Brief for the United States (1914)

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.

200 PART IX. HERBERT MILES, of Miles Bros. (Inc.), a licensed exchange, principal office in New York City, branch offices at Boston and Baltimore. (IT, 1218 et seq.) His licenses were canceled April 19, 1910. (II, 1221, fol. 1.) The \vitness presented two bulletins, dated, respectively, April 19 and 23, issued by the Patents Co., notifying the exchanges of the cancellation of the license of Miles Bros. (II, 1222, fol. 3; 1221, fol. 4.) LEWIS M. SWAAB, for nine years an exchange man in Philadelphia ; prior to 1908 he bought film from the Vitagraph, Biograph, Lubin, Edison, Pathe, Selig, and Essanay Cos., and machines from Powers, Edison, Lubin, and Enterprise Cos. The films were not sold as patented articles, but like the projecting machines were sold without any restrictions. (II, 80, fols. 1-2.) AYitness first heard of the license exchange agreement when it was read byMacDonald before 60 to 75 members of the F. S. A. at the Hotel Imperial meeting. The majority of those present objected to the agreement. (II, 802.) There was no adequate supply of good film outside the Patents Co. manufacturers at that time. (II, 803, fol. 2.) The witness took a license, and observed its terms. (II, 803, fol. 3.) There were five licensed exchanges in Philadelphia. At the time the General Film Co. came into existence one had been canceled, so that four were doing business (TI, 802, fol. 2) all competing with each otlier.