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.

MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 1553 Mr. Owens. Mr. Chairman, he is probably still in jail if he went to jail in April '47, Mr. Levy. I am reading this as of the time this bulletin was prepared. I am not any more interested in Mr. Freed because of the fact, as I said earlier, the strike to all intents and purposes is over. There are merely picket lines there. There is no more mass picketing, no more violence. So far as we are concerned we are now discussing something which was finished months ago. I have not followed Mr. Freed's career whether he is in or out of jail. Mr. Owens. Of course, that may be your theory. Judge Levy, but there are probably hundreds of thousands of people out in Los Angeles that might feel differently than you do. ]Mr. IjT.\y. I live in New York. Mr. McCann. Right on that point, Mr. Levy, we received a letter this morning from one of the workers out there who advised me that she is still out as a result of the strike and wants the committee to know that the strike is not over, so far as she is concerned. IVir. Levy. All I can say is that if she is a capable employee and she wants to return to work, she does not have to write counsel for this committee, she can apply in accordance with the law and obtain her employment. Mr. McCann. She stated that she had done so. I do not know that it is true. Mr. Levy. I do not want to get into a debate with you about that, Mr. McCann. That is a different phase of the matter entirely. I am representing the lATSE and I assume you are not representing anybody else here but the committee. Mr. McCann. Exactly, but I wanted you to know we are getting €ommunications from people to the contrary, and I wanted to make that note on the record, that is all. Mr. Levy. I will be pleased to pay attention to any communications directed to me. Mr. McCann. That is what I am doing now, Mr. Levy. All right. [Continuing reading :] Joe Wilson, employee of the Communist People's World. Dorothy Ray, a Communist representing Labor's Non-Partisan League mentioned heretofore. Frank Scully, screen writer and supporter of present strike. (People's World, March 18, 1940, official records of secretary of state of California on McCormick.) National Federation for Constitutional Liberties, Southern California Branch. The Attorney General of the United States has pronounced this organization to be a Communist front. On September 28, 1941, a meeting of this organization was held in San Francisco, Calif. Herbert K. Sorrell, in the official announcement of the meeting, appears as one of the sponsors of the organization. This organization has followed e^ery twist and turn in the Communist Party line for years, and it is still in operation. Others whose name appear on the announcement and who are now actively supporting the present Communist -inspired strike in the