"Howard Di Silva was wrongly accused"





Howard Di Silva(Howard Silverblatt) Da Silva, who had joined the Communist infiltrated Group Theatre in 1931,  was named as an active communist in the Hollywood cell by Robert Taylor (and later by Sterling Hayden) who said in 1947, “"I can name a few who seem to sort of disrupt things once in a while. Whether or not they are Communists I don’t know. One chap we have currently, I think is Howard Da Silva.”

Di Silva was a communist, having joined the party in the early 1930s. He helped to organize and run several communist front organizations including the National Conference of the Arts, Sciences and Professions. Ronald Reagan recalled Da Silva menacing John Garfield after Garfield had failed to toe the Communist line at a meeting.

Da Silvia was called before the HUAC on 21st March 1951 


TESTIMONY OF HOWARD DA SILVA, ACCOMPANIED BY ROBERT W.
KENNY AND BEN MARGOLIS, AS COUNSEL


Mr. Wood. You solemnly swear the evidence you give this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. Da Silva. I do.

Mr. Da Silva. I should like to voice an objection, if I may.

Mr. Wood. Just have a seat, please.

Mr. Da Silva. May I voice an objection?

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman, the telegram to which you referred
was presented to the committee in executive session yesterday, and I
understood it took action on it at the time.

Mr. Wood. Are you represented by counsel here ?

Mr. Da Silva. I am.

Mr. "Wood. "Will counsel please identify himself for the record?

Mr. Kenny. Robert Kenny, 250 North Hope Street, Los Angeles.

Mr. Margolis. I am also appearing on behalf of Mr. Da Silva. My
name is Ben Margolis, 112 West Ninth Street.

Mr. Wood. At any time you are asked a question by either counsel
for this committee or any of its members, you have the privilege of
conferring with your counsel to your entire satisfaction before making
answer, and you are given that right at any time.

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your full name, please ?

Mr. Da Silva. I would like to voice my objection now, if I may.

Mr. Tavenner. Will you state your full name, please?

Mr. Da Silva. May I not voice my objection?

Mr. Tavenner. You have not yet been identified in the record.

Mr. Da Silva. My name is Howard Da Silva. I was born Howard
Silverblatt. I was born in Cleveland, Ohio, May 4, 1909.

Mr. Tavenner. Will you furnish the committee, please, with a
brief resume of your educational background.

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Chairman, I have a statement which I would
like very much to make. It has been announced in the press that
this committee has as its purpose complete objectivity, and I think
in the face of that it is quite important that I present my own statement
here for clarity and for objectivity. Here is the statement I would
like to present [handing statement to counsel].

Mr. Tavenner. Is this the same statement that counsel sent in to
the committee a while ago ?

Mr. Kenny. No ; I don't think we sent a statement in. It may be
a statement of which you have seen a copy.

Mr. Tavenner. Is it a statement that was given to the press ?

Mr. Da Silva. It was given to the press.

Mr. Wood. This is a statement that you released to the press?

Mr. Da Silva. What is that?

Mr. Wood. This statement you now desire to read is a statement
that you released to the press ?

Mr. Da Silva. Simultaneously with my appearance; yes.

Mr. Wood. Let's see if I understand you correctly. When did you
release this statement which you now propose to read?

Mr. Da Silva. I was called here at 10 o'clock this morning.

Mr. Wood. When did you release the statement to the press ?

Mr. Da Silva. Shortly after I arrived here.

Mr. Wood. Shortly after 10, and it is now after 3. In the light
of the fact it has been given this wide publicity, I see no purpose in
burdening the record with a repetition of it.

Mr. Da Silva. My purpose is not to burden the record. My purpose is to achieve the kind of objectivity which was originally stated to the press by this committee.

Mr. Wood. Proceed with the questions.

Mr. Da Silva  I don't follow you. Did you say my statement was not to be read?

Mr. Wood. Yes, sir.

Mr. Da Silva. It is not to be read.

Mr. Tavenner. My question was, Will you please furnish the committee a brief statement of your educational background?

Mr. Da Silva. At this point, may I object to being called to testify against myself in this hearing. I object because the first and fifth amendments and all of the Bill of Eights protect me from any inquisitorial procedure, and I may not be compelled to cooperate with this  committee in producing evidence designed to incriminate me and to  drive me from my profession as an actor. The historical

Mr. Wood. Would an answer to that question incriminate you?
You were asked to furnish a statement of your educational back-
ground. Would a true answer to that question incriminate you ? If
so, you have a right to protect yourself.




Mr. Da Silva. You want me to make this objection at a time when I think an answer to the question will incriminate me? 

Mr. Wood. If a true answer to any question asked you by counsel
or any member of this committee would tend to incriminate you and
you so swear, you have a right to claim it, as I understand the law.

Mr. Margolis. It is our position that this witness is in the same
position as a defendant, and I think he should be allowed to complete
this objection.

Mr. Wood. He is not a defendant here. He is a witness.

Mr. Margolis. It is our contention that he is and will suffer the
consequences and pains in many respects.

Mr. Wood. He will suffer the consequences of testifying falsely, if
he does so. If he refuses to answer without valid ground, he is sub-
jecting himself, as you well know, to a proceeding for contempt of
Congress. It is a matter you can advise him about. You have that
privilege any time you want.

Mr. Tavenner. Now, will you answer the question, please?

Mr. Da Silva. I attended the public schools of New York City; Bronx High School ; and for a term, City College of New York.

Mr. Tavenner. When did you spend a term in City College of New
York?

Mr. Da Silva. I was born in 1009. I was about 17. That would make it about 1926.
I also attended Carnegie Tech in Pittsburgh for a short semester, working through college by working in the Jones & Laughlin steel mill.

Mr. Tavenner. What is your present address ?

Mr. Da Silva. My present address is 936 North Stanley Avenue, Hollywood 46, Calif.

Mr. Tavenner. And what is your present occupation ?

Mr. Da Silva. My present occupation is acting.

Mr. Tavenner. Have you ever held the position of vice president
of the Civil Rights Congress, that is, the New York chapter of the
Civil Rights Congress?

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Chairman, it is very clearly the object of this committee to tie me in with organizations which are in its disfavor, and therefore I object, and now I will tell you my objection.

Mr. Wood. We are not interested in your objection. We are interested in knowing whether you will answer the question.

Mr. Da Silva. I refuse to answer the question on the following basis: The first and fifth amendments and all of the Bill of Rights  protect me from any inquisitorial procedure, and I may not be compelled to cooperate with this committee in producing evidence designed  to incriminate me and to drive me from my profession as an actor.
The historical origin of the fifth amendment is founded in the resistance of the people to attempts to prosecute and persecute individuals because of…..

 Mr. Wood. Will you please wait a moment ? Please ascribe to the committee the intelligence to determine these questions for itself, and don't argue about it.

Mr. Da Silva. I don't care to argue about it, but I wish to clarify my position.

Mr. Wood. You need not teach this committee a class in law.

Mr. Da Silva. It is not my position. It is my position to uphold the law and to make sure the committee does.


Mr. Wood. If you say you decline to answer for the reasons given,
it will be understood.

Mr. Tavenner. Do you refuse to answer the question ?

Mr. Da Silva. I refuse to answer the question on the basis of my  statement here, on the basis that my answer might, according to the  standards of this committee, tend to incriminate me.

Mr. Tavenner. When did you go to the State of California for
employment, how long ago ?

Mr. Da Silva. I think for the first time in 1939, when I appeared in Abe Lincoln in Illinois.

Mr. Tavenner. Prior to 1939 how were you employed and where?

Mr. Da Silva. I was an actor on Broadway.

Mr. Tavenner. Over what length of time were you an actor on
Broadway?

Mr. Da Silva. I served my apprenticeship in 1929 with the Civic Repertory Theater, so from 1929 to 1939 I served as an actor on Broadway.

Mr. Tavenner. Were you connected at any time with the Federal
Theater project in New York?

Mr. Da Silva. Yes, I was and I was very proud to be. That was the advent of a magnificent period, and I think some of the greatest Work that ever came out came out at that time ; truly a people's theater.

Mr. Tavenner. How large an organization was it ?

Mr. Da Silva. In the Federal Theater?

Mr. Tavenner. Yes.

Mr. Da Silva. I think it is a matter of record, but there were many hundreds of actors in the Federal Theater all over the country. The audience was many millions of Americans, who for 55 cents could see plays they had never seen before and would not have had an opportunity to see otherwise.

Mr. Tavenner. Was it privately financed, or Government financed?

Mr. Da Silva. It is a part of the public record that it was Government financed.

Mr. Tavenner. At that time, while you were a member of it, were
you a member of the Communist Party ?

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that the most vital concern of this committee is to really control every concept of free thought throughout the country, to do it by attacking Hollywood, and

Mr. Wood. This committee is not interested in your opinion. Do you decline to answer the question, or will you answer it ?

Mr. Da Silva. It is necessary that I answer it in my own way. It seems vital to say that the object of this committee is a smoke screen. Nobody, either in Washington or Hollywood, thinks there is a group in Hollywood dedicated to overthrow southern California by force and violence.

Mr. Wood. You were asked a very simple question, whether at the
time you were a member of the organization you were asked about,
you were a member of the Communist Party.

Mr. Da Silva. Because the very clear intention of this committee is to tie me in with an organization in its disfavor, I refuse to answer the question for the reasons previously stated.

Mr. Wood. Let it be understood this committee is not trying to
tie you in anywhere. We are endeavoring to find where you tied
yourself.

Mr. Da Silva. I have a function as a citizen, but I think in this period of war hysteria it is the purpose of this committee to pull the wool over the eyes of the people.

Mr. Wood. The committee is not interested in your opinions. We
are anxious to get the facts.

Mr. Tavenner. Did you attempt to recruit persons into the Com-
munist Party from the Federal Theater project while you were a mem-
ber of the Federal Theater project ?

Mr. Da Silva. I decline to answer that question for the same reasons previously stated.

Mr. Tavenner. After going to Hollywood, did you become affiliated
with the Joint Anti -Fascist Refugee Committee there ?

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Chairman, there is a rumor that those who have been anti-German in the last war will be brought before this committee. I must decline to answer the question for reasons previously given.

Mr. Kearney. Mr. Chairman, cannot the witness be made to answer
"Yes" or "No" or to decline to answer on the grounds he might incrimi-
nate himself, without going into a speech.

Mr. Wood. It would certainly be appreciated by the committee if
he would not air his views and would answer the questions more
directly.

Mr. Tavenner. Have you been affiliated with the Actors' Laboratory
in Hollywood ?

Mr. Da Silva. Once again, because it is the purpose of this committee to link me with an organization it considers unfavorable, I decline to answer this question on grounds previously stated.

Mr. Wood. Any further comment by you as to the object of this
committee will be ignored by the reporter.

Mr. Da Silva. I didn't hear you, sir.

Mr. Wood. From now on I order stricken from the record any comment by you as to the object of this committee.

Mr. Da Silva. They seem to me a propuse, sir.

Mr. Wood. I will permit it to remain so far, but I will not permit
you to continue to repeat that.

Mr. Tavenner. Did you sign a statement which appeared in the
Daily Worker of February 28, 1949, which defended the 12 Communist
Party leaders who were convicted of conspiracy to overthrow the
Government of the United States by force and violence ?

Mr. Da Silva. I decline to answer for reasons previously stated.

Mr. Tavenner. Did you register as a member of the Communist
Party in 1944 and in 1945 ?

Mr. Da Silva. I decline to answer this question for the reasons
previously stated.

Mr. Tavenner. Were you married when you went to California, I
believe you said in 1938 or 1939? When did you go to California;
what was the date ?

Mr. Da Silva. I don't recall the specific date that I went to California; but is the matter of my marriage or my personal relations pertinent to this inquiry ?

Mr. Tavenner. It certainly is.

Mr. Da Silva. In what respects, may I ask?

Mr. Tavenner. Were you married while you were in California,
and was your wife's name Evelyn?

Mr. Da Silva. I still don't understand in what respect this question is pertinent to the inquiry of this committee.

Mr. Wood. Do you think an answer to that would incriminate you?

Mr. Da Silva. I should think I would be entitled to find out if it-
was pertinent or not.

Mr. Wood. You have competent counsel, I assume. In fact, I know
you have.

Mr. Kenny. Thank you.

Mr. Wood. Just advise your client.

Mr. Kenny. I have advised him that the protection of Jones
against SEC

Mr. Wood. Please advise your client.

Mr. Kenny. He has asked the committee to state wherein this ques-
tion is pertinent to the inquiry.

Mr. Wood. It is a matter of your advising your client and letting
him make up his own mind as to what course he wants to take.

Mr. Da Silva. Apparently any answer which I make has to be specifically pertinent, is that correct? In other words, I can't answer the question in my own way. I will answer that question. I think I was divorced from my first wife when I went to California in 1939. I believe that to be the fact. To the best of my knowledge I think that is true.

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know whether she is now living in Norfolk,
Va.

Mr. Da Silva. No. I don't know anything about her. I haven't been in communication with her for a long time.

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know whether she has since remarried?

Mr. Da Silva. I have heard somewhere that she was remarried; yes.

Mr. Tavenner. Would you know her husband's name if I mentioned it?

Mr. Da Silva. I don't think I could say what her husband's name is.

Mr. Tavenner. Was she engaged in any Communist Party activi-
ties at any time prior to your divorce or since, to your knowledge ?

Mr. Da Silva. I have many relations, and the activity which they have engaged in I have in no way made my concern, but I can tell you once again it obviously is your purpose to tie me in with any activity of hers and through us both with associations which are in your disfavor. I must decline to answer this question for the same reasons
previously stated.

Mr. Tavenner. You declined to answer the question as to whether
or not you were a member of the Communist Party when you were in
New York between 1936 and approximately 1938. Have you been
a member of the Comirumist Party since then, and are you a member
of the Communist Party now ?

Mr. Da Silva. I decline to answer this question on the grounds previously stated.

Mr. Tavenner. You appear here in response to a subpoena which
was served on you on February 24 by James A. Andrews, investigator
for this committee ?

Mr. Da Silva. Yes.

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Wood. Mr. Potter.

Mr. Potter. Mr. Da Silva, you in your statement said you felt that
you were a loyal American ; is that true ?

Mr. Da Silva. You mean in my statement?

Mr. Potter. Yes. I believe in your statement you made some ref-
erence to loyal Americans and you included yourself as being a loyal
American ; is that true ?

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Chairman, my specific statement, which has not been returned to me and which is here, says specifically that my love for this country is deep enough for me to be able to distinguish between its people and its policies of the moment. I will always identify myself with the interests of the American people, but I will
support or oppose my Government's policies to the extent that I understand them to serve or harm the people of the country.

Mr. Potter. Then you feel that our Government's policies today you
cannot support?

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Chairman, I think the overwhelming majority of
people in this country are

Mr. Potter. That is a simple answer.

Mr. Da Silva. This is a simple answer which I must answer in my
own simple way. I feel

Mr. Wood. Make it brief.

Mr. Da Silva. Are you about to time me ? I feel it is very essential I make this statement.

Mr. Wood. Please. Let us get along with the hearing. You were
asked simple questions, whether or not you could support and feel like
you can support the policies of the Government of the United States.
That is a question you can answer very simply, without giving us a
lecture here on the subject.

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Chairman

Mr. Wood. Do you or don't you ?

Mr. Da Silva. My opinions are my own. My opinions belong to
me. My opinions, present, past, and future, belong to me.

Mr. Potter. Then you refuse to answer ?

Mr. Da Silva. Your question again is what?

Mr. Potter. Do you feel that you can support the policies of our
Government at this time, or do you support the policies of our Gov-
ernment at this time?

Mr. Da Silva. Which specific policies, Mr. Chairman?

Mr. Potter. For example, if the Soviet Union should attack the
United States will you support and would you bear arms for the
United States ?

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Chairman, the prime issue of the day is peace, not ways of waging war. Your obvious intent once again is to tie me with organizations that you consider subversive. Any word "peace" today is considered subversive by this committee and by those who prefer war to peace. I decline to answer this question on the grounds previously stated.

Mr. Potter. If the witness could confine his acting to Hollywood
1 am sure the committee would progress much faster.

Mr. Da Silva. Is it the committee's object here to uphold the law? It is the committee which is seeking publicity.

Mr. Potter. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Wood. Mr. Jackson?

Mr. Jackson. No questions.

Mr. Kearney. Are you in favor of the Communist-inspired peace
marches on Washington?

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Kearney, my opinions on peace have been many, and I have made them over a period of many years.

Mr. Kearney. No further questions.

Mr. Da Silva. But today, when the purpose is to link the word "peace" and the word "subversive" all over America, I refuse to answer this question on the basis previously stated.

Mr. Wood. Mr. Velde?

Mr. Velde. Do you think this is a legally organized committee of
Congress ?

Mr. Da Silva. A legally organized committee of Congress ?

Mr. Velde. Yes.

Mr. Da Silva. I think its actions have been decidedly illegal. I think its actions have been for the specific purpose of pulling wool over Americans' eyes.

Mr. Velde. Do you think the Congress has a right to inquire into
subversive activities in the United States of America?

Mr. Da Silva. I think that Congress has many rights. The least of its rights are the freedom to wage war today.

Mr. Velde. I would appreciate a specific answer.

Mr. Da Silva. Would you voice your question again ?

Mr. Velde. Do you believe that the Congress has a right to inquire
into subversive and disloyal activities in the United States?

Mr. Da Silva. Well, this is obviously what this committee is doing
at present.

Mr. Velde. Do you believe that we have that right?

Mr. Da Silva. I think that the overwhelming majority of the American people want peace and don't want to drop an atom bomb. I think that is the most pressing issue of the day. I think that any attempt to investigate so-called subversive organizations is an attempt to pull wool over the American people's eyes, the old Army game, to
say, "Look what is happening there, and meanwhile we pick your pockets and drop atom bombs." That is the real function.

Mr. Velde. I think you are not answering the question.

Mr. Da Silva. I am answering the question as specifically as I can. It. has been said before. This is part of the same thing. I heard Mr. Walter say it sounds like the Daily Worker. I recognize that every statement made which is on peace or on any issue that you find in your disfavor is called an issue that sounds like the Daily Worker or an
issue that is subversive or an issue that is questionable. To me the question of peace today is not a subversive issue.

Mr. Wood. Mr. Frazier.

Mr. Frazier. No questions.

Mr. Doyle. I think in view of this witness' statement that this
committee is not interested in peace that I want to challenge that state-
ment. I challenge it publicly and say to this witness that this commit-
tee is interested in peace, and I as a member of this committee am
interested in peace. But I am not interested in protecting Communists
or subversives in connection with their alleged peace program. I want
this witness to know that I as an American very much resent his state-
ment to this committee that this committee is not interested in peace,
because we are, Mr. Da Silva.

Mr. Da Silva. Mr. Doyle, you are from California. What program of peace are you in favor of? What kind of peace do you want, Mr.Doyle?

Mr. Kearney. Will the gentleman from California yield to me ?

Mr. Doyle. I do.

Mr. Kearney. I will say the gentleman from California is not in
favor of the Communists' plans for peace.

Mr. Da Silva. Would you tell me what plans for peace you are in favor of in this country ?

Mr. Kearney. Yes, I could, but not here, because you have made
many a speech here and you are not going to make any more as far as I
am concerned.

Mr. Da Silva. I see.

Mr. Wood. Any further questions, Mr. Doyle ?

Mr. Doyle. No, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Wood. Mr. Walter, any further questions ?

Mr. Walter. No.

Mr. Wood. Any further questions by counsel ?

Mr. Tavenner. One further question, if you please. The Daily
Worker dated July 8, 1937, at page 5, announced that Howard Da Silva
would be a member of the cast of a play to be presented at the seventy-
fifth birthday celebration of Mother Bloor. Did you take part in that
celebration ?

Mr. Da Silva. Your purpose is very clearly indicated, to link me with organizations or people that you find in disfavor. I decline to answer this question for the reasons previously stated.

Mr. Tavenner. Do you know Will Geer?

Mr. Da Silva. Will Geer? He is a fine actor. I have known him for years.

Mr. Tavenner. Did he direct the play on the occasion that I mentioned ?

Mr. Da Silva. Which one again?

Mr. Tavenner. The seventy-fifth birthday of Mother Bloor.

Mr. Da Silva. Once again your purpose is to link Will Geer and me through an association that you find in disfavor with you. I will not support that. I decline to answer this question on the grounds previously stated.

Mr. Wood. The answer of the witness is that he declines to answer
for the reasons stated.

Mr. Tavenner. I have no further questions.

Mr. Wood. Very well.

After his refusal to testify

Di Silva didn’t work in film or TV from 1953 through 1958. While it is wrong that he was, apparently, denied work, it wasn’t as if his career was going anywhere at the time. 
From 1935 through 1949 Di Silva appeared on film 31 times. He was uncredited in four of those films and one was a short.  He had mostly bit parts in the remaining films.

In 1950, two years before he appeared before the HUAC,  he turned to television. In total he had 8 film roles and two TV role throughout the fifties. And again, Da Silva brought it on himself knowing full well what the consequences would be. When Da Silva was called to testify before the HUAC March 21, 1951 and refused to cooperate with questions regarding his political activities, citing the Fifth Amendment repeatedly and generally came across as arrogant and hostile. He came to DC looking for a fight and he got one.

To say that he was driven to the stage by blacklisting isn’t correct either. From 1930 through 1948, he appeared on Broadway in 21 different plays. From 1962 through 1982, he appeared on Broadway in 11 other productions. By comparison, he appeared on Broadway in only four (long running) plays from 1950 through 1958.

While Di Silva was playing make believe communist in Hollywood, real, heavily armed  communist, over ran the city of Seoul South Korea with the aid of Communist Chinese Army which had also over run the Tibetan capital of Lhasa. In New York, Communist spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were arrested for handing Russia the formula to make an atomic bomb.