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.
1480 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. Kearns. The fourth question: In Los Angeles you testified that neither Mr. Hutcheson nor anyone else exerted pressure on the committee with regard to the clarification. Mr. DoiiERTY. On the committee; that is right. Mr. Kearns. Those are all the questions. Mr. Landis. Mr. Flanagan's testimony did not have any bearing on the clarification; is that right ? Mr. DoHERTY. Oh, very definitely, Congressman Landis. Presi- dent Green sent an organizer by the name of Flanagan into the motion- picture studios. He conversed with practically everyone out there, if I remember his report correctly. He conversed with the leaders of the various unions, and I suppose he also contacted the industrial relations experts or efficiency experts. That was early in August when his report came in. I would say that that report back to President Green by organizer Flanagan had a definite bearing on the executive council's later action in instructing us to clarify. The clarification was the handiwork then of the executive council, because it was done in conformity with the directive handed down by the executive council in August of 1946 at Chicago, 111. Mr. Owens. I am sorry I had to stand back and permit Mr. Landis to bring that out after I developed it a few moments ago, because I realize that what you are saying now is that the clarification is the result of a supplemental report after December 1945, and therefore could not be a clarification of evidence that you took before Decem- ber 26, 1945. Mr. DoiiERTY. It was supposed to be a clarification of the language that we had in the directive. Mr. Owens. Then you put a sentence in your last paragraph of the clarification that you still stood by it and wanted them to obey the directive of December 26, 1945? Mr. DoHERTY. Yes, sir; positively; that is what we did. Mr. Owens. As it was rendered on December 26,1945 ? Mr. DoHERTY. Yes, sir; that is what we did exactly. We also said in the opening paragraph of the clarification that the clarification was being handed down in conformity with the instructions given us by the executive council of the American Federation of Labor. Mr. Owens. You really handed the executive committee the lemon that they asked for then, didn't you ? Mr. DoHERTY. It is a 50-year-old lemon that we are all sucking on. As I said to your committee out tliere in Hollywood, Mr. Owens, so I guess that is a good way to put it, we handed the lemon back to them. Now you have the lemon. Mr. Kearns. Mr. Bodle asks this question: Do you still stand behind your clarification of August 1946? Mr. DoHERTY. We stand behind everything we said, the directive and the clarification. Mr. Kearns. Are these your questions, Mr. Cobb? Is this your writing ? Mr. Cobb. May I stand behind you to interpret them ? Mr. Kearns. No. 1 is: Did you hold a committee meeting at Chicago after leaving Hollywocxl and before your 12-26-45 decision?