Variety (July 1919)

.■'■"„ '.' " ■.'.■'' ''.•': ■ ! ,"."l : -/f- ; '- , :?'/'i' 1 - ',''/■ '"'• ; ':'-' '" ; : : ; ""' : v '."•■■■'''■'•'- i ,;-y" Variety :' 9*V, • ■ .•'•'■ • cations, you might sag » men, the man that yon WM to tee. But as for going In to Mr. Hodgdon, who wat the booking manager of the United Booking Offloao, and sitting., down and explaining your case, and taking for time, I never knew of any one who waa able to do It I never wai. Q. But you were going to tell about your experience at the Putnam Building. A. These are the experiences. I have also written letters asking for time, at the period when I, had no agent, with no success. Q. Now, I understand you think that an actor ought to be represented by an agent or personal representative In some way? A. Personally, I do. There are people In the organisation wbo differ with me. especially the men who have played in England, and wbo book direct with the owners of the the- atres; but I personally believe that the personal representa- tive is a necessity In America. Q. And you think there ought to be some sort of a book- ing office, a central booking office I A. I think there ougbt to be a booking office. You can call it a booking office, but I would call it a registration bureau, at which every manager who runs a theatre la America, or • wbo hires actors, sbouid be obliged to register before he can operate bis theatre. I think that every actor who works In' those theatres must be registered before he can secure employment. I think then that the owner of the the- atres should hire his own representative to select the ma- terial for his theatre, and I think the actor should hire bis personal representative to book him, with the theatre manager's representative; that there should be no connec- tion at all between any form of booking office and any man who has any interest In a theatre, directly or indirectly. I think there ought to be in connection with that govern- ment registration bureau a complaint bureau before which complaints of actors against managers and managers against actors could be heard and decided, and I think if a man- ager is found guilty of violating his contract he- should be suspended from the list of registered managers or owners and should not be permitted to run a tbeatre again; and the same way with an actor, that if he violates his contract he should be suspended and not permitted to earn his liv- ing In the business again. Of course that means the elimi- nation of the White Rats Actors' Union, It means the elimination of the N. V. A., of the United Booking Offices, and of the other Anna of booking offices now existing. Q. You think that the personal representative should be a tree agent? . A. I think he should be employed by the actor and act as the actor's servant, being paid by him to do as he Is told. Q. What do you say in reference to the system in vogue as to giving franchises to a number of representativesT A. That is the application of the dosed shop and the book- ing business to which the managers make-such violent ob- jection among the actors. Q. What Is your objection to Itt A. It keeps a man from going anywhere he will to book his act. For Instance, if 1 have a franchise with the Keith Office, and I represent 800 acta, and I cannot book them at the Keith Office, 1 cannot go across the street to the Loew Office and book them, and vice versa. It is done through an intermediary, now. Q. Howt a. By a go-between agent For instance, the man who has the franchise in the United Booking Offioes has a friend who has a friend who la an agent in the Loew Office, doing business with the Loew Office. So, if my value has expired on the Keith time and my agent can secure me no more work on the Keith time, he cannot go direct to the Loew Office and book me, so he uses this intermediary with the agent who has a Loew franchise, and so the result is that I pay the Intermediary agent—I pay the United Booking Agency and I pay the Intermediary agent and I pay the Loew agent Q. Is there anything about the system of personal repre- sentative or agent that makes him more the servant or the agent of the booking offices than he Is of the actor T A. The fact that be does not get his full amount of com- mission is the chief thing. The power that one man has to hold out money which is coming to another man makes him automatically subservient to the man who holds the purse strings, and it also compells blm to get the additional amount of the actor,, the same amount or a greater amount which the intermediary or Intermediate accepting agent keeps out of his commission. For instance, if Mr. Han la my agent—I use him as an Instance, not because be la one °* the <»•» who does this sort of thing, because I cannot testify of my own knowledge that he does—but my com- mission slip for Mr. .Hart, which la put Into my salary envelop on Saturday night, calls for 5,per cent of my salary. Mr. Hart does not get that 5 per cent of my salary, because the Vaudeville Collection Agency keeps a certain percentage "U'iE 010 bUa tor the Privilege or right of collection. Q. That is a collection agency T -O" ^.collection agency keeps a csrtalu proportion, two and a half, or more, per cent out of his 5. handing back to him the remaining,two and a half per cent Mr. Hart says to me—this is a hypothetical case, understand—Mr. Hart says to me, I cannot run my office on 2% per cent and L^ 8 ** 0 ' to h ? Te u 2% , Der •"* *»>*•■" *» * addition £n^-i5L pe . r 25'i**', 1 w the booking office, the 5 per !">-^l* lB deducted from my salary for my personal rep- ~!? lta , UT 2 1 '. 1 ff" J*"** 1 to par him on the outside 2)4 per 5f^» fff.'g" t0 taaslie my business; and by virtue of the fact that the contract I sign with him gives him unlimited xf^f ov .! r . ,aj , act,v, "« i . I cannot get a release from him «HS? u . to '"•▼ocable and in perpetuity, I believe. Q. That la, you believe the agent and personal representa- tive should be entitled to and receive the full B per cent A. I believe he ougbt to get what be earns. v.&iL? 1 ?n« aM, Sf I°? T **tmtlon *« the Respondent's Exhibit Number 100, which is an assignment by you of B per cent commta " ,on u to your ■••"t, Jo Paige Smith, on December 7, 1812. Is that the statement which you referred to—"This assignment and power Is Irrevocable" T A. Yes, sir. Q. What do you think about the proposition of limiting the number of agents who shall do business at the booking office? A. I don't think they should be limited. Q. WbyT . A* Because the more men who work for actors, the more interest they are going to take, and If one agent does not dp the work for you you can go and get another, and with the supply always at hand there is always an Incentive for an agent to work more earnestly for you and more hon- estly and conscientiously; whereas, If the number Is limited, you cannot go from one to the other, by the terms of that assignment that Is made, or by your contract. You have to stick to the man whether he works for you, or not i„ Q .V D .° rou ? ,nk wbere *! •wata are limited in number, in that way he Is in a position to present the interests of the actor as vigorously as if the number were not so limited, and he did not have to rely upon the vaudeville collection SMSl lS r *"» '""•"ion of his eommlsslo"i and dlvW. **? *£*■ ite j g MM" N«cy part of his commission? A. Do I think It would be better It ths agsst ware free and there were mora agents? ^^ wvm vm a Yam. A. Tat, r to, think sey-ttore rellshls agents. -.«■,. — • Q. That is, there would not be agents who wtra of ths selection and at the will of the booking officeT q! I call your attention to Commission's Exhibit Number 80, which appears to be a form of contract approved by the B, F. K. Circuit It appears to be a blank contract between the B. F. K. Company and a corporation of Boston for the employment of B. F. Keith's theatre in Boston, Massachu- setts and the- third paragraph of the contract Is this, "B. K Hodgdon, of 1694 Broadway, New York City, la acting for the manager In employing the artists." I will ask you If that la the same 8. K, Hodgdon Who la- the booking manager and superintendent In effect of the book- ing operations of the U. B. O.T A Yes sir * ho 18 o! Nevertheless to this contract I find that tie actor au- thorizes the manager to deduct and pay the United Booking Office for procuring the artist the engagement' What do you say about that sort of an arrangement? A. Why, I think it la altogether wrong. Q. I mean, what la the matter with Itt _-, A WeuTyou play in the Keith theatre and you getJi/al- ary, and "you pay Mr. Keith's booking office 6 per cent of your salary for hiring you to play In his theatre. Q. Do you know Jules DeJmar? . ., ^ A. I know who he la yes. I £ave met Mnt ■Q. He occupies a position in the U. B. o. oncer * q! Does he°book what Is known aa the Southern time? Q.' 1 "show'you what purports to be>a cohttact with tha Academy Theatre Company. Charlotte, North Carolina, dated the ethday of December. 1018. with an artist.known as Nat Burns, and ask you it that Is the same character, of contract and subject to the same objection aa the contract marked Commission's Exhibit Number 89? . A. Yes, Mr. Delmar here Is described aa acting for tne manager and employing the artist , v Q. In thess Instances to which I call your attention, that Is the contract In which Mr- Hodgdon is designated as too manager In employing the artist and the one In which Mr. Jules Delmar is designated as the manager In wnplcjlJJ* «• artist, can you conjuncture In any way in those Instances how the booking office renders any service for the actorT A. I never have been able to see under any circumstances, 1 Q*!*! 0 think "yotTtestlned yesterday in reference to a letter which you received from Mr. Fogarty? .:_J "^ v „ A. Yes. I did. That waa In answer to a question of Mr. Goodman's it I had ever heard any protest made about the election by members of the White Rats. I said No. He asked if I had ever neard of Mr. Frank fogarty JMMttM and I said No, and I started to say In addition that I had received a letter from Mr. Fogarty when I was a ««dldate for office, and I atlU have that letter In my possession Mr. Goodman: Walt a moment I object A. (Continuing.) Wherein he says that he haa seen my can- didacy and intends to vote for me. f Mr. Goodman: I object I do not care anything about It but when I start to object, I think the witness ought to QUlt. The Witness: All right Mr. Goodman. Q. Referring again to this proceeding of the woman Pember- ton, that waa Instituted against tha White Actors' Union, did you know this woman? A. I did. . Q. Where did she live? ' , , . A. She lived In Brookllne, Massachusetts, Just outside of Boston. _. Q. Did she attend the meetings of the Whits Rata Actors' Union? A. She did, both In Boston and New York—a regular atten- dant Q. When? A. Week after week, and week after week. Q. How would she attend it and where would she have to go, from Boston to New York, to attend these meetings? A. Yes, sir. The meetings In New York were on Tuesday nights and the meetings In Boston were on Friday nights.. She would come from Boston to New York weekly. Q. Do you know whether or not she was a woman of means! A. Well, I only bave her own statement for It Q. What la that? A. May I tell how It happened? Q. Yea. A. When we were closing up the office of the White Rats Actors' Union In Boston, after the strike was suspended, she waa present at the meeting and she had been asked by Mr. Mountford at the last meeting at the club house In New York to leave the meeting because she was under suspicion -by the members, and In view of the tense situation that there might be some trouble, and she had her choice of leaving the meet- ing or standing up and being accused of being an employe of the Vaudeville Managers' Protective Association. So she left the meeting. | . Q. Did you leak her to leave? A. No, I did not. Mr. Mountford did. The following Fri- day night I was In Boston myself winding up the affairs of the office there, and she came to me before the meeting and wanted to know why she had been asked to leave the meet* lng In New York: that Mr. Mountford had asked her to leave. I told her because she wss under suspicion, and In view of the fact that she wss an object of suspicion and that the members know it there might be some balrpulllng, and It was best that she go. I said, "I must ask you to do the same thing here." She said, "They had no right to suspect- ma." .1 said. "Well, I have been told that you were getting 816 a week from the United Booking Offices to come to New York and report the meetings, the proceedings of the meet- ing, to the managers." She said, "That Is not true." I said, "Welt, why do you come to New York every week then?" Bhe said, "Well, I am the victim of a very serious complaint and I had to——" ( Q. What do you mean; what kind of a complaint? A. Oh, soms sickness or other. Q. Physical complaint? , A. Physical, yes—and,-she said, "I am obliged to consult a specialist and cannot afford to go to the specialist here In Boston because I have not got the money." So she said, "I go to New York to a clinic because I can get treatment there for nothing." So I said, "Well, I am very sorry that all this has happened, but I think for your own best In- terests, and in the Interests of peace and to avoid a scene, you had better get out" And she got out, and subsequently started this accounting or the demand for an accounting of the White Rata funds. Q. Did you ever see her since then? A. No, I never have. Q. Did you ever appear In any of these proceedings? A. Never to my knowledge. Q. And did you ever know that the V. M. P. A., or ths U. B. O., or ths respondents In this case ever had this re- port until It was presented here In this proceeding? sV.lg s I.ss M not. There were extracts from tha report. garbled extracts printed in certain theatrical newspapers but there was no copy of tha report printed to too hast of my knowledge. I never saw one. . ' Q. In this report It says after October 81,—I assume it is 1016—It became evident that the order would bave is resort to force. What did you mean by thatT ; ■_v_.i--' a. Well, we would have to nas ail possible meant of tryias , to secure a conference, and the conference having tailed wa ,<-.- would try to see If we could not resort to a strike or some other thing for forcing the managers Into a conference. Q. Does this force or pressure relate to physical violence? A. No, I have always—and I think even the members of tha White Rats who perhaps did not agree with me will go «s record aa saying, that I never made a pcbllo speech or utterance or had a private conversation in which I did not', (ftjf asy that I was unalterably opposed to any force of any kind, ; <g sort or description. q. That is. physical force? A. Physical force, . _ , U» ;• Q. Were you willing that other fores should bo applied? A. All the legal means should be applied or enforced. 1 posted a notice la the Boston office that any member or the White Rats Actors' Union that was known to go Into a theatre on strike would be instantly expelled. Q. There is soma information of the men carrying a lllly In their hands, I did not get clear What tha tlgn U tonon o£ that waa; will yon state It now? v A. I do not know what the Inference was, ox what the Infefc.;. ence drawn from It was. Yon can draw any Inference yon like from It I suppose. The Inference waa that if yoa go to work and take a lily in your hand—I dont know whether it was for purposes of Identifying you as a ledy-llko char- acter or what At that time there waa a show running In New York, If I remember correctly at the Winter Cardan. In which Mr. Jolson used that phrase, something about taking a Illy in your hand and—vaudeville actors have a vsry strong sense of humor, and I think It waa comedy advertisement more tbnn anything.else, for certainly no one who went to .work while the strike was on In the theatre took a Illy In their hand. Q. I call your attention to what is designated as the an- swer of the Vaudeville Managers' Protective Association, which has heretofore been put In evidence, the exhibit number of which I do not have at band, la which waa plainly stai.d' this anawer, the answer being directed to yoa: "Thu totes): sole issue between this Association and your Assoclcticn. This issue cannot bo and will not be arbitrated or discussed. Wc absolutely refuse any conference with any committee of White Rata as long as the White Rats bears too Union's stamp." Notwithstanding thin ultimatum In September, or the latter part of September, did you still seek an Interview With the managers? '■''.' Y-.' A. Constantly. I would seek one tomorrow, If I could get Q. Then In the same answer there Is this: "Strike or no strike, we are forever pledged agalast the White Rata find against any conference with It and any of its committees, so long as the White Rata continue to be a labor union with Its policy of closed shop, and what that baokward step would mean to vaudeville." How did you regard tha question as to whether or not the managers should have anything to say as to the term Of organisation of the actors? A. I felt that tha actors ought to form their organli^tlon and run their own organisation, and direct tha affaire of their organisations without any assistance from,the managers at all. ■ ">...; '"■■■. p Q. Wm there any claim made by your orgaatoaUoa that H should come into camp, as it were, and disintegrate and attempt to deal with the managers over your grievances, other than M your White Rate Actors' Union? ■ •, fflr A. I do not get that question, Mr. Walsh. Q, (Repeated by the stenographer.) A. Yes., We agreed or were willing to agree, olnco that* was such violent opposition to the closed shop idea, to sub- stitute a bond for the olosod shop, that every man who ran a theatre In America would pnt up a bond of sameieht slse, for every theatre that he ran, to insure the findings cf this Arbitration Board which waa to consist of one manager, one actor and a third man to be selected by ths first two. to see that the findings of that Arbitration Board wsrelivaa" up to. I made the proposition myself to Mr. Pantages. The objection was raised to Mr. Mountford and Mr. Mountford offered to resign. .....v.: Q. I show you what purports to be an advertlslment of the Vaudeville Managers' Protective Assootaaion, Inserted In "Vsriety," of November 8, 1010, in which the coaoludlns paragraph Is this: "In conclusion, there la no use of Mount* ford trying to make a martyr of himself or trying to de- ceive the artists as to our attitude toward Union labor. Conditions have reached such a stags now, that wo wish it known by all concerned, that we are opposed to tbo Whit - Rate Organisation, whether Mountford stays or rsslr whether the White Rata continue its affiliation with American Federation of Laborer not" ' ■ A ' r Mr. Goodman: What Is the date of that, Mr. Walsh? ■ Mr. Walsh: November 0, 1916. ■ r *v\ Q. Was there a proposition that Mr. Mountford should rei sign? A. Ths suggestion was made directly—or Indirectly, rather —that the whole trouble was Mountford, Mountford, Mount- ford, Mountford, Mountford. Mountford was this and Mount- ford was that, and the White Rate would never get anything as long as he waa In the organization; that he was supposed to be the chief stumbling block to ths conference and to ths amicable settling of differences. A. And was there a proposition to eliminate Mr. Mountford? A. How do mean, proposition? Q. Was there some talk of eliminating him from ths or- ganization so that some conference and settlement might be had? A, Yss.' Q. What waa It? • - pr A. Mr. Mountfoid made tha statement to Mr. Pastagse In my presence—msde It to me personslly and made It to members of the International Board-that If he was the stumbling block and they would . )r n the agreement be woold resign the day thoy did It, and than when the statement was made «/, LrS^l <»"•«"»». * talked with Mr. Sam McKsi ovsr the telephone. Q. Who Is he? .• A. He is the representative of the Morning Telegraph. Hs U '« » ««d of Mr. Albee's, and I thought I might be*able to | talk to him and see if he could not say a word to us that M would.result In a .conference. Mr. MoKee told me that - ; Mountford was the objectionable thing. I ssld, "Weil, Mount- ford Is willing to resign." Then be said, "Wall, ~' your charter In the American Federation of Laboi Never"' what about i 'Q. There hss been some talk about Mountford being out Of certain policies which were to be pursued, they were unsbl tns o^n%s«cT MBMB " d **' B T mUoro *"**" •« W-f Q. How long was he out? A. Hs was out fou r years. ] never know ths totalis i 2J$&^