We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
184 COMMUNISM IN MOTION PICTURE INDUSTRY
felt that I ought to chi]) in to get Mr. Mooney a new trial in California. I got together several linndred dollars, by getting some of my friends to chip in with me. This was at Mr. P^inerty's request.
Some time after that, a group of people came to the house and said they had heard I had been collecting money, showed me their credentials and I gave them the money. About a week later, Mr. Finerty arrived in California, and my wife and I met him at the airport. We had dinner together, and I very proudly told him of the several hundred dollars I collected and told him I had given it to them, whereupon Mr. Finerty almost fainted. He said, "My God, you have given that money to the Communists. They don't want to get Mooney out of jail. Their whole object is to keep him in jail."
There were two instances in which I was victimized.
Now, I would like just to ask one thing: When an ordinary crook who is not a Communist — and we have some of those — sells you a bill of goods and misappropriates the mone}^ you have a chance to investigate him, prosecute him and send him to jail, and everybody says, "Fine." But if the crook is a Communist who sells you one bill of goods — let us say milk to starving Bulgarians or the freeing of innocent prisoners — and then doesn't deliver, of course you mustn't then say anything about it, because you are interfering with civil rights and, as I see by the Daily Worker here, Senator Pepper will bawl you out for it.
Mr. Smith. It has been your experience, then, that these front organizations attempt to use the people connected as writers or otherwise in the motion-picture industry as examples here where they have attempted even to use you ; is that correct ? •
Mr. Ryskind. That is right.
Mr. Sjiith. What experience have you had so far as the guilds and unions themselves are concerned? In other words, are you a member of the Screen Writers Guild, Mr. Ryskind ?
Mr. Ryskind. No ; but I was a member.
Mr. Smith. How long were you a member, and during what period?
Mr. Ryskind. When I came to Hollywood in 1935 or '36 I had been a member of the Dramatists Guild in New York and of the Authors League. There was a fight on, apparently, to recognize this guild. Believing in collective bargaining, I saw no reason why writers shouldn't have a guild, as actors have. I fought for the guild.' After the Wagner Act the guild was recognized and I was made a member of the board of directors. We had roughly some 15 members on the board. Now, you have got to realize that most of us who are Americans are not used much to political trickery. Here we were, 15, and we thought everybody was in there pitching for the good of the guild. We found after a while — we were very naive — that about 7 of the 15 voted together on every doggone question that came up. The question didn't have to be important. Whether the question was whether the next meeting should be on Friday, or whether we should ask the producers for better terms, it was always the same, with the result that these seven, although they constituted a minority, won every point. The rest, being Americans, would normally divide on any question.
Mr. Smith. Was that in the Screen Writers Guild ? /
Mr. Ryskin. That was in the Screen Writers Guild.
Mr. Smith. Approximately when?
Mr. Ryskind. In 193(), right after its recognition in 1936.