In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants (1913)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

H. N. Marvin, Direct Examination. 1397 ("and I know a lot more like myself) there is no way that I can see my way clear, for in a small town like, Sac. an exhibitor cannot afford to show pictures very day after the other's houses, I was willing to even go so far, as to show them, three days out of seven, but I won't stand for seven days out of the week and when ever the patents co. can arrange matters so that each house gets the same treatment I will be more than willing, to show patent picture. Now I know that my house is only a drop in the bucket, to the patent co's business, still (as I said before) I know lots of others that prefere the license pictures) still it take several drop to fill the bucket hoping you see the injustice done the small exb. I will close. Remaining Respecfly Yours, H. WOLFF Lyric Theatre Sacramento, Calif. P. S. I even offered more money for the same service, that other houses was getting and the exchange, said they could not furnish it. By Mr. Kingsley : Q. I show you a letter dated Baltimore, Maryland, September 7th, 1910, signed John Carter. Did you receive that letter? A. I did. Mr. Kingsley: I offer it in evidence. Mr. Grosvenor : Same objection. The paper offered is received in evidence and marked "Defendants' Exhibit No. 81," and is as follows : Defendants' Exhibit No. 81 Balto., Md., Sept. 9/7/10. Motion Picture Co., Gentleman. Wer'e forched to go Independent, by the Moore Film Exchange. On account of the Service we have been getting has been satisfactory until the midle part of July. After that time our second and third reels were the same 4