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.

1464 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES appointed a teamster named Flanagan to go into the area and see how it was operating and an elaborate report was made by Mr. Flana- gan to the council containing the complaints which were made hj many unions against the operation of the directive, so that the council did not act without additional evidence. Mr. Owens. Have you a copy of the testimony that was taken in connection with that investigation, Mr. McCann ? Mr. McCann. We have in the record Mr. Green's letter directing Mr. Flanagan to make the investigation. Mr. Owens. Do you have a copy of the testimony taken that was the ground for Mr. Flanagan's report ? Mr. McCann. We have Mr. Flanagan's report. Mr. Oavens. Do you have any testimony that was taken Mr. McCann? Mr. McCann. That was Mr. Flanagan's report to the American Federation of Labor. Mr. Owens. Do you have a copy of any of the testimony taken? You can answer that, do you have a copy of any testimony ? Mr. Kearns. There was no testimony taken on the clarification. Mr. Owens. All right, there Avas no testimony taken, was there? Mr. McCann. I stated to you additional evidence was submitted to the American Federation of Labor. Mr. Kjearns. That was not the question, IVIr. McCann. Mr. Owens. Mr. McCann, evidence legally means testimony. Was there any testimony taken? No. Correct? Mr. McCann. No ; I do not agree with you. I think you are maknig a point that is not a point, and I will tell you why Mr. Kearns. Now, just a minute. Mr. Owens. Well, Mr. McCann, if you don't want to answer, I don't want to hear any more about it at all. Mr. McCann. I am being guided by the chairman of the committee. Mr. Kearns. After the directive was handed down Mr. Green sent Mr. Flanagan out to make a survey of the jurisdictional dispute. Mr. Flanagan testified before my committee in Hollywood and submitted his report, which is in the record. However, the three-man committee did not hold any hearings or take any testimony after the report had been submitted to Mr. Green, as to his findings. Mr. Owens. ]\Ir. Flanagan did not take any testimony, either? Mr. Kearns. Not open hearings of the three-man committee. His were all private interviews in an evaluation of the picture. Mr. Owens. In other words, Mr. Flanagan's statement overrules all of the testimony of the previous hearing. Mr. McCann. I think that is a conclusion, Mr. Chairman, that is not justified. Mr. Kearns. We will drop it right there. Mr. Landis. I would like to ask one question. Mr. Kearns. Yes, Mr. Landis. Mr. Landis. Mr. Lindelof, could you tell us if all your officers connected with this dispute have signed the anti-Communist affidavit? Mr. Lindelof. Oh, yes. Mr. Landis. That is all. Mr. Kearns. Do you have any further questions, Mr. Owens? Mr. Owens. No ; I think we have covered everything.