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)

MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 1543 Mr. McCann. If charges of communism are to be received in the record against anyone here, I ask that those charges shall be personal and given under oath by the parties making such charges and that we shall restrict and refuse to receive documents or communications which are not personal in nature, from the ones who can testify under oath. Mr. Kearns. The witness is under oath. Mr, McCann. The witness may be under oath but now he is quoting from someone else who is not under oath before this committee, I believe that with such a grave charge that the person who makes such a charge should be subject to examination by the counsel of this committee and by the members of this committee. Mr. Owens. Mr, Chairman, while ordinarily I think that point would be a very good point, I believe what Judge Levy is reading now is from the proceedings of the hearings of last year where Mr. Hartley made the statement and put these telegrams right in our record so that they are already public. Mr. Kearns. Mr. McCann, I believe that is correct, although your observation is well taken. The records being read now by the judge are records of last year. ]Mr. McCann. The record received by the committee at that time, Mr. Chairman, the full committee of the House, was a record in which any witness could appear before the committee without being put under oath and without the sanction of an oath, except as to those accused of being Communists, such as Mr. Christoffel. Mr. Christoifel is being tried at this time in district court. Mr. Owens. He is being tried for perjury. Mr. McCann. Being tried for perjury. Outside of a few witnesses of that character anyone could come before the committee and make a statement and there was not the sanction of an oath. Mr. Landis. ]\Ir. Chairman. Mr. Kearns. Mr. Landis. Mr. Landis. You might mark those items, but I believe every witness who comes here ought to have his say. We could mark those items as to whether they were given under oath or not given under oath. Mr. Kearns. That is right, sir. ]\Ir. Landis. Let's not bar any witness from having his day in court. Mr. BoDLE. Mr. Chairman, could I be heard on that ? Mr. Kearns. No, not at this time. Mr. Owens. May I make one further observation, Mr. Chairman? When a man is testifying as Judge Levy is doing he is taking the responsibility for the testimony he is giving in the record ; he is taking the responsibility for the telegrams which are read and for the further proof of those very things he is stating. That is my theory of it. It is different when we take a telegram in from someone in the West and put it in the record ourselves. Mr. McCann. Mr. Chairman, I very seriously, and without any thought to block out any testimony here which is right and based upon oath, feel that the statements now being made by counsel are being made purely as hearsay ; it is a record of what someone else said, what someone else has done. So far I have not heard one word from this witness which is based upon his personal knowledge and which he can verify or certify to this committee under oath. I refer now to charges with respect to communism.