Mr. STENHOUSE. It may have recalled their names to me then, but it doesn’t now. Mr. VELDE. Did you give any names to the FBI when you were questioned? Mr. STENHOUSE. No; I didn’t. Mr. VELDE. You said it may have recalled some of the names to you at that time but it doesn’t now. If at that time it recalled the names of people with whom you had associated, why didn’t you give them to the FBI? Mr. STENHOUSE. I declined to state whether or not I had been a member of the Communist Party in Los Angeles. Mr. VELDE. Do you mean you declined to state to the FBI whether or not you had been a member of the Communist Party in Los Angeles? Mr. STENHOUSE. Yes. And, as far as I remember, he told me I didn’t have to state. I can’t be sure of that, but that is my recollection. Mr. VELDE. Of course, you don’t have to tell the FBI anything. But I am just wondering what was in your mind at that time--the reason why you did not give the FBI that information. Mr. STENHOUSE. The reason was that I had, to the best of my knowledge and conscience, done nothing hostile to the United States. In fact, I thought that I had been a very loyal and active citizen in promoting the war effort. Mr. TAVENNER. When did your employment terminate with the Department of Commerce? Mr. STENHOUSE. I got my termination notice in October, and it was effective in November of 1947. Mr. TAVENNER. What was the reason for termination of your services? Mr. STENHOUSE. It stated that I was being relieved due to a reduction in force. Mr. TAVENNER. I believe you stated then your next employment was with the United Nations. Is that correct? Mr. STENHOUSE. Yes, sir. Mr. TAVENNER. Will you tell the committee, please, how you obtained your employment with the United Nations? Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, I was trying many avenues to get employment. Mr. TAVENNER. I am referring only to your employment with the United Nations. Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, there may have been a number of channels through which I got it, but I think that it may have been through the Institute of Pacific Relations. Mr. TAVENNER. Why did you appeal to the Institute of Pacific Relations? Mr. STENHOUSE. Because I had been a subscriber to the Institute of Pacific Relations, and I knew of the Institute as one interested in far-eastern affairs. And that, amongst several dozens of business firms and organizations, seemed to be a likely place to find an occupation in the area where I wanted to be. Mr. TAVENNER. Before going to the Institute of Pacific Relations, did you have in mind that you desired to secure a position with the United Nations? Mr. STENHOUSE. No; I don’t think I did. In fact---- Mr. TAVENNER. Was the suggestion then made to you by the Institute of Pacific Relations that you seek employment with the United Nations? (At this point Representative Morgan M. Moulder left the hearing room.)