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.
1468 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. HuTCHESON. It is a long report and it is all right in there. I offered to put it in the record yesterday. Mr. I^ARNS. We have Mr. Flanagan's statement. Mr. HuTCHESON. I think the chairman said you have the statement already in the record. Mr. Owens. I would not want Mr. Flanagan's statement personally, and I would not pay the slightest attention to it if he were not here to testify, frankly because his statement would mean nothing to me; that is, if I did not have an opportunity to cross-examine him. I would pay attention to testimony taken that was the basis for his statement. What I am asking is whether or not they didn't take into considera- tion his statement to the executive committee? Mr. HuTCHESON. I think, ]Mr. Owens, if you will read the minutes I just gave to the chairman of the May meeting of the executive coun- cil of the American Federation of Labor in 1946, you will see in there that the council authorized President Green to appoint someone to make an investigation of the then existing conditions in Hollywood. Now, I think in the record yesterday, in the August meeting in Chicago, Mr. Flanagan's report is in there. I think the record of yesterday will show that that report of Mv. Flanagan Avas taken up in conjunction with the connnunication that the executive council or President Green had received from the general secretary of the brotherhood, which was laid over from the May meeting until this investigation was made. I think that was all in the record yesterday, Mr. Owens. Mr. Owens. Wliat I am trying to bring out in short is this: Mr. Flanagan made an investigation subsequent to the time the committee handed down its directive. Mr. HuTCiiESON. No; clarification. Mr. Owens. Mr Flanagan made his investigation subsequent to the time that the committee handed down its directive in December 1945 ? Mr. McCanx. That is right; he did. Mr. Hutchesox. Subsequent? Mr. Owens. Yes, afterward. Mr. Hutcheson. Yes, that is right. Mr. Owens. And the clarification issued by these three men at the direction of the executive council, was based upon what they had previously heard before December 26, 1945, and the report of Mr. Flanagan and these other unions did not have an opportunity to present any new evidence to the three-man committee before they made their so-called clarification, is that correct ? Mr. Hutcheson. Congressman, would you please keep this in mind ? The council only requested that three-man committee to endeavor to define, if you please—although they used the word ''clarification"— the decision they made in December 1945. They merely asked them to define their language, what did they mean by this and that? That is all they asked them to do. Now they only asked them to do that themselves. Nobody on tne council tried to tell them what language to use. Mr, Owens. What I am trying to bring out is that they were not making a change based upon the evidence which they heard prior to December 1945 alone, they were given an additional statement by a man who had gone out on his own apart from them and had made