Variety (July 1919)

:'.;•• ii' ' ■ \ ■ • - If .36- •■■ V,V'..;- .,., .,. ..'■'.■. ■■-: ifr- P-. f FEDERAL INVESTIGATION (Continued from page 88) leaving the organisation. I beard film attacked constantly by Mr. Cook and others at the meetings of the Board, or. at the lodge meetings, and I asked on many occasions what the reason was, and I never could find out. When the plan was known that Mr. Mounttord was to resign, I personally waB most bitterly opposed to it and expressed my opposition most vigorously. Q. Upon was that based? ' A. I gave as my reason that the Board of Directors, which was then in power, was in power when they let him go or fired' him, as I was always led to believe. I believed that if bo -wob dishonest when be was fired they bod no business hiring him back again, now. I believe also that it they were wrong and he was not dishonest when they fired him, they were a lot of fools, and their Judgment could not be trusted; and because I, like many other actors, bad formed an Im- pression of Mr. Mounttord by reason of the attacks which had been constantly made on him for years. A member of the organization came to me, Mr. Lorella, and we hod many violent discussions and I announced my intention of leaving the organization. Mr. Mountford returned. "Well," he said, "You better wait and see, don't convict anybody until you find out yourself." So he said, "Would you like to be con- victed yourself, on some one else's testimony without being given a chance to defend yourself T" I said, "No." He said, "Well, why don't you give someone else the some treatment?" I said, "All right, that licks me, I will go back and find out tor myself." So I went back to the organisation and when the revision of 'this constitution came up, there was certain points In it, with which I disagreed violently, Q. With whom? • _ A. With Mr. Mountford. We talked It out on the floor. Q. How did he come to get back at this time? A. Ob, the sheriff was at the door. The man was at the bull switch In the building to pull the light out and—— Q. When was that? A. This was in 1916, In September, I believe. We were all expecting to be thrown into the street Q. That is, at the club house? * .' A. At the club house, yes. The Board of Directors which had accepted his resignation, and the members of which were dishonest enough to permit him to remsln away four years -under the accusation of dishonesty, had to get somebody to bring back the organization. They went to Mountford and be came back under an agreement which was known to the mem- bers and which waa discussed on the floor and voted upon by the members. ■ Q. la this a statement which was published In "Variety" as to these facts on October 22, 1915 (handing to witness)? , a Yes ■lp Q.* That is a statement published by the Board of Directors? A. By the Board of Directors of the White Rats Actors' Union. Q. Was this resolution passed upon bis return: "This spe- cial meeting of the White Rats Actors' Union hereby un- animously endorses and heartily approves of the action of the Board of Directors in re-engaging Harry Mountford, as In- ternational Organizer, and pledges to the Board of Directors and to him their absolute support in any steps It may be necessary to take to re-establish the power and the Interest of the organization and to protect the actor in the exercise of his profession and obtain for him fair treatment and justice." How long after he returned was this passed? A. That was passed before be came back at all. Q. That was when the proposition was on? A. Yes, when the discussion was on, -whether he should be taken back or not It was submitted to this special meeting and was carried. Q, What was it proposed that he be taken back for? . a. To bring back the organisation from the state of do- prepltude in which it was to what it had been when he left, i By Mr. Kelley: 1 Q. And that covered a period, as I understand, of about four years, did you say? i > A. Four years, yes, Mr. Kelley. Q. Preceding what date? A. From 1911, in October, until October, 1915. By Mr. Walsh: Q. When did you become president? A. i was installed In August—I think I was slsotsd on the 1st of April. Q. What year? A. 1916. Q. 1916? A. Yes. vi. The 1st of April, 1916? A. Yes. t Q. And when was Mr. Mountford elected? A. He was—do you mean elected or brought back? He was eleoted International Executive the same election, at the some time. Q. That you were? A. Yes. Q. So that he was in office there from October until tbe next spring, before you became an offloer? A. Yes. Q. Then henceforth you were Jointly officers? A. Yes, sir. Q. Previous to the time you became Big Chief and up to the time he came back to the organisation, were you asso- ciated with him In tbe work of tbe organization? A. No, sir. Q. Your association with him began at the time you became Big Chief? A. Yes, sir; I was always looked upon as an Insurrectionist by the Board, which I helped put out of office. Mr. Kelley: I think it is In the record, but Just for my own information, when was It that Mr. Mountford became officially re-established? The Witness: You mean as an officer? Mr. Kelley: Yes, coming back again. The Witness: He became International Executive. Mr. Kelley: What Is tbe date of that? The Witness: That same election, April 1. Mr. Goodman: 1910. The Witness: But he was hired as organizer or engaged as organizer In the Intervening time, Mr. Kelley. Q. And have you been associated with Mr. Mountford In that work ever since? A. Ever since, Intimately, day and night Q. What has been bis behavior towards the organization It- self? ■ A. Well, he, I bellove, has done more for it than any man that ever was in It, and endured more for It than any man I know of, in or out of It Q. What would you say In reference to the disbursement or the funds of the organization by Mr. Mountford? .v™ ny money that was ever disbursed by any member of the White Rats Actors' Union when I was in office, at the tims It was disbursed, I went over with a magnifying glass. a. is that true with reference to all moneys which Mr. Mountford disbursed? A. Yes. Every week at the meeting I went over that financial statement with a magnifying glass snd I never infl a penny out of tho way, I never Found a penny illegal!- VARIETY disbursed, wrongfully'disbursed: or dishonestly used against anybody, and I know that Mr. Mountford never took a penny of any actor's money for his personal use, and I would stake my life on it. Q. You spoke or said something yesterday or this morning that it has been your observation that there has. been stifling competition in the Industry. What do you mean by that, or in what respect Is competition stifled? A. For Instance, in a certain town there is a big time vau- deville theatre booked by the United Booking Offices or the Orpheum Circuit Now, It is impossible for another man to go into that .town and start a theatre and-book big time after this, because he has opposition and he cannot get the acts, and If he cannot/get tbe acts he goes out of business. That is the situation in a nutshell. In order to have com- petition you have to have acta, and the man who controls the acts controls' the situation, >: Q. Has it been your .observation that there could be more of competition and more theatres In towns throughout the country? '■■ .< ■,'%?.■' ';« < " A. I think there is- scarcely Playing big time vaudeville in America that could not stand at least one more theatre and in some places two more,)theatres. , ; , , . <Q, What effect would that have < oh the profession itself it there were more theatres? ■ ', '•' ■ ■ - 'A. It would afford a larger opportunity for work, It.would afford an opportunity for greater Initiative on the part of the actor, it would create vaudeville audiences, and help the business. 'jj '•■■» *.' ■•- tf \ ; ' - "■ ■'"• , . ;_ Q. Are vaudeville Audiences created by education and obser- vation ,and going to vaudeville theatres? ,., . . A. They are. -,>There is•* type of tbeatre-goer known as a vaudeville fan and; he doe.8-not.go anywhere else, and you make the type of audience thatt*tf in your theatre by giving them the kind of stuff that they* want. *• Q. Do yon-know any one who attempted to start a first class vaudeville house? Do youMtno* anything-of the activities of William Morris? .■ .. . ■ ' . 1 _.•■ . A. Oh, only remotely, that is all. 'I.,know Klaw & Brian- ppt* tried ''■' ■ i* ' Q. Now, In the matter of the club house, when did you lose possession of the c\ub house? • .':/'.' .\, .- ... A. I cannot fix the date now. It was in "Variety." Q. I think in April, 1917. ■ :*-""•." A. Yes. '"■•..-■ .■• ' : *'. Q." What became of the club house? A. The club house was bought by a man named Corcoran. Q. And where dtd the title ultimately go? A. I beg pardon? Q. Where did the title go, finally? A. It went to 239 West 46th Street Corporation. I think that is the name. \Wt . , ' „ „ . . Q. Is that where the club house of the N. B. A. Is now? A. YeS. ." Vi : .'(..'' Q. In the same building? ;; V •; ■>- A. Yes. -.'-. '■-■ ia<#l*s '' Q. But remodeled? . >;;,• ■ • ■ A. Yes, sir. . . '"> . . :? *-'l_ Q. Where did the sale take place, de you know? A. In the Directors* room, at the Mutual Bank. In 34th street I think. Q. 83d stret '£&.' ,.,■ A. 33d street, between Broadway and oth avenue. Q. Did you ever meet Mr. Corcoran, the gentleman who bought It? ' A. No. i « ■••_>> ■ ■ . ., Mr. Goodman: .That transaction was conducted by Mr. Mountford, wasn't It? The Witness: No, I was present. Q. What occurred? ' A. Mr. Mountford had been In. negotiations with tbe com- pany for eight or ten houw. I think it was on Monday, and <m Tuesday Mr. McCree and Mr. North and Mr. Mountford and myself went down for the final conference on the disposal of the lease. At that hearing or at that conference, rather. Mr. North who contended that the White Rats Realty Company or Union owed htm $4,000, I think insisted on getting the full amount. Mr. Sackett offered htm a certain sum. I cannot, recall tbe exact amount now. I think It was three thousand odd dollars. Mr. North protested against the dis- posal ot the lease until he got his money, which resulted in a disagreement between himself and me, In which I told him that be was willing to sacrifice $58,000 worth of actors' money, who needed it as badly as he did. for a miserable few hundred dollars ot his own, and, In tho record of that meeting, which was held, I went on record as being unalter- ably opposed to paying him one single solitary penny more, than what Mr. Sackett offered htm. The lease was 'disposed of to Mr. Corcoran and under certain terms, t and that we. were ' to be'permitted to take out our office furniture. That con-. ference ended at One o'clock In-the morning or thereabouts, and I went back to the clubhouse and went.to bed, and at ten o'clock In the morning when. I came down, I found Mr. Sackett talking to Mr.' Mountford, and he said,-"I am very sorry.to tell you that my client, or the man.for whom-1 am acting, absolutely refuses to- permit anything to be taken out of this room with tile exception"—he designated a chair and a desk and a itypewriter. I said* "You call your- self honorable business men, to make an agreement at one o'clock in the morning to do certain things, and come back at ten o'clock In the morning and say you won't.do> it, and ypu accuse me ot being a fanatic and suspicious." ' I said, "It is no wonder I am, when I have to do business with people like you," He said, "I regret It, Mr.. Fltzpatrlck, sb much as you do, but I am helpless in the matter." So In the meantime Mr. Mountford, who was not as gullible as I was, and who had had more experience In dealing with these reputable business men, determined that he would get tbe membership Cards out of the building, because we had a very strong idea—In fact Mr. Sackett did not deny it when I said that Mr. Albee was the purchaser or was to be the pur- chaser, and he said, "I cannot say anything about It" I said, "Well, if Mr. Albee'Is going to be the purchaser ot tbe White Rats Club I am unalterably opposed to tho disposal of the lease, and I won't be a party to it" He said, "Well, I cannot say anything about who I am acting for." So the membership cards were taken out ot the White Rats office that night, between one o'clock In the morning and ten, be- cause if the sheriff bad come In or tbe caretaker had come In and taken possession of our office, the very thing which the Vaudeville Managers' Protective Association most desired to find out, who our membership was, and who paid their levy, would be in tbelr hands. We had given .our word to the actors that we would keep faith with them and that no one would know or ever would know. .That Is how the membership cards and the levy list were taken out of that house and out of the State. I brought them to Waterbury, Conn. They were token out of the club houBe the night we left the club house, but montbB and months before tbla Pemberton investigation was started. . Mr.- Walsh: I offer these three papers in evidence, (The papers above referred to was received and marked Commission's Exhibits Nob. 71, 72 and 73.) RE-CROSS EXAMINATION. By Mr. Goodman: Q. Was tbe auditor whose report was admitted In evldene- here a witness In the Pemberton proceedings? A. No, sir; sot that I know of. ' Q. Are you sure of that? ' .. ■ : -,,' '•.'*:• ..'<f-vh>V A. No; I am not sure. r Q. Was tbe auditor's report Introduced in evidence? Mr. Walsh: No, not the report, but the statement In refer- ence to it . Mr. Goodman: No, I am talking ot the Pemberton ease. Was the same statement that 'was offered In evidence, here offered in evidence there In the Pemberton case, in the: refer- ence? , •.- ■ - •■• - N, Mr. Meyers: It was submitted, but whether it waa offered in evidence, I do not know. A. I could not tell you: I was only there once.. ,, -\ ' Q. With the statement of Mr. Meyers, your counsel/ who has epoken with our permission, can you say whether It res or not? Mr. Meyers: I don't know, but if we have the record I will look it up for you. I can And It in the record. Mr. Goodman: Very well. By Mr. Goodman: ,Q. You said something about a case where an actor not being: able to get time through the United Booking offices and his personal representative would then turn him over to a friend, . who had a friend in tbe Marcus Loew office, or something to ttlQt CffSCt. A. I did not say he would turn him over. I said the work would be secured tor him in the Marcus Loew agency by that means. Q. But you gave vent to this expression—that that meant you would pay the U. B. O., the Intermediary and the agent? A. Well, I was wrong there. I am glad you called that to my attention. I mean be paid his personal representative, he , paid his representative's friend, and . he paid bis friend's friend, who was the representative In' the Loew office. I did not mean to Bay he paid the booking office 5 per cent I want to moke that' clear. , Q. You mean he paid how much per cent? A. 15 per cent, at least* Q. To r get a Job? A. With his own office, through, the agent. Mr. Goodman: On the point that Mr. Walsh might want to examine this witness, I do not want to get Into an altercation - with the legal propositions,. but I Just want to make this . statement on the record—that these contracts between actors and personal representatives, as a matter of elementary law, as contracts between any principal and agent, are absolutely revocable at any time, no matter how many times and In what language the contract states tbey cannot be revoked, unless It Is an agenoy coupled with an interest We, as lawyers, know that ■ . Q. Now, you were shown the Keith contract Commission's Exhibit No. 39, and then you said that your objection, or one ot your objections to tbe payment to tbe booking office, was that you bad to pay a Keith booking office a commission to get work in a Keith theatre? a. Yes, sir. Q. Isn't it a fact that the booking office, however, booked for theatres other than Keith theatres? A. That does not alter the fact that I have— • Q. Now, wait a minute, let us follow It along. A. Yes, that Is true. Q. It books for Buffalo and Toronto and Mr. Moore In Rochester and Detroit and for other managers? A Yes sir Q.' So while It is true that the Keith Interests have theatres and are Interested in the United Booking Office, It is not true that the only theatres that the United Booking Offices book for are the Keith theatres? A. No, that Is quite true. Q. I Just want to get the record to show It A. That is true. They book tor other theatres in which they have no interest that I know ot. Q. Now, you said you did not remember or know of this re- port which you and Mr. Mountford made to the White Rata Actors' Union In June, 1917, ever having been published? A. No. Q. In any paper?. ' ■ A. Not fully, I said, Mr. Goodman. Not in full. Q. All right, I show you a "Variety" ot July 6, 1917, at page 6. I will ask you It that article does not Indicate that at that time somebody connected with "Variety" or the man who wrote the article had or wrote or saw a copy of the re- port (handing to witness) ? A. Well, I don't like to say unkind things) Mr.- Goodman, 1 i hope If I answer that that you won't feel that I am trying to be nasty, but perhaps the man who wrote that'story had access to that oopy which you have. '■''..%'• Q. Now, I think we all understand here that It Is your con- tention that the condition which the White Rats found them- selves in In October, 1915, Just before Mr. Mountford's return, was brought about by the misconduct of the Board of Directors or by whatever name they were known—the Board that con- trolled the White Rate Organization up to that time? A. It was due to the failure ot the Board of Directors to do anything to remedy, correct or eliminate growing abuses in the theatrical business. It was an' absolute supine or- ganization, which did nothing, literally and figuratively nothing. Q. Well, don't you understand or want us to understand that some of these directors were guilty of malfeasance In offloe or misappropriation ot funds? A. I could not say. 1 never made that accusation, Mr. Good- man. My chief contention was—I conducted many a fight on the floor when there were only 50 or 100 people at the meeting and attacked them simply and solely on the fact that they were doing nothing, dying of dry rot. Q. The condition they found themselves In was due, was It not, to the fact that they invested money of tbe White Rats Actors' Union In this club house? - A. No, sir. A. No, sir. Q. Well, did not Mr. Mountford testify In the Pemberton proceeding that he asked the Board of Directors to bring action against the previous board for misappropriation of v th?m? conneotIon w,u - % cluo -"""a* or •**• diversion of *» A ' tS. e . may m£ tt 7 e ' but tbat t0 , "••* mmd nB * nothing at all to- do with it That was only a side Issue. The membership, Mn Goodman, had so far deteriorated from the numbers which were in the organization when Mr. Mountford left that I figured It cost the organization In lost dues about $000 000 In that four years that If they had had that membership and that membership had been kept up by a vigorous, honest bfifsSiW^S flght !S g K pol *T Jk *wSn!w been* in $600,000, and they would have been able to weather the bad management and the building of the club house „„S' Ha iL tn . e W 11116 ^ 84 ; Union ever begun an action* against any of the former Board of Directors or the members of the International Board, to recover S100.000 or any Bart of the Wrn?" Mr ' Mouatford c,a ' med hB « "een dlwted by -A' J,* 0 SS kn . ow UlBt the organization has. I think my- self that there Is no reason for It. I think the mistake was an honest one and made under the advice of counsel don t reproach them with dishonesty at all. 1 tblnk that they acted according to their lights in the matter/ ♦.,?; X nnjejjtood you to say on your redirect a moment aao M r o 1 ?o r -M B r RCk A e iU OU "^ Mt ° W,M - d to ^S A. i did not say tbat I was net opposed to the sal* I sold