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)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

330 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES to where we are dealing with this thing in a factual way. I appreciate the way you men are answering questions. We are not trying to catch you. We are trying to get at facts. 1 have some more questions. Mr. KxiGHT. About tliese men going to work. These men at the studios that Avent on strike, I think, on March 12, 19-15, went back to work before this committee was appointed. This directive was agreed to by everybod}' before the committee was appointed. Probably, if some of them had known who the committee was going to be, they Avouldn't have agreed to the directive. Mr. McCann. I tell you I think this: You gentlemen have been trying to help us in the last few minutes. There will probably be some more questions tomorrow that we will have to ask you. I want to acconmiodate Mr. Murphy, who came up especially today to tell us his version of what took place in Chicago. You gentlemen will have a chance to hear Mr. Murphy. I want to be able to excuse him. if possible. Mr. DoiiERTY. Counsel said we have been trying to help him in the last few minutes. We have been trying to help him since Ave arrived in this city. ]Mr. Knight. That was what we came out for. Mr. McCann. Mr. Price offered this question : Did you say to Mr. Hutcheson you were not taking any jurisdiction aAvay from him by the December award? Mr. DoiiEKTY. I do not remember. Mr. McCakn. Do you remember, Mr. Knight? Mr. Knight. I think it was said there that it wasn't our intention to take an}^ jurisdiction away from Mr. Hutcheson, but in the ap})lication of that decision Avork had been taken aAvay from him. That Avas responsible for his statement to the effect he Avas going to lose work for 300 or 350 members. On that subject might I say, Mr. Chairman, that I don't think there is a one of the organizations involved that didn't make the claim they were going to lose men. The fact of the matter is, it I am correctly informed, some of them gained. But that is the charge. Mr. McCaxx. I think Ave Avill Avant to call the gentlemen back tomorroAv for further conference. May Ave noAv at this time call Mr. Murphy ? Mr. Kearns. I Avant to extend the opportunity to Mr. Doherty. I said I Avould give him time to make a brief statement. And then Ave Avill take Mr. Murphy. Mr. Doherty. Mr. C'hairman, I rise on a ])oint of personal privilege. I am 45 years old. I am not one of those senile members of the executiA-e council that you have been reading about in the press here locally and elseAvhere in the last feAv daj^s, statements alleged to Mr. McCann. I Avaiit to say, Avith all the sincerity Avithin my being, that I have the utmost respect for the Congress of the United States, for the legislatiA'e branch of (lovernment, for the executive biT.nch of Govcrnmont, and I believe Congress in its wisdom, in the seA'enty-ninth session, acted Avisely in enacting the LaFollette-Monroney bill, knoAvn as the Reorganization Act of 1947. That bill proAided, among other things, that each committee of the Congress Avould have a staff of some four experts — some six assistants,