Jurisdictional disputes in the motion-picture Industry : hearings before a special subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Eightieth Congress, first-session, pursuant to H. Res. 111 (1948)

272 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. I^ARNS. Will you please make a note of it and ask Mr. Dolierty later? Mr. McCann. Excuse me. Go ahead. I didn't mean to interrupt you. I was just going to elicit further information. Mr. DoHERTY. I just want to be helpful, counsel, in this instance. I have no objection to interrogations, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Kearns. Well, as long as you request it Mr. DoHERTY. No ; it was on the original statement, Mr. Chairman. I have no objection whatsoever to interrogations. Mr. Kearns. We will be very glad to rule that counsel can ask. Mr. McCann. I just wanted to develop it as you went along. You brought out a fact there — an opening statement on the second page of the carpenters' brief there. You said something about their having offered that as a tentative statement. Would you mind repeating that again so I will get it from the stand here ? Mr. Doherty. Would be very happy to ; this is called a preliminary statement. Mr. McCann. A preliminary statement. Now, was there a statement made to you by Mr. Hutcheson after that preliminary statement was received, to the effect that he wanted you to postpone your decision for 60 days after this 30 days before you made one ? Mr. Doherty. Not to me ; no ; it was not. Was there such a statement, Chairman Knight? Mr. Knigiit. He requested me to not render a decision until such time as he had an opportunity to personally testify before the committee, and requested that that be done at the meeting of the executive council convening in Miami, Fla., I think, on the following January 15. Mr. McCann. Well, that covers the point. That is what I want. Go right ahead. Mr. Doherty. Is that satisfactory ? Mr. McCann. And yet under your authority, as I understand it, sir, you were obligated to make your report here within 30 days. Mr. Doherty. That is correct, Mr. Counsel — definitely correct. Mr. McCann. Proceed. You go right on with your statement, I just wanted to clear that point. Mr. Doherty. Following the issuance of the directive on December 26, 1945, we w^ere informed that there was some resentment. We rather anticipated that there would be such resentment, as a matter of fact. Every person who appeared at the original meeting was informed by this committee of three men that we w^ere unwilling to hand down a directive unless it was an absolute necessity. We not only implored them, but we pleaded with them, we begged them, if I can use the word, to get together and try to resolve the existing differences so that this committee would not have to hand down a decision, because we knew full well that whatever decision we handed down would not be too popular, and that somebody would be hurt. It is very evident in this instance that somebody must have been hurt, or we would not have the trouble that exists today. So we, Mr. Chairman, begged them, we implored them, to get together and settle the entire dispute. We went into this lengthy testimony which shows in the transcript, taking testimony from all of the organizations involved, including the machinists, and handing down the decision December 26. I don't think it is necessary, since this is of record with your committee, counsel, to