The screen writer (Apr-Oct 1948)

or the blacklisting of any screen writer. III. That the defendant producers be enjoined from taking any concerted action with respect to ( 1 ) Refusing to purchase or acquire plays, scenarios, or other literary property, from any person because that person holds a membership in any particular group, however that group may be defined ; (2) Refusing to purchase, acquire or produce plays, scenarios, or literary property because it falls into a particular classification or description or because it deals with a particular theme, or with any individuals or characters in a particular manner : (3) Restricting, eliminating or discouraging the use of any type of material, subject matter or characters, on the basis of any social, economic or political criteria. Or, in the alternative, if the relief in I, II, and III above is not granted : IV. That, in order to determine the nature and extent of the threat against plaintiffs, discovery be order ed as to the intent and purpose of defendants in discharging screen writers by collective action along the following lines: (a) What individuals in the industry will determine whether any writer is to be barred from employfent by all the producers ; (b) How will the evidence against such writer be collected ; (c) Will such writer be confronted with charges, and if so by whom ; (d) Will such writer be represented by counsel before the industry takes action, or will the precedent of the writers already discharged be followed ; (e) Will such writer be confronted with the witnesses against him ; (f) What existing or past political parties do the defendants refer to as advocating the overthrow of the government by force ; (g) What do the defendants mean by "groups" ; does the term include social associations ; (h) What constitutes "member ship" in the "groups" referred to in the resolution. Does the opinion of the majority of the group determine its character as a forbidden organization. If so, must dissenting members resign if a so-called un-American position is taken by the majority ; and (i) What does the advocacy of the overthrow of the government by "unconstitutional and illegal methods" refer to. Does it mean methods which have already been determined to be illegal or unconstitutional by the courts, or methods which may in the future be decided to be illegal or unconstitutional.' There are three appendices setting forth the objects of the Screen Writers' Guild as stated in Article II of its Constitution and By-Laws, the statement and resolution issued by the Association of Motion Picture Producers on November 25, 1947, and excerpts from the testimony of John Moffitt, Jack Warner, Eric Johnston, Adolph Menjou and Rupert Hughes given at Thomas Committee hearings. ^ Thurman Arnold Fund The question of opposing blacklisting concerns every member of the Guild. It should be clear, as it is emphatically stated in the current editorial, that the suit undertaken by the Guild has no reference to any political point of view. This is a fight to protect the interest of every member against a practice that is vicious no matter at whom it is directed and that may, if allowed to go unchecked, be turned against any of us recklessly and capriciously. The response to the request for voluntary donations to help defray the expenses of the suit has been good. To date almost $15,000 has been pledged* and the largest part of this sum already paid in. We need at least $10,000 more; this should be forthcoming even if in small amounts from every individual member, for, in the long view, every member must realize that blacklisting is a weapon which, if the occasion arises, can be turned against him. THE EXECUTIVE BOARD 28 The Screen Writer, June-July, 1 94 J