: :t
Portrait of Sylvester Andriano.
SATNT MARY’S COLLEGE OF CALIFORNIA, ARCHIVES.
82 Ex POST FACTO Sylvester
George HouKs
by tion DIsILLusIONMENT them United Japanese American riod American. B strated in Andriano activism following ers and sympathy base do West ing the Fascism wrote People). articles dence Fichera front government not There In Andriano claimed him influence in and Sebastian their Coast to December a that San utilize States his Malachowski etween couraged in into to brief of use persecute his in derived A These Pearl of has numerous conclusions the with Activities leave ndriano San Francisco San the complicity Andriano’s that in downfall Andriano’s the being of anti-Fascist article declared has a not general, Fichera California Benito Harbor, Francisco’s Francisco World broad sanctions two his his city’s Fascism 1941 from particular been social, a people
OF and wife, numerous sources hearings, leader entitled (the and during range Wars social on an Mussolini’s his war, with and rise and a the Italy activities friends, cultural, in their comprehensive during Tenney newspaper the in anonymous Assembly’s cultural of of Army to Italians Dino in the are the I their of
PAINFUL Italian importance and World “The declared proceedings and Italian the the prominence activities San subsequent sources biased government San SPRING World political and Army c Ph.D. Cinel fascist II Committee). and and Francisco Individual Fascist/Anti-Fascist nationalism regime were War Fascism. San Francisco Il descent, community witness, war against his Interim economic Corriere in War dissertations.’ served both in Francisco’s I] in pro-Fascist. movement study their culture of persecution the alienation illustrates and in on this labeled 11. the 2003 write San specifically. Exclusion Italian any the discrediting Bay an known Committee analyses. its and In of Just Del Tenney historiography for exclusion ties while Francisco political United semblance fact, the Area. chapters Catholic these Popollo Italian in over American and days the to Andriano VoLuMe influence as during the Unfortunately, Struggle it however, Committee Program Italy. extent public Mr. Fichera States. a maintained ties later, San Historian ideology. their on year. community order politics about (The faith of X, World pro-Fascist Subversive When Francisco community of Fascism humiliation because after is efforts of accused Andriano’s in to In and Andriano’s Messenger Italian rather crucial the Andriano, Fascism San and during October XII Rose War the and Italy Cinel these influence assimilated to Francisco” newspaper and than participa Cinel Bay attack Sylvester and II to even and Scherini become and demon this c caused studies largely as accus under on inflate of 1942, Area forc civic from used Un- evi and en pe the the the on 83 of as
as
not
not be the
and
that
the
that the
also
and
him Wil
little most
influ pro
gave
activ com
politi
Rhode
is
to
of Castel did
has
Italian-
Fichera Italian
Mary’s
Lateran brother Italy))
such
the
Italy complete But
in commu
prepared
show State
also
Catholics homeland
Andriano American
led of
California Language
pro-Fascist crucial
his
that subjects
the
and
[the
to
how
community
between
of
many and allowed
the of
Saint
religious
a
1889 as on
more
locations, Diggins Catholic
when to
in
Francisco. languages
skills,
Bank a with
community. Mussolini
Andriano
such
immigrant
Fascist
active
of
31 Cinel
Italian
act
positions,
Catholic Italian,
Providence,
events was
from
Andriano
education
the
on
American an John San and
live
to
other evidence that
views as
the these pride
especially paint
that
and
hostilities document
in and responses of
to
schooling
in
integral
Archdiocese.
Italian
Italian
University leanings of
was
community
spoke
of Andriano’s vitality
are
such
many
his
Francisco
supported
also
the the
Bean, the was “called
the
work rhetoric
December, Andriano
and
varied
suggests
Catholic (formerly
community exclusion. graduated there groups
only
at
between that and
Church
Utilizing
San
at
subsequent
and
on political, receptions.”
differences
Fascist
The
They Francisco
the period with
his
Francisco
between
that
within communities, the
Since
President)
Phillip
assumptions secession who
his
and Church
pro-Fascism to
varied
skills
born
a
Andriano
in
San
this
solve
these
specific
San
College
of
frequently
the communities
evidence
and If
Italian,
Church Catholic as and
interplay to
important
these argue the Andriano
English.7
to Paul
(later Ohio.2
later
importance
was ofAmerica
documents
the
in
the in people
the
examines
the
was
the
ofAndriano’s
during the in
who and especially
festivals,
Francisco.3 and distinguish
in
connections
of
treaty
limited
write he unearth he
Bank moved
Luconi, 1914.
important
to
Hastings
with
Andriano’s or
Catholic
his or
questions skill community.9
San
served
Director
Diggins
Francisco this at
existed in
He
for
Peter
a those
Andriano
of attempted
documents
leader
in
was
phenomenon
Cleveland, the
as
However,
government. to
and
document
authors
speak
because saw
San
activities English,
banquets,
activities
Stefano
lay
the
and
Italian-American Francisco,
difficult INVOLVEMENT
Italy.
and
Committee
degree extensively Saints
at
a
to labor city rejected
documented
not
always
is
in
DISIllUSIONMENT
especially
therefore
fluently.6 Francisco.
the
and FAcTO
however Trustees
They
American
because
It
These San sentiment
Doggins
between
did law
the
activities.
of
on citizenship
attorney
was
credence over
York,
in and
a San Turin,
Francisco.
enrichment
Catholics
Church’s
Tenney
pro-Fascism
discussion relations
war.
in
became because Italian
Italian
Area.
Fascism
many
give
done however,
debate.
at
researching
New near
PosT
D’Agostino,
San
PAlNFU Board the
within
question spokesman
place
that
languages COMMUNITY gained
this
participated Fascism.
for earned
Mussolini,
the
immigration
their Some in
at
Bay
communities
extensive
this
agreement has, pro-Fascist engagement, to the
struggles
spoke
to
OF
Language
been
this
were successful
of
otherwise.4
held
Mussolini
Ex
and five Peter
Catholic
would
and
of
and
the Utica,
a
his
an
on
because
d’Asti,
claim activities
the
it
Andriano
community
special and
he
has
uncovered
Issel of
civic
to support
in
for a
Historians
The
1901
Andriano
1915.
speak
sizeable
ence standing HOURS cally, support use movement and notably Island, American America picture a been cause liam ism work important Catholics
Treaty, formalized education. Church
believed ANDRIANO’S Andriano’s in him College Nuovo in
to him
serving This munity,
became accusations nities secular activities leader
community’s] 84 moted George Malachowski
School, President of the Board of Trustees of the Fugazi Building (an Italian-Ameri can community center in North Beach), and Director (later President) of the Italian Chamber of Commerce.’° These organizations supported events not only for Ital ians, but for all San Franciscans, most prominently by hosting the annual Columbus Day Parade and by bringing Guglielmo Marconi, inventor and Nobel Laureate, to San Francisco. Andriano was driven to these activities out of a sense of duty for his countrymen and pride in their shared cultural heritage. In these activities, Andriano strove “to keep alive and foster in the hearts and minds and will of my people the faith, the culture and traditions which earned for Italy the proud title of mother of civilization.” Indeed, Andriano strongly claims, “at no time did I take any part in the politics of Italy.”” Although Andriano did not feel his activities promoted Fas cism, his activities with the Italian Language schools, the Fugazi Build ing, and the Chamber of Commerce were all characterized as pro-Fascist by the Tenney Committee. Andriano’s involvement in the political realm also proved a liability and played a part in his exclusion. His involvement also shows the high offices Italian Ameri cans held in San Francisco and the growing power of Italian Americans in San Fran cisco politics. A reluctant politician, Andriano received appointments to each of his political positions. While he participated in the fight against Prohibition and in presidential campaigns, Andriano’s political career truly began on 3 March 1928 when San Francisco Mayor James Rolph, Jr. appointed him to serve on the Board of Supervisors.’2 In 1936, Angelo J. Rossi, Rolph’s successor, called him into service again by appointing Andriano Trustee of the Public Library of San Francisco. The next year Rossi appointed him to the Police Commission for a four-year term.’3 In 193$ the federal government also asked for Andriano’s assistance when the State Department delegated Andriano to represent the Golden Gate International Exposi tion in order to secure the participation of Italy and Hungary.’4 In 1940, after the start of World War II, Andriano took an active role in the war effort upon receiving an appointment from President Roosevelt to Local Draft Board #100.’ Although Andriano never desired political office, he later explained that he served because he felt a duty to serve his community and the people who trusted him with the public good.’6 A devout Roman Catholic, he took part in many organizations in the San Fran cisco Archdiocese and particularly in the parish of Saints Peter and Paul Church in North Beach.’7 Andriano’s prominence in the Catholic Church illustrates that in San Francisco, unlike most American cities where Irish Americans dominated the clergy, Italians held leadership positions. Andriano involved himself in a myriad of activities, from supporting North Beach Boy Scout troops with donations to financ ing the building of a new church to making a dedication speech for the home of the Dante Council of the Knights of Columbus.’8 Andriano’s fellow Catholics included many powerful San Franciscans, and through his activities Andriano met people like Amadeo Peter Giannini (founder of the Bank of Italy), James Bacigalupi (also of the Bank of Italy), and Mayor 55j•9 Andriano also developed a personal rela tionship with Archbishop John J. Mitty, giving him political advice on such matters as who to support on the school board and the number of Italians who spoke En glish. He worked closely with the Archbishop on a number of organizations, most prominently an organization based on Catholic Action.20Andriano discovered Catho lic Action when he took a trip to Italy after he was delegated to represent San Fran cisco at a Mayor’s Conference in Paris, France in 1931. Inspired by the Pope’s Encyclical Non abbiamo bisogno (On Catholic Action in Italy), which details the
SPRING 2003 VoLuME XII 85 HOURS OF PAINFULDISILLUSIONMENT
strugglebetweenthe forcesof CatholicActionand the Fascists,Andrianotook Catho licAction as his sacred cause. CatholicAction was a movement that came to promi nence in the first half of the 20h1 century and was an effort to create a lay apostolate to combat secularism and spread the teachings of the Church to the individual, fam ily, and society. This program was extremely diverse and asked laypeople to pro mote attendance at mass, protest against objectionable movies and literature, and even to promote the Pope’s Labor Encyclicals.2’ After traveling to Italy Andriano began a crusade for Catholic Action in San Francisco and the Bay Area. As early as March 1932,Andriano publicly supported CatholicAction by speaking before branches of the ItalianCatholic Federation, lec turing them on “Azione Cattolica del Laicato” (Catholic Action and the Laity).22 Andriano desired to create an archdiocesan lay organization based on Catholic Ac tion so he and his good friend, James Leo Hagerty,began to build an organization called the Catholic Men of the San Francisco Archdiocese (Catholic Men).23On 7 January 1938, the Feast of the Epiphany, this organization received authorization from Archbishop Mitty,and began promoting attendance at mass, planning lectures and radio programs about Catholic Action, and organizing the archdiocesan par ishes in this movement. The Catholic Men formed branches in over 90% of the archdioceseparishes, wrote a forty-sixpage CatholicAction Manual, created a guild of Catholic Lawyers, and sponsored CatholicAction courses in seminaries and else where.24 Andrianocultivated his knowledge of CatholicAction through texts and through discussions with high-ranking Catholic leaders. In May 1938,Andrianoreturned to Italyand visited with two of themost importantfigures in the CatholicAction move ment, Giuseppe Cardinal Pizzardo and Monsignor Luigi Civardi. Having letters of introduction from Archbishop Mitty,Andriano was able to meet with both prelates and speak with them at length about Catholic Action in general and the specific work that was being done in San Francisco. Cardinal Pizzardo was so impressed by Andriano that he said he would speak to the Pope about their efforts and asked Andriano to translate a Catholic Action pamphlet into English. He also arranged a meeting for Andriano with the Directors General ofthe Men, Young Men, and Women Catholic Action Organizations of Italy so he could further discuss plans for Catholic Action. Monsigiior Civardi was equally impressed with Andriano and after an audi ence with the Pope told him, “The blessing of the Holy father will put the seal of Divine approval upon the work which you and your associates are doing in San Francisco, the same as if Our Lord Himself were blessing it.”25 Andriano’s involvement with Catholic Action is the single greatest indicator that Andriano was not pro-Fascist. Andriano’s belief in Catholic Action precluded support of Mussolini’s government because of their fundamentally different ideolo gies. Catholic Action wanted to return secular life to the Church, while Fascism wanted to focus people’s efforts on the state. While many Catholics, especially in Italy, came to grips with this division, Andriano thought otherwise. In a letter dur ing his banishment during World War II he wrote:
I never had any sympathy with Fascism as such although I did approve of some of the things done by it, but I have always strongly disapproved of some of its principal tenets such as its totalitarian philosophy, its claim to monopoly in education; its regimentation of youth and its militarism.26
While he did make these claims after he was accused of being pro-Fascist, he made
86 Ex POST FACTO George Malachowski them in a personal correspondence that would not be public. Furthermore, his years of active participation in Catholic Action support these claims.
THE TENNEY HEARINGS AND PUHLIC OPINION
Andriano found himself embroiled in public controversy beginning in December 1941, when the Tenney Committee heard an anonymous witness accuse Andriano, Ettore Patrizi, and Renzo Turco of leading a Fascist movement in the San Francisco BayArea.27 Andriano testified at these hearings, claiming neither he nor his organi zations were pro-Fascist.28 The hearings were cut short by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, but in May 1942, the Tenney Committee re-convened in San Fran cisco to hear testimony about a Fascist menace in the Bay Area. These accusations led the Commander of the Western Defense Zone, General John L. Dewitt, to exile Andriano from California from October 10, 1942 until December 25, 1943 for be ing a dangerous individual. The Tenney Committee played a decisive role in the events leading up to Andriano’s exclusion, because it made his case a public spectacle.29 In May 1942, the Tenney Committee subpoenaed over 40 people to the inquiry, including Mayor Rossi and Andriano, creating front-page news in the leading newspapers of the Bay Area, the San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco Examiner, and San Francisco Call-Bulletin. These proceedings, held in the Borgia Room of San Francisco’s Saint Francis Hotel, helped to shape public perception of the threat enemy aliens posed in the Bay Area. On 25 May 1942, Italian anti-Fascist newspaper editor Carmelo Zito went before the Tenney Committee, accusing Mayor Rossi, Patrizi, and Andriano of being the leaders of the Fascist movement in the Bay Area. The Chronicle blazed in 60-point font “S.F. Fascist Link Charged” and the Examiner headlined “Andriano Accused as Fascist Leader at Tenney Probe.”30Zito accused Andriano of being the lawyer for the Italian Consulate, Director of the Fascist schools (the Italian lan guage schools), President of the Italian Chamber of Commerce, an inspiration for youthful fascists, official speaker for the “sacred regime,” and organizer for receiv ing the Fascists coming to California. Additionally, Zito charged that Andriano received large sums of money for his work as the inheritance lawyer at the Italian consulate.3’ The nature of these hearings did not allow for cross-examination of witnesses except by the committee members, who were hostile to those accused of Fascist leanings. The main controversy centered around the Italian Language Schools (Scuola Italiana), because these schools received funding in the form of textbooks, medals, and diplomas from the Italian government. Italian language schools, with financial support from the Italian government, had existed since 1886. In the 1930s the Scuola Italiana provided after-school language classes in five locations in the city. The school was run by a board of directors, the Patronato Scolastico, composed of rep resentatives from the Italian Chamber of Commerce, Italy-America Society, Italian Catholic Federation, 11Cacacolo, Bank of America, and Transamerica Corpora tion.32 Andriano, Director and President of these schools, maintained that the prime purpose of the school was to teach Italian so children could understand their parents and so adults could learn English. When directly asked by Tenney why these schools existed, Andriano replied, “We thought they should know the language of their par ents; we felt it would make them better Americans.”33 The majority of newspapers in San Francisco gave credence to the accusations against individuals at the Tenney Hearings with the glaring exception of the Catho
SPRING 2003 VoLuME XII c 87 HOURS OF PAINFULDISILLUSIONMENT
Attorney Richard Combs (left) of Tenney committee hands document to Sylvester Andriano at hearings on alleged Fascist activities in San Francisco. The hearings were held in the Borgia Room of the St. Francis Hotel in May 1942.
SAN FRANCISCO HISTORY CENTER, SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY.
88 , Ex POST FACTO George Malachowski lic press. In response to the sensationalist coverage in the daily press and the con demnation of Ii Corrierre Del Popollo, the Archdiocesannewspaper, the San Fran cisco Monitor printed a forthright defense on May 30, 1942:
tt would appear a small group of.. . men have secretly promoted to pick out first this one and then that one for a public tarring and feathering to use spe cifically created organizations or a few scandal-mongering papers to abuse and discredit their fellowAmericans on trumped up charges.34
The Monitor was a minor paper in the BayArea. However, it shows that one group of people believedAndriano. The hearingsbecame a media spectacle andAndnano became the subject of overwhelming media scrutiny facing “newspaper reporters who were literally hounding and harrying me and my wife night and day.”35
THE GOVERNMENT’S WARTIME POLICY OF INTERNMENT, RELOCATION, AND EXCLUSION
Andriano’s travails during World War 11are part of a much larger story of injustice against people of Japanese, German, and Italian descent. The government catego rized and dealt with these people utilizing three distinct programs: internment, relo cation, and exclusion. The government’sprogram of internment dealt with enemy aliens who were Italian, German, and Japanese nationals. The government began preparation for internment in Septemberof 1939when Roosevelt requested that the FBI prepare a list of “potentially dangerous persons” to be detained in case of na tional conflict, called the Custodial Detention List. Immediately after the Japanese drew the United States into war, the FBI used Title 50 of the U.S. Code, which gave the government the power to detain aliens in case of emergency,to intern 595 Japa nese and 187Germans by December 13, 1942.36 Relocation affected the largest number of individuals, especially those of Japa nese ancestry. On a smaller scale, relocation also affected people of Italian and German descent. In California, 10,000Italian foreign-born residents were evacu ated from coastal areas and other militarily sensitive areas and another 52,000 faced nightly curfews from 8 p.m. to 6 am. In Pittsburgh, California the Army forced 2,000 of these residents to abandon their communities and move inland. The government also used the Custodial Detention List to detain American citi zens suspected of being potentially “dangerous individuals.” The Army used the List in conjunction with the Individual Exclusion Program to remove American citizens of Japanese, German, and Italian descent from sensitive areas. Authorized on February 19, 1942 by President Franklin Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066, this program affected 254 Italian and German naturalized citizens. They received a perfunctory hearing before a Military Exclusion Board where they were not told the charges against them and could not cross-examine witnesses. After the hearings they received orders to move out of designated military zones within ten days.38 Divisions developed in the federal government on the subject of excluding Ameri can citizens. The Department of Justice (DOJ) felt apprehensive about the Army’s Individual Exclusion Program, and in Andriano’s case the DOJ disagreed with the Army’s findings. AtAndriano’s hearing before a Military Board, the United States Attorney at San Francisco “stated he was unable to concur in the findings of the Military in the recommendation of the Individual Exclusion Board and concluded that the subject was in no sense potentially dangerous and was perfectly trnstwor
SPRING 2003 VoLuME XII $9 HOURS OF PAINFULDISILLUSIONMENT
Unknown to Andriano, the DOJ at higher levels also challenged the Army. In a DOJ Report of October 1942,SpecialAssistant to theAttorney General Roy C. Clark reported to Assistant Attorney General Berge that “he did not believe that Andrianowas ‘potentiallydangerous.”3° The Army even documented its disagree ment with the DOJ in a SupplementalReport of the WesternDefense Commandon the Exclusion of Non-Japanese. The Army noted that when Andriano repeatedly violated the exclusion order the Attorney General refused to prosecute the viola tion. The Army also suspected the Attorney General of notifying Andriano when theArmyplanned to forcibly eject him from the WesternDefenseCommand.41The government’sposition was more divided than the media portrayed.
FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES RALLY TO ANDRIANOS SIDE
Andnano and his friends, especially Mitty and Hagerty, decided to avoid a public fight against the exclusion order. Instead, they met privately with high-ranking government officials. Andriano and his friends believed the best strategy to lift the order lay in clandestine activity,because the negative portrayal ofAndriano by the press would be difficult to counter effectively.42 Archbishop Mitty supported Andnano from the start of the Tenney Hearings. He collated information on the members of the TenneyCommittee and their views on Catholics, queried Brigadier General Joseph Donovan about matters, and even wrote to the Right Reverend Michael Ready asking him to stop Andriano from being removed from the Draft Board.43He supported Andriano more publicly in a speech at a high school com mencement in June of l942. He also petitioned the Justice Department and the WarDepartmenton a trip to WashingtonD.C. in November of 1942. There, he met with several high ranking Justice Department officials, including one who confi dentially told him “that the U.S.Attorney’s office had serious misgivings about the procedure that was followed,but there was nothing that his office could do since the matter was in the hands of the Army.”45Although Mitty’s efforts failed to persuade General DeWitt to lift Andriano’sban, Mitty met and corresponded with Andriano numerous times during his exile and gave him encouragement and spiritual guid ance.46 Hagerty, a close personal friend of Andriano, was a Professor of Philosophy at St. Mary’s College where both had received degrees. Andriano and Hagerty corre sponded before, after, and especially during, his exclusion. Not only did Hagerty supportAndrianowith encouragingnews from the BayArea, but he also gave moral and spiritual support.47 Hagerty also served as a sounding board and counselor for Andnano, often telling him he should fight his exclusion. In one letter he coun seled:
Now that the election is passed it may be opportune to consider it simply as the case of one SylvesterAndriano vs. the WesternArmy Command. There have been several cases where the exclusion order has not been put into ef fect, and I believe at least one where is [sic] has been rescinded.48
Their correspondencehelped to sustainAndriano in many ways and allowed him to express his frustrations, insights, and troubles.
90 Ex PosT FACTO George Malachowski
THE BATTLE AGAINST EXCLUSION
Though he disagreed with the Army’s decision and its legality,Andriano left Cali fornia without a fight. He believedthat complyingwith the exclusion order was the best course of action for his community.49Andriano explains his sentiments most clearly in a letter to Hagerty:
When the order for my exclusion was served upon me, my first impulse was to allow the matter to be submittedto the courts for the purpose of testing the validity of the order and determiningwhether it was applicable to me. Many of my most intimate friends strongly urged me to follow that course assuring their full backing. Upon more mature consideration, however, although still convinced that my civil rights were being wantonly violated and that I was an innocent victim of unjust measures and illegal processes based on slan derous testimony, in order not to stir up any controversy or bring about a division among the people that would be detrimental to the national effort or to imperil the legal structures for Army exclusions, and with due regard to
the prestige of the military authority. . . I was out of the restricted areas and on my way to Chicago.
Even though Andriano decided to leave California, his fight did not end, as his friends’ actions attest. Early in 1943,Andriano decided to return to California in defiance of the government’s order. Andriano’s return allowed him to test the resolve of the government and see their reaction. Despite his defiance, Andriano claimed he wanted to return “tact fully and with due deference to the authorities, not for the purpose of resisting the Order or challenging the authority of the Army, but merely to have the court deter mine what my rights are.”5° Sometime around March 1943,Andriano returned to California and lived with his wife in Los Altos for several weeks, even attending Mass. His return was not a closelyveiled secret and he instructedhis law partner to inform the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of his whereabouts.51 When the FBI discovered his return they interviewedhim, but took no action. Andriano only left when he realized his presence might lead authorities to suspect that his friend and fellow Los Altos resident, U.S. District Attorney Bill Hennessey, was aiding him. In mid-March, Andriano promptly left for Los Angeles, returning to the Bay Area to spend Easter week with his wife’s family in San Jose. 52 Andriano thus discovered that the government would not take direct, public action against him, which gave him opportunities to travel in California. It was not the government but a sermon that influenced his subsequent response to the exclusion. While in Los Angeles, Andriano heard a sermon by a Reverend McCoy on the Epistle of St. Peter, which counseled him, “Be ye subject therefore subject to every human creature for God’s sake. . . for so is the will of God that by doing well you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men.”53 Andriano de cided the sentimentsappliedto himpersonally,and left for Denver,Colorado. Safely outside of the prohibited area, Andriano seemed content to stay in Denver until the lifting of the exclusion order. It took an extraordinary event, the news of his mother’s death in Italy, to draw Andriano back to San Francisco. After receiving this news, Andriano decided to return to San Francisco “for the purpose of joining with the other members of the family at a Mass for her and depart immediately.”54In fact, Andriano admitted that
SPRING 2003 VoLuME XII c 91 HOURS OF PAINFULDISILLUSIONMENT
this return might be foolish; however, he decided to accept any punishment that might result given the importance of being with his family in their moment of grief. Andriano’scalculationproved costly, because it meant that for the rest of his exclu sion the FBI would follow him. The day after Andriano’s arrival in San Francisco, the FBI began its surveil lance. They even followed him to Mass at St. Brigid’sand sat behind him while he prayed and received communion. Despite their presence Andriano “never felt so little distracted in my life” and he felt that the Stations of the Cross had added meaning that day.55 Six days later, on June, the Army presented Andriano with an order to leave the restricted area by 11June. In fact, Andriano had concluded his visit with his family,and he already had tickets to leave on that day for Denver.56 The FBI followedAndriano, placing two agents in the lobby of the Sears Hotel where he stayed for the remainder of his exclusion. Andriano had reported skin trouble throughout his exclusion and a Denver Dermatologist ordered Andriano to the hospital. He stayed there for three weeks before returning to his hotel room.57 Even when his wife, Leonora, visited him she was bothered by the constant pres ence of the F.B.I. Eventually,she left because of illness and to look after their house in the Bay Area.58 Despite the unnerving presence of the F.B.I., Andriano accli
mated to their company. He remarked to Hagerty, “. . . to their credit they have been gentle- and I’m half inclinedto think that I’ll miss them if ever the day comes when I shall be wholly rid of them.”59 Religious convictions sustained Andriano for the year he was excluded from his home, his wife, and his family. He went to Mass regularly, wrote to clergy mem bers,andfrequentlywroteabouthisfaith. InthelettersbetweenHagertyandAndriano biblical allusionsappear often, and the topic of faith is prevalent.60 His faith helped him cope with theemotionalpain of exile, and ultimatelyhe viewed his exclusion as a blessing. In a particularly illuminating passage, Andriano wrote:
Pope PiusXII says in SummisPontUicatusthat “hours of painful disillusion ment are often hours of grace- “a passage of the Lord” when doors which in other circumstanceswould have remained shut, open at Our Saviour’swords:
“Behold I stand at the gate and knock” and. . . that “as a result of such painful trials, fall withinthem an effective and salutary thirst for the truth, justice and the peace of Christ.”
As a result of my experience during the last few weeks, if not months or even years, I think that I can understand and appreciate the meaning of those words a little better than when I first read them and perhaps, in time, with God’s help, I may begin to feel a little of that effective and salutary thirst of which he speaks.”6’ Andriano wrote that he was “sincerely grateful to those who are responsible for my exclusion, whoever they may be, for unwittingly they did me a very great fa vor”62 Religion sustained Andriano throughout his exile, guiding his actions, and reminding him how important was the community of faith to which he belonged. Andriano’s activities in San Francisco during the 1920’s, 1930’s, and 1940’s made him a public figure with extensive ties in politics, religion, and the Italian ethnic community. These ties illustrate the importanceof the ItalianAmerican com munity in San Francisco during this period and how individuals in this community reached prominence. During WorldWar II, accusations made against Andriano and others demonstratehow ties to Italy made people vulnerable to charges of pro-Fas cism during World War II. While these charges were often unfounded, they had a
92 Lx POST FACTO George !vlalachowski devastating impact on the lives of Italians, especially Andriano. Ultimately, the controversy surrounding Andriano diminished when the Army lifted his Exclusion order in December 1944, however, it stripped Andriano of his prestige in San Fran cisco. Despite the trauma of these events, Andriano returned to activities in the Catholic Church and the Italian American community, but the vitality that existed in the pre-war years was lost. Despite these troubling times, Andriano fomid solace in his experience because he became closer to God, finding hours of grace during times of painful disillusionment.
SPRING 2003 VoLuME XII c 93 NOTES
1 Rose Scherini, “The Fascist/Anti-Fascist Struggle in San Francisco,” in NewExploration in Italian American Studies: Proceedings of the Twenty-fifthAnnual conference of the American Italian Historical Association, 64-71. New York: The American Italian His torical Association, 1994;. Dino Cinel, “Conservative Adventures: Italian Immigrants in Italy and San Francisco” (Ph.D. diss., Stanford University, 1979); Sebastian Fichera, “The Meaning of Community: A History of the Italians of San Francisco” (Ph.D. diss., UCLA, 1981). 2. Peter D’Agostino, “The Triad of RomanAuthority,”Journal ofAmerican Ethnic History, 17 (Spring 1998), 3-37; Phillip Bean, “Fascism and Italian-American Identity,”Journal of Ethnic Studies, 17(Summer 1989), 101-119;Stefano Luconi, “From Pae.canitoAmeri can Ethnic,” and “Italian Fascism and the Italian Americans of Providence,” Rhode Lc land History, 60 (Spring 2002), 39-54. 3. William Issel, “A Stem Struggle’: Catholic Activism and San Francisco Labor, 1934- 1958,” in Labor and the Cold War at the Grassroots: Unions, Politics, and Postwar Political Culture, ed. Robert Cherny, William Issel, and Keny Taylor. Unpublished. Paper in author’s personal collection. 4. Joim Diggins, “American Catholics and Italian Fascism,” Journal of Contemporary His tory, 2 (October 1967), 51-68; Diggins, “Flirtation with Fascism: American Pragmatic Liberals and Mussolini’s Italy,” The American Historical Review, 71 (January 1966), 487-506; Diggins, “The Italian Anti-Fascist Opposition,” Journal ofAmerican History, 54 (December 1967), 579-598. 5. Sylvester Andriano to James Leo Hagerty, 19 March 1943,p. 3,Saint Mary’s College of California Archives, Dr. James Leo Hagerty Collection, box 215, folder: Letters to SylvesterAndriano. All correspondence between Andriano and Hagerty may be found in this archive. For more information on Andriano’s college career see Saint Mary’s Col lege Commencement Brochure, 23 June 1911, Saint Mary’s College of Califomia Ar chives, folder: Commencement—l9 11. 6. Floyd Healey, “Mailliard, Andriano Given Positions on Police Commission,” San Fran cisco chronicle, 7/20/1937, p. 7. 7. Anddano toArchbishop John J. Mitty, 13January 1933. Andriano estimated that only 35 percent of Italian immigrants knew English and among the whole community, between 25-30 percent did not speak English and 35-40 percent didn’t read or write English. These are unconfirmed figures. 8. Andriano to Hagerty, 28 October 1942;”Sylvester Andriano Dies in Italy,” Son Fran cisco Chronicle, 15October 1963, p. 26. 9. A quick look at the Saints Peter and Paul Church history reveals that many of these secular events were part of the Catholic Communities activities. 10. Ibid. 11. Andriano to Hagerty, 10 March 1943, p.S. 12. “Badaracco’s Seat Taken By Andriana: North Beach Attorney Formally Accepts Post as Supervisor,” San Francisco C’hronicle,3 March 1928, p. 1. 13. Andriano to Hagerty, 10 March 1943, p. 10; “Andriano Accepts S.F. Library Post,” San Francisco Chronicle, 20 August 1936, p. 7 ; Healy, “Mailliard, Andriano Given Posi tions on Police Commission.” 20 July 1937, p. 1. 14. Andriano to Hagerty, 10 March 1943,p. 10. 15. Ibid., p. 12. 16. Ibid,p. 10. 17. Andriano to Hagerty, 28 October 1942, pp. 3, 7. 18. Alessandro Baccari, Jr.. et aI. Saints Peter and Paul Church: The Chronicles of “The Italian Cathedral” of the West1884-1984, (San Francisco, 1985), 63, 75, 108. 19. Ibid., 75. The fundraiser for St. Peter and Paul Church is only one example of an orga nization that brought together with the elite of the Italian Community.
94 tø Ex POST FACTO 20. For a more complete look at the relationship between Andriano and Archbishop Mitty, the San Francisco Archdiocese Archives (SFAA) which houses Mitty’s correspondence includes letters between the two. See Correspondences “A” for various years. The ar chives also documents Andriano’s involvement with Catholic Action through letters to Mitty and others. See folder: Catholic Action for various years. For example Mitty asked Andriano in a letter dated 4 March 1936 to be the speaker at a combined graduation of all the Catholic High Schools at the Dreamland Auditorium. Another example is a letter from Father Connolly to Mitty dated 1 April 1935 in which Andriano advises the Church on the selection of a member to the San Francisco School Board. See SFAA vertical file “Schools 1935.” 21. For a thorough examination of Catholic Action, Monsignor Luigi Civardi’s, Catholic Action, New York, 1936 is an excellent source. See also, Issel, “‘A Stern Struggle.” for the youth view of this program see ‘Student’s Handbook of Catholic Action,” Christian Brothers Archives of the San Francisco Archdiocese, Institute Room, Mont La Salle, Napa, Ca. Box 170, “History of Catholic Action.” As President of the Catholic Men of the Archdiocese, Andriano reviewed this Handbook and gave suggestions on its content. 22. Bolletino, March 1932, p. 1; Boltetino, April 1932, p. 4. 23. for a thorough examination of Catholic Action, Monsignor Luigi Civardi’s Catholic Ac tion is an excellent source. Another source is the Student’s Handbook of Catholic Ac tion. Christian Brothers Archives of the San Francisco Archdiocese, Institute Room, Mont La Salle. Napa, Ca. Box 170, “History of Catholic Action.” Incidently, Andriano met with Civardi on a trip to Rome. As President of the Catholic Men of the Archdiocese Andriano reviewed this Handbook and gave suggestions on its content. 24. Andriano to Hagerty, 10 March 1943, p. 8. For further proof of the Catholic Men’s actions, the San Francisco Archdiocese Archives holds several folders ofCatholicAction material including several yearly reports on the branches of the Catholic Men. 25. Andriano to Mitty, 19 May 1938, Archdiocese Archives, folder: A Catholic Action 1936- 1940. See also Mitty to Giuseppe Cardinal Pizzardo, 23 March 1938, Mitty to Civardi 23 March 1938, and Pizzardo to Mitty, 4 June 1938. 26. Andriano to Hagerty, 10 March 1943, p. 5. 27. “Tenney Committee: Mayor Rossi Summoned as a Witness in S.F. Un-American In quiry,” San Francisco Chronicle, 23 May 1942, p. 1. Andriano later identified Mr. X as Giuseppe Cogliandro (a notary), which this author could not confirm. Andriano to Hagerty, 10 March 1943, p. 13. 28. “Ronchi Says Schools Also Dominated,” San Francisco Call-Bulletin, 5 December 1941, p. 1. 29. Floyd Flealey, “Tenney Hearing: Investigators Beaten Here, Committee to Be Told,” San Francisco Chronicle, 25 May 1942, p. 1; “Tenney Committee: Mayor Rossi Summoned As a Witness in S.F. Unamerican Inquiry,” 23 May 1942, p. 1. 30. The San Francisco Chronicle covered the Tenney Committee and these accusations in “Tenney Committee: Investigators Beaten Here, Committee to be Told,” 25 May 1942, p. 1, “SF Fascist Link Charged,” 26 May 1942, p. 1, “The Tenney Inquiry: Committee Asks Removal of Andriano from Draft Board,” 28 May 1942. The San Francisco Examiner covers this is in “Andriano Accused as Fascist Leader at Tenney Probe,” 26 May 1942, p. 1,“The Tenney Inquiry,” 27 May 1942, p.1, “Tenney Committee Asks Immediate Andriano Ouster from Draft Board,” 2$ May 1942, p. 7. For a similar view see the San Francisco Call-Bulletin for the same period. 31. “Noto Colonia,” 11Corriere Del Popolo, 6 January 1944, p. 2. 32. Rose Scherini, The Italian Communityof San Francisco, (New York 1976), 197-198. 33. Ibid. 34. R.W. Doyle, Thomas Doyle, and R.A. Doyle, “Editorial,” San Francisco Monitor, 30 May 1942, p. I 35. Andriano to Hagerty, 10 March 1943, p. 12. 36. Ibid. Lawrence DiStasi and others, “Selective Internment of ‘Dangerous’ Aliens,” Una Sotria Segretta, available from www.io.coiu/—segretal; Internet. The arrests were based on the 1798 Alien and Sedition acts, which gives the govemment power to detain aliens
SPRING 2003 VoLuME XII 95 in times of emergency. For a complete analysis see Distasi, “The Individual Exclusion Program for Persons of Italian Descent,” a paper presented to the U.S. Department of Justice for their report on individual exclusions during World War II. In the author’s personal collection. Also see the government’s own reports, Committee on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians, The Internment of German and Italian Aliens Compared with the Internment ofJapanese Aliens in the United States During WorldWar II: A Brief History and Analysis, report prepared by Peter B. Sheridan, 1980, San Francisco Public Library, Italian-American Collection, San Francisco City Archives; Department of Justice, Report to the Congress of the United States: A Review of the Restrictions on Persons of Italian Anceshy During World War II. 2002. 37. Patricia Yollin, “A Secret Uistoty,” San Francisco Chronicle Sunday Magazine, pp. 8- 11, 19. 38. DiStasi details the governments program thoroughly in “The Individual Exclusion Pro gram for Persons of Italian Descent.” For the government’s report on this process see, Report to the Congress of the United States: A Review of the Restrictions on Persons of ItalianAncestn’During WorldWarII. To see an example of an exclusion order, Andriano’s Exclusion Order can be found at the San Francisco Archdiocese Chancery Archives, Correspondences “A,” 1943. 39. “Exclusion Case: Sylvester Andriano,” Department of Justice Report #146-7-291, Ex clusion No. 3-7, Northern District California, 9 August 1943. 40. Ibid. 41. Western Defense Command, Supplementary Report Part JIJ: Exclusion of Non-Japa nese, National Archives, RG. 338/290/38/20/2, box 9, 854-855. It is doubtful that the Attorney General notified Andriano of Army visits. Based on Andriano’s correspon dences with James Leo Hagerty, Andriano’s stated reason for leaving the West Coast was to protect a friend and for religious reasons. This is documented later in the essay. 42. Hagerty toAndriano, 18 August 1942. 43. Monsignor Collins to Archbishop Mitty, 27 May 1942; Mitty to Michael Ready, 27 May 1942; Ready to Mitty, 17 June 1942; Mitty to Ready, 24 June 1942; Joseph Donovan to “Eddie,” 24 September 1942. SFAA, vertical file, Correspondences “A,” 1942. 44. Archbishop John J. Mitty, “Graduation at Civic Auditorium,” San Francisco Monitor, 19 June 1942, p. 1. 45. Andriano to Hagerty, 25 November 1942. 46. AndrianotoHagerty, 17November 1942,p. l;AndrianotoHagerty,25 November 1942, p. 1. 47. Andriano to Hagerty, 21 October 1942. 48. Andriano to Hagerty, 15 November 1942. 49. Andriano to Hagerty,10 March 1943, p. 2. 50. Andriano to Hagerty, 25 November 1943, p. 3. 51. Andriano to Hagerty, 10April 1943,p. 1. 52. Andriano to Hagerty, 24 June 1943, p. 1. 53. Andriano to Hagerty, 24 June 1943, p. 2. 54. Ibid., p. 2. 55. Ibid., p. 4. 56. Ibid., pp. 4, 5. 57. Andriano to Hagerty, 19 July 1943, p. 1;Andriano to Hagerty, 26 August 1943, p. 1. 58. Andriano to Hagerty, 12 November 1943, pp. 1-2. 59. Ibid., pp. 2. 60. Hagerty to Andriano, 18October 1942,p. 1;Hagerty toAndriano, Palm Sunday, 1943, p. 1;Andriano to Hagerty, 26 August 1943, p. 1. 61. Andriano to Hagerty, 28 October 1942,p. 3. 62. Ibid., 12 November 1943, p. 5.
96 Ex POST FACTO