Dark Victory

Home > Other > Dark Victory > Page 22
Dark Victory Page 22

by Moldea, Dan E. ; Miller, Mark Crispin;

“Did you ever hear it said, Mr. Reagan, that Screen Actors Guild granted a blanket waiver to MCA due to the fact that MCA was willing at this time to grant repayment for reuse of TV films to actors?”

  “No, sir.”

  “I will show you a document marked Grand Jury Exhibit Number 41 from [Laurence] W. Beilenson; do you know who Mr. Beilenson is?”

  “Yes.”

  [Fricano reading:] “‘To Mr. Lew Wasserman, MCA Artists Limited, re amended Revue-MCA-SAG letter agreement of July 23, 1952.’ This letter is dated June 7 [1954]. I will ask you to read Paragraph 1 of this document and see if that doesn’t refresh your recollection as to the reason why Screen Actors Guild granted a blanket waiver to MCA. May I read it for you, sir?

  “‘Should the letter be a superseding letter or an amendment?’ And I might add for your information that this dealt with the renewal of the blanket waiver which had been granted in 1952. The original agreement in 1952 extended to ’59 but for some reason which we hope to elicit, in 1954 another year was tacked onto that waiver. Continuing, ‘I prefer the latter because the letter of July 23, 1952, was executed under a specific set of circumstances where Revue was willing to sign a contract giving the guild members reuse fees when no one else was willing to do so.’”

  [Reagan replied:] “Well, then I was wrong but, and I can understand that, but I certainly, I am afraid when I answered before that I was under the impression you were trying to make out that in negotiating a contract we made this as a [bargaining] point of giving a waiver.”

  “Isn’t it conceivable from this language?”

  “Mr. Beilenson is a lawyer and in charge of negotiations. It’s quite conceivable then if he says it in this letter.”

  “Does that refresh your recollection, sir?”

  “I don’t recall it, no.”

  “In your capacity of president of SAG it was your belief at this time that a waiver should be granted MCA because it would give actors work, is that right?”

  “Well, this was always our thinking, yes.”

  “Did you ever preside at board meetings when other waiver requests were discussed?”

  “I am sure I must have.”

  “Do you recall any of them?”

  “I don’t really. There weren’t too many of those people as I recall that were interested in producing. Feldman, I recall coming up.”

  “Any other talent agents for TV film production?”

  “I wouldn’t recall.”

  “So that you wouldn’t know whether or not blanket waiver requests were made by talent agencies, is that correct?”

  “I couldn’t say whether they were or weren’t.”

  [Fricano said:] “I’ll ask that this document be marked as Grand Jury Exhibit 44 for identification. It is a document entitled Screen Actors Guild Board of Directors as of July 1952.

  (Whereupon the document was marked Grand Jury Exhibit 44.)

  [Still Fricano speaking:] “Mr. Reagan, I will show you Grand Jury Exhibit Number 44 which is Screen Actors Guild Board of Directors as of July 1952, and I will ask you to go down this list and indicate to the best of your information and belief the agent representing each and every [one] of the board of directors.”

  “Wait a minute. You have me there. I know my wife. When is this? ’54?”

  “’52, sir.”

  “’52. At that time my wife was represented by [Bert] Allenberg.”

  “She was not represented by MCA?”

  “I don’t recall the date she went over to MCA. She was not represented by MCA following [Bert] Allenberg’s death. She went with a member who had been a member, had been with the [Allenberg] agency, Coryell, and nothing happened there although she wasn’t really working at having a career after we got married. So I happened to be the one who suggested to her one day why she didn’t talk to Art [Park] about representation. This was after Mr. Coryell had admitted to her, because she only wanted now and then to work when it wouldn’t interfere with being a wife and mother, that he didn’t feel that his agency was set up to handle her on that basis. They had to devote their efforts to actors and actresses who were out of work and wanted to work and she spoke to Art and went over. I don’t know. A lot of people are always changing agencies. I am looking here, trying to see if I can see a name that rings a bell.”

  “Why don’t we take them ad [seriatim] and I will read them. Ronald Reagan we know MCA. William Holden?”

  “Bill Holden is with Feldman.”

  “Walter Pidgeon?”

  “I don’t know.”

  “John Lund?”

  “I don’t know. Never asked him.”

  “Paul Harvey?”

  “I don’t know.”

  “George Chandler?”

  “I don’t know George.”

  “Leon Ames?”

  “No.”

  “Edward Arnold?”

  “Look, let me save you some time here. You don’t particularly talk to people about this or ask. It just never occurred to me to ask who someone’s agency was.”

  “I understand that, sir, but we are hoping you can assist this grand jury and give some information. If we call upon your expertise, we would be most appreciative.”

  “Bill Holden happens to be my very close friend so we used to talk over our business problems and I would hear what he said to Feldman and he would hear what I said to Art [Park]. I knew Nancy, of course. Many of these supporting players are with agents that deal in that sort of thing. This could have been true of a Chandler, of Leon Ames. They are with agents that deal in that kind of work, in the kind of parts they get, and I never bothered myself with it. It didn’t seem to make any difference. I could tell you, whether his name is on there, that Van Heflin is in and out of MCA like somebody going in and out of a department store. He was always falling in and out of love with them. You never know about him.”

  “Did Mr. Heflin have a few hard times?”

  “He was always in hard times. He enjoys hard times.”

  “Let’s digress for a minute. What complaints did Mr. Heflin have against MCA?”

  “Oh, everything. That he played the wrong part and they should have stopped [him] from playing it, or he didn’t get the right part and they should have gotten it for him. This was true of whoever he worked for. I like Van very much, don’t get me wrong. He is just one of those fellows who enjoys being unhappy. When he was under contract to Metro they were the worst people in the world.”

  “Let’s continue with the names here.”

  “It might come that I could recall.”

  “Gertrude Astor?”

  “No.”

  “Ward Bond?”

  “Oh, Ward Bond, I don’t know. I don’t know who he was with then. I think later he did go with MCA, whether before or after Wagon Train I will never know.”

  “Macdonald Carey?”

  “I don’t know.”

  “Richard Carlson?”

  “I don’t think he was with MCA but I don’t recall.”

  “Chick Chandler?”

  “No.”

  “Fred Clark?”

  “No.”

  “Wendell Corey?”

  “No, I wouldn’t know.”

  “Ann Cornwall?”

  “I would guess that Ann would be with one of those smaller agents that handle supporting players.”

  “Nancy Davis?”

  “Well, I told you she went through a couple of them and by marriage—”

  “I’m sorry, sir, I forgot the fact that she was your wife.”

  “Rosemary De Camp?”

  “I don’t know.”

  “William Demarest?”

  “Well, Bill Demarest I would have to guess unless he changed was with them because, as I told you, he was one of the original clients that went with MCA.”

  “So he was MCA?”

  “Yes.”

  “Frank Thielan?”

  “No.”

  “Glenn Ford?”

  “Glenn Ford it seems to me, an
d I could be wrong, but somehow it seems to me like Glenn Ford sounds like the Allenberg Agency.”

  “What about Tyrone Power?”

  “Golly! I think Ty Power was with what used to be the William Morris office.”

  “Robert Preston?”

  “I wouldn’t know.”

  “Frank Lovejoy?”

  “Frank Lovejoy I don’t think was with MCA but I wouldn’t know who he was with.”

  “At this time, sir, in 1952, did you have any discussions with anyone at MCA-Revue or any of its affiliated corporations or divisions with respect to the blanket waiver which it had requested from the Screen Actors Guild?”

  “No, not that I know of.”

  “Do you recall at all discussing this matter with personnel from MCA?”

  “No, although I can’t recall about that seeing them as much as I do, meeting as we do, that this very possibly could have been discussed but any discussions as such, would be in the files of the Guild.”

  “Well, either official or otherwise?”

  “Not out of the regular negotiations with the agent and so forth.”

  “Do you recall whether or not you participated in the negotiations held by MCA and SAG with respect to the blanket waiver in July of 1952?”

  “No, I think I have already told you I don’t recall that. I don’t recall. There were times when I wasn’t involved on a committee. Whether that is one of them or not I wouldn’t recall. I must tell you that I always told Jack Dales in the Guild that I realized I felt a little self-conscious sometimes about that, lest there might ever be a misunderstanding because of the fact that I had been so long with MCA, and sometimes I kind of ran for cover and was very happy to duck a committee duty in these matters.”

  “Because of the possibility of some conflict of interest that might arise?”

  “That’s right.”

  “Inadvertently or otherwise?”

  “That’s right.”

  “Do you recall if in 1952 you made the statement to Mr. Dales in connection with the Letter Agreement of July 1952?”

  “I don’t recall. I know I have very frequently told Mr. Dales my own feeling, that I have never seen any harm in this and felt they had filled a great gap in giving employment at a time when unemployment was quite heavy.”

  “Do you recall, sir, whether or not you spoke at board meetings or other negotiating committee meetings as a director of the Guild in 1952 in favor of the blanket waiver to MCA?”

  “I always placed myself in favor. As I told you, I was one of the group that could see no harm because if ever harm developed, we always saw the ability to pull ourselves out of it and we favored someone giving jobs.”

  “Did you participate in any negotiations in 1954 on SAG’s behalf with respect to a waiver to MCA? I refer specifically to June 4 of 1954 when the Letter Agreement of July 23 was extended another year. Did you participate in any way in those negotiations?”

  “I don’t honestly recall. You know something? You keep saying [1954] in the summer. I think maybe one of the reasons I don’t recall was because I feel that in the summer of [1954] I was up in Glacier National Park making a cowboy picture for [RKO,] Ben Bogeaus Productions, so it’s very possible there were some things going on that I would not participate in but I have no recollection of this particularly.”

  “I would like to know, sir, if you can tell the grand jury why in June of 1954 the blanket waiver to MCA was extended and the negotiations which SAG held with MCA were private negotiations, whereas twenty-four days later, negotiations were held for other talent agencies who had also requested waivers and the waivers which those agencies [received] were limited waivers?”

  “I wouldn’t be able to tell you.”

  “Were you aware of the fact?”

  “I will say one thing. I don’t know what you are getting at with the question and I am certainly in no position to infer that I want to tell you what to do or not. I can only say this. I have tried to make plain why my memory could be so hazy on a great many things whether it had to do with this or not because of the long years and participation in all of these in which days of meetings would be devoted to one particular point in a producer’s contract or something. I can only say this, that in all of my years with the Screen Actors Guild I have never known of or participated in anything, nor has the Guild, that ever in any way was based on anything but what we honestly believed was for the best interests of the actor and, however it may look now as to the point of private negotiations or anything else, if there was—”

  “If I may say one thing, sir, we do not mean to cast any aspersions on Screen Actors Guild. I think at this point the grand jury would be inclined to agree with you. The Screen Actors Guild is looking out for its members as it should as a union. I would just like to see if you can shed any light with hindsight on negotiations which took place at this time between SAG and MCA.”

  “In view of what is shown in Mr. Beilenson’s letter, it is very possible at that time, in spite of my not remembering, it is very possible that we saw an opportunity to break the solid back of the motion picture industry with regard to residuals and if we saw that kind of thing we moved in, as we did in the most recent strike when we found one studio, Universal, which would break the unit of the motion picture studios and we signed a separate contract with them. You can refer to those as secret negotiations. I met in an apartment in Beverly Hills—”

  “I didn’t use the word ‘secret’ in speaking of the negotiations that took place between SAG and MCA. That was your word.”

  “Well, I met privately with the president of Universal Studios and we walked out with the contract and were about to face the rest of the producers with one of their number had broken this rank and willingly signed a contract to pay repayments. This could very well have taken place. I can see where MCA would be in an untenable position. They wouldn’t represent actors and deny actors the right to residual payments.”

  “But the fact remains that according to Mr. Beilenson’s letter, he states that ‘we gave you residuals when no one else in the industry would,’ and you have already stated, sir, that residuals at this time were a very important bargaining point between the guild, not only the TV producers, but also the motion picture production companies, is that right?”

  “Yes.”

  “I might begin by calling these facts to your attention and the fact alone that you recalled that residuals were important at this time, that it might ring a bell with you as to the reason why at this time Screen Actors Guild granted a waiver to MCA of the type that it did.”

  “No, it doesn’t.”

  “Were you aware, sir, that in 1954 negotiations did take place between MCA and Screen Actors Guild with respect to the waiver which had been entered in 1952?”

  “No. It’s like saying what I was doing on October 25, the night of the murder.”

  “I don’t care what you were doing October 25.”

  “I mean you pick a year that is going back eight years and you say, where were you. I have to try to picture what [hassle] the Guild was in at that time.”

  “Take your time and think about it. I don’t expect an immediate answer.”

  “I don’t know. The Guild—”

  “Do you recall now, sir, whether or not you were aware in 1954 of the renegotiations of the Letter of Agreement of 1952 between Screen Actors Guild and MCA?”

  “All I can say, usually these negotiations and things of that kind seemed to fall in the even years. So I would say probably 1954, yes, this would be. To tell you of my own memory, in my mind I can tell you whether we did or not, no, I can’t. Serving with Screen Actors Guild long years of negotiating on meetings for a long time, just retaining things that happened, the lawyers’ reports and then so forth, and then you find yourself in a battle like we had with the communists or with the strikes.”

  “Excuse me, sir, I don’t mean to interrupt you, but we would like to focus on this one question. Is your answer—I don’t quite unders
tand it quite frankly but is it your answer at this time you do not remember whether or not you were aware of the 1954 negotiations between Screen Actors Guild and MCA?”

  “That’s right.”

  “In other words, my presentation to you this afternoon came not as a surprise possibly but—”

  “Well, yes, you are asking me thing[s] I haven’t thought about for a long time, as a matter of fact, I [didn’t] think about too much then.”

  “The fact that you hadn’t thought about it too much either now or then is somewhat immaterial to the purposes of our investigation. My only question is at this point whether or not you were aware of this 1954 renegotiation of the MCA blanket waiver?”

  “If it was going on, I must have been aware of it.”

  “But you have no independent recollection whatsoever at this time?”

  “No. And all of this, including the opinions of myself, is vague at the Guild on everything that took place for all those years all the way back including whether I was present or not.”

  “I assume, then, sir, you would not be able to answer my next question, but I will ask it in any event. The original Letter Agreement of 1952 extended the waiver to MCA until 1959. In 1954 when this was, if we may use the term, renegotiated, it was extended for another year to December 1960. Do you know why it was extended for another year?”

  “No, although very probably it could have been to arrange our own setup. Very many times I know we discussed getting contracts, contract negotiations in sequences where we didn’t find ourselves all at once going in three directions. Very possibly this could have been to arrange it with regard to when other contracts such as the producers’ contract expired. I don’t know.”

  “That was speculation on your part right now as a possibility of why it may have been extended?”

  “Yes.”

  “Do you know for a fact whether or not this was the case?”

  “No, I don’t although I say this is a thing that frequently came up and our office staff would be turned loose to see if we couldn’t arrange some way. I know—you are awakening a memory. Some place along the line I remember extending the Artists’ Managers contract, I am sure, to get it out of the way because we were producer negotiators and we didn’t want to have to meet the agency negotiations at this same time. We just don’t have that much manpower.”

 

‹ Prev