The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1923-03-01
PUT GALLAGHER
|. AND SHEAN IN
BUSTERS
Witnesses Sustain Claim Of
Comedians They Are
Second-Raters.

| foremost author1t1eG OF the ,tnehL-
rical world were called to the wit
ness stand yesterday to determine
the batting average OF these vaude-
vile league pennant winners.
| That they were "bushers" and be-
longed in the short time circuit wae
the emphatic opinion OF their most
carefully selected friends. That they
were luninaries of the first magni.
tude was sworn to by their legal
enemies.
Mark A. Luescher, for six years
manager Of the Hippodrome, gave
them a rating suggestive Of Babe
Ruth in the late series. McIntyre
and Heath, he said far outshone
them: Corbett and Van were far
greater; Savoy and Brennan en-
| joyed a much greater reputation,
and Howard and Howard were Tar
better known throughout the coun-
| try.
Van and Schenck, he said. were
greater drawing cards, while VIII
| liams and VOTERS and Moran and
Mack were on about the same foot.
| ing as the defendants. Clark and
McCullagh fell in about the same
Glass;" and ConrOy and Lemaire
were described as more valuable
from the managers viewpoint.
Sued by Shuberts.
The legal battle which the Shu-
berts are waging to curtail the lib
critics OF the positively foremost
head1iners was devoted especially
to cross-examination of Mr.. Gala
CHER, which consumed the greater
part Of the time. Mr.. Shean was
not called and a verbal duel as to
=. -
tween Tobias Kepp1er for the DC.
tense and Charles II. futile for the
plaintiff was the chief offering TO
the standing-room only crowd which
packed the courthouse.
Gallagher said he had been IN the
theatrical business for about twenty
nine years, that he had appeared
| in about every sort or theatrical
| entertainment. At one time he said
he worked for Weber and Fields,
and six years ago he had appeared
with Shean in 1.-THE Rose Maid. +"
Before the Shubert engagement
they were in vaudeville together.
The defendant said that for ten
| or twelve years his earnings had
averaged, with single partners, $6OU
or $3.50 q week, and when he work
ed alone $3.50, 1915 or $500. As to
Mr.. HamHnerstein's narrative or MS
| performance with Shean at the Vic
| toria Theater. the witness said that
| ii had lasted one week out of the
-four vaudeville weeks" with Shean
already alluded to. Since that time
they had been apart, but each was
anxious to quit travelling and
''settle down home"
ST explained that fact to Lee
| Shubert when we met" said the de-
/ fendant-witness. ''Mr. Shean had
come to me with a form OF contract
as long as this Indicating the
length by stretching his arms
apart. I told Mr.. Shubert that II
he was, as he said, willing to agree
to our terms, we would sign up
II we got the right sort Of con-
tract"
Wanted Equity Contract.
SCI said that I was an Actors
Equity man, and that would not
feel right II / signed any other
than an Equity contract" Gal.
lagher said.
Later, the witness testified, an
equity contract was submitted to
him and he noted that no "Droduc-
| ton" was mentioned in 1t, nor the
number of weeks that were to be
worked as q minimum, each year.
Furthermore these was q clause
providing for the payment of s
per cent weekly to the Shubert
booking service, which he had
known nothing about. He chen
| spoke to Shubert, who in a letter
accepted as part Of the contract,
explained that the defendants might
| be placed in vaudeville and said
that this clause had been inserted
because of the impossibility Of be.
ing certain in advance that "pro-
| auctions" would be successful.
Klein. booking agent for the
Shuberts he said, had urged him
not to be too particular about get.
ting every word Of the exact agree.
ment, with addenda, into the con.
tract lest he offend the producer.
In September, 1921, when the pc.
riod for performance under the con-
tract began. Mr.. Gallagher said
he went to Lee Shubert, as did
Shean, and protested because no
| production" had been provided
| for them. Mr.. Shubert, he said,
declared that he would use them
in vaudeville for a time as he had
no production for them. When
finally he refused to sign an agree
ment to put them in production,
removing them from vaudeville,
by January, 1929, they regarded
the contract as broken.
Sacrificed Money.
Ibid you ever tell Lee Shubert
that you were glad to be with him
in his fight against trust?" asked
Tobias Kepler, attorney for the
defendants.
mo
Did you say to Klein that you
were glad to get that contract.
that 1t was for the biggest money
you had ever earned?"
mo. That Is absurd. had
earned more. In fact, sacrificed
money to go to the Shuberts."
Gallagher said he told Lee Shu-
bert that he regarded the contract
as abrogated by Shubert's failure
to put him and Shean in a pro-
duction, and that he believed any
court would hold likewise.
The witness said that the greater
part of his and Shean's act was
used by Duffy & Sweeney long
before themselves.
Gallagher admitted signing con-
| tracts with the Keith interests in
September, 1921. He said he had
regarded the Shubeft agreement as
off