Communist infiltration of Hollywood motion-picture industry : hearing before the Committee on Un-American activities, House of Representatives, Eighty-second Congress, first session (1951)

COMMUNISM IN MOTION-PICTURE INDUSTRY 425 Mr. Tavenner. What did you have reference to ? Mr. Dmytryk. Well, simply this: That after the hearings here in 1947 when we went back to Hollywood we organized. We had—it couldn't be called an organization, but a group who shared lawyers, called the Nineteen. Of these, 10 appeared before the committee and were cited for contempt, and so we organized the Hollywood Ten in Hollywood for the sharing of expenses, because we were all pretty broke by that time. We had to pay our attorneys. We conducted certain public-relations campaigns, not very successfully, but we did— that took a good deal of money. We had to hold affairs to collect money from private people and at functions, dinners, and that sort of thing. And we held meetings quite frequently in order to discuss the various problems that came up. Right after the hearings in 1947 a number of speeches were made at various places. We were hot copy then, and, as a matter of fact, I think I made a couple of speeches myself. However, not being a very good speaker, I didn't continue speaking. Now, I left the country shortly after that. I couldn't work in Hollywood. We were all fired, those of us who were under contract by the studios, 5 out of the 10. I went to England to make a couple of pictures there. I made two pictures while I was there. I was there all together for a period of about 18 months, roughly. In other words, I went there early in 1948, and I came back in 1949, at the time when it was assumed that our case would get up in the Supreme Court, and there would be some decision made, and we would either go to jail or not go to jail. I had to be back in the country. However, quite a bit of time inter- vened before the Supreme Court actually handed down its decision, so I really became more active then. I had been away from it in England for awhile. My friends in England were comparatively con- servative people. Some were Socialists. I don't know of any Com- munists in the group. One thing happened in England, however, that might be of in- terest. That is, Kravchenko, who had written a book Mr. Tavenner. Victor Kravchenko? Mr. Dmytryk. Yes. Had written a book exposing Russian com- munism, I believe. I never read the book. I am not sure. Anyway, a Communist newspaper—I don't know the name of it—in Paris printed the story about it, said that it was composed of lies. He sued the paper for libel. While I was in England a subpena was sent over to England from France for me to appear at the trial. I was called and asked to accept a subpena. I didn't then. I tried to find out what they wanted me for, and I found out they wanted me to come and testify. Mr. Tavenner. Who wanted you ? Mr. Dmytryk. The newspaper side. In other words, the Commu- nist side in this case wanted me to come over and testify in the light of my experiences in the United States that there was a great deal of repression and persecution in the United States. This didn't seem to me to have any bearing on whether or not Kravchenko had been libeled, and, besides, I think no man, even if he feels a grievance, should wash his dirty linen in public in a foreign country. Anyway, I was asked three different times to accept the subpena, and I refused, and they finally stopped calling me.