Mr. STENHOUSE. No; I don’t. But you said it was in 1946, and I think it probably was. Mr. TAVENNER. So before you were selected for the position in the United Nations and, particularly for this project in China, you had refused to give information to the Federal Bureau of Investigation as to whether or not you had been a member of the Communist Party? Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, that is true, some nearly 2 years before. By the time I had applied for the position in the United Nations I didn’t consider myself to be whatever it was I had been before. Mr. TAVENNER. And no governmental agency, after the FBI came to see you, ever made any inquiry until the present time? Mr. STENHOUSE. Well, that is not so. Last September I was called by a Treasury representative, and he told me he wanted to ask me some questions. So I met him at my home and he started to ask me about the sort of work I did and whether I ever did much traveling. And in the course of that discussion I told him that I had been in Washington, D. C. I told him quite frankly what I had been doing. Mr. TAVENNER. Did you tell him you had been a member of the Communist Party? Mr. STENHOUSE. No. He didn’t ask me. Mr. TAVENNER. Was that the first time you had been questioned along this line? Mr. STENHOUSE, Yes. But he did ask me a question did I know a certain individual in Washington, D. C. And the name of the man was---- Mr. TAVENNER. I would suggest that you not mention the name in public. The committee, I think, would want to know privately. Let me ask you this: In seeking that information from you, did it have any connection with the Communist Party? Mr. STENHOUSE. I don’t know what his intentions were at that time. Mr. TAVENNER. I think, Mr. Chairman, under those circumstances, we should not ask him to state the matter in public when we have no idea what it is he is talking about. (The witness confers with his counsel.) Mr. STENHOUSE. You asked me if I had ever been questioned. Mr. TAVENNER. I mean questioned about communism in a Federal agency and regarding the matters under discussion here. Mr. STENHOUSE. I beg your pardon. I thought you meant had I ever been questioned by an agency of the Government in the interim. Mr. TAVENNER. Of course, we are not interested in whether you have been interrogated by someone in a Government department on matters not at all related to the functions of this committee. I understand you to say you have not been. (The witness confers with his counsel.) Mr. STENHOUSE. The reason I thought you might be interested in it was that he did ask me a question which related to the Institute of Pacific Relations. And since it related to that, I thought that the committee should know about it. He asked me if I had ever known (name deleted). And first I couldn’t remember the name. But then he said, “Well, didn’t you ever go to a luncheon in Washington, D. C., sponsored by the Institute of Pacific Relations?”