afraid I am not in a position to detail very accurately all the several passages, but in another instance, it is an article entitled "The Tenth Anniversary of the W F,T.U. (15 must be a step forward towards unity." And it appears to be well, it is the first article in this particular World Trade Union movement bulletin. It is really a mixture of articles and editorials dealing, purporting to deal, to indicate the policy of the organisation concerned, that (20 is the W.F.T.U. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: All those editorials, or whatever articles they are, are they hearsay information, or what type of information is it? BY MR. DE VOS: Milord, quite possibly there may be hearsay (25 I could not vouch for that, there may be hearsay in them. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is it your submission then, that because the document which you have said, that is the W.F.T.U. publication, is prima facie proof of that... BY MR. DE VOS: Prima facie proof... (30 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: That is your case?

22 Professor Murray BY MR. DE VPS: That is my case. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Have you any authority for that? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, I cannot take it further beyond the practical point of view, that that should be the position for all practical purposes. That a document which bears (5 the printed stamp of its own origin should he capable of being construed in that manner, heing given effective... on that basis, that the Court must under the circumstances be able to rely on the prima facie... BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is that because it is printed, and(10 not handwritten. BY MR. DE VPS: It is printed; document. it is formally a printed BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: What is your submission in the case of a roneod document? (15 BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, in the case of a roneod document, that I submit would indicate the personal handling of some person concerned with that document. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Do you draw a distinction between the method of reproduction of the document, manuscript (2C roneod and printed? Do you say that in the case of a printed document it should? BY MR. DE VPS: I would say that in the case of a printed document, or a document containing at least that printed cover, indicating its origin, there's a certain formal (25 validity attached that can be inferred from that fact, while if it is quite without any formal inference, that inference is certainly not so strong. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: Somebody wrote "Printed by the W.F.T.U." on that document* Isn't that so? (30 BY MR. DE VPS: That is so, Milord.

23 Professor Murray BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: Isn't that for present purposes the same as somebody other than the witness saying printed that, which makes it hearsay. W.F.T.U. BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, if one hears knowledge of the way in which these things are done, it is hardly...it may he (5 a case even, to some extent a case of necessity, hut I submit that it is hardly hearsay in the ordinary sense of the word. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is the basis of your argument that necessity knows no law? (IP "^Y MR. DE VPS: No, Milord, unfortunately I cannot go as far as that. I certainly cannot submit that. Milord, I am unable to take that particular point further than this, but apart from the source of this matter, this matter is properly before the Court, And I submit that the expert (15 opinion can be asked on the contents of these documents. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: In what respect., We are dealing here with your own statement that you want to ask the witness his opinion about the nature of this particular Federation. That is what we are dealing with. (2C BY MR. DE VPS: That is quite correct. Milords, I can only submit that printed matter in this particular form must lead to a certain inference of validity on the basis that one does not expect normally a wrong publisher and a wrong printer to be indicated, in material of this kind. I (25 cannot take the point any further than that. BY MR. "WELSH: Milords, in my submission, statements on documents as to the place where or the person by whom they were published are clearly in the nature of hearsay evidence. Milord, the definition of hearsay given by Phipson is as (3P follows: "Pral or written statements made by persons who are

24 Professor I'urray not parties and are not called as witnesses are inadmissible to prove the truth, of the matter stated, except in certain exceptional cases." Now, my learned friend is seeking to put in these documents in order to prove the truth of their contents, not merely in order to prove that these (5 documents were found in the possession of the Accused persons or co-conspirators, but in order to prove as in the case of the first document, that a speech was in fact made in Peking in 1953, by the President of the World Federation of Trade Unions. There is no sanctity about (10 a written document or a printed document. The statement at the end of it as to the name of the person who published it jjs hearsay. And for that reason, Milords, these documents, in our submission, have not been properly proved, and it is not competent for Professor Murray to give evi-(15 dence, expert evidence as to the inferences which may be drawn from their content in regard to the character of the organisation sa^d to have published them. That evidence can only become competent if it has first been established that the speeches were in fact made by the persons by whom (20 they purported to be made, or that the documents were published by the World Federation of Trade Unions. Milord, this problem, I believe, has cropped up in the Transvaal before. There was a case, and if necessary I shall try to find a reference to it. I think it is an unreported case.(25 But it was a case which was heard before two judges in the Transvaal Provincial Division, and the question that emerged was whether certain books had been illegally imported into the Union. And the Crown sought to prove on an allegation of contravening the Customs Act, that the documents having (30 been imported, because the documents bore superscriptions of

25 Professor Murray the kind that we have here, in other words, the documents themselves purported to have been printed outside the Union. And I am told that in this case it was held that that evidence was inadmissible and that therefore the appeal was upheld. I am told Milord that these documents purported (5 to have been printed in Prance, and it was their Lordships ffir. Justice Ludolph and Mr. Justice Cooper who sat in that case, But, Milords, with respect, the matter is different here on principle. My learned friend is treating these documents gs if there was something sacrosanct, something (10 relieving the Crown from the consequences of the hearsay rule, merely because something appears in print. And Milords, not only is there no authority to that, for that, but it is completely contrary to the ordinary principles governing evidence. BY ME. JUSTICE BSKKER: The section I mentioned, that (15 doesn't assist the Crown in any way? BY MR. WELSH: No, Milord, that section deals only, I think, with documents relating to organisations, questions of policy and that kind of thing. The section relates only to a case where a document is found in the possession of a (20 member of an organisation. Now, Milord, there is no evidence at all, that any of these documents are so found. In the documents mentioned by my learned friend, the only evidence about that is a police lieutenant, Mr. Hugo, found it in the possession of an alleged co-conspirator. (25 The second was found in the possession of another coconspirator. The third was found in the possession of the Congress of Democrats, so was the fourth. The fifth was found in the possession of another organisation, the S.A. Congress of Trade Unions. The next one was found in the (30

26 ^ m- - Professor Murray > possession of r ft of the Accused. The next was found in the possession of the Congress of Trade Unions. And the two last documents mentioned were hoth found in the possession of the same co-conspirator as the first document. And Milords, that I am told is the only evidence which connects these documents with this case. Now, Milord, that evidence cannot possibly be admissible to prove that these things wore said or published hy the World Federation of Trade Unions, or by its officials or office bearers. And unless that sub-stratum is laid, in my submission it (10 is improper and incompetent for Professor Murray to be asked these questions. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: We rule that the Crown cannot put to Professor Murray the documents which we have referred to, beginning with GN.47 to GN.72, to ask his (15 opinion on the quality of the W.F.T.U., as alleged in the further particulars hy the Crown. BY MR. DE VPS: As Your Lordships plaase. Milords, I now intend putting to Professor Murray certain documents, one by one, the first of these being A.15. (2P BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Could you just inform us now on what heading you are, in regard to your charge sheet and further particulars. BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, I am merely at present trying to, establish the Communist matter contained in certain doou-(25 ments, some of them found in the possession of organisations, and some of them found in the possession of Accused, and indicating Communist influence in each particular document. It is hard to categorise the documents under one head, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: I thought you might have gone over (30 to the World Peace Council, or any of those organisations.

27 Professor Murray BY ME. DE VPS: No, for the time heing I am leaving those front organisations alone. The first document is A.15, It is a document entitled "Constitution of the African National Congress." And as the number indicates, it was in the possession or on the premises of the African Nation-(5 al Congress, BY MR. MAISELS: Milords, may I suggest Your Lordships will remember this particular document is a document, when it was first handed in, contained a large number of pieces of paper which were pinned together, were found in that way.(ip I think it is very unfair of me to say Your Lordships would remember it. But the point I want to make is that unless Your Lordships see the document before the witness is asked questions, perhaps a wrong impression might be created. I would like to suggest that perhaps that should be done (15 in regard to the exhibit itself and then of course it can be handed back, unless there is a further copy available. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: It hasn't been read out, has it? BY MR. MAISELS: Yes, it was read out. It was one of those that was read out in part in one place and part in another.(20 The first witness was Mr. Moeller, and it is one of those where, if this witness is going to give the evidence which he is reported as having given in another place, will be on one of the pieces *;f paper which it is important for Your Lordships to see. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: May we have a look at the exhibit?(25 (Court inspects Exh. A.15.) BY MR. DE VPS: The position is, Milords, that we have made a note of our own, that is counsel to indicate where and what part of the record, certain portions of the document have been read in before. I could read out that first, and(3p

28 Professor Murray * A, 15 add in, or read out the other portions which are relevant to what the expert requires. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: I'm afraid that you will have to read to the witness, or let the witness read, whatever he wants to give an opinion on. (5 BY MR. DE VOS: So that we are not referred hack at all. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: No. BY MR. DE VOS: I m;rely wanted to indicate that certain portions have "been read in and I didn't want to repeat them unless Your Lordships thought that it would he more con- (10 venient, EXAMINATION BY MR. DE VOS CONTD.: Professor Murray, here is the original of A.15, and you have also before you a photostat copy of A.15 which you used previously and have compared with the original? I'm sorry, the photostat copy(l5 doesn't quite correspond. Well, use the original. Professor Murray, forget about the photostat; then you look at the original document only, at A. 15* BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: Well, has he had an opportunity of (20 studying the original? BY MR. DE VOS: Yes, Milord. EXAMINATION BY MR. DE VOS CONTD.: Professor Murray, you have seen the originals of all these documents, haven't you? I have seen the originals of these documents. (25 And what was your procedure that you followed when you looked at the document? I read the document, and made notes as to what appeared to be Communistinfluence in the document, in the contents of the document. BY MR. WELSH: Milords, with respect I submit that (30 Professor Murray should not refer to notes when he gives

29 Professor Murray A.15 evidence. It stands on the same footing, really, as the notes which he was going to use at the beginning of his evidence in regard to general Communist documents, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: It is slightly different, isn't it? BY MR. WELSH: Well, Milord, except this, that the witness (5 may have notes which amount virtually to a statement, or to a proof of the evidence which he is going to give. And in my submission it would be better, and in fact the proper course would be that he shouldn't have any notes at all. It is not a case where he is refreshing his memory, and (10 it is not the type of case where he is in fact entitled to have any notes at all. He is not refreshing his memory about facts. We would have no objection, of course, to his flagging the portions of the document he wishes to refer to, but he oughtn't to have notes, (15 BY MR. DE VPS: Milords, I submit it is par excellence a case here where the witness does need some assistance in construing the document. He certainly needs those notes to refresh his memory. He has seen, I tiink, hundreds of documents. He couldn't possibly remember now to refer to (2P every passage without a very careful study, as he has done previously. He wouldn't be able to find those passages within a reasonable time. It would take a long time for the witness in each instance again to seek out the passages and to comment on them, if he has to deal with them de novc.( After all, Milords, he is an expert witness, who applies his expert scientific knowledge to a certain state of affairs, and as Your Lordships mentioned in the beginning in the case of a doctor too he would refresh his memory on the notes of a certain case here, and here it seems to (3P me that this is exactly similar.

30 Professor Murray A.15 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: There are two aspects, I think, to this case. It may he that Professor Murray wants to read a piece on page 1, 15, and 18. Now, if he has got a note saying that page 1, 15 and 18, then obviously he can refer to that. That is merely flagging the pages in order to (5 get the correct hits that he wants to read, from this exhibit. But on what grounds could he then, having done that, look at what he wrote down, what his opinion was, when he wrote down the notes. I take it that the rest of the note consists of opinions. (10 BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, the note consists of two elements, as Your Lordship has pointed out. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Well, the reference to the document or paragraph, of course, that obviously is admissible, he can refer to that. But then what do the other notes con-(15 sist of? Cf opinion evidence? BY MR. DE VPS: To some extent yes, Milord. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Why to some extent.? BY MR. DE VPS: Well, it is difficult; it is partially a reference to that passage and partially interwoven with (2P that the opinion of the witness on that particular paragraph BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is it a summary of his evidence? BY MR. DE VPS: Notes about which he must give evidence, yes. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Constituting a summary of the evidence? (25 BY MR. DE VPS: Yes. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: In short, it is an abbreviation in phraseology only single words are found, but it is a summary BY MR. DE VPS: Yes. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER: But isn't the question not what (30 his opinion was at that time, but what his opinion is here

31 Professor Murray A,15, in Court? BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, but surely, he is not trying to revive his memory now. As Your Lordship says, he is being asked his opinion now, but surely that must be the same scientific opinion he had at the moment when he had the (5 document. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: I don't know. And that is not the point at all in regard to looking up notes. You can't give evidence in a short form and then give it in a long form here. (10 BY MR. DE VPS: No, Milord, it is merely to revive the witness' memory on the passages which he wishes to make use of and that as Your Lordship says, there cannot he any difficulty about that, and it indicates that particular phrase he refers to, and perhaps his opinion on that. It is (15 merely to expedite matters, Milord, Surely, Milord, for a man of science to be able to do that, he cannot be improper in any way, it cannot he ahused in any way. It is merely after studying all these documents,.,... BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Is this an argument again based (20 on necessity? BY MR. DE VPS: No, Milord. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: v/e have dealt with the matter already, haven't we? BY MR. DE VPS: No, Milord, I submit it is not the same. (25 In the other case, it was a question of giving dogmatic evidence, philosophic or dogmatic evidence on Communism, and here is comment on a particular document. BY MR. JUSTICE KENNEDY: I think Mr. De Vos the witness be allowed the various references to the pages, and nothing(3p more. Because in principle I think the matter is on exactly

32 Professor Murray A.15. the same footing as the previous ruling which we gave-, on this subject. Because otherwise the witness will be giving evidence on the notes which he made. BY MR. DE VPS: Milord, in that event I am not able to proceed, because his notes which he has before him contain (5 more than pure references to passages. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Professor Murray, the notes which you have before you, are they passages of the documents to which you will be referred...? Yes, they are marked here. Page so-and-so, paragraph so-and-so. (IP If the witness refers to that then he can give evidence, EXAMINATION BY MR. DE VPS CONTD.: Have you marked all the passages you are referring to on the document itself, Professor Murray? This document unfortunately is another issue which does not correspond to the pages (15 of my notes. There are various documents bound in f perhaps this is it; there are various documents bound in here together. I beg your pardon, I have got the right paging now. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: v/ould it be possible for you, Pro- (20 fessor Murray, to look, if you are asked to read portions of the documents, to look at the portion in your notes, the reference to the portions, read them, and not look again at the other section of your notes? Yes, I can read them merely as page references, (25 BY MR. WELSH: May I suggest my learned friend Mr. De Vos might have the witness 1 notes, and I have no objection to his referring to a particular page. At any rate, from this first document. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Yes, if that is possible. (30

33 Professor Murray A.15. BY MR. WELSH: Milord, I wouldn't like Professor Murray to have his notes before him. EXAMINATION BY MR. DE VPS CONTD.: Will you give me your notes, Professor Murray? (Notes handed to Mr. De Vos.) Will you look at page first of all, Professor Murray (5 you have in front of you the original document, A.15? That is so. And it is entitled "Constitution and Programme of the A.N.C."? That is so. I'm afraid I may have the same paging difficulty now (10 that you may have had, Professor Murray may I have a look at the original for a minute.? It is all right if you take that paging. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: Could you perhaps go on to another document? (15 BY MR. MAISELS: Milords, I think my learned friend really is in a difficulty, if I may say so, because of events that have happened, and speaking for ourselves, Milord, if my learned friend would apply to Your Lordships for an adjournment so that he can get the papers in order, we wouldn't (20 oppose. Milord We have been in trouble ourselves like that, BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: He could go on to another document and fix up this document before tomorrow, BY MR. MAISELS: Well, as he likes, but I only really think (25 it may be more convenient for him, BY MR. DE VOS: Milord, I think I will be able to proceed with the one I have been dealing with. Looking at page 1, paragraph 2(a), Professor Murray, it reads: "Objects: The aims of the Congress shall be (a) to protect and advance the (30

34 Professor Murray A. 15. interests of the African people in all matters affecting them.? No, that is not my page 1. 1 here. There are two pages BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF: May I seriously invite you to go over to another document?? Counsel is reading from the(5 Constitution of the African National Congress, What I have heen asked to comment on is Constitution and Programme of the African National Congress, the original page in 1, a new page in 5. COURT ADJOURNS:

35 (A.H. MURRAY) C URT RESUMES ON THE 21st OCTOBER, APPEARANCES AS BEFORE. ANDREW HO "if SON MURRAY, under former oath; EXAMINATION BY ICR. DE VCS CONTINUED : Professor Murray, you have already testified to the role played by the U.S.S.R. as the motherland or the fatherland of the proletarians, and in that sense in a certain acknowledged position as far as Communist doctrine is concerned, not so? Yes, the doctrine is that Russia 5 is, as ommonly said, the motherland of the international proletarian movement. What is then as regards questions of policy - in terms of Communist theory, I'll ask you to remember whatever you reply to my question must be a reply in the 10 sense that you give information in terms of Communist theory, Communist doctrine as known to you. What, in terms of Communist doctrine, is the relationship between Russia, the U.S.S.R. and the Communist world outside the U.S.S.R. as regards international policy? The Communistl5 Parties over the world are expected to support Russian foreign policy on the points which Russia takes up, following on the basic doctrine of Communism. Now are there specific policies which are in Communist doctrine again, accepted as being those of 20 the Soviet Union in international policy - on the sphere of international affairs? There are many points which are recognised as Russian Foreign olicy, which is supported by Communist parties over the world, and these points follow on the basic doctrines of Communism. For example Mention instances, please? For example, the

36 4984. (A.He MURRAY) Russian policy vis-a-vis Korea, which is regarded as... BY MR. WELSCH : My Lord, I object to this evidence. If the witness wishes to give evidence as to the Russian policy in Korea, My Lord, as a fact, he must lay a proper foundation in 5 respect of his knowledge of that policy, which he hasn't done, My Lord. BY MR. DE VOS 1 My Lord, I find it impossible to preface every sentence, evary specific part of a question I ask Professor 10 Murray, with the words "in Communist doctrine". I thought I had ma.de it very clear. I want Professor Murray only to testify as to what in fact in the view of Communist doctrine as expounded is accepted in that view as Soviet policy. What are Soviet policies accepted in Communist doctrine, in 15 Communist theory, as expounded. BY MR. JUSTICE BUMPFF : What is your objection, Mr. Welsch? BY MR, WELSCH s My Lord, the objection is this, that a question of 20 what Russian policy is towards Korea is in my submission again a question of fact. Policy, My Lord, foreign policy means what does the Russian Government do, and what does it say in regard to Korea. Now My Lord, if it is desired to prove what the Russian Government does or did aiid said in 25 regard to Korea, then those facts, My Lord, must bo properly proved. This witness My Lord, has not laid any foundation of qualifications. All that this witness is, is a Professor of political philosophy at Cape Town University, and such a witness, My Lord, in my submission, with his qualifications, is not competent to speak as to what Russian foreign policy is. If, My Lord, if it is correct that Communist doctrine

37 (A.H. MURRAY) lays down certain policies, I would suggest that it would he much better if the witness would refer to the classical books on Communism in which this doctrine is laid down. BY MR. DE VPS : The position of the Crown is simply... 5 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF : Doesn't your question amount to this. You are asking the witness what is the Russian policy in regard to Korea? BY MR. DE VPS : 10 No, My Lord, no. I said in Communist doctrine, as expounded, what is accepted as being the Soviet policy. According to Communist doctrine, and I asked the opinion, and I want him to quote sources after giving his opinion on that point. But in terms of Communist doctrine, in terms 15 of Communist theory, I tried to formulate the question on that basis as clearly as I could, what is accepted as being the Soviet policy? In fact itmay he something else, as far as this particular reply is concerned. I am not attempting in fact to prove that Russian policy is A, B and 20 C. I am merely asking the witness to testify to what, in the view of Communist, is considered -is accepted as being Soviet Union policy. BY MR. JUSTICE KENNEDY : Why not leave it on that theoretical basis, 25 without quoting examples, and then let the witness quote from the textbooks. BY MR. DE VPS : My Lord, it is a matter of procedure, hut it is merely an expression of opinion which he is entitled, in 3P my submission to give, and of course to quote the grounds. The weight of his opinion vail have to be judged by the Court

38 (A.H. MURRAY) of course, "but formally and technically I submit it is quite in order to do it in this way. BY MR. JUSTICE KENNEDY : The reference to a particular country, as Mr. Welsch points out, may or must hring in a statement of 5 fact, apart from the theory of the foreign policy. BY MR. DE VPS : My Lord, in my submission, no. My submission - in my submission the position is that Communist doctrine as expounded now contemporaneously, accepts certain facts, IP as a doctrine, as a body of doctrine. These facts may be wrong, they may not in fact - in fact the Soviet Union may have a different policy towards Korea. But a certain version is accepted in Communist doctrine as being the correct version. 15 BY MR. JUSTICE KENNEDY ; Can you not get the evidence that you want, this part of Professor Murray's evidence, without referring to examples of where it has been put into force, and let - unless the witness can speak of it as a fact. 2C BY MR, DE VPS : My Lord, in fact the Crowh intends making use of numerous refeimces in writings and documents, where it appears that a certain attitude towards certain questions of international affairs is adopted by the persons con- 25 cerned, and that adoption of that particular attitude, the submission of the Crown will be, conforms to the Communist pattern, the Communist doctrine as expounded. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF : Well now, shouldn't you satisfy us that it is in 30 fact theory and not practice what he is talking about, and if that is so, should you not at this stage ask him to show

39 4987 (A.HLMURRAY) that it is theory, pure theory as opposed to fact. you have laid the foundation for that. BY MR. DE VOS : Then As Your Lordship pleases. Professor Murray, you have made a certain statement about the influence of 5 Russia in international affairs as seen in terms of Communist theory. Now before you proceed further, will you refer, as a political scientist to the way in which you see this problem, basing your conclusions on Communist theory alone, Communist doctrine, and how you are able to take it further 10 on the basis of an exposition of Communist doctrine in relation to international affairs at the present moment, or almost contemporaneously. Will you explain that to the Court on the basis of your view of Communist doctrine and theory? My Lord, as I said before, the basis of 15 Communist doctrine is the bankruptcy of the capitalist system, that the capitalist system has reached the imperialist stage, imperialism is the last, the highest development of capitalism and that imperialism is now entrenching itself into forms of Government which are called fascism, to 20 which one refers as fascism. The doctrine is, the contemporary doctrine following on that is that the world is divided into two camps, the warmongering camp and the peace loving camp. The peace loving camp is a camp which supports the proletarian movement internationally, and to 25 the extent that the proletarian movement, the working people's movement prevails in the world, to that extent the class struggle and production for profit will stop, and therefore there will be peace. On that basis Russian foreign policy is a policy of spreading the peace doctrine, 30 criticising the warmongering camp, the so-called imperialist camp for promoting war, promoting unrest

40 (A.H. MURRAY) Professory Murray, are you now always referring to Communist doctrine on the point or to what you in fact consider your knowledge to he? I want you to distinguish between the two, if you can, as far as you can, and refer only, solely to what you consider to he the position in 5 terms of Communist doctrine as expounded? I thought I was referring to Communist doctrine as expounded, and showing the admitted implication... BY MR, JUSTICE RUMPFF 2 I'll tell you what the difficulty is in regard to 10 this point. When you say Russian policy is - I think the question should simply he put 'In terms of Communist doctrine, what should the policy he of a state, that is a Communist State, including Russia'. What in terms of Communist.-doctrine should he the policy of the motherland? 15 If a country adopts the position which I have explained of the bankruptcy of imperialism and so forth, and the division of the world into two camps, the warmongering camp and the peaceloving camp, and the position that the - that imperialism is at an end, it follows that the coun- 20 try must adopt a policy of peace, international peace, it must adopt a policy of fighting any attempts by the warmongering camp to destroy these conditions of peace, to destroy the conditions which promote peace, and therefore the policy would be, in their own terminology, anti- 25 imperialist, anit-war. That would follow from the basic assumptions of the doctrine. BY MR. DE VPS s Anti-war in what sense, Professor Murray? Antiwar in the sense that-the doctrine is that the warmongering 3P camp promotes war, and must promote war in view of its economic system, whereas on the doctrine the peace loving

41 Collection: 1956 Treason Trial Collection number: AD1812 PUBLISHER: Publisher:- Location: Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg LEGAL NOTICES: Copyright Notice: All materials on the Historical Papers website are protected by South African copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, or otherwise published in any format, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Disclaimer and Terms of Use: Provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein, you may download material (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal and/or educational non-commercial use only. People using these records relating to the archives of Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, are reminded that such records sometimes contain material which is uncorroborated, inaccurate, distorted or untrue. While these digital records are true facsimiles of paper documents and the information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be accurate and reliable, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand has not independently verified their content. Consequently, the University is not responsible for any errors or omissions and excludes any and all liability for any errors in or omissions from the information on the website or any related information on third party websites accessible from this website.