amendments after that do not come into the contract until the contract dies out.

Mr. NIXON. You see no reason why those bylaws should not be delivered, then, to every station?

Mr. PETRILLO. No reason at all. It is all public property.

Mr. PADWAY. If they do not get it, they should, and I am sure if they wrote in to headquarters they would get it.

Mr. NIXON. In your policy on television have you ever considered the possibility that by continuing to deny the use of live music on television that you might eventually force the television people to develop other means of entertainment which in the end might displace musicians when television grows to the extent that it is bound to grow? At the present time, as you recognize, television is having to go out and find other means of putting on programs than by putting on live music. Mr. PETRILLO. They are using canned music now.

Mr. NIXON. Canned music and different types of programs, as you know, are on radio stations. All the stations do not have music all the time. Of course, it is your contention that music is necessary and the best part of radio. But what I am driving at is that by continuing your policy, by refusing to allow live music to go on television, it seems to me you might be working against the interests of musicians themselves.

Mr. PETRILLO. That could be. Of course, that is to be seen. Of course, we can make mistakes, too. I hope that that won't be the final result. I hope that the final result will be that we get the thing settled somehow.

Mr. NIXON. It might be well for you to make an offer to the television people as to what you would be able to do, what you would be willing to offer your services for.

Mr. PETRILLO. It is just one of those things we don't know what to offer.

Mr. NIXON. You do not know what to offer?

Mr. PETRILLO. I am telling you the truth. We are scared to death. Mr. NIXON. So you will have to wait until television develops? Mr. PETRILLO. I don't know whether television is ready to go or not. Mr. NIXON. You are not willing to cooperate in the first instance? Mr. PETRILLO. I am willing to cooperate. As I told you yesterday, if they will give us some sort of guaranty that we will not lose our work-because they can't do that-they don't know-they can't tell us where television is going-they can't guarantee us anything, We don't know where we are going on television. We don't know whether our stand is stupid or whether it is smart. We don't know that, either. Mr. NIXON. Turning now to the statements that you made yesterday, that you might find it necessary to do two things in order to protect the musicians; one, to discontinue broadcasts on a national scale, the network broadcasts, and to discontinue selling your services to the record companies. The result of that policy, as I understand it, would be that you would require the local broadcasting stations either to have live music or to use the records that had been made up to this date. It would mean, in other words, that the people of the country in the end would probably have much poorer musical entertainment than they are having today. Is that not true? In other words, there is only one Toscanini and he could only be heard at one time.

you know he has been in my memory for 30 or 35 years and I apprehended that it would be just as well to make a memorandum while it was fresh in my own mind. I have that statement here, if you like. Mr. MCCANN. May we have that statement?

Mr. BAGLEY. I will read it to you. You can examine it if you

want to.

Mr. MCCANN. I would like to see your statement.

Mr. BAGLEY. All right, you can examine it. I wrote this statement out because I am a very busy man and I wanted to have it in my own mind so I could recall it clearly.

Mr. MCCANN. Will you excuse me, Mr. Chairman, for a minute. while I look at this?

Mr. BAGLEY. I would like permission to read that in the record, because that is the whole statement as I know it.

Mr. MCCANN. No objection except to that portion where you are referring to matters that were 9 years old.

Mr. BAGLEY. Well, of course, that really happened in the conversation.

Mr. MCCANN. The situation that I am calling to your attention, Mr. Chairman, is that he is referring to some incident 9 years ago, and to a matter which I do not think is germane to our hearing, and I wish that you would look at that and see if I am not

Mr. BAGLEY. You said you wanted me to state what happened, and that is what I want to do. I would like to state it all; not part of it. Mr. MCCANN. I notice that you have some of the things in there as having happened that you told me a minute ago did not happen. Mr. BAGLEY. No; I don't think so.

Mr. MCCANN. I think when it is read it will show that.

Mr. BAGLEY. I don't think so.

averments when you read them.

You will find they were different

Mr. MCCANN. Well, you may be right.

Mr. KEARNS. Mr. Bagley, I think you have the right to read this statement. However, I would rather have you confine it, if you will, to conditions pertaining to this particular incident, and I think if you will read that to us, you may want to ad lib in different places here. Mr. BAGLEY. I probably will. As it comes along, something is suggested to my mind. I have always heard and one of the first things I learned in law school was that when an instrument was received in evidence that covers all of it, not part of it, and you have a right to read all of it.

Mr. MCCANN. As I understand the situation here, he is refreshing his memory as to something that he read, and he apparently is going to read the instrument. I object to the instrument being received in evidence as it relates to matters that he refers to as of 9 years before. Mr. BAGLEY. It was in the conversation that day, just the same. Mr. KEARNS. Which part is this particularly that you object to? Mr. MCCANN. He is referring to some musician, some trouble that Mr. Carroll had 9 years before.

Mr. BAGLEY. I suggest that that be read, and objections could be made to it as it comes along.

Mr. KEARNS. Read the article, and make objections as it is stated. Mr. BAGLEY. This statement I have written down here was written, as I say, a day or two after that hearing, at the Carroll conference at Wallace's office, May 28, 1947, about 2 p. m. Present: Earl Carroll,

a man named Long, whose first name I didn't get, J. K. Wallace, John te Groen, Lee MacQuarrie, and myself.

Mr. Carroll began it by stating that he had three men in his orchestra whom he didn't hire, that he didn't pay, and he didn't want. He denied knowing anything about them. He said he couldn't afford to keep them. I asked him how long they had been there, and he professed not to know, but it happened I had heard from some of the men that the men in question had been on the job a long time, some of them nearly 2 years or more. This was substantiated by MacQuarrie and Wallace, who were familiar with the situation. I was not familiar with it.

I asked Carroll if his establishment kept books. I asked if those books did not show, besides salary payments, deductions for social security, unemployment, and withholding taxes. He said, "Yes." I then told him right to his face that he was not telling us the truth. I said, "How can you possibly have a group of men like that in your place for 2 or 3 years, with your set-up of books on social security and unemployment compensation and withholding tax, and you say you don't know anything about them and you never heard of them?" And he finally admitted that he knew all about it, that they had been hired and he knew all about it; they had been paid by his establish

ment.

Mr. MCCANN. Right there at that point, had they been paid for full time or part time?

Mr. BAGLEY. I don't know. I am only talking about what he said. Mr. MCCANN. Did you know that the union was requiring him to put those men on a full-time basis when they had been on a part-time basis?

Mr. BAGLEY. I did not. I was not familiar with that end of it. Mr. McCANN. That was not argued down there at all?

Mr. BAGLEY. That was not necessary information for me at the time and I didn't know anything about it. I don't know the business of the union that way. I don't stay there with the board every day and follow their action. I have some other business to attend to. Now we will go on.

I then asked him why it was he told the press that he had to pay three men there and they didn't work at all, and those articles had appeared in the press, that was the inference that was given to the public. So far as I know in my long acquaintance with local 47and I am a charter member of it and it was organized 53 years ago this November-I was present at the first meeting, and that has never been done in this organization. He would not even reply to the question at all; he didn't reply. He said that his testimony was on record. Now, wait a minute. I have lost my place here. Wait a minute. Yes. The articles I said I saw in the press to that effect, he said he would not answer my question, but he said his testimony was on record, but he didn't say where it was on record. He said the musicians are operating a monopoly-that is the only place he said that-that he was in bad financial condition and he couldn't afford to pay for the musicians. At the same time he admitted, in answer to my questions, that he had made material raises in admissions and prices charged by him for meals, and so forth. in his place-he admitted that had been done.

It was then that I told him if it seemed he could not pay the musi

cians, that he should not go to Washington and Sacramento and other places and make false statements about musicians. He made no reply. No further reference was made to the matter. There was no other comment made. I was not interested whether he went to Washington, Chicago, Kamchatka, or where. The only thing that brought it up there at the time was that he made the statement about other things, that he couldn't-he said then, he says, "I will have to close up my business and quit it entirely." And I want to call to your attention-you can verify this in the press-one of the papers here, I think it was the Los Angeles Times, carried that very statement, Mr. Carroll said he was going to close up his place.

He continued, as he kind of patted himself on the breast, "You know I am an old writer; I can go back to that." That is after he said he was going to close up.

I made no comment whatever. I know that he had claimed to have written music, the music and score for So Long, Lettie, and things of that kind. And at that time I made the comment that I was a member of the orchestra that played the So Long, Lettie show, and at the first rehearsal he was sitting in the front row of the theater and when we went through the overture we found that his main theme song was not written by him but had been lifted bodily from Vincenzo Bellini's opera, and I know the minute that we struck that, the members of the orchestra said, "Well, Bellini, Norma." He sat there and he had a sort of a sickly grin and he said that was right. This matter of Kavanaugh, he came there and opened a place about 9 years ago

Mr. MCCANN. Who is Kavanaugh?

Mr. BAGLEY. Kavanaugh is a manager who worked for Mr. Carroll at that time. I will tell you a story, because that is the thing that was talked about that day, and that is part of the conversation, it is part of the res gestae, if you want to call it that.

Mr. MCCANN. Mr. Chairman, we are interested in what took place in this conversation relating to the matters which deal with contempt of Congress, and not with Mr. Bagley's statement on what took place 9 years ago with respect to some individual.

Mr. KEARNS. I think counsel is correct.

Mr. BAGLEY. You don't want to hear that. That is quite all right with me.

Mr. Carroll wanted to know what could be done about his proposition, and I told him, "I am not a member of the board of directors, I have nothing to say about what the board of directors does. They ask my advice and I give it to them, and then," I said, "sometimes they do just as they please, just as all clients do. There is no man's client who absolutely accepts the advice of his attorney." I said, “I have nothing to do with this, but I advise you to negotiate with the board of directors, to get in touch with them and see what kind of a deal you can make." He kept saying that he wanted to make a deal. I said, "That is the way to make a deal, get in touch with the board of directors, negotiate with them."

That is about all. I can't recall anything else that happened.

Mr. MCCANN. Who else did any talking there that day?

Mr. BAGLEY. Well, I don't think Long said three words, as I said a while ago. Mr. te Groen I don't recall as having opened his mouth

Mr. PETRILLO. It doesn't look good, but I am willing to sit down. and talk with them.

Mr. KEARNS. Mr. Petrillo, as you know, this committee was appointed by Congress to study the working agreements and the problems of the country as represented by the functioning of the American Federation of Musicians.

I am greatly heartened with your promises of this morning pertaining to education. I feel that we have accomplished a great deal in this hearing by having an understanding along those lines, and I know when you said that you would develop, that you will develop them. I have every confidence to believe that.

I hope that you and your board will most certainly work out an agreement with broadcasting companies, and also the recording companies, so that the people of America will be able to enjoy having the kind of music that they desire.

I go along with Mr. Nixon in his request that you use every effort possible to leave no stone unturned.

Mr. PETRILLO. That goes, Mr. Congressman, without saying. It would be silly for me to say, and my colleagues on the board, that we want to take the musicians and put them out of work and go out on strike. There is a possibility that we could get our brains knocked out, too. We don't hold the club to the extent they are going to go broke. They could use a lot of canned music. They did a pretty good job on ASCAP, and ASCAP has laws protecting them here in Congress. And the broadcasters did a good job on those people, and were very successful.

I mean, when you say that radio is free, and you want it to be free for the people, it is one thing to say that it is free, and it is another thing to say "is it free?" I think it is as free as the broadcasters are willing to make it.

Now, on top of that I will say this for the broadcasters, and that is more than they will say for me-the smaller stations-that I think that the chain companies have done a very good job with their programming and getting out the fine music for the public at large. I hope it continues that way.

But we are always frightened of the "bogeyman," you know, that we may lose our employment, and that is what we have in mind.

On top of that we have to consider the public. And in considering the public it is a question of whether we should destroy ourselves, if that be so, or the public. And we can't do one thing without considering both, the musicians and the public. That is what we are up against.

We certainly don't want to hurt anybody.

Mr. KEARNS. That is right. And I hope that you will not be too concerned about technological developments.

Mr. PETRILLO. That is going to come.

Mr. KEARNS. I feel we are always going to have employment as long as we have progressive minds and progressive people in America.

Mr. PETRILLO. I found out how good that was in the strike in my building in New York City, on the thirty-fourth floor. They take me up at 9 o'clock in the morning and call a strike at 4 o'clock, and didn't tell me anything about it. At 6 o'clock I walked down 34 stories. I was mad at the union.