blandly states that Laurence Duggan, arnmember of the Soviet apparat in thernState Department, “jumped or fell” fromrna 16th-story window in New York—rnclearly a defenestration (much like JanrnMasaryk’s in Prague) to prevent himrnfrom corroborating the testimony ofrnWhittaker Chambers and ElizabethrnBently.rnThe Haunted Wood is subtitled SovietrnEspionage in America—The StaUn Era.rnHowever, it merely scratches the surfacernof what was already known, while failingrnto add anything substantive to our knowledgernof the subject. Nowhere is therernany mention of, say, Arthur AlexandrovitchrnAdams, a ranking Soviet espionagernagent, who entered the UnitedrnStates on the very day in the early 1930’srnthat Maxim Litvinov, in acknowledgingrnU.S. diplomatic recognition of thernU.S.S.R., promised President Rooseveltrnthat Soviet espionage and subversionrnwould cease. Adams set up major Sovietrnespionage rings in the United States,rnamong them the apparat fi-om whichrngrew the atomic spy ring of which J.rnRobert Oppenheimer was a part.rnThere is little in the Weinstein opusrnabout these germinal activities. And ofrnthe first blockbusting case—the defectionrnof GRU Lt. Igor Gouzenko withrndocuments which shook the complacencyrnof Canada, Britain, and the UnitedrnStates, leading to meetings betweenrnPrime Minister Mackenzie King andrnPresident Truman—there is nothing atrnall, other than the simple statement thatrnLt. Gouzenko defected. Gouzenko’s assertionrnto me (as the first newsman to interviewrnhim) that there were nine Sovietrnspy rings operating in the United Statesrnseems to have escaped Professor Weinsteinrnand his collaborator, who are alsornnot interested in Gouzenko’s later disclosurernthat Lester Pearson—Canadian foreignrnsecretary and later prime minister—rnwas one of the Soviet Union’s own.rnThe Haunted Wood ignores entirelyrnthe notorious Amerasia case, involvingrnthe theft of some 1,700 secret documentsrnfrom every sensitive government agencyrnwith the exception of the FBI, which ledrnto an even more notorious whitewash byrnPresident Truman’s attorney general,rnTom Clark. (“Journalistic zeal,” the JusticernDepartment told the court.) OfrnOwen Lattimore, there is not a word, norrnof the brigade of Soviet agents who hungrnout at the Institute of Pacific Relations.rnThough he has Flora Lewis’s Red Fawnrnin his bibliography. Professor Weinsteinrnfinds it unnecessary to describe NoelrnField’s role in the Office of StrategicrnServices (or his role as Judas Goat in Stalin’srnpostwar “liquidations” in Hungary),rnthough he is fully aware of Field’s activitiesrnas an espionage agent in Washington.rnIn the case of the OSS, of course,rnwe are given little clue to the Soviets’rnthorough penetration of it, though Weinsteinrndoes scatter a few names about. Yetrnthe most sensitive of sections, the CentralrnEuropean desk of the OSS, wasrnstaffed almost totally by Herbert Marcusernand the Comintern’s International Instituternof Social Research (the “FrankfurtrnSchool”) which worked through NoelrnField—and, after the war, through U.S.rnoccupation authorities —in an effort torndeliver postwar Germany to the SovietrnUnion. And there is nothing of how fieldrnoperations were conducted by MajorrnMilton Wolff and his fellow veterans ofrnthe Abraham Lincoln Brigade, theirrnhands still bloody from Stalin’s purgesrnduring the Spanish Civil War. These arernbut a few of Professor Weinstein’s sins ofrnomission. He must be credited, however,rnfor devoting over 29 pages to therncomedic case of Boris Morros, a minorrnHollywood producer, who played no significantrnrole in the major espionage andrninfiltration operations while thoroughlyrnconning the Soviet secret services intornsetting him up in business and separatingrnthem from some minor amounts ofrncash.rnAs the author of Perjury, Allen Weinsteinrnshould have had the last authoritativernword on Alger Hiss, in particular onrnhis activities in the 1940’s and 1950’s.rnYet we are not told of his delivery to a leftishrncolumnist of the secret British orderrnof battle in the Greek postwar hostilities,rnthereby forcing British forces to withdrawrnand compelling President Trumanrnto substitute American troops. Or of howrnthe Hiss report to the United Nations—rndescribing Panama as a “colony”—almostrnblew us out of the water in LatinrnAmerica and contributed to our subsequentrnloss of the Panama Canal.rnThe Haunted Wood does enhance accountsrnof well-known cases with materialrndrawn from Soviet secret archives. Andrnfor those who had their heads buried inrnthe sand during the Cold War, or reliedrnon the liberal press, there is some new information.rnFor others, better groundedrnin the great game of foxes (as LadislasrnFarrago called it), Weinstein’s book canrnprovide little more than added affirmationrnthat the Soviets, aided and abettedrnby Americans in and out of government,rnspied with impunity while the nationrnslept. While the fiill story is slowlyrnemerging, through the Venona interceptsrnas well as the partial opening of SovietrnKGB archives, much of it remains tornbe told—which is why even so thin anrnaccount as The Haunted Wood is of val-rnRalph de Toledano is the author, mostrnrecently, of Notes From the Underground:rnThe Whittaker Chambers-rnRalph de Toledano Correspondence:rn1949-1960.rnIt Takes Smarmrnby J.O.TaternDear Socks, Dear Buddy:rnKids’ Letters to the First Petsrnby Hillary Rodham ClintonrnNew York: Simon & Schuster;rn203 pp., $20.00rnAnyone entertaining an unpleasantrnthought about the Clinton WhiternHouse is almost certainly a victim of thern”vast right-wing conspiracy” which Mrs.rnClinton (formerly Ms. Rodham-Clinton)rnhas blamed for her husband’s travails.rnFor many years, the Clintons havernused the word “children” as an odd euphemismrnfor “government,” Joycelyn Eldersrnand Marian Wright Edelman beingrnbut the best known of their associates inrnthis regard. In any case, Mrs. Clinton,rnwoman of letters, is back, following uprnher compelling It Takes a Village withrnthe present remarkable volume, whichrnwill set to rest any unwarranted suspicionsrnor hostilities, and by the surest ofrnmethods. Dear Socks, Dear Buddy shouldrnallay whatever fears or apprehensions thernpublic may have entertained about thernsinister mentality of the First Family.rnIn the first place, no reader need bernconcerned that any profits from DearrnSocks, Dear Buddy will be diverted to thernm.any legal defense funds of the President,rnthe First Lady, or their allies. Thernproceeds will go directly to the NationalrnPark Foundation, because Mrs. Clintonrnis devoted to the integrity of the nation,rnto historic preservation, and to the main-rnJUNE 1999/33rnrnrn