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)

334 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIOXAL DISPUTES come out hero to the Avest coast. And as I say. our questions and our feelinirs with re<iard to exactly what they meant hy the directive were satisfied, and when we left that room there wasn't any question in any of our minds on the committee as to what tlie o;entlemen meant. Mr. McCanx. Now, what do you think tliey did mean? Mr. Murphy. Well, 1 think that, with legard to the construction of sets on the stages, that work, with the exception of mill and trim work, was given to the lATSE, in accordance with the agreement of 1926, which has been mentioned hei-e today and which at that time I am frank to admit 1 had not read. I have read it since then, and it was referred to continuously in our conversatio]i. so that there was no ambiguity as far as we were concerned. We thought that we had finally gotten to the crux of this situation and we could come back and announce to the industry our conversations, which we did diligently and as closeW as we could to the fact, and we thought that that would in some way help to settle the controversy out here. Mr. McCanx. Mr. ^^lurphy, did they tell the committee in your presence that this original decision of theirs of December 1945 was plain, that everybody understood it, but that they had had terrific pressure brought to bear upon them for many months ? Mr. Murphy. They seemed to give that impression. Mr. McCaxn. Did they say that? Mr. Murphy. I would not quote at this late date, but I will answer your question, if I may, in this way : That there was no question in my mind after leaving that room that there had been pressure brought to bear on them, first, not to write that decision until they had returned to Chicago, and second, to in some way change the decision. Mr. McCaxx. Now, I will ask you this : Did you hear them say that they were so worried about this problem that they had their resignations in their pockets? Mr. Murphy. T w^ould not testify I heard them say they had their resignations in their pockets, but I know, which I will testify to having heard them say, they were so upset and so incensed about the situation they were ready to resign if the council had reversed their original decision. Mr. McCaxx. Will you tell me whether or not they made the statement to you that the reason for the clarification was that Mr. Bill Hutcheson wanted a bushel of words from which he could argue ? Mv. Murphy. It was not a bushel of words, it was a basket of words. They said they were sorry it was written in that way because it was a basket of words which could be twisted and turned and ma}^ be the cause of further argument, where the clarification Avas supposed to cleai" the thing up. Mr. McCaxn. And did they say in your presence that that was the reason for this clarification, and that the clarification was a basket of w'ords, so that Mr. Hutcheson could have something to argue abf)ut? Did they tell you that? ^fr. Murphy. If you are asking me to remember actual quotes, sir. I can answer that this way : I can say that the phrase "basket of words'" was used, I believe, to the best of my knowledge, by Mr. Doherty. I may be wrong, but the term was used, and there was no question about the impression that he wanted to impart to us was that the}' had already