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

426 COMMUNISM IN MOTION-PICTURE INDUSTRY Now, when I came back to this country, as I say, we had a great many meetings then of the Hollywood Ten. We used to meet almost regularly at least every week. There were special committees. And during this time I, too, having been away for so long particularly, I attended all the meetings. I got into discussions. I got into argu- ments. I noticed that a change had taken place in the time while I was gone, and that the group was, without question, following the party line all the way down the line. I know the basis of my arguments was primarily that I thought that since we were conducting a fight on civil liberties that we ought to include as many people in our fight as we could, liberals, middle- of-the-roaders, progressives, eveiwbody, and that the only way we could do this was make an honest fight on an honest issue. However, the group usually voted to support every cause they could. That is, they put stuff out in defense of the New York 11, the Commu- nists in New York, the Harry Bridges case, every case of this sort that came up. As I say, it was a typical Communist front at this time, and a great deal of this—we used to have discussions in our groups. Sometimes others would agree with me on my point of view. Some- times they would initiate this kind of point, but I noticed that when it really got down, when the argument got hot, that somebody would call on John Howard Lawson, and then eventually on Ben Margolis, and the dialectical reasoning would come, and in effect, the party line dictate would come. I am convinced now—although I can't prove it—I am convinced at least a small group of these people probably used to meet before the meetings and lay out the agenda. I know this is a common prac- tice in the other meetings I have taken part in. It probably happened at our Hollywood Ten meetings, too. In the long run it would wind up always, of course, in favor of the broad Communist Party line of action. Mr. Tavenner. During the early period—I might say about the time you were subpenaed to appear before this committee, was there any indication to you that the Communist Party was endeavoring in any way to influence the course of action that you as a group should take when you appeared here before this committee? Mi*. Dmytryk. You mean the first time ? Mr. Tavenner. Yes. Mr. Dmytryk. Well, I certainly had no idea of it at the time. In looking back, of course, I can reach conclusions based on my later experiences about that, which I couldn't have had at the time. I think in looking back on it and remembering how the 19 were organ- ized, I would say the answer to that would probably be "Yes." Mr. Tavenner. Well, describe that to the committee. Mr. Dmytryk. Well, it went something like this. When we first got the subpenas, Adrian Scott and I accepted snbpenas from the marshal at RKO studios. We had been in touch with nobody else, nor did we get in touch with anybody else at that time. We de- cided we wanted to get a lawyer. So I think that Adrian Scott at that time on a story, Behind the Silken Curtain, had had some contact with Bartley Crum, whom we knew as a liberal Republican from San Francisco, a man who had been very active in Willkie's campaign. So we decided to contact Bartley Crum and ask him to serve as our counsel.