Natalie Notkin (1900-1970) was the Foreign Books librarian at The Seattle Public Library's Central branch from 1927 to 1932. Born in Kherson, Russia, Notkin emigrated in 1921, earned an undergraduate degree from the University of Washington in 1925, a degree from the University of Washington's Library School in 1927, and become a naturalized citizen in 1928. In 1930, Seattle Police Chief Louis Forbes submitted a (completely unsubstantiated) letter to the United States Congress during that body's investigation into Communist propaganda [chaired by Hamilton Fish, Jr.(1888-1981)] accusing Notkin and 17 other Seattle residents of being Communists. Forbes later informally retracted his accusation. The sole public employee on Forbes's list, Notkin professed astonishment at the charge, declaring that she was not a communist and had never attended any meetings of the Communist Party. Nevertheless, the Seattle City Council cut her position and salary from the library budget, and, on February 2, 1932, the library board agreed to dismiss her. This People's History includes the text of the letter Notkin wrote to the library board after she had unofficially been asked to resign, but before she received her termination notice.
A Diverse Collection
Notkin had certainly purchased Russian language books as
part of the library's collection, in part due to Seattle's burgeoning post-revolution Russian
expatriate community. As of January 1,
1931, the library collection included 11,893 books, 1,514 of which were written
in Russian. The largest number of
foreign books in the collection was French, with 2,780 titles, followed by
German, with 1,869 titles. The total
collection numbered 11,893 titles in languages from Arabic to Yiddish, with
total circulation of 37,252.
Notkin asserted that she bought Russian books in the same method as she bought all the other books in the collection: considering reviews of specific books, literary standing of the authors, and buying trends among other libraries. Before being placed, her orders were scrutinized by the library's Book Committee. The library board and chief librarian always had the authority to deny a purchase, or to remove a book from circulation. Head Librarian Judson Jennings (1873-1948) had previously opined that the library's collection must represent differing points of view, and that books should not be barred simply because some library patrons disagreed with the author's point of view.
The library's letter of dismissal was dated February 8,
1932, and stamped as having been mailed on February 10, 1932. Natalie Notkin's letter to the Board of
Directors of The Seattle Public Library was dated February 8, 1932. The two letters must have crossed in the
Notkin's letter in full:
"I have been requested by the Board to tender my resignation
from the Library Staff. I feel that the
Board has a right to know my motives for refusing to comply with this request,
and I have tried to state my motives in this letter, as completely and clearly
as I can.
The reason given to me by the Board as the foundation for
its request was that an inspection has been made of the Library's Russian collection
and that the collection was discovered to contain communist books and some
obscene books. I shall deal with the
second part first, as it seems to me by far less important and more easily
I do not believe that any librarian of decent standing was
ever accused of knowingly and consciously getting obscene books into the
Library. Books are being continuously
objected to on moral grounds, sometimes deservedly, sometimes not, and are
taken care of by the Library. It happens
even to English books, where the Library's source of information is
considerably greater, and the book-reviewing force consists of the entire staff. It had happened to several foreign books, and
whenever a book was called to my attention it was treated accordingly.
As far as I can now remember it had happened to two German
books, one Swedish and three French books.
Of those, the Swedish books appeared on the Providence Public Library
list, and later was referred to favorably by the Booklist. Two of the French books were recommended by a
University professor, and the third appeared on the Los Angeles Library
list. Of the German books one was the
recipient of the Kleist prize in Germany and was also among the
books specifically recommended by the Los Angeles Public Library to the
readers. The other is in the Library in
English. As an example of the extreme
relativity of opinion as to what constitutes obscenity, I must say that the Los Angeles lists,
respectively containing the French and German book just mentioned, were
described by the assistant there as 'innocuous'!
I have no reason to suppose that certain books, however
highly recommended by some reviewer, might not have seemed objectionable to the
Russian borrowers, and if called to my attention they would have been treated
by me in the same way as the books in other languages.
The first part of the accusation is more grave and of a
nature that affects me not merely as a librarian, but as a citizen. As a citizen I object against the implication
that I was getting communist books, getting them, moreover, for propaganda
purposes. I can truthfully say that to
my knowledge the Russian language collection has no communist propaganda. I did not believe, nor do I believe now, that
a book of fiction describing life in Soviet Russia is a book of communist
propaganda. On the contrary, most of the
fiction books published in Russia,
which were purchased by the Library, present a picture of life so dreary, so
horrible, that its effect would be rather the reverse of propaganda.
It would be unreasonable to deny that books published in
Soviet Russia have a different approach to things from books published by
Russian émigrés. It would be just as
unreasonable to suppose that on the part of the readers with one viewpoint
there have been no objections against the books published by the opposite side. I have mentioned this in my annual report,
for the Board to read, as far back as the report for the year 1928, and then
again in the report for the year 1930.
Knowing that the mere fact of buying books published in
Soviet Russia is an offense in the eyes of some people, I did not consider it
possible to assume the entire responsibility for so serious a matter, and
besides mentioning it in my annual reports I have talked to Mr. Jennings on the
subject. I was assured that the Library
has a right and a duty to have books presenting different sides of a controversial
question, and I knew that to be the policy of all public libraries. In spite of this assurance I confined the
purchase of books published in Soviet Russia to works of fiction, and such
non-fiction as was especially recommended for its impartiality, or which dealt
with subjects entirely unrelated to politics.
Being physically unable to read every foreign book which
came to the Library, and having depended solely upon reviews and the literary
standing of the authors, I cannot state that no mistakes had been possible, and
that no objectionable books could have slipped in. In fact, upon several occasions, after a book
had been purchased due to favorable review, it has been found unsuitable and
stacked immediately. It is entirely
possible that there are other books which should have been treated likewise,
but had not been, because the objectionable places in them have escaped my
It had been rather a matter of pride to me that I was
ordering books which from the reviews appeared to have literary value,
impartiality or descriptive vividness, irrespective of the place of their
publication, and have in every way been trying to follow the principle of
librarianship: non-partisan fairness.
In spite of the fact, however, I feel myself to be
completely innocent in the matter, and the accusation of the Board
unjustified. I would have signed my
resignation when requested to do so, moved by simple professional pride, should
this be an isolated occurrence. But this
appears to be part of a much larger thing, consisting of a series of events,
which I shall make an effort to stop.
At the time the first event took place, namely Mr. Forbes'
letter to the Hamilton Fish, Jr. Committee, I had not taken legal action upon
the recommendation of some of my friends, and some of the members of the
Library Board, who assured me that such rumors die a natural death if left
alone. For the sake of the institution
with which I was connected, knowing the inevitable publicity that would be the
result of any legal action, I have taken no steps to refute the libel. I now consider this to have been a mistake,
and I feel that steps must be taken now, lest it should proceed any further.
It has been conveyed to me, that should I voluntarily sign a
resignation, the records of the meeting at which this was discussed would be
cancelled. I know that I have done
nothing to justify the withdrawal of the confidence on the part of the Library
Board, nothing of which if discussed or recorded would hurt me, nor have I been
given any opportunity to see and inspect the records in question.
I am naturally refraining from work at the Library until I
receive an official notification from the Board as to my status. In refusing to tender my resignation I am not
trying to defend my position with the Library, but my standing as a citizen of
this city and country.
Natalie B. Notkin
(Natalie Notkin letter to Seattle Public Library Board of
Directors, Folder "Natalie Notkin"...)."
After her dismissal from The Seattle Public Library, Notkin hired
attorneys to represent her at a hearing demanding that she be reinstated with
back pay. Calling the charges
"maliciously false," Notkin told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, "I am willing to stand on my
record and reputation. I have done
nothing I wish to conceal" (February 21, 1932). On May 27, 1932, an Alternative Writ Mandate
was served on the members of the library board and Head Librarian Jennings. The library board filed a demurrer and, on
June 17, 1932, the demurrer was sustained and the writ was quashed.
In 1937, Natalie Notkin was hired by University of Washington Libraries. She worked there until until 1941, left for a few years, and then worked there in the Catalog Department from January 1949 to December 1968.