Variety (June 1919)

;3v - It':- ■' 4, ■ VARIETY 27 frr ■•■ :■ I'I -mir ; . .where I played there wan no appreciable loss at all. ■•''■. Q. Was there a publication of the statement in the press that all salaries were cut J •■•«•-'- \' A, I believe there was, yes. Q, You make another claim in this statement of the claims of the White Rats Actors' Union like thl»: "They have Introduced public rehearsals In the early morn- ing, thus destroying the mystery, romance and Illusion of the theatre." > What was that based upon? A. On the fact that In the Loew theatres, I know one particular Instance in Boston of my own knowledge, where there was a rehearsal, I believe, at 10 o'clock In the morning, and the audience was admitted to see how the act was re- hearsed ; and they stayed there until they were fatigued sufficiently with the performance to go out, Actors came down in their street attire, tired and dis- heveled after an all-night trip sometimes, and walked down and went to the rehearsal of their act, with anybody that wanted to come Into the theatre at'.that hour in the morning to Bee how It was done. Whatever value there Is In the theatre, It Is due to the , spirit of Illusion, and just the minute you take tho illusion away from the mechanics of the theatre, you destroy a large portion of Its entertainment quality, just the same as when you make the personal life of any prominent star in the theatrical world a matter of public inspection, you take away a vast amount oi-tholr attractiveness as a theatrical personage. I believe, myself,, that four-fifths of M Iss Maude Adams' prestige in the theatre is due to the tact that nobody knows anything about her private life, and there Is an element of mystery about it which Is always attractive. By the Intro- duction of these awful early morning entertainments,' it was simply taking the audience back-stage, and letting them see what made the wheels go 'round. Q. Did the audience pay tor this? A. Oh, yes; they bought in. That was the hors d'oeuvre to the dinner, the appetizer. Q. Was such a system in vogue at the Oreeley Square In New York? A. I could not say that of my own personal knowledge. I believe it was. Q. How about McVlcker's Theatre In Chicago? .A. I could not say of my own personal knowledge. I know that It was in Boston, as I was there when the thing was advertised. Q. The last claim here Is as follows: "They have blacklisted, as they please, good, intelligent, and first-class acts." - What was your basis for that? A. I think documentary evidence we had In the organiza- tion's possession at the time. I am quite sure of it—a list of the blacklist, and also the item contained In a letter signed by Mr. Albee and Mr. Murdock and Mr. Beck, and I think Mr.' Keith, that the blacklist would be abolished. It was a perfectly natural conclusion that you could not abolish a thing which did not exist Q. That Is, you refer to a letter, or a copy of a letter, from Mr. Keith, Mr. Albee, Mr. Percy Williams and Mr. Murdock to the White Rats of America? Mr. Goodman: When was that letter dated? . J£ r - Walsh: That letter was dated the 27th of February, 1007. Mr. Goodman: I object to any characterization of a black- list In 1910, when Mr. Fltzpatrick was president of the Asso- ciation of White Rats, referring back to a letter in 11)07, presupposing that because there was or may have been a blacklist in 1907, there was one In 1916. Ono 13 a far cry from the other. The Witness: The same men were there. Mr. Goodman: I am not addressing you, but the Examiner. Mr. Walsh: That is as far as 1 wish to go tonight, Mr. Examiner. Examiner Moore: Very well. We will take an adjourn- ment, then, until 0 o'clock tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 4:45 o'clock p. m., an adjournment was taken until tomorrow, Saturday, May 17, 1919, at 9 o'clock a. m.) j _. ' 20 West 38th Street, New York City. . r,J??..^ earlDS waB resumed, pursuant to notice, before EXAMINER CHARLES S. MOORE; Esq. Appearances as heretofore noted. SATURDAY, MAY 17 JAMES WILLIAM FITZPATRICK . DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued). By Mr. Walsh: Q. Referring again, Mr. Fltzpatrick, to Commission's Exhibit No. 64, which Is your open letter published In Variety, on September 22, 1916, in which, as 1 called to your attention yesterday, were statements of certain al- leged abuses, which you explained, I find .on page 18 of this open letter. In the first column, under the heading Nineteen Hundred and Sixteen": "The story of my election to office need not be repeated here, but It Is necessary that there should bo repeated a statement of abuses which not only I, but every other vau- deville actor, knew 6xlsted when that election took place." Then there Is an enumeration of what you allege were tn fse abuses; and I read the first, as follows: I knew that the business morality was, to use the least offensive word, defective." What did you claim was the foundation for that state- ment? Mr. Goodman: We object to that, upon the ground that jt calls for the conclusion of the witness, and for general- ities, and because It Is not competent, material, nor bind- ing upon tho respondents,, not the proper way to prove the abuses which this gentleman belloves existed. And I make the same objection to all of the testimony of this witness along the same lines. If it is understood that my objection gocs^to each of such questions, without being repeated each Mr. Walsh: That Is perfectly satisfactory. Examiner Moore: Yes. Tho objection is overruled. The Witness: The chief phase, I think, of that particular statement has to do with the matter of cuts, salaries and the commissions, particularly, I think, the mntter of salaries Having been cut under the plea of bad business on account or the war, and the falluro to restoro those salaries when business got better. It also refers to the constant breaking of contracts, cancellations; and also to the aggravated com- missions which had Increased—tho bonus system. By Mr. Walsh: Q. What was tho bonus system? jui Pn y |n S on agent In addition to his commission an ad- ditional amount to secure work, or on the pretenso of se- curing work. Q. You talked of the cancellations of contracts of actors? a. Yes. Q. Just tell us what the situation was about that? A. We were receiving at that time in the organization, and i, personally, knew of my own personal knowledge, before mat—we were receiving constant reports that thU cancel- lation hud grown to be almost a general nuisance In the business. We were constantly receiving complaints from actors who had been canceled, and there was always a great deal of trouble In the office with people who were being can- celed out o( town, here, there and everywhere. Q. You mean In the White Rats offices you were receiving those reports? A. Yes. Also, I knew of such cases before my election to office where acts had been canceled. Q. Where were these acts being canceled? A. Either in the town where they were to play, or they would receive cancellation, if they were to play on Monday, on Saturday night before they left the theatre where they were playing. Q. How did that affect them 7 A. It simply deprived them of that work which they had contracted for, and prevented them from filling In that en- gagement, by not giving them, sirlflclent notice to enable them to secure other employment, and It put thehi to great Incon- venience and monetary loss. Q. How about expense? When cancellations occurred, was an actor required to pay his fare and expenses back to hie headquarters, or to New York? A. Usually It means that he hae to come back to New York, it the contract has been made In New York, to see what the reason was. In any event he has to come-back to'New Yoik, or to Chicago, wherever he may be, to secure other work. Q. At whose expense. A. Always at his own expense. Q. What was the situation In reference to other circuits besides the New York circuits—the Orpheum or the Inter- state, these circuits that are far away fro mheadquarters? A. Of course, the hardship in those cases was far greater. - ■ If a man happened to be playing on the Orpheum Circuit, and he was in the northern section of the Pacific Coast region, it meant that he had to jump all the way back, pay hie own transportation,, his own excess baggage, it be happened to have any, and usually it happened that most people have excess baggage; he had to pay the additional expenses of eating and sleeping on the trip in the time, and the great loss Involved In making the return. Q. There was a system In vogue at one time on the Orpheum Circuit of the managers furnishing the transportation, was there not? ""*" A. Yes, sir. Q. Was that in vogue when you came into office? A/ No; nor a number of years before that. I think.four or five years, perhaps. ' Q. Did you have any complaints about acts being canceled in Oklahoma? A. I cannot recall, now, at the moment; but I think that the arbitrary cancellation of acts in Oklahoma was a constant source of trouble and annoyance and complaint to us. Q. How did you get these actors back? A. Sometimes we had to furnish them transportation our- selves ; they had to get back the best way they could, If they could not get In touch with us. Q, You mean the White Rats would furnish the trans- portation? A. Yes. The matter of furnishing transportation to acts which were left there, and did not have any money, and things of that sort, were matters that came under the province of Mr. Mountford, as the National Executive. I only know of them casually. •'''*' i Q. The next statement here, that you make in this public letter or statement is: "I knew that there was no such thing in use as ah equitable, enforceable contract." . What was your claim in reference to that? A. That the contract was altogether one-sided; that It would not hold water In a court of law, and that any chance of an actor going Into court on a possible chance of securing redress would bo nullified by reason of the fact that if he did make a pronounced fight, he practically committed suicide In the business. Q. Why? A. Because he would be branded as an agitator, and the word would go'along the line that he was undesirable. Q. I call your attention to Commission's Exhibit No. 89, which appears to be a form of contract by and between the B. F. Keith Company, a corporation of Massachusetts called in the contract manager, and blank, intended to be the actor, which appears to be the form of contract on the B. F. Keith Circuit, and ask you It that Is the form of contract which you characterize as a one-Bided contract, and to which ob- jection was made? A. Yes. Q. The next claim that you set up Is this: "I knew that rates of commission in criminal violation of the law were being extorted from the actors by agents. In some cases as high as 70 per cent," A. Yes. Q. What is the foundation of that claim? A. I made a note at the time the incident was reporte'd to me, and I think I still have It- Mr. Clancy, who was booking acts for the Poll time— Q. Was he an Independent booker? A. Well, be was acting as Mr. Poll's representative In book- ing certain of the houses on the circuit, booking a dance act for $60, a man and a woman, I think they were to play the Poll Circuit for five or six weeks. They were playing In Brooklyn, and he went over to see the act, and went back stage, and suggested that. In view of the fact that they had six weeks work, they ought to get some new wardrobe. Mr. Goodman: As I understand it, this witness la now testifying as to some Information he received. This le not something that happened In your presence, is it, Mr. Fltz- patrick? The Witness: No. Mr. Goodman: It pertains to something that was told to you? The Witness: Yes. By Mr. Walsh: Q. Did you talk to Mr. Clancy about this? A. Yes; It was he who told me. Mr. Goodman: it is understood that this Is taken over my objection, Mr. Examiner? Examiner Moore: Yes. Mr. Goodman: This is something that was told you by someone el Be? ' The Witness: Yes. By Mr. Walsh: Q. Who did you say Clancy was? A. He was, at thnt time, one of the booking representatives for Mr. Poll. Mr. Poll owns and operates theatres In Water- bury, Hartford, Bridgeport, New Haven, Merlden, Sprlnglleld, Worcester, Wllkes-Bnrre and Scranton. Mr. Clancy went and suggested to this act that they get some new wardrobe to make, as be expressed It, a "Bash," meaning by that to brighten up the costuming of tho act, so thnt It would make a bright appearance, and give It an air of newness and class. Ho hnd booked the act for $00; that Is, they were to receive $00 less the customary commission- Mr. Goodman: What do you mean by the customary com- mission? ■ The Witness: Fivo per cent, booking commission. I do not recall, whether there was an additional live per cent, charged by Mr. Clancy or not. But the act said they could not do It, and he said: "Why not? You have got six weeks work booked, and you ought to be able to do that."- And they said: "Because w.e have to pay Dock Adams $25 a week ouz of our salary, as his fee." J".;' Q. Who was Dock Adams? . A. He was a man who was acting as their personal agent. I had never heard of him before. He was a newcomer since I had been in the business. ' ■ Mr. Goodman: You have not mentioned the name of tne The Witness: No; I have not got that. I did not get the actor. If I had it at the time, I simply put down this now of the story. ,/ Mr. Goodman: Mr. Examiner, this Is getting pretty tar outside of the issues. I thought either the act was. named, or the act would be named. ■ l^C Mr. Walsh: He Is reciting a statement ot Mr. Clancy who was'Poll's representative. ■; \- . /• Examiner Moore: What somebody told Clancy? '■_ . .• Mr. Walsh: No; what Clancy told aim. That Is What he is telling—Isn't It, Mr. Fltzpatrick? ■ .. . '^ • • Tho witness: Yea. Mr. Claney told me that he had booked this act—... Mr. Goodman: Unnamed, unknown? x-..^-'? The Witness: No; I do not recall whether he told me the name or not. . - . ^, ■..-■„ •.■: Mr. Kelley: According to the rules of evidence, Mr. Ex- aminer, it would be incompetent, inasmuch 'as It Is hearsay. We are not Interposing that objection, but it is wholly speculative. . ' •._ Lis-' Mr. Walsh: It le not hearsay, at all. . ;;;; Examiner Moore: The objection has been made to it, ana overruled. Go ahead. ,'"-.i-"- The Witness: They were getting $60 as salary, less the booking fee of five per cent., and when asked to buy new.-. - costumes, they said that it was Impossible to do It, because, in addition to their commission which they paid, they had to pay this man Adams $25 a week out of their salary as a bonus. - ■ . . .-J";■"'-.' •:".■ The reason I made a note of that wae because It was .ail:, agent who told me, a man. who had been a manager, and is still a manager In the burlesque business, and I considered that It had special value, as coming from a person Who was actually Involved In this kind ot "transaction. .; ■ Mr. Goodman: May I ask a question, to get one thing clear? ^i&t Mr. WalBh: Yes. -.-;" By Mr. Goodman: ■ ' : ".' .v Q. At (bis particular time, at the time of this transaction you are relating, was Clancy acting as an agent, or was Be,: at that time, manager for Poll? "...•■. '.. - ,;■-v : A. Well, now, I think he bad a double capacity. I think ha ; was an agent, and engaging acts for Poll at the same time. Q. Do you know where Clancy Is now? ._. A. He Is the manager of the Jacques Theatre In Waterbury. •'; Q. Do you know his full.name? .'';:■., A. James Clancy. .r-H By Mr. Walsh: ■ ,' y. ■•:■ Q. The next claim which you set forth Is this: _ "I knew extra performances were demanded without re- . numeration being given, although stage mechanic? and musljy-.'; clans who belonged to an organization were Invariably paid for such performances." ''•':•' What was that claim based on? , t . A. That an extra performance was being given without remuneration to the actors, when the mechanical staff of the theatre was boing paid, and that that was eminently unfair. Q. Was that a general practice In the profession at that time? '■'■: '"'■ ■■,■'■■'" A. It was, yeB. I played it myself, at Keith's Theatre In ■ Louisville, played an extra performance on Election night, for which I received neither remuneration nor thanks, and I knew that the stagehands and the musicians did -fljcelve- extra pay for that overtime performance. ',.'."' -: ." Mr. Goodman: Let.me ask you: Did your contract provide for that extra performance? ' : v v' The Witness: No; I think It did not, at that time, Mr. Goodman, because, It I remember correctly, when we got In ' on Monday morning, we were asked by. the manager ot the. theatre whether we were going to play this election night extra show, or not. ''■■>> •■'■" '■'' '• Of course, being there, and realizing what would happen If wo did not play the extra performance,, we did play It, although I always felt that it was a very bitter, very cruel bit of injustice, and a species ot treatment which was bound, in the long run, to create the most acrimonious feeling on. the'part of the actors towards the managers. I felt that aa long ns the additional show wus being given—and I think the business on that' night was very large—that, in view of the extra Income to the theatre. It would have been only the - fair and honorable thing to at least have made somo con- cession In the matter of salaries to the people who were- obliged to do It. '■ . By Mr. Walsh: ■■ Q. What did you mean by saying that you played It, know-, lng what would happen? ,\"* ,','* A. We had a season's road book, and I knew that If I refuged to go on and give this performance, that inside of 48 hours I would receive notification that the rest ot my time \ was off. I do not recall that that clause was In the contract. I know that there is such a clause, but even tho existence of ' the clause In the contract is, In itself, an Injustice, because a man who is obliged to look for work Is not a free agent; he cannot accept work, or refuse It, It ho Is dependont upon that work for his existence. Q. The musicians and stage hands are paid for such extra work? ■ . A. Yes; time and a half for overtime, I believe. Q. Do you know anything about the Nora Bayes Incident? A. I recall the story, at the time, that sho refused to give . a morning performance, I think It was in Keith's theatre In Philadelphia, and had to got out, or her time was either can- celed, or they refused to book her any further, because ot her refusal to play this morning performance in Philadelphia. - May I further touch dn tho unfairness of that extra per- formance thing? ' ' Q. Yes; go ahead. A. Bocauso in tho contract thore is also a clause that If. by any act of God, or for any reason, the manager is prevented from giving the full number of performances In tho week, ho Is permitted to make a pro rata deduction for the loss of that performance. , Now, if tho actor can be obliged to glvo an extra perform- ance, without remuneration, nnd If tho manager Is permitted to deduct a pro rata amount for any performance which he is prevented from giving, it Is eminently unfair, and in- equitable and I huvo always oxprossod that feeling. Mr. Goodman: How about tho other side of It, where an actor Is booked for a 6-day town, and is paid a 7-day salary? For example, an actor booked In Philadelphia, In Keith's thentro, after playing New York, draws the same salary In.' Philadelphia that ho gets In New York, ho plays six days Instoad of sovon. That Is tho othor sldo of the picture, is It not? Tho Witness: No, I do not think that Is a parallel case, Mr. Goodman; I think that his salary is fixed for a week's en-' gagoment In a big tlrao theatro Irrespective ot whether ho plays six days or seven days. I do not believe that the number of days Involved In a week's engagement, In a big time thea- tro, cuts any figure In the consideration of the salary. By Mr. Walsh: ■Mm Ji'.yS-'j fill ' '' ■'■'?' ■■,-'■• J ;.v, • 'i • mi nftmi -.-ilium ftrfgl m ■i '-.'V | i§ -m '■■■ssas ..-..■xl-ili : .-ifrrSh; m % ^V-,i:.-'.: ; ■■:: ■ ;,-,; ■;;'•.' ' ■■■:■■■;■ W