The screen writer (June 1947-Mar 1948)

WITCH-HUNTING IN HOLLYWOOD banks and charlatans who preach bigotry and racial and religious intolerance? Uncle Rupert is smart enough to know, and if he doesn't know he could easily find out, that there's about as much chance of the Communists overturning the government of the United States as there is of me dethroning Joe Louis. He should know that most of the things he has been saying about the Screen Writers' Guild and the proposed American Authors Authority are sheer poppycock. We need your weight on our side, Uncle Rupert ; we need your thunder to help answer some of our more powerful detractors. Of course, we couldn't ask you to stoop to a controversy with the Hollywood Reporter. After all, one doesn't call on the heavy artillery to shoot rabbits. Following a series of public utterances, the irresponsibility of which was challenged by Sa?nuel Goldwyn and other leaders of the industry, Ronald Reagan, president of the Screen Actors Guild was quoted recently by the trade press in a reference to the Screen Writers' Guild. Under the date of May 7, Emmet Lavery, president of the SWG, wrote Mr. Reagan inquiring about the item in the trade press in which he was quoted as saying that "there were some Communists in the SAG and in the Screen Writers Guild, probably more in the latter than in the actors' group." Mr. Lavery went on to say: I am very much interested in an item printed in the Hollywood Reporter yesterday in which you are quoted as saying that "there were some Communists in the SAG and in the Screen Writers Guild, probably more in the latter than in the actors' group." If this report of your speech is correct, on what basis do you presume to offer the public the gratuitous information that there are "probably more" in the Screen Writers' Guild than in the SAG? At a time when inter-Guild unity is of increasing importance, it is a little difficult for us in the Screen Writers' Guild to understand why the president of a neighboring guild should go out of his way to make this particular type of criticism. My own private guess would have been that you have many more Communists in the SAG than we have in the SWG, but I certainly would not, in the first instance, have felt the inclination to grab a public platform and offer this generality as an absolute fact. Undoubtedly there are some Communists in the Screen Writers' Guild and there are some Commu nists in the Screen Actors Guild. But since neither of our Guilds has a political test for membership, we have no way of screening out the few Communists, any more than we have of screening out Republicans or Democrats. And in the light of prevailing Supreme Court decisions neither of our Guilds would find very much support — especially in time of peace — for exploring the private political lives of our members. I see nothing to be gained for either Guild in a guessing contest as to the probable number of Communists in either. The solid democratic worth of each Guild is a self-evident fact which needs no apology from anyone at this time. Now, as always in the history of our country, there is a simple remedy for seditious activity in time of peace or war. If members of any guild or union in Hollywood are truly engaged in any activities bordering on sedition, there are standard procedures in law by which these activities can be stopped. The Screen Writers' Guild, as you must well know, has always had the friendliest regards for the Screen Actors Guild. I can only hope that you have been misquoted in the trade papers. If this is so, I would appreciate a word from you so that I may refer it to our Executive Board without delay. Sincerely, s/ EMMET LAVERY President Screen Writers' Guild. Mr. Reagan's reply, dated May 12, follows: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of May 7th. I was not only misquoted — I was smeared, and I am a trifle surprised that you should place any credence in anything the professional red-baiting section of the press says, for if memory serves, you yourself have had some experience with the lengths to which some papers will go to justify their own peculiar policy. My entire talk was a defense of Hollywood and about 95 per cent of it had nothing to do with Communists. I discussed from a number of facets the fact that Hollywood is just a cross-section of the country at large and that it would be unjust to judge the entire city of Des Moines by the actions of a very few individuals who might misbehave in public and land in the hoosegow. In briefly touching on politics, I said we had all shades of opinion here in Hollywood, ranging from the Fascist-reactionary on the extreme right to the Communist Party member on the extreme left, but that the vast majority of people in the industry decried both extremes. I ventured the opinion that the Communist Party was a bit more active here in Hollywood than in Des Moines, for propaganda purposes, and that for propaganda reasons, individual party members sought to use the Screen Actors Guild and the Screen Writers Guild. I did not say there were more Communists in the Writers Guild than in the Actors Guild. I did say that the active Communist Party member infiltrates where he can do the most for his party and for this reason, it is possible that the party has directed greater attention to the Writers Guild than to the Actors Guild — although both Guilds have a few of them. This small portion of my talk led up to a condemnation of some previous investigation of alleged subversive influences in Hollywood, which have unfairly smeared the names of screen 21