Hugh Farr
(1903 - 1980)
The song embedded in this page is Cajon Stomp, a creation of the Farr Brothers, Hugh and Karl. Hugh's violin and Karl's guitar answer each other in a spirited instrumental. But Hugh also had a deep, soft voice with the drawl of his native Texas. The trio in the Sons of the Pioneers became a quartette in many of their songs, with Hugh singing bass. Listen to Hugh's solo of Old Man Atom.
John Fullerton Collection photo.
It has been related that during a Walter Winchell interview, the noted conductor Leopold Stokowski was asked whom he considered the greatest natural violinist of the century. Stokowski allegedly replied, "It really must be two musicians - the left hand of Fritz Kreisler and the right hand of that gentleman who plays the violin with the Sons of the Pioneers. I can't recall his name...." (Hear My Song, by Ken Griffis, 1994 p. 107)
The small central Texas town of Llano was the birthplace of Thomas Hubert (Hugh) Farr (future fiddler for the Sons of the Pioneers), December 6, 1903. His father, Thomas Benjamin Farr, was an independent building contractor and part-time musician. Both Thomas and Hattie Wheatley Farr, while going together, played for local dances and neighborhood parties, Tom playing the fiddle and Hattie the guitar. Hugh accused his father of branding him a fiddler at birth. The doctor, who previously had delivered five sisters, Lyla, Belle, Winnie, Stella, and Maggie, informed Thomas that he finally had a son. Thomas wouldn’t accept the word of the doctor until he had seen for himself. “Well, I’ll be darned, there’s my fiddler!” Following Hugh were brothers Glen and Karl. (Ibid, p. 103)
Hugh Farr was a masterful musician. He claimed no one had influenced his playing and there is no question he developed a style of fiddling that was completely his own. Yet while Hugh could amaze you with his solos he never let his playing interfere with the Pioneers’ singing as he provided stylish and subtle accompaniment to their harmonies. Karl Farr’s guitar playing was the perfect complement to his brother’s fiddling. Bringing him into the group made them strong instrumentally as they were vocally. It was truly as if each of the Pioneers was a part of a musical jigsaw puzzle with each piece fitting together perfectly. Apart each had talent and would have enjoyed some measure of success. Together they formed a group that became the cornerstone of western music. (Laurence Zwisohn, Los Angeles, California, March 1998)
Hugh Farr joined the Sons of the Pioneers between November 1933 and February 1934 and remained with the group until 1958, adding that immediately identifiable fiddle styling and soft bass voice to the classic sound. But he had been active in music from a small boy.
Hugh told Ken Griffis that when he was seven he mastered the guitar and joined his father playing for the Saturday night community dances. He recalled that when he was about 9 years old, his father let him play hooky from school to learn to play the violin. He accomplished that, he said, in one day flat and from then on did the fiddling to his father's back-up guitar.
He admired the jazzy sound of the Kansas City Hawks and would sneak out of bed at night to listen to them on the family radio but he quickly developed his own style. He could play the harmonica with panache as well as every stringed instrument he ever tried.
The family moved around a lot, eventually ending up in Encino, California, where Hugh tried construction work. Before too long he had found work at Mammy's Shack, a bar on Ventura Boulevard and he decided making music was more in his line. He stayed at Mammy's Shack for three years until the place burned to the ground. He and Karl joined Len Nash and His Country Boys, a band which played on radio and in a dance hall until 1933. The Farr Brothers worked as staff musicians on KFOX until Hugh left in March 1933 to join Jack LeFevre's Texas Outlaws on KFWB. Late in November of 1933, Len Slye, Bob Nolan and Tim Spencer offered him a place with them. He was hesitant to leave his own staff job until he heard the trio sing - and then he was sold.
1934 Farley's Gold Star Rangers with Gus Mack
1936 The Sons of the Pioneers at the Texas Centennial with, possibly, Leo Spencer.
1940
photo courtesy of Ed Phillips
Publicity still from the Columbia picture, Spoilers of the Range, 1939.
Back with Roy Rogers for the Republic films, 1941.
Hugh with fan club executive, Joan Shapira, in Casper, Wyoming, in the early 1950s.
(photo courtesy of Joan Shapira)
(photo courtesy of Joan Shapira)
Most of Hugh's career is entwined with his brother, Karl's, and is covered on the Karl Farr page. Hugh remained with the Sons of the Pioneers when he attempted to form his own group which he called "The Sons of the Pioneers". None of these groups was successful. Hugh had always been under the impression that since he was one of the original four members of the group that, when all the others left, he would own the name so he copyrighted it. Shortly after his brother Karl's death in 1961, he formed another but the current Sons of the Pioneers objected and a court case sorted the matter out. The transcript from a photocopy of the original trial transcript courtesy of Fred Goodwin is provided at the end of this page.
About four years after losing the court case he joined or helped form a group called The Country Gentlemen composed of Jimmie Widener, Pat Patterson and Kenny Baker. They made Lake Tahoe their base. Although they didn't sound like the Sons of the Pioneers, their sound was much admired.
To quote Will Osborne, the entertainment director at Harvey's Wagon Wheel in Lake Tahoe where The Country Gentlemen were appearing:
During the formative period of The Country Gentlemen, I was fortunate enough to hear the group in rehearsal. A close friend of mine telephoned me one afternoon and suggested that I come over to his home here at Lake Tahoe for a cup of tea and a musical treat. The tea was brisk...the musical treat, exhilarating. The Country Gentlemen were in rehearsal. They had decided to get completely away from Hollywood and its influence and had chosen this garden spot as a base while rehearsing and polishing the group to be known as The Country Gentlemen.
What I heard that afternoon in early January 1962 took me completely by surprise, not because of innovations or gimmicks, but mainly because I had never heard such quality in voices, such fine musicianship and presentation in a group in the country and western field.
My first thought was to insist that they sign a contract to appear for us at Harvey's Wagon Wheel but then it seemed ridiculous that such an outstanding organization could possible be at liberty. On broaching the subject, I was told that they would not be ready to play their first engagement until after some weeks of rehearsal. To shorten the story - 5 days later, The Country Gentlemen opened at the Wagon Wheel on January 19, 1962. Since that date, they have played six engagements for us in a period of nine months ... an all-time record.
Among the many top musicians and celebrities frequenting the performances of The Country Gentlemen, Harry James said, "The most modern sound and the finest musicianship in the western field." Bob Wills, "The first musical thrill I've had in 20 years." Red Norvo, playing on the same bill, spent much of his time between shows "out front" listening. He is a staunch fan of The Country Gentlemen. To quote Red, "They have such good taste and produce a wonderful sound."
I am naturally proud of the boys and of the great strides they have made in such a short period of time. They have made me a fan of country and western music - Country Gentlemen style.
The group broke up within a few months of recording this album because of the illness of one of the members.
Hugh made brief public appearances at ceremonies where the Sons of the Pioneers were honored and demonstrated that he had lost none of that genius that had helped raise the Sons of the Pioneers to the height of popularity.
1976 at the Hollywood Walk of Fame dedication ceremony with Bob Nolan and Roberta Mileusnich.
"The photo was taken the day the Pioneers got their star on Hollywood Boulevard.
In addition to the then current lineup headed by Lloyd, Roy and Bob were there
along with a gaunt looking Hugh Farr. Hugh, if I recall, was living in Wyoming
and drove down with two of his neighbors. As gaunt as he was he was clearly
recognizable.
"That evening there was a show
honoring the Pioneers at the Hollywood Palladium. Roy sang with the group and at
one point in the show Lloyd introduced Hugh as one of the original Pioneers who
had come back to be a part of the evening. The Palladium was packed since radio
station KLAC had promoted the event (they also underwrote the show at the
Palladium). Hugh's appearance that evening came as a complete surprise to almost
everyone in the audience.
"Lloyd introduced Hugh and although
he had aged considerably over the years he walked with a steady gait to the
center stage, put his fiddle under his chin and the years just rolled away. Hugh
blew away the entire audience who gave him a prolonged standing ovation after
his number. He was magnificent. Lloyd was beaming as the audience rose to their
feet and when Hugh began to leave the stage Lloyd stopped him and said the
audience wouldn’t let him leave after just one number so Hugh came back and
played another tune and, once again, knocked everyone out. It was a truly
wonderful moment. (Laurence Zwisohn)
In later years, Hugh suffered severely reduced circumstances and on March 17, 1980, he passed away, leaving to mourn his wife, Lynn.
Following are some of Hugh Farr and Karl Farr's compositions.
Blues in D
Bon Ton Schottische
Farr Away Blues
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
DEPARTMENT 34
HON. EMIL GUMPERT, JUDGE
No. 721111
KARL FARR, LLOYD PERRYMAN, GEORGE FISHER, LLOYD T. DOSS, DALE WARREN Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants, Vs. HUGH FARR, Defendant and Cross-Complainant
REPORTER’S TRANSCRIPT
Tuesday, December 15, 1959
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiffs: MAX E. GILMORE
For Defendant: ROSENTHAL, ROMANIK & NISALL
By: GERALD L. ROMANIK
GRACE A. ROGERS, C. S. R., Official Reporter
INDEX
PLAINTIFFS’ WITNESS DIRECT CROSS
FARR, Hugh (2055 CCP) 2 14
DEFENDANT’S WITNESS
FARR, Lynn 26 31
REBUTTAL WITNESS
PERRYMAN, Lloyd 33 36
EXHIBITS
DEFENDANT’S IN EVIDENCE
A – Group of Business Records 30
ORAL OPINION OF THE COURT PAGE 38
Page 2
Los Angeles, California, Tuesday, December 15, 1959 9:30 AM
THE COURT: Farr versus Farr
MR. GILMORE: Ready, your Honor.
MR. ROMANIK: Ready for the defendant, your Honor.
MR. GILMORE: I WILL CALL Mr. Hugh Farr under 2055.
HUGH FARR, the defendant herein, called as a witness on behalf of the plaintiffs under the provisions of Section 2055 of the Code of Civil Procedure, having been previously duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
THE CLERK: State your name, please, again for the record.
THE WITNESS: Hugh Farr.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. GILMORE:
Q Mr. Farr, as I understand it, it is your position in this lawsuit you are the sole owner of the name “Sons of the Pioneers”?
A Yes, sir, I have always thought that; yes.
Q It is your position in this lawsuit that your brother Karl has simply been an employee of this group since he joined in about 1935?
Page 3
A Yes.
Q And it is your position that Mr. Fisher has been a member of the group since he joined in 1936[1]?
A Yes.
Q And it is your position that Mr. Doss has been a member of the group since he joined in 1939[2]?
A Yes.
Q The old original group of “Sons of the Pioneers” were Roy Rogers, Tim Spencer and Mr. Robert Nolan and yourself; is that correct?
A Yes.
Q It is your position that those original four agreed regardless of who joined the group later on the name remained with the original four or whoever of the original four remained in the group; is that correct?
A Yes, but it has been so long ago they have forgotten. You forget a lot in 27 years.
Q In February of 1939[3] you were the only member of the original group still with the “Sons of the Pioneers”; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q And you are the only original member of the group who has been with the “Sons of the Pioneers” since
Page 4
Tim Spencer left in about 1952; is that correct?
A Yes.
Q In about 1954 your then wife, Rosita Estelle Farr, secured a divorce from you in this court; is that correct?
A No, I got one from her.
Q About that time?
A Yes.
Q In that proceeding you filed an affidavit in which you purported to set forth all of your separate community assets; is that correct?
A All except the name of the “Sons of the Pioneers”.
Q But in your affidavit that you made in that proceeding –
MR. ROMANIK: Do you have that affidavit with you, counsel?
MR. GILMORE: No, I do not.
Q --you purported to set forth all of your assets, both community and separate, in that affidavit; is that correct?
A Yes.
Page 5
Q But you did not include the name “Sons of the Pioneers” in that list of property?
A No, because that was my livelihood.
MR. GILMORE: May it please the Court, may counsel approach the bench?
THE COURT: If you wish to say something without the witness hearing it, you may. However, there is no jury here, of course.
MR. GILMORE: It need not be on the record.
(Conference at the bench between both counsel and the Court, without the reporter.)
THE COURT: We discussed informally a stipulation, but this is no indication of the feeling of the Court, because the Court, of course, does not form or express any opinion on a case until it is finally submitted to the Court, the same as with a jury. But as I understood counsel in chambers, there was a further stipulation that was not put on the record, that if the court should determine that the firm name was a partnership asset it would be sold and the proceeds divided equally between the parties to this litigation.
MR. ROMANIK: So stipulated, your Honor.
MR. GILMORE: So stipulated.
THE COURT: That is to say, one-sixth to each; is that correct, gentlemen?
MR. ROMANIK: So stipulated.
Page 6
MR. GILMORE: So stipulated.
THE COURT: All right. You may proceed.
Q BY MR GILMORE: Mr. Farr, on or about 1954 you filed a petition in bankruptcy in the United States District Court here in Los Angeles?
A Yes, sir.
Q In connection with that proceeding you filed under oath schedules which purport to set forth all of your property of every nature and description; isn’t that true?
A Yes, sir.
Q In those schedules is it not a fact you did not include as one of your assets the trade name “Sons of the Pioneers”?
A That’s right.
THE COURT: At the time you swore to those schedules in bankruptcy did you consider –
THE WITNESS: My lawyer –
THE COURT: Just listen to the question, please. Did you consider the name “Sons of the Pioneers” an asset of any value, or did you consider it an asset of no value and for that reason leave it out of your schedules?
THE WITNESS: Well, it was of value to me, but I couldn’t see how the name “Sons of the Pioneers” was of any value to the bankruptcy – I don’t know what they could have done with it. Not only that, but my lawyer never suggested it. He told me everything to do, and the name of the “Sons
Page 7
of the Pioneers” was never mentioned.
THE COURT: You did not mention it?
THE WITNESS: Well, he knew who I was and I never even thought to mention it.
THE COURT: But in any event, you did not list it?
THE WITNESS: No, sir.
THE COURT: So whether it was listed or not, wouldn’t it pass as an asset, Mr. Romanik; if it had any value under the law and under the federal states, wouldn’t it pass as an asset to the creditors, whether it is listed or not?
MR. ROMANIK: I think your Honor has correctly stated the law, but I think there is a provision that if one party goes through bankruptcy the estate is managed by the remaining and solvent partners and not by the trustee in bankruptcy, although as your Honor says, his interest in the partnership would have passed.
THE COURT: If he went through bankruptcy and all of his assets were listed there, wouldn’t his asset have passed to the bankrupt estate and be in the other court now?
MR. ROMANIK: I can only render an offhand opinion, your Honor. I think so.
THE COURT: Your stipulation would cover the fact – assuming that the asset or most of the value of the asset remained in the plaintiffs or in the partnership, everyone has stipulated now that the interest would be divided
Page 8
one-sixth to each.
MR. ROMANIK: However, it could be held, your Honor, that the name would be in effect a tool of his trade, in which event the name would have been exempt.
THE COURT: He did not claim any exemption of that, did he?
MR. ROMANIK: But had the name been brought into the bankruptcy proceeding I think it would have been exempt as a tool of the trade.
THE COURT: This is a novel position.
MR. ROMANIK: I think your Honor has put me in a position where I have to become novel.
THE COURT: All right. Proceed.
Q BY MR. GILMORE: Did you copyright the name “Sons of the Pioneers”, sir?
A Yes, sir.
Q You made your application for that copyright in the United States Patent Office on March 2nd, 1959; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q That was after you had separated from the rest of the group known as the “Sons of the Pioneers”; isn’t that true?
A No, sir, that was before that.
THE COURT: That was while you were still operating together?
Page 9
THE WITNESS: That’s right.
Q BY MR. GILMORE: Were you still operating with the “Sons of the Pioneers” on March 2nd, 1959?
A Well, I thought we were until my brother came to me and told me he didn’t want to work with me any more.
Q Isn’t it a fact that the last time you worked with the “Sons of the Pioneers” was down in Florida in February 1959?
A That’s right.
Q And after you completed your assignment of your work there in Florida in February 1959 you went to Washington, and on March 2nd, 1959, you filed a copyright; isn’t that right?
A Well, I thought I went from Madison Square Garden to Washington, D. C.
THE COURT: Mr. Farr, at the time you filed this application for copyright you believed you were still one of the members of the group?
THE WITNESS: Yes, I knew I was.
THE COURT: Did you consider at that time that the group was operating as a partnership?
THE WITNESS: As a partnership?
THE COURT: Yes.
THE WITNESS: No, sir.
THE COURT: What were they operating as?
THE WITNESS: Well, like I said, all the way through
Page 10
I felt that I fell heir to the name.
THE COURT: Well, they were not working for you, were they?
THE WITNESS: Well, more or less.
THE COURT: Of course, if the relationship of partnership existed at that time, or even if this defendant believed so, he would be in effect a trustee for the other partners, and if he proceeded to copyright a name that belonged to the partnership he would be acting on behalf of the partnership and the partnership would be entitled to the benefit of any copyright.
THE WITNESS: It was after Madison Square Garden.
Q BY MR. GILMORE: Isn’t it a fact that when you made this application for a copyright of the name “Sons of the Pioneers” you were doing it to protect not only yourself but all the other members of the group?
A No, just to protect the name, to protect everything that was connected – You might say to protect everybody, because other groups had been trying to use it.
MR. GILMORE: Is the original deposition of Mr. Hugh Farr on file?
THE COURT: I do not know.
(Discussion in re the filing of the original deposition.)
THE COURT: There is no objection to utilizing a copy, I am sure.
Page 11
MR. ROMANIK: None, your Honor.
Q BY MR. GILMORE: I call your attention to page 62 of the deposition of Mr. Hugh Farr. Sir, was your deposition taken at 6253 Hollywood Boulevard Friday, October 16, 1959?
A I don’t exactly remember the date, but somewhere along there, sir.
MR. GILMORE: Pardon me, Mr. Romanik. I want to start at page 60, line 16.
Q I hand you, sir, what purports to be a copy of your deposition and ask you to read to yourself beginning page 60, line 16, down to page 63, line 24, and when you have finished reading it, please inform me of that fact.
A (After reading) Well, I know I went from Madison Square Garden –
Q First, have you read that?
A Yes.
Q Were the questions that were propounded to you at that time –
THE COURT: Were those questions asked and those answers given as appear in the deposition you just read?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir
MR. GILMORE: May I read that portion, your Honor, into the record?
THE COURT: Yes. From what page to what page?
MR. GILMORE: Page 60, line 15, to page 63, line 24.
Page 12
THE COURT: Did the witness read those pages?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Very well.
MR. GILMORE: (Reading from deposition)
“Q Did you copyright the name “Sons of the Pioneers”?
“A I did.
“Q When did you do that?
“A The latter part of February.
“Q What year?
“A 1959.
“Q The latter part of February 1959?
“A I think that is when it was. I got the exact date at home.
“Q It wasn’t after you had appeared in the Madison Square Garden show?
“A Yes.
“Q 1958?
“A 1958?
“Q Yes.
“A No, I don’t think so. I can tell you that date. I can call and get it at my home.
“MR. GILMORE: May we adjourn now and maybe you can bring it in the afternoon.
“MR. ROMANIK: No, I don’t think that will be necessary. Are you seeking the date the
Page 13
application was filed with the United States Patent Office? That was March 2nd, 1959.
“MR. GILMORE: March 2nd, 1959.
“Q Who were the attorneys who made the application for you?
“MR. ROMANIK: For the record, they are Fisher, Christen & Goodson, Washington, D. C.
“MR. GILMORE: Did you go to Washington in connection with this matter?
“THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
“Q BY MR. GILMORE: Was a copyright issued to you?
“A What was that?
“Q Was a copyright issued to you?
“A Just to me?
“Q Issued to you.
“A Yes.
“Q In the name of Hugh Farr?
“A Yes.
“Q Did you disclose that to your brother, that you were making this application?
“A No.
“Q Did you disclose it to any other members of the group?
“A I did not.
“MR. ROMANIK: By disclosure do you mean
Page 14
personal disclosure?
“MR. GILMORE: Yes.
“Q In other words, did you tell them you were going to do that?
“A No.
“Q What were the circumstances that made you take those steps?
“A Because there had been too many people trying to use it and there has been groups that go out and do television shows without him and me. They have done a lot without me.
“Q Meaning ‘him’?
“A Without him and me.
“Q When you say ‘him’ you mean your brother?
“A Yes. And to protect the name and to protect all of us I went and had it registered.”
MR. GILMORE: No further questions.
THE COURT: Any questions?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ROMANIK:
Q Mr. Farr, during the period of time the “Sons of the Pioneers” and you were associated did you negotiate a number of contracts for them?
A Yes, sir.
Page 15
Q Can you tell me approximately how many?
A Oh, all down through the years since Tim Spencer, off and on – There was three of us, and whoever they would call up – A lot of people didn’t know who to call. They would remember the name Lloyd Perryman mostly, because he was the master of ceremonies, and they would call him or they would call Karl or they would call myself.
Q Is it your understanding that so far as this copyright of the name is concerned that the final letters will be issued the 16th of this month?
A Yes.
Q Did you receive that information from me?
A No, I don’t think so.
Q Who did you receive it from ?
A I received it from Mr. Christen.
Q That is the attorney in Washington, D. C.?
A Yes.
Q Was it your understanding, sir, throughout these years that the name “Sons of the Pioneers” was to remain with the original four who were in the group?
A Yes, that was agreed on and was talked over from the very, very beginning.
Q During the year 1957 were you operating as a corporation?
A Yes, for a short while.
Q Who handled the books for that corporation?
Page 16
A My wife handled the books for the corporation.
Q I show you a number of columns and sheets here and a Spiral bound folder. To your knowledge are these the books your wife kept?
A Yes, sir.
Q During that time, do you know of your own knowledge who paid the employers’ withholding tax?
A Karl and I.
Q Did that cause you to essentially earn less?
A Yes, quite a little less, a difference of three hundred and seventy something dollars, and $469, or something like that that the other boys got.
Q Because you and Karl made the employers’ contribution?
A That’s right.
Q Was there any discussion among the members of the group consisting of you and your brother and Messrs. Perryman, Fisher and Doss as to the continuation under the name “Sons of the Pioneers” or any other name?
A I don’t understand your question.
Q Did Mr. Lloyd Perryman ever tell you he would just as soon go out and work under any other name?
A Yes, sir. They said they should go out and work as the “Six Little Fat Boys,” and that was because they thought the name had lost its prestige and drawing power, and they wanted to go out under the name of the “Six
Page 17
Little Fat Men” or “Six Little Fat Boys”, I forget which.
Q Will you tell the Court under what circumstances you became dissatisfied with Mr. Lloyd Perryman, Mr. Lloyd Doss, Mr. Tim Spencer and –
MR. GILMORE: I understood we were not going into that.
MR. ROMANIK: I am sorry. I withdraw the question. I have nothing further.
THE COURT: Mr. Farr, your brother Karl came in with you in about 1933?
THE WITNESS: No, it was the latter part of 1935, I would say.
THE COURT: Let us get the sequence of events here. The original four was yourself, Roy Rogers, Tim Spencer and Bob Nolan; is that right?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: What year was it that you formed this group and operated under the name “Sons of the Pioneers”?
THE WITNESS: That was around the latter part of 1933.
THE COURT: At that time you were earning a rather nominal sum for your services; isn’t that correct – that is as compared with what you earned in recent years?
THE WITNESS: That’s right, but there was a mistake
Page 18
here and the different boys didn’t remember it, but I happen to remember it. It was 45 instead of 25 we were making, and we give Karl Farr about $8 a week out of our pocket.
THE COURT: Has the income of the group, of the individual members of the group, increased year by year?
THE WITNESS: Some. The last job I worked, though, was done quite a little over what I have made.
THE COURT: But over the years the reputation of the organization, I assume, nationally expanded and it became greater than in the earlier years?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: And therefore your income increased?
THE WITNESS: It increased, but in the last few years it has decreased, too.
THE COURT: About what year did Roy Rogers go out, according to your recollection?
THE WITNESS: About what time did he leave the group?
THE COURT: Yes.
THE WITNESS: About 1937, or somewhere in there.
THE COURT: And about when did Tim Spencer leave, according to your recollection?
THE WITNESS: Well, let me see, now. Tim Spencer left – I don’t know exactly, but he left – Roy left first and then Bob Nolan left –
THE COURT: When was it Bob Nolan left?
Page 19
THE WITNESS: He left about 14 or 15 years ago, about 15 years ago, I would say.
THE COURT: About 1944?
THE WITNESS: 1944 or ’45, somewhere around there.
THE COURT: When did Tim Spencer leave?
THE WITNESS: Well, he left sometime after that. I don’t know exactly.
THE COURT: Approximately.
THE WITNESS: Well, he hasn’t been in the group for nine or ten years.
THE COURT: That would have been around 1948 or ’49 then?
THE WITNESS: Somewhere in there.
THE COURT: Or 1949 or ’50.
THE WITNESS: That would be close. It is hard to remember all of these years and dates.
THE COURT: Let me have your recollection of the dates when these other individuals came in, whether they are still there or not. Who was the next one after the formation of the group in the latter part of 1933 – who was the first individual who came into the group?
THE WITNESS: After the first four it was my brother, Karl Farr.
THE COURT: When did he come in?
THE WITNESS: Around the latter part of 1935.
THE COURT: And the next one?
Page 20
THE WITNESS: The next one then I think was Pat Brady.
THE COURT: When did he come in?
THE WITNESS: He come in around 1938[4], or somewhere in there.
THE COURT: When did he leave?
THE WITNESS: He left about 14 years ago, I would say. We let Roy have him as his comedian.
THE COURT: He left about 1945[5] then, would you say?
THE WITNESS: Around in there.
THE COURT: Who was the next one that came in?
THE WITNESS: Well, that made the group, that made the six, and nobody else come in until some of them started to leave.
THE COURT: Well, just tell me as best you can.
THE WITNESS: Bob Nolan left.
THE COURT: He left in about 1945?
THE WITNESS: Well, let me see. It was Pat Brady, and he has been gone about 15 years. I don’t think Bob Nolan has been gone that long. He has been gone only about 10 or 11 years. It was Lloyd Doss who came in and took his place, and we had a Lloyd in our group already, so we called him Tommy Doss.
THE COURT: When did he come in?
THE WITNESS: He come in about 10 years ago, about 1948 or ’49, somewhere in there.
THE COURT: All right.
Page 21
THE WITNESS: And then when Tim left, Ken Curtis come in[6]. And after Ken Curtis left –
THE COURT: When did Curtis come in?
THE WITNESS: Ken Curtis come in and he stayed for about four years, something like that, and then when he left –
THE COURT: When did Curtis come in?
THE WITNESS: Let me see. Kenny come in about the time Bob Nolan left.
THE COURT: That would be about 1948 or ‘49 then?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: And he stayed about four years?
THE WITNESS: He stayed about four years, that’s right
THE COURT: Then he left around 1952 or ’53?
THE WITNESS: Somewhere in there.
THE COURT: Who was next?
THE WITNESS: When he left, Dale Warren came in[7]. that has been about eight years ago.
THE COURT: About 1951?
THE WITNESS: Somewhere in there.
THE COURT: All right.
THE WITNESS: Well, that made the group. That made the group up until –
THE COURT: You have not accounted for Fisher.
THE WITNESS: Well, Fisher had been in and out of the
Page 22
group for the last 17 or 18 years.
THE COURT: When did he come in originally?
THE WITNESS: Recently?
THE COURT: No, originally.
THE WITNESS: I think he came in first to take Lloyd Perryman’s place while he was in the Service. He was in Burma, India, and Fisher come in and took his place for about three and a half years, I would say.
THE COURT: Was that in about 1941, ’42, or ’43?
THE WITNESS: Yes, somewhere in there, I would say.
THE COURT: Then he was in and out?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: What about Perryman[8]?
THE WITNESS: Well, when he come back then he took his place back again.
THE COURT: When did Perryman come in originally?
THE WITNESS: The first time?
THE COURT: Yes.
THE WITNESS: He come in the first time about 1936.
THE COURT: In the years 1933 and ’34 you were working for the radio station, were you not?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Did you continue to work regularly for the radio station for some period of time?
THE WITNESS: Well, for quite a while.
THE COURT: For how long?
Page 23
THE WITNESS: Oh, I would say we worked there 18 months or two years.
THE COURT: What was the next job you got after the radio station job?
THE WITNESS: Well, the next job after we got there – We went out on tour, and after we got out of the tour we went back to the Texas Centennial.
THE COURT: Had your brother Karl joined the group while you were out on the tour?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: While you were working for the radio station what was the maximum amount you received as earnings?
THE WITNESS: Well, that was during the depression, you will remember, and any kind of a job was good, and we would be there under two different names before my brother got there – “Jack and His Texas Outlaws” and the “Goldstar Rangers,” and with “Jack and His Texas Outlaws” we wasn’t making over 10 or 15 dollars.
THE COURT: What was the most you were making at the time you went out on the road?
THE WITNESS: We was making $45 a week when my brother joined the group.
THE COURT: What was the maximum you made after your brother joined the group?
THE WITNESS: Every job we took was at a different price.
Page 24
THE COURT: Did it continue to go up over the years?
THE WITNESS: It went up for a while.
THE COURT: For how many years would you say the reputation of the organization grew and expanded and became better and better known?
THE WITNESS: Oh, I would say it reached its peak in about 15 or 16 years.
THE COURT: When you reached that peak approximately what was your maximum income?
THE WITNESS: Well, we made $5,000 a week quite a few times, and we have made a little more and we made less.
THE COURT: That $5,000 was divided between how many?
THE WITNESS: It was divided between the six of us.
THE COURT: So you were each making something in excess of $800 a week?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: To what do you a attribute that increase in the amount of earnings, the expanded reputation?
THE WITNESS: The hard work from the very beginning, and the coaching of the new members that came in. We rehearsed nine hours a day for nine months in my room, and we had one job and we made five or six dollars a night one night a week, and that was what we lived on. We had a thousand numbers memorized. We wouldn’t take a job until we were ready for it. None of these boys was in on the tough part of it, they just come in on the gravy.
Page 25
THE COURT: For how long had you used the name “Sons of the Pioneers” before Karl came in?
THE WITNESS: About three and a half – four years.
THE COURT: What? I’m just talking about the name “Sons of the Pioneers” now.
THE WITNESS: Well, I would say about three years.
THE COURT: You started using the name “Sons of the Pioneers” in what year? I am not talking about any other names now.
THE WITNESS: Well, I think about 1934 it was we started using it.
THE COURT: What part of the year 1934, the latter part or middle or what?
THE WITNESS: Well, I would say the first part of ’34.
THE COURT: And Karl came in during the first part of 1934 or the latter part of ‘34?
THE WITNESS: No, he come in about the middle of ’35.
THE COURT: Then up to the time Karl came in you had been using the name for something less than a year and a half, hadn’t you?
THE WITNESS: I don’t exactly remember, but I thought we had used it longer than that, that we used the name “Sons of the Pioneers” before he came in.
THE COURT: I have no other questions. You may step down.
Page 26
MR. ROMANIK: This obviated the need for recalling him on direct testimony, your Honor.
THE COURT: You may step down.
MR. GILMORE: The plaintiff rests.
MR. ROMANIK: Mrs. Farr.
LYNN FARR, a witness called on behalf of the defendant, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
THE CLERK: Be seated and state your full name, please.
THE WITNESS: Lynn Farr.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. ROMANIK:
Q You are the wife of Mr. Hugh Farr; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q Were you for a period of time in 1957 the bookkeeper for the “Sons of the Pioneers”, a corporation?
A Yes, sir.
MR. ROMANIK: Do you want to look these over, counsel (indicating documents)?
MR. GILMORE: Yes, but I can’t look them over while you are questioning the witness. I might state that at the time I took the deposition of Mr. Hugh Farr it was taken
Page 27
pursuant to a subpoena duces tecum under which he was required to produce all the records pertaining to the “Sons of the Pioneers”, but these were not produced at that time so I have had no opportunity to peruse them until now.
MR. ROMANIK: If it please the Court, counsel will recall the little colloquy regarding those columnar pads and they did appear at the deposition and these are the pads to which I refer.
THE COURT: There is nothing before the Court.
Q BY MR. ROMANIK: Mrs. Farr, I have here a Spiral bound folder. Will you tell us what this is?
A It is the records of the “Sons of the Pioneers, Incorporated,” the last corporation, drawn up by the “Sons of the Pioneers”.
Q Did you keep these records?
A Yes.
Q Are these records of their financial transactions?
A Yes.
Q What are these columnar pads?
A I started it out during the year. I brought the balance forward from here to here (indicating), and it wasn’t right this way because it is more difficult, and this is a complete record (indicating).
Page 28
Q In other words, the columnar pads represent a continuation of the Spiral bound folder?
A Yes, sir.
Q I see. Throughout these records were employers’ contributions withheld from all the wages paid?
A There were employers’ contributions paid just by Karl and Hugh Farr. The others refused to pay it. They were going to quit if they had to pay it.
Q So who paid the employers’ contributions?
A Hugh and Karl Farr, and that shows here (indicating).
Q Will you show me where it shows it?
A It is up here. You see, this is their total deductions –
Q You are referring now to the fifth page of the columnar sheets, and you are indicating a column entitled “Total Deductions”?
A Well, I made out a page for each of them and showed the total deductions and where they worked and the dates and the employer tax on each job.
Q but the employer tax was deducted only from Karl Farr and Hugh Farr?
A Yes.
THE COURT: Mrs. Farr, you said the others refused to pay. By the others do you mean Perryman, Fisher, Doss and Warren?
Page 29
THE WITNESS: That’s right, sir.
THE COURT: Did you hear them say they wouldn’t pay?
THE WITNESS: Well, may I explain the situation?
THE COURT: Yes, certainly.
THE WITNESS: They had a meeting over at the house. They came over to the house and we explained the situation to them.
THE COURT: Who was there?
THE WITNESS: All of us.
THE COURT: All of you?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Where did that meeting take place?
THE WITNESS: That was when the corporation was first drawn up. When they started going out – before March 22nd.
THE COURT: Before March 22nd of what year?
THE WITNESS: 1957
THE COURT: There was a meeting then in your home?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Tell us what was said and by whom.
THE WITNESS: Well, I tried to explain the situation of the corporation to them and that there would have to be a certain amount in the corporation to enable it to manipulate, and so I explained to them the setup –
THE COURT: Well, what did you tell them?
THE WITNESS: Well, I told them there was an employer tax and that their deductions and their expenses would be
Page 30
taken out, and all the expense of the corporation, like the employer tax that goes out of the total on the gross, and they refused to pay it.
THE COURT: Well, who said what?
THE WITNESS: Well, I can’t remember just who said what, but they felt that Karl and Hugh had gone out and had this corporation drawn up unbeknown to them, and they didn’t want any stock in it or to contribute to any employers’ tax, but they wanted to receive equal pay with the other members of the group.
THE COURT: Did they say they were not employees?
THE WITNESS: No, I don’t recall they said that, sir.
THE COURT: Didn’t they say they didn’t want to work for a corporation?
THE WITNESS: No, they didn’t say they didn’t want to work for a corporation. They just said they didn’t want to buy any stock in it, and all they wanted to do was to receive an equal share of the gross amount.
THE COURT: Who offered them stock?
THE WITNESS: Well, Karl and Hugh both asked them if they wanted to buy some stock in it.
MR. ROMANIK: May we offer these into evidence?
THE COURT: Received as Defendant’s Exhibit A.
THE WITNESS: The reason that the organization became dormant is because I talked to the man who drew up this corporation, Mr. –
Page 31
MR. GILMORE: I object to that as hearsay.
THE COURT: Yes, it would be hearsay.
MR. ROMANIK: That is all, Mrs. Farr.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. GILMORE:
Q Referring to these yellow sheets—
A This is the second quarter.
Q Well, the first one –
A This is the second quarter balance forward.
Q Just a minute.
A I am sorry.
Q The first one marked “Second Quarter”, did that refer to the second quarter of 1957?
A Yes.
Q I notice here that under the heading Dale Henry Warren and under the column labeled “Gross Amount,” the gross amount assigned to him is $1,705.26; is that correct?
A Yes.
Q And the same amount for the quarter and for the year has been assigned to Mr. George Fisher?
A Yes.
Q And to Mr. Lloyd Perryman?
A Yes.
Q And the same amount has been assigned to Mr. Lloyd Doss?
Page 32
A Yes.
Q And the same amount to Karl Farr?
A Yes.
Q And the same with reference to Mr. Thomas Hubert Farr?
A Yes.
Q Where on this document does it show that Mr. Hubert Farr and Mr. Karl Farr paid the withholding tax for the entire group?
A Up here where I show the total deductions, employer tax on Hugh Farr and Thomas Farr is here, see, I write it very small. And on the others, of course, that isn’t there. And, of course, the last, it was less than five months, is all.
Q The “Sons of the Pioneers” operated under this corporation for how long, Mrs. Farr?
A Well, let me see. From March 22nd – at first – the first job was April 19, 1957, and it went through August 8, 1957 under the corporation, and after that it became dormant.
Q It became dormant then?
A &nbs