Harold Bell Wright
Goes to the Movies

Copyright 2001-2002, Gerry Chudleigh
Last edited June 18, 2002

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION 

     Harold Bell Wright’s success in the movie industry never approached his triumphs in fiction.

     Wright's first novel to be made into a movie, The Eyes of The World, was filmed in the mountains near Redlands, California, the location described in the book.  It was produced by Clune Films, well known at the time for excellent cinematography.

     The critics said The Eyes of the World had beautiful scenery, but unless a viewer was familiar with the novel there was no way to figure out the story.  Evidently Wright agreed, because for his second movie he and his publisher, Elsbery Reynolds, formed the Harold Bell Wright Story-Picture Corporation with Wright serving as writer, producer, and director.   "People do not go to the theater to see scenic effects," Wright told a Los Angeles reporter after "The Shepherd of the Hills" achieved some box office success.  "They go to see a story visualized.  The story is first; everything else is incidental."  (Los Angeles Evening Herald, June 17, 1919.)

     By 1920, after only one movie, the Harold Bell Wright Story-Picture Company was dead.  Wright and Reynolds were no longer on speaking terms as a result of Wright's decision to have his books published by Appleton instead of by The Book Supply Company.   There is evidence that this quarrel cooled off later and the two men were friends again, but the fight lasted long enough to contribute to Wright's losing his movie rights.  

     In an interview conducted by Columbia University in 1971, Hollywood producer, Sol Lesser, recounted how in 1920-22 he obtained the right to make movies from all Wright's books published to that time.  According to Lesser, he and his partner, Mike Rosenberg, wanted the movie rights to Wright's books because they figured the millions of people who had read the books would want to see movies based on those stories.  So Lesser traveled to Tucson to see if Wright would sell.  Wright was willing, but there was a problem.  Reynolds owned half the rights to the books, and Wright was not willing to talk to Reynolds or deal with him in any way.  But Wright offered a solution.  If Lesser would deal with Reynolds directly, and buy from Reynolds his half of the rights, Wright would give his own half of the movie rights to Lesser in exchange for what would then be Lesser's half of the publishing rights.  Lesser says he "hot-footed" it to Pomona, paid Reynolds $175,000 for the book and movie rights, and the printing plates, and made the trade with Wright.  When the dealing was done, Reynolds had $175,000, Wright owned all the publishing rights (and the printing plates), and Lesser owned the movie rights to all the Book Supply Company titles.  Unfortunately, Wright traded away lucrative movie rights in exchange for book rights that proved to be of little monetary value.  Worse, he gave up all right to control the content of the movies.

     Lesser's contract with Reynolds, dated September 6, 1922 and now in the UCLA Library, shows that before Reynolds sold the rights to Lesser, Reynolds already had some deals in motion for production of movies from Wright’s books.  Clune had agreed to pay Reynolds 3% of receipts for the 1916 movie, The Eyes of the World, and The Norris Company had bought the rights to make a movie of The Winning of Barbara Worth, also paying Reynolds 3% of receipts.  Evidently Clune and Norris (who never completed the Barbara Worth movie) had only bought licenses to make one movie each, because Lesser now bought the unlimited rights to those titles, along with rights to the other seven Book Supply Company titles.  He also bought the existing film copies of the 1919 movie, The Shepherd of the Hills.

     It is likely that the language in Lesser’s 1922 contract with Harold Bell Wright was identical or very similar to the language in the contract with Reynolds, in which Reynolds granted Lesser "the exclusive universal motion picture and stage rights . . . together with the exclusive and universal right to use the titles and themes . . . and to adapt, arrange, change, transpose, add to or subtract from the themes and titles . . . to such an extent as the purchasers may deem expedient," to make movies from Wright's first nine novels (from Reynolds contract in UCLA Special Collections). As the contract would suggest, the Harold Wright "B-movies" that followed departed significantly from the stories in the novels. Sometimes only the names of Wright's titles and characters were recognizable.  The first movies produced under this contract were: When a Man’s a Man (1924), The Mine with the Iron Door (1924), A Son of His Father (1925), The Recreation of Brian Kent (1925), The Shepherd of The Hills (1928) and The Eyes of the World (1930).  In 1926 Lesser sold the rights to “The Winning of Barbara Worth” to Samuel Goldwyn for $125,000. Goldwyn employed the top romantic duo of the time, Ron Colman and Vilma Banky, to play the leads in The Winning of Barbara Worth.  Coleman's performance was overshadowed by the brilliant acting of a rookie named Gary Cooper who made his debut in this epic silent Western.

     By 1930 it was clear that the future of movies included sound.  So Sol Lesser, believing that he owned the unlimited rights to make movies from the Harold Bell Wright titles he bought in 1922, produced The Eyes of the World with sound.

     By the early 1930's it had also became obvious to Wright that there was much more money to be made from movies of his early stories than from reprints of his books, and he wanted back into the movie business.  This is when it occurred to him that his 1922 contract had only conveyed to Lesser the right to make SILENT movies.  It could not have conveyed rights to sound movies, he reasoned, because they hadn't been invented in 1922.  He informed Lesser that if Lesser wanted to make, or remake, sound movies from Wright's early books he would have to enter into a new contract and pay him for each sound movie.

     But Lesser argued that his earlier contract conveyed to him the right to make ANY movie, including talking pictures, from the titles covered in the 1922 contract.  Wright and Sol Lesser agreed to let a judge settle the matter.  "Before undertaking production, the two presented their briefs to the California Court for 'Declaratory Relief,' the Court to declare a finding on the respective rights in advance without parties suing each other. The Court found that rights were conveyed, regardless of technical changes or additions in the film medium."  (Email message from Sol's son, Julian Lesser, to Chudleigh, May 15, 2001.)  In other words, the judge ruled against Wright, and Lesser was free to make sound movies with no additional payments to Wright.

     In a letter (now in the Princeton University Library) to Harper and Brothers, written in January, 1944, Wright provides a slightly different ending to the story.  He says that after the judge ruled against him, he threatened to appeal, and rather than continue the legal case, Lesser and associates settled, "on my terms."  These negotiations, Wright says, led to the six-movie contract mentioned below.  Evidently his terms only related to additional titles not covered in the 1922 contract.

     The first of several sound movies produced after the judge's ruling, and Wright's later settlement, was the 1935 film, "When A Man's A Man," though before the dispute Sol Lesser had already re-made "The Eyes of the World" with sound.  The other sound movies that Lesser produced under this phase of the 1922 contract included When a Man’s a Man (1935), The Calling of Dan Matthews (1936), The Mine with the Iron Door (1936), and Wild Brian Kent (1936).

     By 1935 Lesser wanted some new Harold Bell Wright stories.  Because of declining health, Wright turned over all his movie dealings to his oldest son, Gilbert, who was at the time employed by Sol Lesser to write story ideas and screen plays for several of the novels Wright had sold to Lesser in 1922 and later. Gilbert quickly created a proposal, arranged a deal, and signed a contract selling Lesser the movie rights to six Harold Bell Wright stories--three PUBLISHED stories and three ORIGINAL stories. The three published stories named in the first part of the contract included two published novels and a published magazine story. One published novel was listed as Exit in one personal letter, and as God and The Groceryman in another. Neither of these novels was ever produced as a movie, so it is probably not important to know which was correct. The other novel was Helen of the Old House.  Lesser did release a movie, WESTERN GOLD (1937), which he billed as being based on Helen of the Old House, though the movie bore no resemblance to the novel.  The third published story that Lesser bought was "A Desert Santa Claus," which was also never released as a movie.  So Lesser really produced none of the three published stories he purchased, though the deal did give him the right to attach Wright's name to a movie that sort of grew from Helen of the Old House.

     The second part of the six-movie contract granted Lesser the right to make movies based on three original stories, not yet written by Wright. This lead to much controversy.  Gilbert said he felt the contract should have SOME names for these three stories, so he inserted names--and short outlines--of three story ideas of his own, assuring his father that genuine Harold Bell Wright stories could be substituted before the movies were produced. The three stories Gilbert listed in the contract were, "Desert Storm," "Man of the Sea," and "A Farmer Returns." Gilbert told his father two of the stories, "Desert Storm," and "A Farmer Returns" were based on ideas he had heard his father express, but, he said, "the sea tale is not yours."

     When Wright learned about Gilbert's stories in the contract, he immediately concluded that if he substituted his own stories in place of Gilbert's, he would reveal to Lesser, and perhaps to the world, that Gilbert had committed fraud in the original contract, and he would position himself as an accessory to the fraud. Gilbert, who asked his father repeatedly over the next few months for original stories to submit to Lesser, never agreed with his dad on that point.  This conflict will be examined in detail in parts two and three of this paper.

     In the end, three movies were produced and released in fulfillment of this second part of the contract. One, THE CALIFORNIAN (1937), was written by Gilbert. It must have been an adaptation of one of Gilbert's three original stories listed in the contract.  Apparently Lesser didn't like Gilbert's other two stories, because the other two movies, IT HAPPENED OUT WEST (1937), and SECRET VALLEY (1937), were written by other writers employed by Lesser. Though Wright had never even seen any of these stories until shortly before the contract was signed, Lesser billed each of the three movies as being "From a Story by Harold Bell Wright." 

     Wright, who believed he had been trapped into selling other people's stories as his own, and into letting his name be attached to movies he detested, was angry at both Lesser and Gilbert. In 1944, at the end of a letter to his youngest son, Norman, Wright penned, "Since this deal with Lesser, and the kind of junk he put out over my name, I have never had, nor been able to arouse, one word of interest in the Wright stories from any producer. I don't blame them. From a 50,000.00 and 75,000.00 writer I have been made into the cheapest sort of Main Street author." (See Storyteller to America, Lawrence V. Tagg, p. 71) But far more important than Wright's anger at Lesser, was the deep disappointment and anger he felt toward his own son, Gilbert, whom he felt had betrayed him for financial and career gains.  Part Two and Three of  this paper will examine how this troublesome 1935 contract developed and why it created such conflict between Wright and his oldest son, Gilbert.

PART TWO:  BEFORE THE STORM

     First, we need to understand that the concept of the two-part, six-movie deal of 1935 between Sol Lesser and Harold Bell Wright was not invented by Wright’s oldest son, Gilbert.  Lesser and Wright were already discussing exactly this package deal before Gilbert got involved.  In his 1944 review of his dealings with Gilbert, Wright tells Norman that in 1935 there was renewed interest in making movies from his recent stories.  Lesser was among those most interested.  The problem was that Lesser did not want to buy the published stories Wright was offering unless the contract also included three new stories by Wright.  Wright responded that he would sell Lesser his published stories, and he would sell him three unpublished, or "original" story ideas that were still in his head, but he absolutely would not tie the two deals together.  "When you came in the 'situation,'" Wright wrote to Gilbert on December 26, 1935, "My deal with Lesser had not as you say, failed.  It is true that he had refused to pay the price that you and your friend advised me to ask.  But our deal was still open, as the correspondence shows."  Wright told Norman in 1944, "I [was] trying to sell Lesser the published stories, and Lesser [was] holding out for me to give him also three originals."

     It is obvious that Lesser was not very interested in any of Wright's published stories--except Ma Cinderella, which Wright was not offering him, at least not at the price they were talking about for the other stories. Why didn't Lesser want the published stories?  According to Gilbert, the stories weren't very good for movies.  In his December 17, 1935 letter to his dad, Gilbert refers to the three published stories as, "the least valuable of your stories," and as "a short story and two novels which you had every right to consider unsalable to the pictures."  Further evidence that Lesser was not interested in the published stories Wright was offering is provided by the fact that after he bought the three published stories, he produced only one of them, Helen of the Old House, and he did that only after he discarded both the novel's story and title.  And he didn't make that movie until after the movies made from the new or "original" stories were in the theaters. 

     Why was Lesser so interested in new, original, unpublished stories? Lesser needed bigger-than-life, heroic action-figures.  If the ticket sales had warranted it, he could have made a series of ten or more movies using the name Brian Kent, which he had purchased in 1922, but what could he do with Exit, or Helen of the Old House, or A Desert Santa Claus?  Not much.  But, if he contracted for new stories, and if he didn't have to pay for them until he approved them, he could make sure the stories had the names and characters he needed.  The unpublished stories would give him a chance to use Wright's name with stories and titles he could control and could sell effectively.  This was especially true if he could include a few of Wright's previously published stories in the same contract with the new original stories.  He could then take delivery of the old stories, and perhaps even produce them and market them, but have the legal right to not pay for any of them until all the stories listed in the contract, including the original stories, were finished and approved by him.  Bundling them into one six-movie contract would give him great control over the story content.

     But Wright would not agree to that.  Why? Wright stated four reasons in his letter to Gilbert, dated, October 26, 1935, and they all boil down to the same reason Lesser wanted them tied together.  "Whether it is in the contract or not, whatever [story] was in the contract would have to be accepted by Lesser and if he refused to accept it for any reason it would certainly complicate the settlement for the books that were already finished."  In other words Wright was afraid he would not get paid for the three published stories until all three original stories were finished, and accepted.  That would give Lesser all the control over story content, and since Wright was not sure he would ever finish three new stories, he might never get paid for any of the six stories.

     That is when Wright got sick and asked Gilbert, who already "was working for Lesser," to take over these negotiations for him.  And Gilbert promptly developed a "proposition" that he thought should be acceptable to both sides.  We do not have a copy of that proposition, but it is not difficult to reconstruct what was in it. In 1944, just weeks before his death, Wright assembled fourteen letters he hoped would demonstrate to his youngest son, Norman, that the senior Wright had been correct in this dispute with Gilbert.  The first letter, from Gilbert to his dad, is dated October 17, 1935.  Gilbert opens the subject with these words: "I have not written you about the Lesser deal because there is very little to write.  He has been away and only yesterday [Lesser] returned to read your letter and mine (the one outlining the proposition I sent to you)."

     Gilbert proposed to give Lesser three published stories, and three unpublished stories, just like Lesser wanted.  But Gilbert sweetened the deal for his dad by adding that he, Gilbert, would help his father write the three original stories, much as he had done with their jointly authored book, The Devil's Highway.  Before October 16, Gilbert had talked to his dad about this arrangement, and Wright had agreed to pay Gilbert $1000 for his assistance with each of the three original stories.

     Apparently Gilbert's "proposition" also included a link between the two parts of the contract, because ten days later, in an October 26 letter to Gilbert, Wright says that after further thought, he absolutely will not agree to a link between the two parts of the deal, or to anything that requires him to finish the original stories. He will only agree to sell the movie rights to Lesser if and when he gets each story done.  But the subject was never mentioned again and the contract Wright signed included all six movies.

     It is no surprise that Lesser liked Gilbert's proposition very much; it was just what he had been proposing to Wright all along.  At that October 16 meeting with Gilbert, Lesser offered to pay Wright $30,000 for the six stories--$7500 for each published story and $2500 for each original story. And, he offered to pay Gilbert an additional $6000 when all six stories had been written, submitted and approved.  It is probably fair to say that Wright was not well represented from this point on in these negotiations, as Gilbert had overwhelming conflicts of interest. Gilbert was already working for Lesser, he was hoping to get future jobs from Lesser, and now he was to be paid $6000 for "assisting" his father in completing the six stories, which would require him first to convince his father to agree to the deal, or as Wright said later, to trick his father into accepting the deal.

     It is not altogether clear whether Wright liked the price Lesser offered for the six stories.   In Gilbert's initial letter on October 17, he told his father that he had informed Lesser he could not accept the price, "for fear of what his father would do to him."  But as we saw in the letter quoted above, sometimes the price Wright asked for his stories was set by Gilbert and his friend.  In any case, Gilbert said he told Lesser that if Lesser would not pay more, he would send the proposal to other movie studios to see if they would.  And he told his father that during the previous week he had already given the six-movie "proposition" to an agent who had submitted it to other studios, and those other studios were reading the stories and preparing offers.

     And now Gilbert, in the same October 17 letter, casually mentions to Wright his innocent-sounding little maneuver that would cause so much conflict for years to come.  "I also took the liberty of giving them [the other studios] a sketchy outline of three originals--saying that they were merely samples. (I worked out three pretty good originals and will of course check with you.  But I thought I should have something)."  In defending this action to his father in a letter dated November 23, 1935, Gilbert says, "I don't see why you should be worried over the ethics of the originals.  You are simply selling Lesser three story ideas; it is up to him to make pictures of them. I should have talked with you before submitting these ideas but I needed them at once.  Two of them are essentially ideas that I have heard you express. . . .  I simply had to have something on paper, naturally I chose ideas I felt I could work up."  Furthermore, Gilbert tells his father, "We can sub- [section missing.  Probably, "We can substitute your stories in place of mine at any time."]  I know that these will be changed and rechanged a dozen times anyway.  All we can hope to do is, with me on the job, to make as good a picture as possible."

     From the October 17 letter it would appear that Gilbert did not present his own story titles to Lesser, only to the other studios.  But in the November 23 letter, Gilbert adds, "I am enclosing copies of these ideas which I submitted to Lesser and which he is willing to buy."

     The other studios did not offer more money than Lesser offered, so Gilbert resumed negotiations with Lesser.  On November 1, 1935, two weeks after their first meeting about this contract, Gilbert and Lesser agreed on a draft of the contract.  On November 22 Wright received a letter from Lesser's secretary saying the contract was being prepared.  That letter mentions that the titles of the six stories are Helen of the Old House, Exit, A Desert Santa Claus [the three published stories] and Desert Storm, Man of the Sea, and A Farmer Returns [the original stories].  In a November 22 letter to Gilbert, five weeks after Gilbert first told his dad about the three stories of his own that he had presented as samples, Wright expresses for the first time that he feels, "just a little bit streaky about these three original stories.  As you have already sent them in there is nothing I can do, but I do think you should send me as soon as possible copies of these stories.  I do not like the idea of selling something as my own which I have never even seen.  I do not feel that it is quite ethical and I think it certainly opens up great possibilities for trouble."

     It is interesting to note how soft Wright was in this objection.  He did not sound angry.  He didn't think it unacceptable.  He only said he felt "a little bit streaky."  For a man who loudly denounced wrongdoing whenever he encountered it, who tossed his manuscript of When a Man's a Man into a bonfire when he didn't like it, who burned his paintings and painting equipment when he decided to write full time, and who set his Imperial Valley writing shack on fire when he learned the next owner was going to put animals in it, this was not the kind of talk that would get his son's attention.  Furthermore, he didn't say he objected to selling stories that he hadn't written, only that he objected to selling stories he hadn't seen. His solution was not to substitute his stories for his son's but to have his son send him the stories so he could see them before they were sold, implying that once he reads the stories he will not feel "streaky" any longer.

     Mail between Gilbert and his dad often traveled faster than the U.S. Postal Service could deliver it.  In a later letter Wright says, "I have your letter . . . delivered by Leta."   Apparently Wright’s “streaky” letter was hand delivered, because the very next day, November 23, 1935 Gilbert sent copies of the three stories to his father, gave his reasons why he inserted these stories, and repeated that other stories could be inserted at any time. Gilbert assured his father that "Two of them are essentially ideas that I have heard you express as suitable material for a novel: the change in ideal of the home, and the Mexican border story.  The sea tale is not yours, but I know you have plenty--WE CAN USE OTHERS IF YOU LIKE." [Emphasis mine]

     By legal standards, Hollywood custom, and Lesser's standard practice, Gilbert was certainly correct.  When Julian Lesser, Sol's son, who knew nothing of this controversy, was asked in 2001 if he had a copy of the 1935 contract, he replied, "I doubt if the original HBW contract with my father is anywhere.  If it is, it would have been modified by subsequent clauses, changes, renegotiated terms, letters of understanding, plus oral understandings reached by phone."  "A contract means one thing to a journalist; there it is, in black and white.  But actual execution comes from fights over interpretation, threats to sue, and talent agents making peace."

     That is what Gilbert was trying to explain to his father in 1935 and for many years after that.  When Wright first proclaimed it “too late” to make substitutions, the contract had not even been signed.  Lesser was buying stories that had not yet been written, so he had to accept any story they produced solely on it's merits upon delivery.  It did not have to match what they showed him during negotiations because they had not shown him anything that anyone expected him to keep.  Certainly the working titles would not be used, and any stories kept would be significantly altered.

     In this same November 23 letter, Gilbert tells his father he will not be able to show the rough draft of the contract to Alfred Wright [apparently no relation] until the following Tuesday because Alfred is out of town.  The contract wasn't signed until the early part of December.

     In light of later developments, we should note here that no harsh words have passed between father and son, and Wright has not objected strongly to anything except tying the six stories together in one contract, which they apparently never discussed again. 

     On October 17, when Gilbert first told his father about his own three stories, Wright said nothing about them.  Why?  Perhaps Wright thought that before the contract was drafted his own stories would be substituted.  But when he saw Gilbert's titles in the contract in late November, he still said only that he "felt streaky" and would like to read them before the sale was completed.

PART THREE:  THE STORM

     But in Gilbert's next letter to his father, written December 17, 1935 he made requests, "demands" Wright called them, that changed their relationship forever, and changed Wright's view of all that his oldest son, Gilbert, had done since taking over the movie negotiations.  "I have been thinking over the original story deal from its conception down to the present," Gilbert says, "and I have come to the conclusion that I am fairly entitled to receive something out of the deal.  Let me outline all that has bearing on the case and see if you agree."

     Wright read Gilbert's outline and he did not agree.  He was profoundly offended and deeply hurt by Gilbert's reasons why he deserved to be paid.  Before responding, Wright asked for clarification, and Gilbert repeated his "demands."  On December 26, Wright exploded, "Gilbert--for all the downright cheap and sordid selfishness, and for ignoble ingratitude, that statement from you to me is a shameful thing.  I could not have believed you capable of it."  He closes the letter, "I am heartsick and tired.  My disillusionment is complete.  I ask you in decency to give me definite assurance from yourself, your friend Rex and the agent, that I am free from any further entanglement from you all.  When you have done this, and the Lesser contract is fulfilled, you will get your money."  That is the last thing on the page.  There is no salutation or signature.

     It is in the midst of this emotional letter that Wright for the first time states that he deplored Gilbert's insertion of his own stories in the contract.  He declared it to be "a low-down, shabby trick . . . that put me in a position that I was forced to accede to your demands for payment."

     Before we examine what Gilbert said that caused this conflict and why Wright responded like he did, we should put the conflict itself in perspective.  In some families, words like those Wright addressed to his son would have marked the end of their relationship forever.  This was not the case with Gilbert and his father, though their future correspondence seems to be quite careful and reserved.  After Gilbert assured his father in a January 3, 1936 letter that he had not been making demands but only asking his father's opinion, and after he assured his father that he appreciated all his father had done for him, Gilbert continues, "We had lots of Christmas presents (thank you both--the stone hippo is a real prize). . . ." "Well, Dad, I hope to God the storm is over between us; after all it is 1936 and there might be something good in it.  Happy New Year to you and Winnie and the Farm." 

     Three days later Wright responded with a rather cool and business-like letter and closed, "We are both very sorry to hear of Barbara's [Gilbert's wife's] illness.  I am writing her a little letter today.  With love to the family, as always, HBW."  Nearly one year later, on December 9, 1938 Wright sent a warm invitation to Gilbert and family to be sure to come to the farm for New Years Eve and over the next day.   Wright urges Gilbert to bring Barbara down for several days before Christmas. After giving some suggestions on how Gilbert could improve his presentation of his stories to get more contracts, Wright closes, "I need not add that these observations are born of my deep desire to see you achieve the success you are so eminently qualified to gain.  A success which you will never gain until, to your own self, nothing that has to do with your work is trivial or unimportant.  At no stage of the development of a story idea can you--dare you--give less than your all." 

     And in 1944, when Wright tells Norman his side of this story, he implores Norman "not to change in the least degree your attitude toward your brother."  And he reminds Norman that even after their difficulties over this contract, Wright offered to provide the money Gilbert needed in order to buy a nice house for his family, and it was to be a gift, not a loan. (That gift was never made because it was conditional upon Gilbert moving out of Hollywood, something he was not prepared to do.)

     That said, let's go back and examine Gilbert's "demands," Wright's reaction, and the ultimate outcome of the six-movie contract.

     Gilbert's letter was dated, December 17, 1935.  Wright notes in the margin that the 6-movie contract had already been signed.  In the opening paragraphs we learn that Gilbert enjoyed a recent visit with his dad.  "It was great to talk story with you once more . . . ."  We learn that Wright has offered Gilbert $15,000 to help him finish "The Man Who Went Away," and Gilbert is eager to get started on it.  It is likely that Wright's irritation with Gilbert's letter began in the second paragraph when Gilbert requested that Wright pay him the $15,000 "when I begin work on the novel."  He didn't actually say "pay me" when I begin; the deal was that in exchange for Gilbert's help, Wright would finance a house for Gilbert at a cost of $15,000.  Gilbert said, "It seems to me that the house should be started when I begin work on the novel.  We need it and want it as soon as possible. I think you might handle the building and then deed the place over to me when it is paid for, by which time the novel should also be ready for the editor."

     From notes that Wright added to the margin of the letter in 1944, we learn that Wright was, "so ill that I feared I would never be able to finish The Man Who Went Away."  And we learn in other handwritten notes that Wright did not have $15,000 and would have to borrow it.  Writers and co-writers normally receive their pay when books sell, only in rare cases before they are written.  But Gilbert requested Dad's payments "when I begin" because he needed it and wanted it.  Wright had to be irritated.

     Next Gilbert tells his dad about all his successes in the movie business.  Gilbert says one of his stories had turned out to be, according to critics, the best picture Lesser has yet turned out.  "Naturally this puts me in a sweet spot; Lesser wants me to join up permanently with the outfit and so on.  I won't of course, because I am going further than that." On Friday, Gilbert reports, Lesser had given him an assignment to write a screen adaptation of The Mine With the Iron Door, and Gilbert had it done by Monday.  "It was acceptable and so naturally our stock reached a new high." But with his father, his stock was beginning to dip.

     Now Gilbert makes his move.  He tells his dad the six-movie deal is done and the stories are sold, "I have come to the conclusion that I am fairly entitled to receive something from the deal."  What Gilbert stated he deserved, and what Wright says in the margins he already expected to pay, are exactly the same thing: forgiveness of a $3000 debt that Gilbert had owned his dad for several years, plus $3000 cash for the three original stories, making $6,000 compensation altogether.  However there was a subtle difference.  In this December 17 letter, Gilbert tells his father that years earlier Wright "had generously said that [the debt] was all water under the bridge and to forget it," and he tells his father that although Wright now owed him $3000 as a commission for the overall deal, he, Gilbert was not going to collect that $3000 from Wright--in appreciation for the debt his dad had forgiven him earlier.  It seems that Gilbert was happy and proud to offer his dad that magnanimous gesture.

     Wright had something only subtly different in mind.  He said in the margin, "This [the earlier debt cancellation] is not true.  I had planned to cancel his $3000 debt to me as a return to him for looking after my interests in the motion picture field.  He beat me to it."

     What difference did it make?  Both men agreed that the work Gilbert did on the deal nicely cancelled the debt Gilbert owed his father, but they disagreed on who should thank the other for the exchange! 

     But a closer look reveals that it made a much more important difference.  There are two different $3000 functions being discussed.  One is the $3,000 that Wright agreed to pay Gilbert for helping him write the three original stories.  The other is a $3000 consideration for Gilbert's help with the negotiations.  The two men had agreed before October 16, 1935 that Wright would pay Gilbert $3,000 for his help with writing the three stories, so that was not an issue.  And we know from reading Wright's notes in the margins of these letters that he intended to cancel Gilbert's $3,000 debt in appreciation for all Gilbert's negotiations with Lesser.

     BUT GILBERT DID NOT KNOW THAT. There had never been any discussion of Gilbert receiving anything from Wright for this management function.  Evidently Gilbert, who had been expecting to receive $3,000 cash for writing the three original stories, had suddenly realized that his Dad was very likely to forgive his old debt instead of paying him for writing the stories.  Then Gilbert would get no new money from all this negotiating and writing.  Since Wright had never told Gilbert about his intention to reward him in any way for his management of his affairs, Gilbert had no choice but to think what he did.  In a letter Gilbert wrote January 3, 1936, still trying to soothe his father's anger, Gilbert says, ". . . until a short time ago I thought I could bank on $3000 from you."  In other words, Gilbert was hoping to receive $3,000 in cash, but had recently realized (wrongly, it turns out) he was likely to only receive the debt cancellation.

     So Gilbert's purpose in his December 17 letter was to prove to his father that there really were two $3000 jobs he had done.  The letter was a pre-emptive strike.  Debt forgiveness was fine with Gilbert, but only if it applied to all the management service he had provided, leaving his dad to pay him $3,000 cash for the original stories.  In his letter he explained this carefully to his dad. Today we know that Wright was already thinking exactly the same thing, but was holding the information in his head to be a pleasant surprise for his son.  It was an honest lack of communication, with tragic results.  It is unfortunate that before Gilbert gave all the reasons his dad owed him $3,000 for his "commission," he didn't ask his dad if he planned to give him anything for his management work.  If his dad had given him a straight answer, this whole conflict might have been avoided.

     But Wright's irritation was rising with each sentence.  In the second paragraph Gilbert said he wanted $15,000 before he did any work on The Man Who Went Away, in the third paragraph he told his dad he, Gilbert, is wonderful, too good for Lesser.  Now, in the fourth paragraph he tells his dad, several days AFTER the contract is signed, that now he feels he deserves something out of the deal, which he never mentioned before.  In the fifth paragraph Gilbert states that his father had already forgiven him the $3,000 debt, which Wright says in the margin he never forgave, but intends to.  In paragraphs six and seven Gilbert argues that his dad owes him money for all the help he has given, and in the seventh paragraph Gilbert grants himself a full pardon for the $3,000 debt because his father owes it to him for his services.  "I actually believe," Gilbert writes, "that the debt is morally and actually wiped out right now."  So what Wright secretly planned as a gift, Gilbert now tells him, is only payment of what he owes.

     But from Wright's perspective the letter is worse than stated above. Wright was planning to give Gilbert a $3,000 credit just because he appreciated all he had done.  But most of the reasons Gilbert provides for his father owing him $3,000 are slightly inaccurate and at least a little insulting.

     Gilbert says Wright already canceled the old debt.  This seems to be a gratuitous point since they both agreed that canceling the old debt was fair compensation for Gilbert’s management work.  But it still irritates Wright, who says he never cancelled the debt.  Gilbert writes, "The deal you originally submitted to Lesser did not go through.  I did all I could to save it."  Not true, says Wright, the deal was still open.  Gilbert stated, "I wrote a treatment of each of your novels and the originals, contacted agents, drew up the proposition for submission to all the major studios and did all possible to get the approximate price you wanted (in this event you would have had to pay the agent’s commission, although he did little more than contact studio heads). When this fell through, I got on Lesser's tail again, MADE TRIPS TO YOUR PLACE [Wright underlined those words], hired a secretary to aid me in re-writing the treatments, etc, and fought Lesser to take the least valuable of your stories . . . which you had every reason to consider as unsalable to the pictures." 

     What? Wright must have thought, my own son says the stories I poured my soul into are really worthless?

     In the next paragraph Gilbert says, "You are to get from Lesser $7500 for three of my stories."  And later, "In other words, as it stands now, I am getting nothing from this intire (sic) deal and am furnishing three of the six stories into the bargin (sic)."  We must remember that from all the knowledge Gilbert had, this was perfectly accurate, at least in his dealings with his dad.  If Wright applied the old debt to his story writing and paid nothing for his management services, Gilbert would not have received a penny, other than the forgiveness of the loan.  But the words, "I am getting nothing," rang false with Wright, who knew perfectly well Gilbert was paid $6000 by Lesser for the same management functions he was now expecting his father to pay him for.  Wright seems to have just begun to believe that Lesser’s $6000 served mainly as a motivation for Gilbert to manipulate his father into accepting the deal.  His anger is beginning to boil.  "I am getting nothing from this deal," Gilbert said.  "The fact that I am being paid a nominal sum by Lesser to work on the screen plays does not enter. . . ."  He had already told his father on October 17, that Lesser was paying him $6000 for the deal.  A “nominal sum” is what Wright received from Lesser for each movie he sold him in 1922--one dollar (plus Reynolds' half of the publishing rights to Wright's Book Supply Company books).

     Weeks earlier, Gilbert had said two of the original story ideas came from his father, now Gilbert describes them as his alone.  "You said you would naturally pay me for my stories," Gilbert said.  Wright noted, correctly, that he agreed to pay him $1000 to help him write each of Wright's stories, not to buy Gilbert's. 

     Finally Gilbert ends, "What do you think?  I knew that so long as I felt this way, after thinking it all over fully, you would want me to get it off my chest."

     From Wright's perspective, as reflected in his many notes in the margins, Gilbert's arguments were greedy, disrespectful and totally unnecessary.  Why go to all this trouble to depreciate everything his father had done, and strain to exaggerate all Gilbert had done, even mentioning his expense for traveling to visit his father, when his father already intended to freely pay him exactly what he was asking for?  Wright noted at the bottom of the page, "Sounds like I am a stranger." 

          There is no evidence that Wright ever caught on that his son was writing these things because he didn't know what Wright was thinking, and Gilbert expected to be left with an empty bag.  In fact, according to Wright, the idea that his own son might think his father would not pay him for his work, was the most insulting cut of all.  "You can scarcely doubt that I expected to pay you for any help you might give me with these original picture stories." So there was little hope for understanding in that direction.

     The tone of Gilbert's letter, and the misrepresentations and exaggerations bothered Wright enormously.  As he thought about them in the following days, he came to see everything Gilbert had ever done on this 6-movie deal as an elaborate scheme to force Wright into a position where he had no choice but to essentially buy stories from Gilbert and sell them to Lesser as Wright's own work.  In the margin of Gilbert's letter of "demands," Wright penned, "He is simply forcing me to buy 3 stories from him which I never saw and never wanted, in order to land that $6000 job with Lesser--which depended upon this deal whereby he sells ME [underlined by Wright] to Lesser."

     It is clear that Wright is thinking like people often think about their ex-spouses after a divorce.  The actions they once saw as most unselfish, the gifts most precious, the things they once proudly told their friends about, are now seen as selfish acts, calculated to get something in return. Gilbert's letter, which Wright saw as greedy and disrespectful, caused Wright to re-evaluate and reinterpret everything Gilbert had said or done since taking over the movie negotiations.

     Perhaps it will help us understand what happened if we look at how easily things could have been different.

     Scenario #1.  Wright at any time before October 16 could have said, "Oh, by the way, son, I really appreciate all you are doing for me with this movie deal.  I would like you to know that when it is all finished, in addition to the $3000 I will owe you for your work on the three original stories, I plan to write off the $3000 debt you owe me."  If he had said that, Gilbert never would have made his "demands," and Wright would not have been offended.  Why didn't Wright tell his son he planned to compensate him for all his help with the movie deal?  Probably because he realized it would be a lot easier to grant the compensation when the deal was done well, than to take it back it if it wasn't done well.

     Scenario #2.  Instead of assuming his dad didn't plan to compensate him in any way, and launching into his list of reasons he deserved to be paid, Gilbert could have added a paragraph at the end of a letter that said, "By the way Dad, I have done a lot of work on this movie deal, and now it is just about finished.  Just in case you are thinking of paying me for all my work, please know that I don't expect payment.  I would be perfectly happy to have whatever value you might think my work has been worth applied toward that $3000 that I have never paid back to you."  If Gilbert had done that Wright would probably have replied, "I guess it is true that great minds think alike.  As a matter of fact, I have been thinking for some time that I would like to forgive that old debt in appreciation for all your work. Since this seems appropriate to both of us, we will consider that a fact--as soon as Lesser pays me for all six stories."  Instead, Gilbert assumed his Dad would not pay him, and labored to change his dad's mind, with many offensive arguments.

     Scenario #3.  Wright, after receiving the offensive letter, could have realized that his son was speaking out of understandable ignorance, and could have written, "As a matter of fact, I have been thinking for some time that I would like to forgive that old debt in appreciation for all your work.  I wish now that I had told you, because it would have made it unnecessary for you to create all these reasons why I owed you the money. To tell you the truth, I found several of your comments rather offensive, and not entirely accurate. But since we agree that forgiving that old debt is fair compensation for all the management work you have done, there is no need to go into those petty issues now.  We will consider your debt paid as soon as Lesser pays me for all six stories.  Thanks for all you have done."

     Why didn't Wright "turn the other cheek" with a gracious letter like the one suggested above?  Obviously Gilbert's comments touched on issues that Wright felt deeply about, but had not expressed until Gilbert's letter arrived.  Gilbert's letter probably ignited angry feelings Wright had been feeling, and perhaps suppressing, for some time.  From the letters that followed, it becomes clear that most of those angry feeling involved Gilbert's substitution of his own original stories, the way Gilbert had manipulated the situation so Wright believed he had "no choice" but to go along with it, and the resulting movies that embarrassed him.  But the thing that really got Wright's blood boiling was that Gilbert now "demanded" that Wright pay him for doing these terrible things to him.

     In a rather terse letter of December 31, 1935 Wright gives some clues of what he is angry about.  "You admit that you owed me . . . $3,000. You claim for your stories $3,000.  You claim an agent's commission of $3,000.  It seems very clear that the $3000 you owe me cancels one of the $3,000 items which you feel that I owe you.  Which item do you consider is paid by the cancellation of your $3,000 indebtedness to me?"

     "If you answer that in canceling your obligation to me, I paid you for your story material, then in the other $3,000 you are charging your father a full rate of commission [ten percent] that a Jew Agent would charge a total stranger-----and that on a deal in which you yourself were interested to the extent of a $6,000 job.  To me this is rather small business for a son of mine." 

     "If you say that in canceling your $3000 obligation to me, I am paying your commission and that the other $3,000 is for your story material (which as you know I had no idea of purchasing outright, unsight and unseen) then, I say you have taken your commission just the same.  And I repeat: that in the face of all that I have gladly done for you these past years, your demand for a full commission for this, the first service I ever asked of you, is too contemptible to pass without my notice."  "Understand, I am not protesting the payment of $3,000 to you----I am protesting the spirit which makes it possible under the circumstances for you to demand it."

     In other words, Gilbert was "demanding" that Wright pay him $3,000 for representation at the bargaining table, and $3,000 for help in writing his stories, and in both areas Wright believed Gilbert acted in his own interest and against his father's interests.

     Then Wright adds a mysterious statement: "You can scarcely doubt that I expected to pay you for any help you might give me with these original picture stories.  I did not expect that in addition you would be so quick to demand a commission on this sale to Lesser in which, as I have already said, you yourself were interested."

     Did Wright intend to pay Gilbert $3,000 plus the $3,000 debt reduction, making $6000 total?  Or did he intend to grant him only the debt cancellation as payment for the stories?  It seems from this letter that he only intended to pay Gilbert $3000, not $6000.  But it is just as clear from Wright's statements quoted earlier, that he intended to pay Gilbert $6,000, including the debt cancellation.  This may illustrate again that Wright did intend to pay $3000 plus the debt forgiveness, but he hated that Gilbert thought his dad owed it to him.  I believe the answer to this question can be found in the profound change in the way Wright saw his son's dealings after he got the letter of "demands."  Before that letter of December 17, Wright fully intended to cheerfully cancel his son's $3,000 debt for all the wonderful service he was providing, and he fully intended to pay him $3,000 for the three original stories.  But once his eyes were opened, once he perceived that he was the victim of a scheme to force him to sell his name to be attached to three stories he didn't write, he began to think that even one $3,000 payment was more than Gilbert deserved, and two payments of $3,000 was outrageous.  As he read Gilbert's letter he probably moved from paying $6,000 happily, to paying it grudgingly, and only after expressing his anger.  Still, he could honestly say he always intended to pay both. It is no wonder that Gilbert seemed completely baffled by his father's reactions.

     All of which begs us to ask one more question.  Was Wright correct in believing that Gilbert conspired with Lesser to trick him into selling his name?  Or was Wright unjustified in this re-appraisal and reinterpretation?

     For both men the question seemed to hinge on whether Wright was trapped or not.  Could he have substituted his own stories for the "samples" that Gilbert named in the contract, or was it "too late," as Wright repeatedly asserted?

     From a legal, business, ethical or even publicity standpoint, Wright was wrong in this phase of the dispute.  He was never trapped.  He could have submitted his stories at any time and it would not have been fraud in anyone's eyes but his own.  I am not denying Gilbert was unwise and insensitive to try to "bill" his dad for commissions and trips to his dad's house.  But the root of the problem was Wright's misunderstanding of the nature of a movie contract with Lesser.  Gilbert stated plainly and consistently that the three titles and story outlines he inserted in the second part of the contract were only place-holders that could be, and certainly would be, replaced later, either with Wright's own stories or someone else's. Gilbert said that:

1.  Lesser knew these were only "samples" of the kind of story that would be provided.

2.  Lesser would certainly change the titles before they became movies, so the titles in the contract didn't matter.

3.  Lesser would certainly toss out all the stories initially submitted and replace them with other stories, or so modify the final stories that they didn't resemble the stories submitted.

     It is clear to me that Wright was thinking of movie scripts as though they were saddles at an auction.  When a man offers three saddles for sale, the bidders inspect them and place their bids, then the winning bidder takes delivery of THOSE SAME three saddles, not some other saddles.  And a man does not buy a saddle to tear it up or throw it away.  He buys THOSE saddles because he intends to use THOSE saddles. Wright said Gilbert had offered his own three stories and misrepresented them as his dad's, Lesser had inspected them and paid for them, and now the only honorable choice was to deliver THOSE SAME three stories and hope no one found out they were not what they were represented to be.

     Who was correct?  Beyond any shadow of a doubt, Gilbert was correct, as is demonstrated by what actually happened to the three stories Gilbert submitted.  Lesser did not use any of the three titles he bought, tossed out two of the stories, and altered the third.  And none of this required the contract to be cancelled.  He replaced two stories and three titles, still paid Wright for three stories, and still billed them as "From a story by Harold Bell Wright."

     If, instead of complaining about Gilbert's "fraud," Wright had just spent some time with Gilbert developing three story ideas, then let Gilbert finish the writing and submit them to Lesser, Lesser would have done exactly what Gilbert said he would do, and what Lesser had done with all the other stories he had bought from Wright--he would have read them, tossed most of them out, modified the rest beyond recognition, and claimed the resulting movies were based on Wright's stories.

     What Lesser did with the first half of the contract also demonstrates the accuracy of Gilbert's position.  In 1922 Lesser had bought the rights to all Wright's works to date, but he only produced what he found useful.  When Lesser became the owner of Helen, Groceryman, and Santa Claus, he ignored two of them, and replaced both the story line and the title of the other.  The resulting movie was sort of like the proverbial 100-year-old axe that had had the handle replaced 10 times and the head replaced twice. There was nothing of the original left.

     Why did Wright refuse to recognize the nature of a Hollywood contract? Why didn't he just work with Gilbert to produce three original stories and submit them to Lesser?  Time pressure probably played some part.  But that seems like a rather thin reason, and it is not the reason Wright gave.  Wright already had three ideas and could have outlined them quickly to Gilbert and let Gilbert run with them. As far as Wright was concerned, it was "too late" weeks BEFORE the contract was even signed!  Again Wright was apparently thinking according to the "Code of the West."  Gilbert had given his word, had named the stories, and that was that.  As soon as the words left Gilbert's mouth it was too late to make changes.

     The whole Hollywood economy was contrary to Wright’s values, and that may be what Wright was really angry about.  From his perspective, this deal was an insult to his name, to his profession, and to his readers.  Earlier, the world had waited anxiously for every inspired word from Wright's pen.  Now Gilbert tells him, in essence, “Your story, my story, someone else's story; who cares? Lesser doesn't care and neither does anyone else.  Write your own story if you must, but trust me, it won't make any difference to anyone.”   Perhaps such a time comes in almost every man's life, but Wright hated hearing it from his own son.

     Wright respected his readers as noble creatures of God.  He felt a sacred responsibility to write stories that championed godliness and gave readers the courage to continue in their God-given work.  The Hollywood producers acted as though they believed their customers were fools waiting to be separated from their money by the lowest forms of entertainment.  And Gilbert was helping Lesser insult those people with lies and bad stories.

     Wright believed every man should perform every task as an assignment from God, for the service of society and individuals.  The Hollywood professionals, including his own son, seemed to have no thought but to make money, and didn't care at all if the work they did was good or bad, as long as it produced money.  Again, your story, my story, good story, bad story, who cares, just show me the money.

     Technically, Gilbert was right.  His stories were only samples, all parties to the deal knew that, and Wright could have worked with Gilbert and replaced them with his own stories.  The charges of fraud were uncalled for.  Supplying genuine Harold Bell Wright stories would not have "exposed" Gilbert or his father to any wrongdoing.  Gilbert had every reason to be bewildered by his father's inappropriate actions and overwrought judgments.

     But on a completely different level, a level where one might peer into the deep canyons of the Catalina Mountains, hear the whisper of the winds in the Coastal Redwoods, and look into the souls of men, Wright was correct. Hollywood had gone to hell, taking his son along for the joy ride.  In Gilbert's proposals Wright perceived the whole world mocking his character, his name, his public, and his life's work.  Wright knew that somehow the deal was wrong, though it wasn't fraud in the way he claimed.  No wonder he could write to Norman in his cover letter, "I want you to understand my complete loneliness; no one is left who understands who I am."  And to Gilbert, "My disillusionment is complete."

     Apparently Wright never recovered from the insult of this final Lesser deal, and he always believed Gilbert had betrayed his trust and been ungrateful, and maybe he had.  But Wright continued to love his family and communicate his optimism about the nobility of the ordinary person, and the ordinary task, as long as he lived.

PART FOUR:  AFTER THE STORM

     In 1944 Wright assembled 14 letters to document his claims against Gilbert.  So far in this study we have covered only 10, the letters written during 1935.  In the later letters, both parties repeat their viewpoints, with neither giving any evidence of understanding the other.

     January 3, 1936, Gilbert tells Dad he wasn't making any demands.  He never expected or asked for a commission of $3,000. He only said this is what he could have charged if he were not forgiving it in consideration of the earlier loan Wright had forgiven him.  Gilbert goes on to say, "I have signed with Lesser to develop the original story ideas into screen stories and to further develop them into screen plays."  He acknowledges that his dad has given him far more than he can ever repay and that he is grateful for all of it.

     Then he repeats that it is even now not too late to substitute Wright’s own stories in place of his.  "If, as you suggest, you do not need or want my help, you would like to get clear of my connection with the original stories it might be done as follows:  Write three story plots of your own and give them to me.  I will then give you $500 each and collect the other $500 from Lesser for doing the screen plays."

     It appears from this comment that Lesser, who has already paid Wright $2500 for each story plot, plus $1000 to Gilbert for securing each story, is now paying Gilbert an additional $500 to develop each story plot into a screen story, and another $500 to develop the screen play. Gilbert is suggesting that Wright can write three screen stories--based on his own story ideas, rather than the ones Gilbert submitted in the first place--and Wright will get the double benefit of having his own stories produced, plus receive an extra $500 for each.  Wright never responds, probably because, as he has stated many times, this would expose both of them as swindlers.

     And Gilbert suggested an alternative.  "Or, trade Lesser Ma Cinderella for the originals."  This was not an altogether unrealistic suggestion because Lesser was paying $7,500 for each of Wright's three published stories, Lesser really wanted Ma Cinderella, and Wright would not have to do any writing to prepare Ma Cinderella for sale.

     On January 6, 1936 Wright replied "I certainly shall not trade Ma Cinderella to Mr. Lesser for these three originals nor for anything else unless I am forced to do so by further developments.  Then he repeats his "too late" mantra.  "Inasmuch as you have signed with Lesser to develop these original story ideas into screen stories; and inasmuch as any attempt to make any change now that the contracts are all signed and payment made, I hope that the matter will go on as you planned it. . . ."  "To attempt any change of this arrangement at this time would certainly be most embarrassing to me and I should think to you also.  In other words you carried this deal through to the point where it was too late for me to object and so I think that you should carry it through to the end."

     December 9, 1938.  I do not know why Wright included this letter in the collection.  In it he tells Gilbert that he, Gilbert, must be doing something wrong because he has written 14 stories and not one of them has sold.  Wright suggests, not very subtly, that it is because Gilbert is insincere and doesn't work hard enough.  But Dad reminds Gilbert he is only telling him this because he loves him and wants to see him succeed.

     July 17, 1937.  Gilbert tells his dad that the three original stories have been released as movies.  Evidently Wright has asked Gilbert what he is suppose to say when people ask him anything about these stories and about where they might find a print copy.  Gilbert opens the letter with this suggestion: "The only thing you can say regarding the original stories is that they 'were written exclusively for the screen.'"  Then he adds this informative note, "Lesser has released three pictures which he would call adaptations of the three original story ideas.  They are: SECRET VALLEY, IT HAPPENED OUT WEST, and THE CALIFORNIAN.  In these you are credited in the following manner: "From a story by Harold Bell Wright."

     Then by way of review, he notes, "I wrote Lesser three stories to fulfill my part of the bargain.  One, The CALIFORNIAN, he used intire [sic]; the other two he worked over with other writers until they had lost all semblance of the stories I had written and he gave me no credit.  Lesser has of course made no attempt to use any part of the original story ideas--any more than he ever attempted to use the story in a published novel.  His contract gives him the right to make any changes he desires."

     Gilbert now turns his attention to the three published stories, which Lesser is starting to work on now that the three originals have been released as movies.  Gilbert says he has been assigned the task of writing "an original western story" that Lesser will call an adaptation of Helen of the Old House--one of the three titles Lesser bought in the first half of the disputed contract.  He continues, "My contract with him calls for a treatment of the three original story ideas and adaptations of the three published stories.  If I did that literally it would be very much easier for me than to dig up and write six original stories along the lines suggested by him.  But if I did, for example, make an honest and excellent motion picture story of Helen Of The Old House, he would not use it.  He would have to pay me, because I had fulfilled the contract, but when the picture came out it would be a western cowboy story written along the lines he wanted by some other writers.  I write what he tells me because I need the screen credit and I also want to keep in his good graces so that he will give me other work.  I hope this explains the situation."

     Gilbert was not talking in these last sentences about Gilbert's three original stories, but for Wright these final sentences pretty well "explained the situation."  Gilbert had betrayed his father's trust because he needed the screen credit, and wanted to stay in Lesser's good graces in order to get other work..  And, as Wright would remind us, to collect the $6,000 fee from Lesser.

     Apparently Wright was still turning these thoughts over in his mind during the final months of his life.  On February 10, 1944 he assembled the fourteen letters and wrote a 12-page summary of events.  The summary was addressed to Norman.

     "God knows," Wright says, "I have no wish to review a matter which cost me many a sleepless night, and heartaches.  But I cannot put the thing completely out of my mind and heart until you know the exact truth of it." So in twelve pages attached to the fourteen letters, Wright summarizes how he had given far more to Gilbert than Gilbert can ever pay back, how Gilbert substituted his own three stories for Wright's and how when he found out about it, it was too late to make any substitutions.

     And what was the “exact truth” of it?  Did Wright ever really know the exact truth of it?  Did Gilbert or Norman?  And do we know the exact truth of it?  Probably not.

ADDENDUM:  IF WRIGHT REPLIED TO THE ABOVE ANALYSIS