The war on books and ideas: the California Library Association and anti-Communist censorship in the 1940s and 1950s - The Role of Professional Associations

Library Trends, Fall, 1997 by Cindy Mediavilla

INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM AND THE OATH OF LOYALTY

No sooner did word of CLA's Sacramento victory go out to the media ("Status," 1948, p. 65) than more trouble began to brew in Southern California. On April 27, 1948, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors adopted a program requiring all county employees to sign a four-part loyalty oath, including: (1) the standard oath promising support of the constitutions of the United States and California; (2) a promise to not advocate or become part of an organization that advocates the overthrow of the American government; (3) a declaration of any aliases used; and (4) disclosure of support for any of the organizations targeted by the Tenney Committee (California Legislature, 1949, p. 595). Seventy-five employees, including twenty from the county library, refused to sign section 4 on grounds of "invasion of intellectual freedom" ("Effect on the Los Angeles County," 1950). A lawsuit on behalf of these employees soon followed.

Though the signing of loyalty oaths had long been the practice of many governmental agencies, the Los Angeles County situation was particularly distasteful because of the requirement to disclose whether the employee had ever "been a member of or directly or indirectly supported" any of the 142 organizations and publications listed by the Tenney Committee (Hughes & Smith, 1950, p. 106). Besides the broader civil rights issues represented here, the matter was even more thorny for librarians who could have appeared to be "supporting" communism by including communist materials in their library collections. As Hughes and Smith wondered, was a librarian who circulated or made available a copy of the New Masses "directly or indirectly supporting" the New Masses? Likewise, was anyone who read communist tracts guilty of supporting the communist party?

Nettled by the library employees who refused to sign the oath, the Board of Supervisors next turned its attention to the county librarian, John D. Henderson, whom they claimed had advised staff to refrain from signing the affidavit of loyalty (Smith, 1970, p. 91). In addition, the supervisors decided to create a five person board to examine all books purchased and circulated by the county library. As Supervisor Jessup explained, "we should have the committee examine all books on the shelves of the public library due to the fact, in my mind, I am not satisfied our librarian--Mr. Henderson--is free of those liberal thoughts that we don't like to see in the mind of the head of our library" (cited in Berninghausen, 1948, p. 1545). Though this action was applauded by Jack Tenney ("Tenney Offers Aid to County in Red Inquiry," 1948), even the traditionally conservative Los Angeles Times saw the supervisors' move toward the creation of a censorship committee as a "grave error" ("Showing How Easily Censorship can Happen," 1948).

The library community, which was outraged nationally as well as statewide, swiftly rallied its forces. Not only was this the first time a "board of censors" was being considered by a political body, but this was the first reported case of a direct attack against a librarian for his "liberal ideas" (Berninghausen, 1948, p. 1546). Miriam Matthews, as chair of the CLA Committee on Intellectual Freedom, testified on Henderson's behalf at an open hearing before the Board of Supervisors (Matthews, 1981, p. 54). Along with A. A. Heist of the American Civil Liberties Union, she also worked fast to round up support by the League of Women Voters, the Parent-Teacher Association, the Democratic party, the American Library Association, and local newspapers ("Los Angeles Supervisors Intend No County Censorship," 1948, p. 1732; Smith, 1970, p. 90). Prominent. Angelenos, such as Harold Hamill, director of the Los Angeles Public Library, and Lawrence Clark Powell, librarian at the University of California, Los Angeles, came to Henderson's defense in the press (Berninghausen, 1948, p. 1546). For its part, CLA passed a "Resolution on the Los Angeles County Library Committee" outlining the professional collection development and intellectual freedom responsibilities of librarians, while decrying any attempt to thwart those efforts through a censorship board ("Proceedings 50th Annual Meeting," 1948, p. 76).