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.
1420 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. Owens. Mr. Hutcheson, I understand we have a record of every- thing that took place before the arbitrators, so we do not have to de- pend upon any oral remark. Is that correct, Mr. McCann ? Mr. Hutcheson. Mr. Chairman, could I answer the honorable Con- gressman ? If that be so, why have the subcommittee hearings ? Wliy not take that record and that would be all there would be to it ? Why bring myself and others before you to tell you the story ? Mr. BoDLE. Mr. Chairman Mr. Kearns. Just a moment. Mr. MoCann. May I add, the testimony given before the three-man committee in California was not under oath. The testimony given before them, as you will observe from all these volumes, consists of statements they saw fit to transcribe. I do not know that all that was presented to them was transcribed. I do not know whether a formal statement was read to them in advance of the testimony that was taken, or not. All I can say to you is that this purports to be a statement made to the three-man committee that he gave to us under oath. Mr. Owens. Would you say of Mr. Cambiano's statement, "Upon learning of this mistake these three good men were also shocked to learn that the lATSE immediately put this construction on their De- cember 26, 1945, decision and made claims to the carpenters' work in the stages that the committee never intended to take away from the carpenters, that never belonged to the lATSE"—would you say there is anything anywhere in the testimony of those three men, especially Mr. Dohertv appearing before us and what shows in the record, that would justify that statement of Mr. Cambiano's? Mr. McCann. Mr. Doherty repeatedly testified before us that he did not know the contracts had not been immediately put into effect, Mr. Owens. He testified out there that it was not until a long time afterward that he found out the 1925 agreement had never been accepted. I have just passed to Mr. Kearns a copy of the 1925 agreement, which on its face was to have been approved by the presidents of the interna- tionals. That agreement was never put into effect. Mr. Owens. You say that agreement had to be approved by the presidents of the internationals ? Mr. McCann. Exactly, "subject to the approval of the presidents of the internationals." Paragraph 3. Mr. Landis. Was that in the directive ? Mr. McCann. No ; that was in 1925 we are talking about, sir. Mr. O^^^NS. It says: The following division of work would constitute a fair interpretation of the international agreement and that both parties to the agreement shall at once submit same to the international presidents with the request that it be in- corporated as a part of the international agreement for a permanent period. Are you saying that means they are to submit it for the approval of the international presidents ? Mr. McCann. That was the way it was understood, sir. Mr. Owens. I am afraid I would not agree with you at all. Mr. Landis. The carpenters never agreed on the 1925 agreement, did they ?