I guess a visa wouldn't be refused to one of them. Would they refuse
Shaw who still says he is a communist? Of course they wouldn't. That's
why I suspect it was something personal to the consul.
If the visa comes and there is no other way we'JI fiy ...
I'll cable you if I get a verdict either way.
Re the question if he is a R[oman] C[atholic], when he asked me if
I were a C-ist, I said: "Politically no and never was, but in life I
practised the c-ism of Jesus, sharing all with children and staff." At the
mention of Jesus he gave a nasty exclamation of annoyance. I have no
way of discovering if he is R.C.
Well, nothing more to say at the moment. Only I do feel so warmly
about all you and yours are doing to help me. At the Embassy Ena
said: "Don't give way; he is the little man, not you." I know it, but to
be cross-examined by an official who obviously has no idea of your
work and worth is most upsetting and degrading.
Orgonon
Rangeley, Maine
My dear Neill:
- • •
July 28, 1950I just received your letter of July 25. Whatever the matter with
the Vice-Consul McIntosh may have been, the official standpoint is
this: Your visa was never denied, only its issuance was delayed. If you
had applied 4 or 8 weeks earlier, you would not have had any trouble
whatsoever. I received an answer from the American Consul General
in London. The letter assured me that your visa was not denied and that
the London Consulate "would have been happy" to accept your appli
cation but that you refused to apply. It seems now that your visum will
surely be granted. The delay is due to the effect of the red fascist under
ground and underhanded maneuvers and spying. I do not believe there
is the slightest reason to assume that either the American State Depart
ment or the Consulate in London had anything against you personally.
Also, our impression here is that you were hypersensitive in regard
to the whole thing in London.
Well, Neill, see you soon, and until then all the best to you, Ena,
and Zoe.
- ••