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.
MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 1423 we were building a house in which a family would live? It would be carpentry work, wouldn't it? Mr. OwEXS. Property building. Mr. HuTCHEsoN. AVhat is your understanding of "property build- ing"? Are you talking about real estate or otherwise? Mr. Owens. I am asking the questions. It says here in section 7, "l)roperty building.'" Mr. HuTCiiEsox. If it is carpentry, it belongs to the carpenters. Mr. OwEXS. "Erection of sets on stages, except as provided in sec- tion 1," all millwork and sets on stages. Of course they accepted that ultimately. Mr. HuTCHESOx. That was not acceptable; of course not. Mr. OwExs. "Wrecking all sets, exterior and interior." Mr. HuTCHESOx. Of course, we are not Avreckers; we are builders. ]Mr. OwEXS. That is their work, then. "Erecting platforms for lamp operators and cameramen on stages." Mr. HuTCHESOX'. Not being photographers and being ordinary car- penters, they would not claim control of a camera. Mr. OwExs. In that so-called verification can you explain the lan- guage in the last sentence these three men put in tliere: In view of the alleged violations, the committee herebj' directs that all par- ticipants in the Hollywood motion-picture studio dispute strictly adhere to the provisions of the directive handed down on December 26, 194"). INlr. HuTCHESox'. You want my understanding of that? JVIr. OwEX'S. Yes. Mr. HuTCHESOX". My understanding would be to carry out the direc- tive plus the clarification made on that day. Mr. OwEX\s. They did not say so, though, did they? Mr. HuTCHESOX^.^ I think they did. Maybe I don't understand English; I don't know. Mr. OwExs. Well, they drew it. Mr. Doherty testified here if thev had it to do over again they would do the same thing they did December 26, 1945. Mr. HuTCHESox. Well, Mr. Congressman, of course I am not re- sponsible for any individual acts, whether they be right or wrong. A lot of individuals would commit a wrong act; and if they had it to do over again, they would commit another wrong act, and that would make it two in place of one. Mr. OwExs. You understand my position clearly. I do not care what Mr. Doherty said or testified to, and I do not care about this. either; but the thing we are concerned with is whether or not they had any riglit to make a change in that directive, in view of the fact that generally those things have to be decided by a court, unless, of coui^se, as you attempted to point out a while ago, there was a precedent through the years that would show the same thing had been done. That was why it was so important to know the language of those orders that were entered by the A. F. of L. in prior years. That Avas why I asked you for the exact language. That might make a difference Avitli the court. It does not make any difference with us. but it might help the court. Mr. HrTciiKsox. Mr. Congressman, not being a learned gentleman and an attorney aihnitted to ])ractice at the bar—as yourself—I would not know, of course, how a court wouhl interpret that; but a common.