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.

1414 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES up, which would indicate it was the 1926 agreement being followed, rather than the 1925. My question cut right in at that particular point where Mr. Hutcheson had stopped, that is, with November 1985 as to what was to take place in March 1936, and inquired whether he— and let's forget names—he and the president of the lATvSE entered into an agreement whereby they ratified the agreement of February 5, 1925, in March of 1936. Mr. HuTCHESOX. Mr. Chairman, I did not understand the honorable Congressman to use that word, the "president" of the lATSE. I understood him to definitely name a gentleman by name, and not as an officer or president of the lATSE. Mr. Owens. You mean when I asked the question first? Yes; I asked it in that way, but I understood he was the president of that group at that time. In the record it shows that in March 1936—and this is a statement evidently, in some case: William L. Hutcheson, president of the defendant carpenters' union, and George Brown, president of the lATSE, ratified the aforesaid agreement of February 5, 1925, as the basis for settlement of controversies between the respective unions over the allocation of work to be performed by members thereof for defendant motion-picture companies. That is what I had reference to. This was in Mr. Schatte's testimony last year. Mr. Hutcheson. Who? Mr. Owens. Schatte, one of your carpenters. Mr. Cobb. What page was that ? Mr. O^^^NS. That is in paragraph 18 of the original complaint. It may be in error. Counsel may have made an error. Attorneys do that once in a while. Mr. Cobb. May I state Mr. I^.ARNS. No, Mr. Cobb, please; let's not get into anything. Mr. Cobb. Your Honor—but may I state something off the record to the chairman? Mr. IvEARNS. I would rather not at this time, Mr. Cobb. Mr, Cobb. If I could state it to the Chair you woidd have no objec- tion. Mr. Landis. Mr. Chairman, if he wants to get on the stand any time, we will let him testify. Mr. Kearxs. Mr. Counsel, I appreciate the mention of the situation you made and that has been adhered to. However, Mr. Landis, as ranking member of the full Committee on Education and Labor, is here and has requested Mr. Hutcheson to go on and state that which he wanted him to state. As chairman, I do not feel I can offer any objection to that, so, Mr. Hutcheson, you may proceed. Mr. Hutcheson. Mr. Chairman, I first want to reiterate a state- ment I made this morning; that no known Communist can become a member or retain membership in the brotherhood. For your information, Mr. Chairman, I would like to read the obli- gation that an applicant takes when he becomes a member. Mr. Owens. We have that in the record of last year, Mr. Hutcheson. You made that very clear when you appeared before us. I can still remember your words.