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.

1440 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIOXAL DISPUTES Mr. HuTCiiESOx. In answer to that I would say that tlie promise or pledge, whatever you want to call it, of the American Federation of Labor to the President of the United States, would have to do with work in connection with our war efforts, which by no stretch of the imagination, as I see it, could apply to the making of pictures. Mr. McCann. The question I am going to ask again, because you did not answer the exact question : Did not your organization continue to support the painters' picket line? Mr. HuTCHESON. Well, why all the window-dressing, then? Mr. McCann. Well, he has given that. Mr. HuTCHESON. As long as you want the window-dressing there, I will give my answer just as I made it just now. Mr, McCann. Before the painters' strike in March lO-io. what assur- ances of support, financial or otherwise, did you give Mr. Sorrell? Mr. HuTCHESON. What was that question ? Mr. Kearns. Will you speak louder, please ? ' Mr. McCann. I thought I was speaking pretty loud, Mr. Chairman. Excuse me. Before the painters' strike in March 1945. what assurances of sup- port, financial or otherwise, did you give Mr. Sorrell ? Mr. HuTCHEsoN. Did I give ? Mr. McCann. That is what it says, sir. Mr. HuTCHESON. Not any. Mr. McCann. How much money did your organization contri- bute to support the 1945 strike ? ]\Ir. HuTCHESON. Whose strike ? Mr. McCann. I assume they mean the Hollywood strike. Mr. Kearns. Wait a minute, we don't want to assume anything there. We have to find out what strike it is. Mr. McCann. Mr. Chairman, we are investigating the 1945 and 1946 strike in Hollywood. Mr. Kearns. Yes; but don't you assume which one it was. You better ask counsel which one it was. Mr. ZoRN. The strike that started in March 1945, w^hich the car- 23enters and painters supported by not going through the picket line. Mr. HuTCHESON. That does not clarify anything, so far as I am concerned. Mr. Landis. Does it include the carpenters ? Mr. McCann. May I fill it in now, Mr. Chairman ? Mr. Kearns. No; I think you better let him restate the question. Mr. McCann. Restate the question, please, Mr. Zorn. Mr. Kearns. No ; give it back to him and let him rewrite it. Mr. McCann. While they are rewriting it. I will ask another ques- tion, sir: Were you present and did you participate in the discussions at the A. F. of L. executive council meeting in Cincinnati in October 1945? Mr. HuTCiiEsoN. The record speaks for itself in that matter. Mr. McCann. The minutes of this meeting show that you, on behalf of your organization, agreed to the directive issued by the council which provided in part Mr. Chairman, may we go off the record? (Discussion off the record.)